Content note: this piece discusses trauma responses and mental health.

Star Trek has a sketchy history when it comes to mental health care. In universe, you can say that Starfleet fails its employees – not always, but when it does, the results are disconcerting, to say the least.

We all know the refrain: “They passed the psych eval.” In a real workplace, especially a hazardous one, that’s the starting point, not the finish line. Dr. Julianne Ludlam writes for KKJ Psychology:

Psychological trauma is often so devastating that it is difficult to imagine it could be neglected, ignored, or misdiagnosed. However, individuals with trauma histories can present in complex and confusing ways, from a straightforward case with a single stressor and clear symptoms, to a complex case with a lengthy history and hidden suffering (Source: https://kkjpsych.com/trauma-informed-psychological-evaluations/).

She calls trauma-informed evaluations “a valuable resource for attorneys and courts working to provide fair, effective representation for clients with a history of suffering” (ibid.). The Brief Trauma Questionnaire (BTQ), a “10-item self-report questionnaire derived from the Brief Trauma Interview (…)”, “was originally designed to assess traumatic exposure according to DSM-IV but specifically asked only about Criterion A.1 (life threat/serious injury) because of the difficulty of accurately assessing A.2 (subjective response) in a brief self-report format” (Source: https://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/assessment/te-measures/brief_trauma_questionnaire_btq.asp), according to the VA’s National Center for PTSD.

We can deduce from these two sources that a) it is very difficult to accurately assess trauma, and that psych evals are instruments to do so, not an all-clear for people who have gone through a traumatic experience, and b) they are mostly used at workplaces for legal reasons and not so much as a healthcare measure.

That’s why Strange New Worlds S3E3, “Shuttle to Kenfori,” lands wrong for me. “Psych eval” is kind of used as an get-out-of-jail-free card by Enterprise’s first officer, Una Chin-Riley, who is in command of the flagship during the majority of the episode, most notably during the main action. The episode shows helmswoman Erica Ortegas clearly spiralling from unresolved Gorn trauma; Una sees it, keeps her in the most stressful seat on the ship, then punishes her when the predictable happens. The story frames the fallout as Erica’s failure rather than a command failure.

That’s not just rough leadership modelling; it’s weak story craft.

This is, in fact, bad writing, and it’s objectively measurable.

Below, I break down why using a simple four-check lens, which I explained in my previous blog post (Motivation • Logic • Pacing • Payoff), then point to Trek stories that handle mental health with more honesty, including a great multi-episode example: Trip Tucker’s grief arc in Enterprise season 3.

Duty of care > “passed the eval”

Starfleet dramas double as workplace dramas in a lot of cases. That’s mostly where the interpersonal relationships and conflicts come from, IN SPAAAAACE! In any high-risk environment, duty of care means: when a leader recognises impairment, they mitigate it – loop in medical, rotate roles, delay the op, or change the plan.

A psych clearance is a snapshot, not a shield against context. It’s one metric used to evaluate the effects of PTSD on the patient, but it should by no means be used as the end-all-be-all, the alpha and omega of workplace mental healthcare.

Trek has modelled this well before. TNG’s “Family” sits with Picard after Locutus; it gives him space and lets command responsibility share the weight. Discovery’s “Forget Me Not” acknowledges crew-wide trauma and explicitly builds supports into the ship’s routine. Those choices make the universe feel ethical and real.

Case study: “Shuttle to Kenfori”

“Kenfori” splits its time between Pike and M’Benga’s off-books mission and a tense border run aboard the Enterprise. At the helm, Erica Ortegas is hyper-vigilant and combative. This textbook triggered behaviour after her Gorn abduction. Before the main action climax, the senior officers meet up to talk strategy. Una notices Erica’s high-strung, tense, aggressive demeanour, which is atypical for her. La’an flags it. The show even calls out that Erica passed her evaluation.

She was allowed back to work full shifts after passing the psych eval, with no easing into it, no further therapy, nothing. Okay, maybe she did consult a counsellor; we’re not told that. However, during the meeting that we, the audience, get to see, Erica shows clear signs of PTSD that not only the ship’s security chief notices, but Erica’s commanding officer. La’an even asks if Erica was allowed back to work too soon, and Una shrugs it off by referring to the aforementioned passed psych eval.

Then … nothing changes. There is no consult with medical. No temporary rotation off the helm. No de-escalation plan. When Erica predictably reacts under pressure and disobeys a direct order, the episode resolves with a dressing-down and a benching – full stop. The framing lands the blame entirely on the symptomatic person while absolving the person who had the most power to mitigate risk: Una, the commanding officer.

Yes, disobeying an order matters. But leadership saw the risk and didn’t act. In real ops, that’s shared failure.

The reason why I call this bad writing is that the episode and the two follow-ups I’ve watched so far do not deal with this issue at all. We get a scene in a later episode where Una sternly talks about giving Erica the benefit of the doubt, but that’s it. The show does not frame this incident as leadership failure. It does not ask questions about how Starfleet deals with metal health or PTSD. It just chastises Erica for disobeying orders and being reckless, and that’s where the conversation ends. The show does not allow the framing of institutional failure. It’s clear that the blame lies on Erica alone, who is a PTSD sufferer.

Una was the commanding officer. She noticed that her subordinate was not okay, and she did absolutely nothing to help. That could be an interesting source of conflict, but it wasn’t. There was no conversation. There were no two sides. There was absolutely no accountability, and at no point does the show ask the question of how the environment, workplace pressure, and bad leadership shape the mental state and the performance of the employees.

That’s what’s bad about the writing. Let’s apply our four checks to make sure we’re being objective (and just to be clear: I actually liked this episode; it had zombies and everything!).

The Four Checks: separating taste from craft

Motivation – Pass.

The episode seeds Erica’s fear and anger coherently. Her choices track with her recent trauma. Her characterisation is coherent. There was an inciting incident. This was the payoff. Her extroverted, gung-ho personality was the basis for the anger and anxiety she felt due to her trauma. This is good writing.

Logic – Fail.

Command observes likely impairment and keeps her in a position of maximum consequence, then punishes the outcome. That breaks the implied logic of Starfleet’s duty of care. The problem isn’t so much that Una is a flawed person who made a very bad command decision and refused a shred of accountability. The problem is that the episode and the following episodes in the season frame her as correct and as a good commanding officer, which is not the case. She’s shown to be self-righteous and callous, as well as avoidant of personal responsibility. The show does not engage with this. It’s a classic show-don’t-tell issue: SNW tells the audience that Una is a competent, empathetic, fair first officer. However, it shows us that when there’s a moment of actual crisis that involves someone else being in emotional pain, she lacks empathy and will not accept her own responsibility in the situation. That is bad writing.

Pacing – Weak.

Bridge tension spikes, then resolves in a quick reprimand scene. There’s no process – no medical consult, no debrief, no follow-through – so the conflict feels like plot accelerant rather than a developed thread. Like I said, the episode lacks a conversation about mental health, metrics of mental health, and how workplace pressures can damage said mental health. It throws PTSD in as a plot device and then refuses to actually deal with it. If you’re not going to focus on something this monumental, then don’t use it at all. It comes across as cheap and unempathetic. There was way too much time spent with the clichéd Klingon warriooorrrrrrrr (rawr), and not nearly enough with the question of what trauma can do to a person and how bad leadership regarding trauma can threaten the safety of everyone on the ship. That is bad writing.

Payoff – Miss.

The narrative centres personal blame and never interrogates the system or leadership choices. The larger thematic question – what do compassionate leaders owe traumatised crew in a live-fire situation? – goes unaddressed. The plot point, the characterisation are set up, but the payoff is minimal. Nobody critically engages with the issue, and in the next episode, all is forgotten, which is something Star Trek has done in the past but should be past by now. That is bad writing.

Trek has done better

• Nog: DS9 “It’s Only a Paper Moon.” A sustained recovery arc with therapy, community scaffolding, and setbacks. The story commits time to healing. Nog’s personality shines through, and the way his trauma informs his choices is deeply connected with his character traits and his socialisation as a Ferengi. Trauma and the fallout are treated with respect, empathy, and the necessary screentime. This is good writing.
• Picard: TNG “Family.” Command recognises the wound, gives space to process it, and the episode treats recovery as part of duty. Picard is never the same after his Borg ordeal, and the show makes a point of showing this. He also deals with his trauma the only way he knows how, and his stoicism and emotionally stunted personality hinder his recovery dramatically. This is good writing.
• Discovery: “Forget Me Not.” Captain and CMO name the problem and build structure around it. The message is: you don’t white-knuckle this alone. Adira is suffering, and the Discovery’s crew are there for them, support them, take them seriously, and show that the crew is an interconnected organism. Rugged individualism and tough-it-out mentality never saved anyone from the consequences of trauma, and this episode shows this very clearly. People need a support system, and especially on a ship with a strict hierarchy, command needs to be empathetic. This is good writing.

These episodes don’t pretend trauma vanishes between commercial breaks, and they don’t offload all the responsibility onto the person in pain – which is a very capitalistic mindset that has no place in Star Trek.

A great example: Trip Tucker’s grief (Enterprise S3)

If you want to see Star Trek thread consequences over time, look at Trip Tucker in Enterprise season 3. After the Xindi attack kills his sister Elizabeth, the show carries that loss through the entire arc: sleeplessness, a short fuse, ethical friction, intimacy and avoidance (including the neuropressure scenes with T’Pol). In “The Forgotten,” Trip is pushed to finish a condolence letter and finally articulates what the death did to him.

What makes it good writing is not just the moment, it’s the return: the way the grief keeps reshaping decisions, relationships, and temperament across episodes. That’s consequence. That’s payoff. Something awful happens to Trip. He tries to soldier on and tough it out, because all of humanity depends on Enterprise’s mission to find the Xindi and stop them succeeding. But Trip is deeply traumatised, and the issues don’t go away by being ignored. He suffers the consequences, and these consequences shape his character arc beautifully. The writing is consistent. The focus on his issues is appropriate. The payoff is consistent. Say what you want about any of the shows above, but good writing means paying attention to the universe you created and the people who populate it. Enterprise did this with perfection in Trip’s case.

The “reset” problem (say it with love)

Trek can also be guilty of what I call the reset button. DS9’s “Hard Time” is extraordinary television about trauma; the follow-through afterward is minimal. It’s not a moral indictment of the show, just a craft note at the series level: a powerful incident with little systemic aftermath.

“Kenfori” hits that same seam. It raises the question and then resets, which cheapens both the drama and the characters’ humanity.

How “Kenfori” could fix itself in two beats

No plot overhaul required. Two short moments align character, theme, and Trek’s ethos:

1. Mitigation on the record. Una clocks impairment → calls medical → temporarily reassigns the helm. (Compassion and operational prudence.)
2. Shared accountability. In the reprimand, Una owns the command choice: “I saw the risk and didn’t mitigate; that’s on me. Disobeying an order is still unacceptable.”

Same mission, same stakes – now the story models leadership instead of making trauma a personnel problem.

Why this matters

Star Trek has always doubled as a blueprint for better futures. If we want the franchise to keep modelling humane institutions, mental health can’t just be flavour text. Trauma isn’t a twist; it’s a variable leaders manage and a reality characters live with. When the writing acknowledges that, episodes deepen. When it ignores it, we get unintentional portraits of bad leadership masquerading as hard-nosed discipline.

Good writing means consistency: consistent characterisation, consistent world-building. It means focus on the right issues, not throwing in something as life-altering as PTSD and then using it as a cheap, one-off plot beat. It means payoff: if you introduce high stakes, they better matter, in the end, and they better make sense.

I hold Star Trek to a high standard because I nurture deep and lasting love for the franchise. And it’s not like I hated this episode. On the contrary: it was fun and exciting, and I love me some zombie shenanigans. Still, it could have been better, because the poor handling of Erica Ortegas’ PTSD soured the experience for me. It lacked depth, it unintentionally sent the wrong message, it characterised Una in a highly unlikable way, and the payoff was ridiculously underdeveloped.

Star Trek can do better, and we can hold it accountable by identifying bad writing in a concise, objective way that weeds out bad actors – mostly those who are afraid of brown people, women, and the gays.

Always remember the Vulcan credo (they don’t actually live by because they’re a bunch of joyless racists): infinite diversity in infinite combinations.

Keep trekking.

References

Baugher, L. (2025, July 24). Star Trek: Strange New Worlds Season 3 Episode 3 review — “Shuttle to Kenfori”. Den of Geek. https://www.denofgeek.com/tv/star-trek-strange-new-worlds-season-3-episode-3-review-shuttle-to-kenfori/

Epsicokhan, J. (1990, October 1). “Family” | Star Trek: TNG. Jammer’s Reviews. https://www.jammersreviews.com/st-tng/s4/family.php

Epsicokhan, J. (1996, April 15). “Hard Time” | Star Trek: DS9. Jammer’s Reviews. https://www.jammersreviews.com/st-ds9/s4/hardtime.php

Epsicokhan, J. (1998, December 28). “It’s Only a Paper Moon” | Star Trek: DS9. Jammer’s Reviews. https://www.jammersreviews.com/st-ds9/s7/papermoon.php

Epsicokhan, J. (2004, April 28). “The Forgotten” | Star Trek: Enterprise. Jammer’s Reviews. https://www.jammersreviews.com/st-ent/s3/forgotten.php

IMDb. (2025). “Shuttle to Kenfori” (S3E3). https://www.imdb.com/title/tt27335045/

Ludlam, J. (2025). Trauma-Informed Psychological Evaluations. Retrieved August 21, 2025, from KKJ Psychology. https://kkjpsych.com/trauma-informed-psychological-evaluations/

Memory Alpha (n.d.). Elizabeth Tucker. Memory Alpha. Retrieved August 20, 2025, from https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Elizabeth_Tucker

Phipps, K. (2025, July 24). Star Trek: Strange New Worlds recap: “Dead Planet” (S3E3 “Shuttle to Kenfori”). Vulture. https://www.vulture.com/article/star-trek-strange-new-worlds-recap-season-3-episode-3.html

Reactor. (2023, June 5). Star Trek: Enterprise Rewatch — “The Forgotten.” https://reactormag.com/star-trek-enterprise-rewatch-the-forgotten/

Shuttle to Kenfori (episode). (n.d.). Memory Alpha. Retrieved August 20, 2025, from https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Shuttle_to_Kenfori_(episode)

Star Trek: Discovery Season 3, Episode 4 review — “Forget Me Not.” (2020, November 5). Den of Geek. https://www.denofgeek.com/tv/star-trek-discovery-season-3-episode-4-review-forget-me-not/

Star Trek: Strange New Worlds (season 3). (n.d.). Wikipedia. Retrieved August 20, 2025, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Trek%3A_Strange_New_Worlds_season_3

The Forgotten (episode). (n.d.). Memory Alpha. Retrieved August 20, 2025, from https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/The_Forgotten_(episode)

The m0vie blog. (2015, August 28). Star Trek: Enterprise — “The Forgotten” (Review). https://them0vieblog.com/2015/08/28/star-trek-enterprise-the-forgotten-review/

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, National Center for PTSD. (2025, March 25). Brief Trauma Questionnaire (BTQ). PTSD: National Center for PTSD. https://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/assessment/te-measures/brief_trauma_questionnaire_btq.asp