I think one needs to be cautious when trying to convince themselves of theoretical hypothesis, as though fact or applicable to how PTSD evolves.
When a traumatic event occurs the amygdala signals a threat. At this moment the normal way how perceptions are converted to memories (breaking them up into words and other perceptions and distributing the memory into different parts of the brain for memorizing) is interrupted in order to facilitate a flight, flight or freeze response.
This is part of the theory.
Memory encoding, theoretically as science presently understands, we take in a memory via one of our senses as our attention is focused, the thalamus and frontal lobe control the processing of attention. Factor in our emotional status, which then determines how fast neurons fire. The more emotional we are, the more focused a sensory sensations is for us, so theoretically a memory then involves the sensory areas of the cortex, processing sensations, and eventually sent off to the amygdala to become a formed single sensation. The amygdala decides what to do with this information, compares it with all other memories (do we need to keep it, yes, no, or merge) and chooses whether long-term memory or short-term, followed by destruction.
This is all theoretical. You should accept that premise before accepting exactly what goes on in our brain as fact, as the leading neuroscientists can't tell you conclusively exactly how a memory is encoded, stored, retrieved. People who have had physical impact damage to their amygdala, or had it removed, have shown an inability to store any new memories. This gives insight, but does not make memory encoding conclusive.
Anything that goes on in-between all those facets a memory travels, can cause disruption to the memory. Theoretically, we can choose whether the memory goes to short-term and self destructs, without even realising it. We know emotion is involved -- but you can't measure that conclusively either. A horrible memory with heightened emotion may not be stored equally to a good memory with heightened emotion.
We know from research that people with good social support are less likely to develop PTSD and I think it is because they are more likely to have someone to talk with in this situation, to receive emotional support---all of which helps to address the memory. In many ways, this is what therapists try to do with us, when they treat out PTSD. They help us to integrate the traumatic memory and to make it less scary and more normal.
Yes, social support after trauma influences outcome. The better your social support, the higher the chance you improve as an outcome. But again, one factor of many involved. It is a factor, not a conclusive statement.
Socio-economic and environment usually hold a significant key to outcome because those who are abused, especially repeatedly, often do not have that support around them. Now again, not all abused get PTSD. It is the exception, not the rule. So two people with no social support, low economic status, poor environment raised within, one can get PTSD and one does not, as adults. Both are in the high risk group for it.
I think that some memories are so well protected by our brain that we will never get to integrate them properly and this is why we may not heal 100 per cent.
You're working on the premise that the memory was even stored to be recalled. Plenty of studies have shown groups who experience an event, they interview each person about what they experienced, recall, so forth, and they often get all different answers, from the colour of objects, size, exact event that happened, so forth. They have shown each a video of what happened, where immediately upon seeing a video they believe they recalled the pieces they forgot. But did they? Or did they now take in a new memory of the event, add it to their existing fragmented version, and believe they now remember? Versus they just say what actually happened in a video of what they couldn't accurately recall prior?
Memory is complicated, is the moral of the story. If you're trying to convince yourself of a specific scenario for how your memory is a problem, you're really just creating more noise for yourself. The memories you seek may not even be encoded or sent to long-term memory. Time additionally can automate our brain to self-destruct memories we have, yet are not useful to us.
This is far from a simple understanding or discussion, IMHO, based on the theory of memory encoding, storage and retrieval. There is a lot of the brain involved in the entire process, not a single dominant area. There is a lot that can go wrong at any given time within the process.
I hope that helps you think a little broader about this and research far more, and err on the side of this is theoretical, not pure fact.
