You'll excuse me if I don't hold an action-adventure series that was produced in the late 1960s as the standard-bearer for character growth in a show produced in the late 1990s.
Star Trek: The Next Generation is more complicated. At times we had plenty of consequences ("Family," the Borg arc, the Klingon arc) and at other times the characters would ignore great ordeals from the previous episode as if they had never happened. It was obviously transitioning to being a more modern kind of drama, but it wouldn't be until
Star Trek: Deep Space Nine that the franchise got there.
Star Trek: Voyager was a total backslide.
I don't see it as fair to blame Voyager for what has been the standard of story telling long before it. This is what Gene Roddenberry wanted Trek to be. This was noted when told Berman specifically that he didn't want the heroes of the show to have any lasting scars.
Roddenberry repeatedly told the producers of Star Trek II (and III, and IV, and V...) that he wanted the movie to be about Kirk and co. preventing the JFK assassination. You'll have to excuse me again if I don't care what he wanted, especially when it comes to
Star Trek: Voyager, a series which was conceived and produced entirely after Roddenberry's death.