In an interview with Austrian public television ORF, which was aired on Tuesday, Natascha Kampusch said she was still plagued by her ordeal and found it tough adjusting to her new, free life. She said she had difficulty eating, going out alone or being in large crowds. She now lives alone in Vienna and has access to counselors to help her recover.

Kidnapped in 1998, Kampusch was forced to live in a basement cell for eight years. Her extraordinary escape in August made headlines around the world. Kampusch's life is the subject of a recent book by two British journalists.

Natascha's September interview on ORF

Another similar case

Not unlike Kampusch, then 13-year-old Stephanie Rudolph -- a German -- was seized on her way to school in Dresden in January.

During her five weeks of captivity, her kidnapper repeatedly raped her. Rudolph managed to drop a note on the sidewalk during a rare walk with her abuser. A passerby spotted it and alerted police, who freed her after several bumbled attempts. Rudolph likewise gave an interview in late September -- shortly after Kampusch's first one on ORF-- to German public broadcaster ZDF.

Rudolph's captor was given the maximum sentence last week of 15 years in prison.

DW-WORLD.DE spoke with German child psychologist and trauma expert Christian Lüdke about the effects of going public with such dramatic events.

DW-WORLD.DE: Is it damaging to the girls to give public interviews?

Christian Lüdke

Christian Lüdke: Both are victims of unbelievably violent acts. Their childhoods were ended brutally and abominably. They were traumatized and need protection and a sense of security.

In general, I think it is right to give the victims a voice, to allow them to speak in public about what happened to them, but only when they are truly ready and when it is beneficial to them.

In Natascha's case, she gave the interview when she was still in shock, in Stephanie's case, while the trial was underway. It was as though they should sell their souls in the way they were asked to divulge information to the public.

The German public broadcaster ZDF requested my opinion about Stephanie Rudolph appearing on their talk show, and I strongly advised against it. I believe such an appearance takes away from the magnitude of the situation; it belittles it. The girls present themselves as stable individuals who have hardly been hurt at all. The culprit is then affirmed in a certain way, and the whole situation appears less dramatic than it actually was.

Millions tuned into Natascha's first interview in September

But in both of these cases, the girls approached the media, and not the other way around.

In Natascha's case, her advisors said the paparazzi was chasing her and rather than giving in to them, the whole business could be turned upside down. In my opinion, that was the wrong advice. They could have simply published a picture of Natascha, and protected her that way.

I found it appalling that during the interview she just suppressed the horrible events. In the end, it was as if a fairy tale were being presented. People wanted to see a fairy tale and they got it: it was as if a girl like "Sleeping Beauty" had suddenly appeared after 100 years. She's pretty, she's eloquent, and people end up forgetting that she has been brutally abused.

And Stephanie?

I think it was her father's interests which were being served, and her lawyers' -- they wanted to be in the limelight. Stephanie should have been protected more and been given peace and quiet, and not been confronted with the whole situation again, especially not with the culprit. Again, it is right to give victims a voice, but not in such a way that other people gain attention for it. That is reprehensible -- both from a professional and a human standpoint. It is a form of victim abuse.

Nonetheless, could the girls' interviews perhaps have helped other victims of violent acts who may have been watching?

There were probably thousands of people watching who may have experienced something similar -- abuse, rape, being held involuntarily -- but I don't believe that Natascha's and Stephanie's descriptions were cathartic for them. It couldn't have been healing for them. The images just come flooding back, which can lead to further trauma. The can of worms is opened up again, the show comes to an end, and then they stand there helpless and alone. That can't be helpful.

Mario Mederake received 15-years in jail for kidnapping and abusing Stephanie R.

Why are other people interested in watching such interviews?

They are fascinated by that which is repugnant, but there's another reason: hearing such stories also offers relief to some people. They feel relieved that such horrible events have not happened to them or their loved ones. However, the latest studies show that for many people who are permanently confronted with such violence on television, a slow trauma process creeps up on them -- they gradually lose a sense of security themselves by hearing about such violent acts in the media.

How can one go about the whole issue better?

I think it's right to inform the public, and to do it quickly and comprehensively -- to explain what happened to the victims because providing information, after all, also gives people a sense of security. It's also right since the perpetrators are so often presented as victors, while the victims are shown as losers. Actually, I find the victims to be the stronger ones because they have survived, and it takes courage to talk to the public. But one should respect their boundaries so that an interview does not become another form of abuse.

Also, in Stephanie's case, she did not appear in court to testify against her captor. That was the right decision. She shouldn't have to confront her victimizer and be traumatized again.

What is a healthy way for victims to try to come to terms with such an experience?

Such traumatic experiences rob victims of a fundamental sense of security. The acts imprint themselves on their souls and in how they feel about their bodies. But every human being has his or her own method of recovery and self-healing. The most essential thing is that survivors live in a peaceful atmosphere and gain distance to the events. They should do nice things and not be constantly confronted with the negative experiences. Young people in particular need a safe environment and reliable people around them who convey a sense of hope. These young girls will never be able to forget what happened to them, but everyone has the ability to overcome even the most horrible events imaginable given the proper support.