So, what is it to be trauma-informed? Trauma-informed practice recognizes the intersectionality of trauma, mental health, and substance abuse, with an awareness that anyone may have experienced trauma, whether they’ve disclosed it or not. Trauma-informed practice aims to create environments that prevent re-traumatization and promote a sense of safety. The individual client’s safety, choice, and control are prioritized throughout services. The approach focuses collaboration, learning, and building trust. Organizational culture should be non-hierarchical and supportive, and there is an emphasis on strengths and building resiliency, and hope that recovery is possible.
Decreasing seclusion & restraints
Being trauma-informed can potentially make a huge difference when it comes to seclusion and restraints. The use of seclusion and restraints can cause significant psychological or physical harm, including traumatization or re-traumatization. The British Columbia Centre of Excellence for Women’s Health identified several strategies for a trauma-informed approach to seclusion and restraints:
- staff training in de-escalation
- have comfort rooms with low sensory stimulation
- promote the development of crisis plans or advance directives to identify triggers and preferred interventions
- assess for and address any unmet needs that may be influencing behaviour
- debriefing following any use of seclusion or restraint to identify why it happened and what was learned.
When I was doing my master’s degree, one of my classmates was working in a psychiatric intensive care unit where they had instituted changes in their approach to seclusion and restraints in order to provide trauma-informed care. She had nothing but good things to say about this, and the unit had achieved very significant reductions in trauma and restraint utilization.
My own experience
My most memorable occasion of being in seclusion was when I had taken myself into hospital, with the support of my community psychiatrist, and said that I was feeling suicidal and needed ECT. They decided to commit me under the Mental Health Act and put me in seclusion, even though I had gone in voluntarily.
When I was informed that I’d be locked in seclusion, I asked to be sedated; the last thing I wanted was to be trapped with nothing but my thoughts. The nurse said there was nothing ordered. I asked if it would make a difference if I told her that I’d throw my tiny tube of hand cream at her. She disappeared, I heard a “code white” (aka violent patient aka me) being called over the PA system. A few minutes later, she returned with a bunch of security guards to give me the injection I’d asked for in the first place. How very therapeutic.
More than just a buzz-word
Sometimes in mental health care, certain approaches or practices will become buzzwords, and many organizations will jump on board. I think this has happened, at least to some extent, with trauma-informed practice, and it’s generally seen as something desirable. Where the problem lies, though, is that there’s a difference between claiming to be trauma-informed and actually being trauma-informed. I’m sure that the mental health and addictions program I work for would claim to be trauma-informed, just like they claim to be recovery-oriented. But in practice, it’s just lip service, although I highly doubt the people running the place would see it that way.
I think all mental health care organizations should be trauma-informed, but it’s essential that it look trauma-informed from the client perspective, not just the staff or management’s perspective. While individual care providers, for the most part, try (with varying degrees of success) to be empathetic, it’s difficult for some clinicians, and particularly for organizations, to have any real understanding of what the client perspective looks like, especially when their perspective is tinged by stigma.
Would you consider the mental health services that you’ve accessed to be trauma-informed?
- British Columbia Centre of Excellence for Women’s Health: Trauma-Informed Practice Guide