We Need to Understand How to Provide Trauma-Informed Care

Print More

The philosophy of trauma-informed care is becoming more and more embedded in the philosophies and practices of child-serving agencies.

When a child experiences a single traumatic event and is fortunate enough to be surrounded by supportive and nurturing adults, that trauma can generally be assessed and usually treated effectively with the help of parental support. When a traumatized child responds with internalized distress such as sadness, depression or anxiety, our systems appear to understand what that child needs to help in their healing and recovery.

However, when a child has experienced multiple and complex trauma, child-serving professionals, including those in behavioral health, child welfare, juvenile justice and educators, can struggle to see the connection between such histories and other common presentations.

It is not uncommon for children with histories of complex trauma to respond with externalizing behaviors and to be diagnosed with disruptive behavior disorders such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, oppositional defiant disorder or conduct disorder. Sometimes children also respond with agitated depression and anxiety. These are the children who may at times rage, fight, argue, refuse to comply, run away, lie and steal.

For more information, visit the JJIE Resource Hub

Why the disconnect between trauma experiences and disruptive behavior disorders? The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-V) does not yet adequately capture the experiences of trauma in children. Instead, the available diagnoses capture only parts of a child’s trauma experiences and presentation.

The problem that I see with this is that an individual diagnosis guides treatment intervention and interventions may or may not include the specific treatment of the trauma. When children are diagnosed with depression or anxiety, it is the depression or anxiety that is targeted in the treatment, rather than the trauma, which is sometimes also the primary issue. When children are diagnosed with disruptive behavior disorders, targeted intervention tends to focus on these behaviors or the secondary symptoms of the trauma, rather than the trauma history itself.

When we think of trauma responses in the simplest form, we think of the “fight-flight-freeze” responses common in traumatized children. The “fight” response can present as verbal or physical aggression; the “flight” response can present as avoidance or refusal, and the “freeze” response can present as dissociation, daydreaming or numbing.

In turn, I see corresponding reactions from child-serving professionals who work with traumatized children. These are the children who can trigger countertransference reactions in the professionals meant to serve them.

The professionals can have a “fight” reaction, which can present as frustration, anger and punitive treatment recommendations; a “flight” response, which can present as child or case avoidance, feeling of hopelessness and referral elsewhere, or a “freeze” response, which can present as a feeling of helplessness or impotence in working with the child or not knowing what to do, so doing nothing.

I see these nontrauma-informed responses toward systems-involved children from both highly trained professionals and those with limited training in behavioral health, child welfare, juvenile justice, and education. Such triggers can elicit our own “fight-flight-freeze” responses to these children presenting with “fight-flight-freeze” reactions to ongoing trauma triggers.

When a trauma-informed approach is being fully used, the behaviors of these children should be seen as “normal” secondary reactions to the trauma they have and are still experiencing. An approach that is not fully trauma-informed will view these children’s behaviors as volitional, purposeful, manipulative and in need of significant consequences.

That is not to say that children should not receive consequences for their behavior. However, such consequences should be focused on teaching appropriate behavior rather than punishing the behavior, especially by escalated means when initial attempts are not successful.

Not uncommonly, staff serving a child agency are overwhelmed with the numbers of child with significantly complex needs, enormous corresponding paperwork requirements and strict deadlines. These working conditions can make otherwise caring, concerned and patient staff less so. Staff have varying degrees of education, experience and quality of ongoing training and supervision. Thus, it is not unusual when staff are triggered by children who challenge their authority or are not engaged.

Our responses of frustration, anger, avoidance and hopelessness only reinforce the same feelings in traumatized children. There is a saying in the school counseling field: “Those children needing the most love will ask for it in the most unloving ways.”

It is easy to react in a trauma-informed manner when a child is responsive and appreciative of our efforts, and treats us with respect. It is harder to respond effectively when that child refuses to talk to us, comply with our requests, tells us off in colorful language or otherwise acts disrespectfully. But these are the children who need us the most.

Luckily, there is training and education available on the neurobiology of trauma. This is the important and emerging research that is connecting the effects of trauma to different domains of a child’s functioning. The domains that can be affected include behavioral, cognitive, emotional and relational functioning.

Without understanding the common effects of trauma in a child’s functioning, the obvious conclusion is that these children are behaving in volitional and manipulative means. If it is understood that these children have difficulty modulating their impulses and are responding in survival (fight-flight-freeze) mode, this allows for a more patient, respectful and positive intervention.

Understanding that these children’s central nervous systems are activated and in need of calming allows us the patience to work with children in calm and respectful ways and reminds us that traumatized children do not “get it” the first, second or third time. Plus, traumatized children do not wake up one day to trust you because you believe you are a trustworthy person. When we understand the effects of trauma, especially pertaining to disruptive behavior, we are better prepared to be with and to help these children.

Most children behave or wish to behave well. Most children want adult respect, love and guidance. Most of those who do not behave well have not yet learned how to behave well and will need lots of time and practice with our guidance.

Our negative responses to disruptive behavior can and do reinforce the misbehavior. In turn, most child-serving professionals like and want to work with children, even if we sometimes do not know how to do so.

Beverly Tobiason, Psy.D., is the clinical director at Pima County Juvenile Court Center in Tucson, Arizona. She can be reached at Beverly.tobiason@pcjcc.pima.gov

3 thoughts on “We Need to Understand How to Provide Trauma-Informed Care

  1. Thank you Beverly Tobiason for your thoughtful and “spot-on” piece…” We need to Understand How to Provide Trauma-Informed Care” . I have worked with children in community schools, UPK programs, and in churches and have witnessed how adults, parents, teachers and even professionals move to, respond by squelching the “acting out, bad behaviors” of these children rather than understanding with love, patience, and care the trauma behind these children’s behaviors. Their response only serve to re-traumatize the child with no change in the behavior. As a professional, I have also experienced my own “flight-fight-freeze” response while working with children. I absolutely recommend professionals to the education and information on the neurobiology of trauma.

  2. Trauma-informed therapy is essential for children. As a psychotherapist, I rely look for what happened to a child, not what is “wrong” with him or her. (Adults, too!) I developed a new paradigm for understanding problems called Self-Acceptance Psychology. (www.SelfAcceptancePsychology.com)

    Self-Acceptance Psychology explains the real, root causes of supposed “mental disorders” and reframes these as normal, natural behaviors resulting from trauma, loss of attachment, low self-worth, fear, shame, self-criticism and a desperate need for love and belonging. These can be easily and effectively addressed without medications by learning to generate self-acceptance. Yet the psychiatry profession continues to medicalize “mental disorders” and push pills, rather than advocate for safe, effective psychotherapy and self-help. As I learned myself, the solution to self-doubt and self-recrimination is finding compassionate self-acceptance, so that internal judgments and the high need for approval decrease. The ideas work for kids and adults, both.

  3. As an individual who has experienced multiple traumas myself, I find that being able to relate, while making sure I am genuine and not trying to get my own needs met by my clients are strengths that have brought favorable outcomes to everyone I have worked with. I have a difficult time seeing so much movement about trauma informed approach and ACEs, when we all have the capacity to just be mature. When I see time and time that retaliation based on feelings is the response given by professionals when a person has been in fight flight or freeze, we are making symptoms and problems greater not less. How can we see disaster as opportunity? Try the Coach approach. Teaching people by example and by being with to help them learn new possibilities.