The capacity of a collective to triumph over shared adversities is based on maintaining and augmenting social cohesion, mutual support, cooperation, and a sense of belonging to a valued social group and community. Initially many disasters are attended by affected communities mobilising into a heroic and altruistic struggle to fulfil survivors’ immediate needs, and to shield them from an overwhelming sense of loss. However, this heroic stage inevitably ceases, and may not be sufficient to conquer slowly evolving erosion of social relationships. This chapter reviews empirical investigations documenting that, post disaster, the path of instantaneous mobilisation of resources emerges in the domain of received social support. The path of a lingering sense of deterioration of resources occurs in the domain of perceived social support and social embeddedness. Differences in the dynamics of social support between disasters resulting from natural and human-induced hazards are noted.

In June 1981, south-eastern Kentucky experienced serious and widespread flooding. Losses amounted to over nine million dollars and, despite the sparse population of the area, over 500 families were left homeless for varying periods of time. In May 1984, a storm system brought tornadoes, strong winds, and severe, extensive flooding to this same area. More than 6000 homes were damaged and over 5000 persons were forced out of their homes by the flooding. The losses, totalling over 20 million dollars, prompted a presidential disaster declaration.

What impact did these two floods have upon their rural Appalachian victims? Were these individuals able to take these events ‘in stride’ or did they present a serious challenge to their ability to cope? Did these floods leave a lasting impact upon the mental and physical wellbeing of these individuals or did they only result in relatively minor and short-lived emotional upset? Were some people more affected than others? What was the impact on the community as a whole? Were these communities able to ‘rally around’ their members or were they shattered and split apart? Did daily life in the community ‘bounce back’ to normal in a few weeks or was the sense of community irreparably altered? These questions and others were the focus of our study of the psychosocial impact of the Kentucky floods.

A considerable body of scientific literature has examined the impact of such disasters on the mental and physical health of victims.