Trauma-Informed or Trauma-Responsive?

TiD Moment

Trauma-Informed or Trauma-Responsive?

Trauma-informed and trauma-responsive--what's the difference?

Lately, we've seen some discourse suggesting that “trauma-informed" practices don't go far enough, and we should strive to be "trauma-responsive." These sources claim that trauma-informed approaches focus on developing an understanding of trauma and its possible negative impacts, but don't give practitioners the tools to respond to or prevent traumatization. But is this really accurate?

According to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA):

A program, organization, or system that is trauma-informed realizes the widespread impact of trauma and understands potential paths for recovery; recognizes the signs and symptoms of trauma in clients, families, staff, and others involved with the system; and responds by fully integrating knowledge about trauma into policies, procedures, and practices, and seeks to actively resist re-traumatization.

This "4-R" approach leaves no confusion about whether being trauma-informed includes responding and actively resisting re-traumatization. Being trauma-informed, as SAMHSA outlines it, is being trauma-responsive.

Why, then, is there so much conversation about consciously choosing to be trauma-responsive rather than trauma-informed?

We believe this reflects the reality that many trauma-informed care trainings currently offered address only the surface of what trauma-informed practice truly entails. The reality is that we live in a fast-paced world, and most professionals are looking for trainings that can be accomplished in a day, if not a lunch hour. Unfortunately, it is simply not possible to offer a brief training that provides individuals with enough information or skill to respond to or prevent traumatization, yet alone fully integrate trauma-informed practices. This leads to a misconception about what it means to be trauma-informed.

It's certainly understandable, as a literal translation of the term would imply that simply understanding the scope and impacts of trauma would suffice. For example, when our Cofounder and COO, Christine Cowart, works with teachers,

they often express their frustration with trauma-informed approaches. They explain that previous trainings in trauma-informed care left them feeling hopeless, because they now understood the prevalence and severity of trauma among their students but felt unable to intervene. They also often feel as though they cannot enforce any kind of discipline in the wake of this understanding and struggle without the classroom management techniques they relied on in the past.

What these teachers are describing is an early stage that individuals and organizations progress through when becoming trauma-informed, called "trauma-aware." We maintain that trauma-informed approaches take time and consistency to fully integrate within organizations and systems of care. Professional

development, supportive supervision, and coaching should be on-going to ensure staff develop the skills and feel empowered to prevent trauma in the first place, respond appropriately to those who have experienced trauma, and resist re-traumatization. To be trauma-informed means to actively and continuously

integrate lessons learned, reflexivity, and new knowledge, research, and applications into one’s approach. These informed perspectives are the root of the design process, which is in turn the act of responding and gathering further information along the way. The end result is a well-informed, comprehensive, and transformative response to the needs of individuals, organizations, and communities.

Trauma-informed care requires organizations to collaborate across staff and client hierarchies to translate their awareness into everyday practices that support resilience and protect against traumatization, then to codify these practices in enforceable, standard-setting policies that govern both internal and external processes. In the case of schools, this includes conducting regular curriculum reviews, to ensure students aren't being harmed by the resources, assignments, and language they face in their classrooms. The same concept applies to architecture and design firms, where risk analysis of personnel policies and research and engagement methods and materials should be standard, to ensure participants are protected from harm. This holistic approach ensures that the design can be effective immediately and into the future, because it is backed by strong evidence, operations, and policies.

The Trauma-informed Design Society uses and encourages the term "trauma-informed" in place of "trauma-responsive" and invites all TiD practitioners to continue their learning through professional development and ongoing community interaction with other informed practitioners. You can join the TiD Society discussion forum at https://www.tidsociety.com/discussion.