From Chaos To Calm: Routines, Relationships, And Real Change In Residential Care, Tom Ellison

From Chaos To Calm: Routines, Relationships, And Real Change In Residential Care

Quality residential care for children who have experienced trauma starts long before any therapy session. It lives in the culture of the home, the clarity of purpose, and the daily rhythm that makes life predictable enough for healing to begin. Experienced organisations describe how knowledge seeps into the “wallpaper” over time: shared language, trusted rituals, and the confidence to pause and think. Reflective spaces matter because staff carry complex feelings that need sorting, not suppressing. Without room to think, practice drifts into firefighting. With it, teams align on a simple aim: help each child feel seen, safe, and understood, then build connection on top of that safety.

Understanding isn’t a soft extra; it is the work. One story shows why. A boy became volatile every evening around bath time. Staff felt scared and resentful until a life story worker shared a missing piece: as a younger child, he was punished with cold baths and held underwater. That single fact transformed how the team felt and acted. They softened bath time, stayed close, and let empathy guide tone and timing. More than tactics, it was the emotional shift that eased the storms. When we know a child’s story, our stance changes from “stop this” to “I get why this is hard,” and behaviour often follows. Curiosity beats control because it treats the child as a mind with a history, not a set of problems to manage.

Routines and rituals are the unsung heroes. They create a steady beat that steadies bodies and minds. Meals at known times, a Sunday ritual everyone can name, bedtime that doesn’t slide around, and roles that are clear reduce guesswork and anxiety. Predictability is not dull for traumatised children; it is relief. The running of the home should be “boringly” consistent so relationships can carry the colour. When homes rush to add models, labels, and jargon, staff drown in concepts and children still don’t know what happens next. Start with the basics: reliable routines, agreed boundaries, and a shared understanding of the primary task. Add reflective practice to tune those basics to each child.

Admission itself is a major intervention. Moving from one world to another is unforgettable, and how a home claims a child sets the tone for belonging. Sending a key worker to meet, bridge, and “claim” the young person helps answer the first-night question: who will keep me alive here? Belonging grows faster when one adult becomes the gateway to the wider team, rituals signal “you are ours,” and the environment feels warm and homely. This foundation lets therapy take root. As clinicians remind us, therapeutic impact depends on dose and context; a technique without the right environment often does nothing. A well-held daily life is already therapeutic, and it makes formal help far more effective.

Staff hold a parental role, but an enriched one. Ordinary parenting isn’t enough when early adversity has shaped development. Children may function well in calm moments, then buckle when routines touch old fears. Authority therefore must be consistent, compassionate, and shared across the team. Boundaries like phone use or curfews are hard to hold if staff disagree or legal orders sow confusion. Still, good parenting means sometimes saying no and always explaining why with care. The aim is not compliance for its own sake; it is safety, dignity, and the experience of being held in mind. Over time, kids test, watch, and learn: do you keep me safe when I lose it? Do you stay when I push you away?

Ask alumni what mattered and you hear the same themes: love, belonging, and small, joyful moments. A weekly quiz show, a silly in-joke, a hot chocolate after a hard evening. These memories are not incidental; they are the texture of healing. For new workers, this is good news. You don’t need perfect theory to matter. Bring steady presence, protect routines, get curious about one child’s story, and use your authority like a good parent would: firm, fair, and warm. Keep building that reservoir of knowledge, together. The child won’t forget how you made their world predictable and how you made them feel understood. That is what transforms futures.

You can listen to the podcast episode here:

You can watch the podcast episode here:

Transcript:

Colby: 0:00

Hello and welcome to the Secure Start podcast.

Tom: 0:04

Organisations that have been engaged in this work for a while tend to be pretty good at it. I’ve been involved in a number of startups over the last few years. And there are things that you can do that help. Regardless of what the therapeutic or the theoretical framework you use is, it’s good to have a therapeutic or theoretical framework. It’s good to have terms of reference that everybody can agree upon. The thing that works really well is a basic framework of this is how we work and some clarity about what are we here to do. And in above all, a space to think and reflect. The idea that we pause in the work regularly and we think about what’s going on for the children and what’s going on for us and what’s going on in the space between. What might staff starting this work need to know, and what might foster care need to know? The thing that I would say is the thing that you’re striving for is understanding. If you’re an RCW, you residential care worker and you started in the work last week, a good place to start is what would give me a better understanding of one of these children. The act of admission is a massive intervention. If you know the stories of the children, it will affect how you are with them. But actually, I think there’s a huge value in structure and boundaries and routines and rituals and the care plan and the the running of the home should be quite boring. Because the children, because it should be so predictable. You know, if you want to establish a children’s home that that and you want it to be beyond the ordinary, there needs to be a lot of focus on okay, what are our rituals and routines and uh how do we deliver those consistently? And how do we get to understand our children better? And by definition of therapeutic is it’s the conscious use of relationships to deliver transformation. But I think sometimes you need to be reminded, and your custodians of childhood. So you part of your job is to give these children a childhood that they will remember fondly. If the thing that has led you to being where you are is a failure of parenting, the solution should be some kind of parenting. What everything we do has the potential to be something that that child makes use of later. As an adult, I think children have a sense of people trying, even when they’re getting it wrong.

Colby: 2:45

Hello and welcome to the Secure Start podcast. I’m Colby Pearce, and rejoining me this episode is highly regarded social care consultant in the UK, Tom Ellison. Now, before we begin our conversation, I’d just like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the lands that I come to you from, the Ghana people of the Adelaide Plains, and acknowledge the continuing connection the living Ghana people feel to land, waters, culture, and community. I’d also like to pay my respects to their elders, past, present, and emerging. So as I said, I’ve got Tom Ellison uh rejoining me for this episode. And uh Tom previously was on the podcast for episode 27. So um if you want to hear more me uh read out his bio. Um we’re streamlining streamlining it a bit this time, but uh his bio is there, it will be in the notes for this show. Um, and it was episode 27. Welcome, Tom. Welcome back. Thank you. Thank you. It’s good to be back. Yeah, no, it’s good to have you back because I do I did feel at the end of the last podcast interview that we we kind of only got the conversation half done in a way.

Tom: 4:14

Yeah, well, I think um there was there was a big focus on leadership, and and I know you wanted to come back and talk about uh the work with children and and what what effective residential childcare might look like. Um so happy to be back.

Colby: 4:33

Well, that’s probably an excellent spot to start uh in terms of um I’m interested to hear your views, and I’m sure our listeners and watchers will will be too about what effective, what quality um residential care looks like, and is there any distinction between quality and effective? I’m not really sure, but happy to hear your views.

Tom: 4:55

Yeah, I think um there’s a big invitation to jump into talking about attachment and trauma and therapeutic frameworks, etc. But I think the there’s there’s a few things that you just can’t help noticing when you’ve been around the work for a while. So one is um organizations that have been engaged in this work for a while tend to be pretty good at it. So so you know, I saw your interview with uh John Turberville and Kevin Gallagher, who each come from you know their organizations have been around a while, certainly decades. And the there is something about organizations doing this work accumulate knowledge over time. And that you know, one of the phrases I’ve used is it kind of gets into the wallpaper. So it’s not so much about, yeah, there are individuals you could point to and say, okay, that person’s been around a while, that’s a wise head. We could go and ask them an opinion on an issue. Um, but there is something to be said for um the culture that develops over time, and that’s you know, that that’s partly shaped by the theoretical framework, the consultants, the the people leading those organizations. It’s also shaped by the children. So there’s a organizations respond to what the children, the challenges that the children bring through the door, and and you know, uh uh a good organization or a good uh children’s home is responsive to the children, not just in terms of uh what the children tell you they need or they want, but what the children show you they need and they want. And so, you know, one one of the again, you know, if I’m visiting a service, a children’s home or an establishment, I’ll quite often ask the manager how long have you been here? And and and you can draw conclusions from that. You you you know that that there are there are few substitutes for experience and and time travel. That said, there are things I’ve been involved in um a number of startups over the last few years, and there are things that you can do that help, you know, and so um regardless of what the therapeutic or the theoretical framework you use is, it’s good to have a therapeutic or theoretical framework, it’s good to have terms of reference that everybody can agree upon, and you know, there’s various. If you sort of wander around and do a tour of the UK, there are various, and there are various kind of levels as well. There’s there’s uh so, for example, in the last few years, there’s um a training called pace training, which is you know, um it it it’s kind of a training in how to be around children, involving things like being curious and being empathetic, and things that are just a good idea if you’re gonna be around children who’ve experienced trauma. But I I would treat that as that’s almost universal now, it’s almost a standard training for anybody working in residential, but then there are layers beyond that, and and quite often one of the phrases I use is there’s levels to this game. There are there are, and and certainly uh in my career, I it it’s almost like layers of understanding as you travel. It becomes deeper and deeper and deeper. And the the the danger is that you hear about that there’s so many theoretical frameworks and models that you can choose from that you end up overloading the staff because a senior a senior manager comes across pace training or social pedagogy or pillars of parenting or secure base, and they think, oh, well, I’ll bring that one in, and then they’ll bring another one in, and then they’ll bring another one in. And then before long, the staff at the call face are a little bit overwhelmed, and they’re mixing up their metaphors, and a lot of jargon’s getting deployed. And you’ll know from the last podcast, I’m not particularly a fan of jargon. That that, but I think the thing that works really well is um a basic framework of this is how we work and some clarity about what we are here to do, and you know, above all, a space to think and reflect. So whether that’s um individually with staff in supervision or whether that’s in moreover, whether that’s in a a group setting, and and that gets called different things depending on the organization, might be reflective practice in one, it might be called dynamics in another. But the the idea that we pause in the work regularly and we think about what’s going on for the children and what’s going on for us and what’s going on in the space between. And so um when I when I’ve been helping, as I have been recently, organizations to establish new services, they’re the kind of uh the reference points that I go to. The first one being what what’s it for? What what what what does what is what is this service, children’s home? What is it for? What’s it to do? What’s the problem that it solves? And then build out from there. But universally, if you were, you know, in terms of working with looked after children, universally, there’s some level of trauma and attachment there. It might be variable in how it manifests, but but it’s there. And so therefore, I would always kind of build in the idea of well, there needs to be reflective spaces, and there needs to be somewhere where the staff can reflect on and think about the experiences of the children. And again, you going back to you know the organizations that you would say, oh, they’re pretty good at this stuff. That’s where they’ve iteratively done that over decades. The thing that’s allowed that culture to develop so that they’ve got good at doing the work is that there is an iterative process of things happening between the staff and the children, and then the staff having a space where they can think about it and process it and develop a greater understanding of what’s going on for the children.

Colby: 11:35

I talk about this a bit in my own work, that um one of the things that you you if you work for a long time and if an organization has it has existed for a long time, um, serving a community, then you have the opportunity to reflect back on not just immediate or short-term impacts of the work that you do, but longer-term impacts uh of the work that you do as well. So you build up a bank of knowledge really about what what works and doesn’t work and what lot long-term outcomes, medium to long-term outcomes look like for um for the for the for the people that we’re serving um just based on on being around for a long time and trying different things and seeing how those things work or don’t work. And I know, for example, um you you mentioned the mulberry bush, that they have um with Richard Rawlinson and and others, they have become quite proactive in terms of reconnecting with alumni of of the mulberry bush, um adults now, parents, you know, husbands and wives, um who came through that system and and are still they’re still getting this, they’re getting longer-term feedback about the experience of young people as they’ve gone through the mulberry bush, which um which can only really um add to that important practice wisdom that develops over time.

Tom: 13:19

Yeah, I think that you someone said to me if I look at um residential care in the UK as a whole, there are fewer, I’m gonna say controversial things now, but there are fewer specialist providers than there used to be. So that so it if I think 15-20 years ago, there were a number of providers, usually operated by their founder, who were um doing innovative and creative things, some that you might agree with, some that you might find a bit more controversial, but they were all trying to pioneer um working with children who’ve experienced trauma and who are in the looked-after children’s system. Um I think increasingly there are I think something’s happened over the last 15 years where there are fewer of those organizations than there used to be. Um, I think that it creates a space because it creates an opportunity for other people to jump in who’ve got ideas. But I think that someone um said to me a couple of years ago, we’ve forgotten how to do this work. And he’s not talking about individual establishments, he’s talking about as a sector, the the knowledge, um, the reservoir of knowledge in the sector is less than it used to be. And I I kind of agree with that, that um the thinking that gets deployed in some organizations is not as great as it should be. And so where organizations are, um, as I know some of some of the organizations you’ve been in contact with are um gathering and preserving knowledge about this work, that becomes important. Because it’s because where do where do you where do you go to learn to be good at this work? Because an awful lot of um practice has been distilled into short courses, and we’ll deliver a short course and you can go off and do therapeutic work with children without an understanding of actually it’s an ongoing process, you never actually get there. You never you in you know when you got in touch and said, Well, let’s do another one where we talk about the children, I always feel a bit um I’m much more nervous talking about the practice with the children than I would be about talking about leadership because I feel like with the children, you never actually get there. You you’re you’re just constantly trying to you’re constantly trying to get closer to something that’s helpful. And um so what one of the things that you know in terms of experience, one of the things that I went through is as I got more knowledgeable in this work over decades, I felt guilt that I wasn’t good enough in the beginning. So you so you look back to the children that I worked with in the first, I don’t know, three, four, five, six years in residential practice. And the more sophisticated me can look back and go, Yeah, that wasn’t that wasn’t good enough, that wasn’t, that wasn’t great, or you weren’t connecting, you weren’t being still enough, you weren’t um you weren’t understanding what that child was trying to communicate to you. And so that experience for me is the idea of well, you never actually get there. There is no you don’t arrive, you don’t get to I am now um you know maximum proficiency at working with you know children who’ve had negative experiences of uh early childhood. You you don’t get there, you try and you try and get closer to it.

Colby: 17:14

There’s a couple of things that you said in there and in your earlier response that um I’d pick up on um and love to talk more about. I love the idea of reservoir building a reservoir of knowledge, a reservoir of knowledge. I think that that’s uh gets to what I was you were saying and what I was taking from what you were saying in my my previous reflection. Um I agree that I think what comes from experience is the understanding that there are enduring sensitiv, I call them enduring sensitivities. There are um enduring sensitivities that the children carry from their experiences growing up and uh including their adverse experiences that they take with them through life. And um that makes sense because we all we we all consider that we are in some way shaped as a person by the experiences that we had growing up as well as our contemporary experiences. Um and I think I think it’s really important to know to have a really good target in a sense or a realistic a realistic goal for the work that you’re doing. Otherwise otherwise you you can become you can feel inadequate, you can become despondent, you can feel um like you just you just haven’t done enough for the children. And without without hogging the floor too much, I see this a lot with in foster care, where where foster carers are um brought into the system both with with the ideas that they come with and with ideas that um that exist within child protection and out-of-home care systems, that you know, kinda all the children need is a you know is a loving home, uh a bedroom and a loving home and and all will be put right. And I don’t that’s just not the case. It is manifestly not the case, and and it is um uh highly problematic in my view to you know for these advertising campaigns to exist and these recruitment campaigns saying that you know you will if you have a spare room and a lot of love to give, you will experience this extra this fulfillment of being able to turn around the life of a young person. Now you may well do that. You you and and um often enough lives do get turned around. Um but you don’t you don’t erase what’s happening, what’s happened in the past, sorry. There’s there’s there is always an enduring sensitivity. So I think we just need to be really uh mindful of what is possible um lest we become overwhelmed, uh despondent. And I think that that is the case right through um the the social care sector. And you you hinted a little bit at at primary tasks, and we did spend a lot of time talking about primary tasks last time, but I think it it’s really important to start somewhere and and starting with having an understanding of what you’re actually here for, what is your role, what is the role of the organization, what is my role in this organisation, where do I sit? I think is a a really good place to start. But it do it does make me think when you look back, and I have done the same, and you think, oh, I wish I knew back then what I know now, and and of course it’s not possible to know, and then it is part of the reason I set up this podcast was to kind of speak to people with tremendous experience and have uh a reservoir of knowledge. I’m gonna I I might pinch that, uh, a reservoir of knowledge that people who are embarking or are early in their career journey can dip into and and um for their learning and understanding of the work. But I’m wondering if there is there are particular there’s particular advice that you would give um relatively inexperienced workers in the social care sector about how to approach the work.

Tom: 21:47

Yeah. Just before I do that, I want to respond to the the the because I it occurred to me even as I was saying it that oh, that’s what you’re doing. You’re the the reservoir of knowledge thing. You’re capturing it on video and on audio. And making it accessible. So, you know, and um in terms of the last podcast, all kinds of people have fed back to me that they listen to that. Not necessarily people in our line of work, even, but I think you in creating conversations about the work with people who you know have uh have some experience to share, I think is uh incredibly valuable. In terms of I don’t know, and I was interested in your point about foster carers as well, and saying, well, you know, do you have a spare bedroom and do you have some love to give? Maybe you could help a child. And it’s not a bad beginning. You know, it’s not a bad beginning. I think where that goes wrong a little bit is there is a little lack of uh understanding of the primary task and the challenges that these children are likely to bring. Because there’s a there’s a sort of fostering crisis in the UK, in that the pool of foster carers is getting smaller over time, and there’s there’s many reasons for that. And uh the government at the moment is putting a lot of resource into advertising campaigns for foster carers. I’m not sure whether that’s going to lead to uh a sustained increase in the number of foster carers because I think there is a problem about how foster care is described and what it is, what what what is it that we are asking these people to do? Because yes, um we’re asking them to provide a home and we’re asking them to provide love, but we’re also there’s there also needs to be an understanding. Well, first of all, needs to be an understanding of what these children might bring through the door with them, and an understanding of well, what do they actually need? Because you know, and if I link that, if I link into uh what does staff starting in the work, what might staff starting in this work need to know, and what might foster care need to know. The the thing that I would say is the thing that you’re striving for is understanding, so that the the it the um not just children, human beings, um rarely have instances of being fully understood by another human being, yeah. It’s it when it happens, it’s usually fleeting. There are people in your life that you’ll think, oh well, that person gets me. And so there’s some understanding there, but those moments of deep understanding and connection are rare, and I think that that uh in in therapy, in relation-based relationship-based therapies, one of the things you’re aiming for is that not just that the therapist understands the client, but that the client has an experience of being understood. So that’s that that that two-way thing, and it’s a connection. So I think for and I I think I talked in the last podcast about the idea of I do come across people who think the job is to make children behave. And I think that’s um you know, and in and in circumstances where a child is in a foster placement or a residential placement and they do well and their behavior improves, that’s a good thing. That’s not that’s not that’s not bad, but uh I don’t think that’s what the work is. I think the work is about um allowing children to have an experience of being understood by an adult and that a relationship grows. Because obviously, well, I say obviously, it’s it um uh it it follows that if you have a repeated experience of being with somebody who you feel understands you, you will develop a relationship with them. A relationship will blossom from that. That is um helpful. So, so in terms of if you’re an RCW, residential care worker, and you started in the work last week, a good place to start is well, what would give me um a better understanding of one of these children? It’s easier to start with one, you’re not gonna if you’re working with you know a number of children, it it’s easier to pick one, and maybe you’ll be directed to one by the management, but it’s easier to just pick one and say, Okay, I’m going to go on a little mission to develop a greater understanding of that child there. And that can be done. Um certainly in my early career, there wasn’t a lot of emphasis on it. I think I’ve worked in environments where an understanding of the child’s history was significant enough that there were dedicated professionals in the organization that went out and found it. And because one of I don’t know how it is in Australia, but one of the issues, anybody who’s worked in residential for a short while in the UK will tell you is that the the paperwork is never accurate. And that that’s not the local authorities’ fault, it’s just that you know, gathering information on a lifetime of experience is not an easy thing to condense into a short biography in a social work report. So um, so one of the things that I would invite that new RCW to do is to turn themselves into a detective and try and find out that child’s story. And yeah, you know, a good place to start would be the the paperwork that the child arrives with, but I wouldn’t uh I wouldn’t restrict it to that. I would get curious about who are the people that this child has uh been around, whether whether they’ve been carers or teachers or uh social workers or you know, who can I who can I speak to who knows this child and try and gather a deeper understanding of this child and their history? Because that will play out in the relationship with the child, the the your deeper understanding. I’ll give you an example. A thing that happened. So um some years ago, I was um managing teams of children’s souls, and we had a uh an office that the teams came to fortnightly for team meetings and to do some reflection. And one of the managers asked me um to come into the meeting because the team were in open rebellion. So I went into the meeting and was confronted by some really angry um residential care workers. Um, and and they directed that anger at me as I came in through there was there was a real kind of um I was bombarded with indignation. And the reason they were angry is one of the children they were working with was pretty much on a daily basis being very violent and hurting people. And once we got through the the anger and the frustration and and the conversation shifted to me, me being curious and saying, Well, you know, tell me what’s happening, tell me, tell me the story. And they were describing uh a boy who was about he was about 12, something like that at the time. And what they were describing was actually, you know, in the morning he was lovely, he went to school. Uh, the feedback from school was the teachers said he was delightful, very quiet. Uh, he’d get home in the evening, he was he was fine until around dinner time, so five 5:30 in the evening, and then he became more agitated, aroused, and that played out. He would be quite manic and giggling and grinning. And I remember someone saying he looks like the devil. They said when he he’s got this devilish look on his face, and he’d start to push things off the dinner table and run around the house, and this escalated through the evening until you know nine, ten o’clock at night, windows are being broken and people are being hurt, and it would go on till the early hours of the morning. And just by asking questions, we gradually got a picture of a child who’s in the day’s baseline was relatively steady and low, and then there was this sort of gradual escalation in the evening till around eight, nine in the evening. And then usually the what what they were describing was um he wanted to come out of it, but he didn’t know how. So he thought he wanted he wanted to kind of get back to normal, but he didn’t know how, and it took a few hours to get him back back to normal. And there was he had a dedicated life story worker, and there was a life story worker in the room, and the life story worker noticed that the peak of the acting out was 8, 8:30 at night when in that home, it was all boys. In that home, the boys were having baths and showers. Coming in from evening activities, they’d been doing sport or something like that, and they were having baths and showers, then they’d have supper and you know, a window to bedtime. And she she kind of jumped on this and homed in on it a little bit and said, Oh, that’s significant. And no one in the room really understood why it was significant. Okay, why is that significant? And she said, Well, when he was when he was five, he lived with a foster carer, and whenever he wet the bed, the foster carer ran a cold bath and held him underwater. And there was a there was there was a I get emotional when I tell this story, but there was a hush, and somebody started to cry. And then the meeting ended because um the it had taken that long to get to that conversation that the school runs people had to go off and do school runs, so the meeting came to an end. And normally when when we were dealing with something like that, we’d start planning. We’d say, okay, so what could we do differently? How could we plan? But there was no time for it. And and I didn’t hear any more about this. And I went to the meet, the next meeting two weeks later. I thought, right, I’m gonna go in and see what’s going on. And I went to the meeting and everything was fine. No one’s no one was discussing this boy, they were discussing other things, they were discussing the rotor and the paperwork and who’s not filling in the paperwork properly and the things that get talked about in those meetings. And um I was really curious. I said, Well, what’s going on with with this boy? And they said, Oh, it’s fine. It’s fine. And and then and I said, Well, what’s going on around bath times and stuff? And they described, well, oh, they said, Oh, he’s having baths. And they described, like, they’ve done some things. They they they um they decided that they were going to put a member of staff outside the bathroom on a chair so there was someone close, and they bought in some bath toys and bubble bath, and they made bath time softer, nurturing, you know, but I don’t think it’s what they did that made the difference. Yeah, I mean it made some difference, but but I think the big shift was they understood. Their understanding, yeah, they understood, and that wasn’t in his the paperwork that came, because he’d had a pretty you know awful uh set of experiences throughout childhood. That detail wasn’t there, and so we only knew that detail because the social worker, uh the life story worker who was a social worker, had gone out and done the digging and done the uncovered these stories, and so that team didn’t need to they didn’t need a deep understanding of any therapeutic model, they didn’t need to understand neurology or have studied you know the effects of trauma on the development of the brain, they just needed to hear that story, and once they heard that story, it made sense. It’s powerful, yeah, and and then and then everything just everything just fell into place, and so that was a real um uh powerful lesson in if you know the stories of the children, it will affect how you are with them, how you relate to them, it how how you respond to um agitation as bath and shower time approaches, you know, in his case. But the but there’s there’s probably a version of that for every child, and uh and understanding the story really thoroughly informs in a way that allows understanding to take place. Because without that understanding, certainly the the anger that I walked into, they they would they thought he was just gratuitously hurting people, you know, and as much as they were a really empathetic team, you you know, you um if you’re day after day after day dealing with a child who’s trying to hurt you, it does, you know, that that resentment can, you know, feelings of resentment can get into you, you know. So so I think that one, um do your best to understand the children you’re working with.

Colby: 35:26

Yeah. And while just if I can jump in there, uh while you were telling that story, I was thinking he’s you know, he’s been hurt. That’s when he’s been hurt. And and um I didn’t go to what had happened maybe in a foster placement, but I was thinking about um, you know, maybe he in his history, his there had been an adult that returned to the home at around you know after work hour, uh after normal work hours, and that something um uh adverse had was happening to him at that time. Yeah. And I think that’s that what you’re talking about is um it go it’s it’s about working beyond the need and the behaviour to understanding that the child that children are not just needs and behaviors, they have a mind. And I talk about this in in my podcast interview with Peter Blake, um, which I which is already released, but how I think he was saying that people don’t always see that children have a mind, a thinking mind, or an experiencing mind, and that um and that these experiences they go somewhere, and we and it’s important to be curious about well, where do they go? How are they stored and how do they present uh later on? And he Peter and I were talking about, you know, this goes right back to the very early days of a child’s life. Um if we agree, if we understand that they have a mind, that they’re not just needs and behaviours, then we have to have this an understanding that well, where where does all the these experiences and their their processing of these experiences go? How is it held? And how does it then manifest in the way they approach life and relationships thereafter?

Tom: 37:31

I think um because I I I I feel like when I came into this work, I was uh blundering around in the dark. And some um one of the other things in turn in terms of you useful things is that when I came into this work, people talked about structure and routines and boundaries all the time. Anyone you met in residential and consistency, words like consistency, but consistency, structure, routines, boundaries, and that that’s less fashionable to talk about now. It’s much more fashionable to talk about trauma-informed practice, but actually, I think there’s a huge value in structure and boundaries and routines and rituals, and like you know, people didn’t really talk about rituals, but you know, you know, I I remember um working in a children’s home that had a very distinct ritual around Sunday mornings, and it was lovely, and I enjoyed it. You know, I I enjoyed joining in. Okay, we’ve we’ve got this ritual, they’ve got the pattern of the week, but Sundays are a bit different. This is the ritual on a Sunday, and those the rhythm of the day today is extraordinarily helpful, and I again I think that it can be underestimated. People reach for they want to talk about trauma-informed work or aces or um you know, therapeutic uh jargon work to embellish their work, to say, okay, my work’s sophisticated. Whereas actually I’d say, well, look, really understanding the children helps, um, a clear structure with routines and boundaries and consistency. Um, though one of the things that I often said to people working with children who are new to the home is actually to some extent, the um the care plan and the the running of the home should be quite boring because the children you because it should be so predictable, because the children are bringing such a high state of anxiety that that’s what they need. Absolutely. They’re they’re accustomed to um mealtime shifting, bedtime shifting, uh who’s looking after me shifting. Am I going to bed at this time? Am I going to bed at that time? What time am I going to school? Am I going to school? So they’re used to that uh lack of consistency. So that one of the biggest gifts we can give is okay, here’s some consistency and predictability. Now you know what will happen. You know, and that that that that daily ritual and routine is enormously helpful. And but people don’t talk about that anymore. They’ll they’ll they’ll talk about you know the need to be empathetic and curious, and those things are useful, but uh, but I think the basics tend to get um overlooked a little bit. And and if you’re working in a really sophisticated service, that’s fine because it’s just part of the culture and the ritual routines will look after themselves. If you’re establishing, you know, you if you want to establish a children’s home that that and you want it to be beyond the ordinary, there needs to be a lot of focus on, okay, where are our rituals and routines and uh how do we deliver those consistently? And how do we get to understand our children better? Before you start layering on, okay, well, let’s let’s bring in a specialist consultant to do um you know to explore the unconscious processes that might be going on between the staff and the children. That stuff’s important, but actually, without the um without setting the stage by saying, well, actually, you know, we’ve got consistency, we’ve got routines, we’ve got boundaries, the roles are clearly understood between, you know, we we know what the manager does, what the deputy manager does, what the senior workers or team leaders do, what the RCWs do. We’re really clear about that stuff, and we’ve got this routine that we that in a way we try to grind out. It will never go like that because the children will bring in, um they will disrupt that routine, and and and that’s where the work lies, actually. Then then disrupting the routine is an opportunity for some work to take place, but uh, but I think um it’s interesting. You know, I’ve been involved in the establishment of some new services in the last year, and and it’s interesting where I found my mind going. And yes, you know, we did introduce um reflective spaces and consultancy, but actually there was quite a bit of focus on what are the rituals, what are the routines, what what you know, what what are we putting in the environment, how are we using the environment um to create something that is warm and nurturing and homely.

Colby: 42:33

And some would say that’s what pace is. I mean, pace is about the a therapeutic establishing a therapeutic environment or milieu. Um I’m with you. I I I just think that you have to start with consistency of routines, of rituals, um, of care. And everything that you set out to do, you should be able to set out to do it consistently. And if you can’t do it consistently, or there can’t be consistency managed between staff members, then you need to pair it back a bit or find something that they can do. I think I think consistency comes second to connection. It certainly in the work that I do, what I’ve taught in terms of importance. So connection absolutely the over the length and breadth of the service that we’re providing is is the most important thing. But I think consistency runs a close second, and part of that is while I was listening to you, I was thinking about you know, we’re the children come from chaos or or or bad things have happened unpredictable, unpredictably. And part of and and talking about that um the the case example that you gave a little bit earlier, it was important to develop a ritual and routine, I think, for that young person to have um to know what. What was going on, and to have an alternative experience of that. But I don’t think the care that what we’re doing in this aspect of the work is that sophisticated as you say. It’s it’s relatively boring. And if people don’t know it uh in this way, I I would have them, and when I talk, I have them think about well, how do we raise little babies? Yeah, because that’s I think that that’s often enough where things started to go wrong for the for the children that we come across, that they didn’t have those experiences of predictability, of uh routines around nurturance and care that a child who grows up in a in a comparatively stable, loving, responsive home had. And so, you know, there’s a there’s a I think there’s a lot of similarity between how we set out to manage our home for for the children we’re talking about, whether that be a children’s home or a um or a foster home, a kinship home. A lot of a lot of what we’re seeing comes from deficiencies and how they were cared for in the past. And if you think about, well, how do we how do we set a new pattern, how do we reset? Well, that we go back and we redo some of that in a more age-appropriate way, perhaps in some respects, but we we reinstitute or we institute the kind of consistency that you see when you’re raising infants. While you’re pausing there, the other thing I was I I wanted to pick up on something else you just said, which was um get to know the children. And I think that there’s my mind goes to a number in a number of directions, I guess, on that. But one so there’s two. Actually, it’s one. People will sometimes say, well, we don’t get enough information in this sector. A common a common um complaint is that is from um people who are in a care role with the children and young people is that they haven’t got all the information. It hasn’t been shared with them. So it’s very difficult for them to know you know the the details of the history. Now, you know, while you’re telling that story, my head would, because I’ve worked in the sector for 30 years, my head immediately goes to something bad has happened at that time. And I didn’t necessarily need to know that it was in that foster care placement. My mind went to an adult comes home and something bad happens at that time. Um I didn’t need to know the the intricacies of that um or the finer points of that history to know that we’ve got to change the child’s experience of this time. And and and as you say, we’ve got to acknowledge that that um this is lightly because um he has had some adverse experiences around this time. So as you say, it just changes the way in which people approach the the relationship.

Tom: 47:24

I think it’s more than that. I think it it because it it changes the way people feel. So it’s not just it so, yes, of course, knowing that information might change the care plan, you know, might change the way you approach those tasks. But I think the great of it is it changes the way you feel as a worker. So so the the resentment and anger that was being experienced based on the child’s behavior evaporated as soon as people understood, oh, that’s what’s going on. And like I say, one person cried, but the the thing there was a real shift in the emotion in the room, yeah. And and so, you know, the I can understand how someone being hurt by a child would develop feelings of resentment, and that evaporated once the staff understood why why that was happening, and that then changed the way they so it wasn’t, I don’t think it was about I don’t think what happened after that meeting is they got together at another time and had and had a real powwow about how they were going to handle bath times. I think just the way they their emotional response to his um agitation was enough. I think it I think that was enough, and yeah, that you know, and then maybe over the two weeks they developed a uh they they shifted the ritual around bath time to make it more tolerable then. But I think the big thing that happened was the a shift in how they felt. Um absolutely, you know, and and that you that’s the sort of thing, you know, you’ve that’s the sort of thing that makes reflective spaces necessary, so that stuff can be processed and you can get in touch with okay, I feel like this right now. Uh, I feel you know, resentful and annoyed with this 12-year-old. That you can find your way to um what what happened to the infant that led to this 12-year-old that’s smashing the house to pieces. Going back to the the the thing you said about um going back to very early childhood, and and one of I had a conversation in the last week with someone about when children are admitted to children’s homes. And I kind of um it’s going out of fashion now, but there was a there was a fashion of um if you were coming at it from a children’s rights perspective, well, when a child joins a children’s home, they should um spend time with each of the staff, we’ll see who they get along with, and they can choose their own key worker. Yeah, and that was that was pretty widespread, I don’t know, 15 years ago or something like that. And I always felt that missed a big opportunity, and and the big opportunity is that the act of admission is a massive intervention. So, so that’s like the the biggest thing a children’s home can do for a child is admit them because you’re taking them from one situation and you’re bringing them into another well, you take you take them from one world and you’re bringing them into another world, and when um and I use this metaphor, when a woman is pregnant with a child, everybody talks to her about what’s gonna happen when the baby gets it. You know, someone might help create a nursery and they might have a baby shower, and um they will there’ll be lots of conversation about motherhood, what motherhood’s gonna be like, and uh you know, ideas like you know, you are you’re gonna have the baby in your bedroom, are you gonna when you’re gonna move in the nursery? All these kind of conversations go on and set up the minds. What that does is it prepares everybody for the idea of there’s going to be a child and there’s going to be a mother. And I think a version of that can happen even for a teenager when a teenager moves into a children’s home. That with the the the home can do that preparatory work, the conversations about who’s going to be the key worker, how we’re going to welcome the child into the home, how we’re going to bridge them in. What um because I I think what works really well is when there is an individual who bridges the child into the home and becomes their gateway to the relationships in the home. And uh a process called cleaning, where you literally go out and claim the child. You’re you’re coming with me, I’m going to look after you. And I think it works particularly well if that person is the key worker. So the key worker goes out into the world, meets the child, brings them into this new world, and then becomes their um kind of parent. It’s not quite a parent, but it’s it’s not far off, you know. They become their kind of parent and the link to the other relationships. Because where you don’t do that, and I I I I I did some work with the team where they didn’t agree with that, and they thought, no, no, no, no, we we let the child come in and and choose. And I said, Well, what do you think on the first night in the home when the door closes, what do you think the child’s thinking about? And they’d say, Oh, well, they’re scared and they’re anxious. And I said, You know, I think they’re probably trying to remember everybody’s names because they’ve been introduced to half a dozen people or a dozen people, and they’re trying to work out who of this lot is actually gonna keep me alive, and and potentially who’s who’s the threatening one. And so that you know, in the world of because I think what we’re doing in this conversation is we’re making building blocks and we’re saying, okay, well, structure and boundary and routines in the children. Well, primary task, what are we here for? Are we clear about it? Have we got a structure? How do we set the scene? What are the structure and routines? And you all that stuff gets worked out before you’ve done it recently. All that stuff gets worked out before you ever admit a child. There’s lots of conversations. There should be lots of conversations about what our structure, boundaries, and routines are, and then moving up a level that okay, how do children come into the home? Well, it should be a process of being claimed, it they should feel like somebody uh went into their world and claimed them and brought them into this new world where you know the promise is you’re gonna be surrounded by a bunch of thoughtful adults who are going to nurture and care for you.

Colby: 54:28

Yeah, it wouldn’t it just sorry, just quickly, it just puts me in mind of one of the key themes that comes out of research with with alumni of children’s residential care is that feeling of belonging somewhere and to someone. And um uh Jenna, who’s Jenna B, whose last name I I’m um struggling with at the moment, but um yeah, Jenna, she talked about um the the research that she did with her in her PhD thesis, highlighted exactly what you’re talking about, is that the the carelivers who’d been through residential care really appreciated the fact that they belonged somewhere, the the experience of belonging somewhere and to someone.

Tom: 55:16

Well, all all of these things contribute to belonging because I think belonging is one of the things that you would want to achieve. So uh so so the and and they’re they’re all things that accelerate relationship. Because I mean, I quite often, you know, in uh a residential placement might not last that long. Um I might not long, you know, two years is not long in a lifetime, and so these are things that accelerate the the development of relationships. So um, if a team, if you’re starting from scratch and you really thought about what you were there for in your primary task, and you spent some time thinking about structures and routines, and you developed a philosophy about, well, we really want to understand our children, and we’re gonna have key workers, and the key workers are going to have particular relationships with the children that would be more parental than the other relationships in the home. And the key workers are gonna go out into the world and claim these children and bring them in, and then we’re gonna use our structure and routines and our rituals and our understanding of the child. All of these things contribute to a sense of belonging, you know. Eventually, we’ll um, you know, six months on, maybe a bit longer, but the child has a sense of okay, I know where I am here, I know the structure and routines and rituals, I know the people, I know that they know me, I know that they can tolerate the things that I do and say, and all of that stuff, it’s not it’s not um it’s not a straight line formula, but the but all of that stuff contributes to a greater sense of belonging. And um and then and then it also creates the space where you can do some work that that that you that could be broadly described as therapeutic. Because I think that stuff’s just good practice. I don’t I I wouldn’t say, oh, that’s you know, that that I think it’s good practice, but it it creates the space and the relationships and the safety to do some therapeutic work and to um you consciously use relationships to give rise to transformation, which is that that my definition of therapeutic is it’s the conscious use of relationships to deliver transformation.

Colby: 57:50

I I hear I I hear what you’re saying, and I hear what you mean and I acknowledge that it is good practice, you know, to set up these these very fundamental building blocks. But I do wonder whether identifying with them as good practice diminishes their importance a little bit. And uh the my reason for saying that is that there can be an inordinate focus on the therapeutic intervention as the change agent. But the therapeutic intervention, and Patrick Tomlinson and I talk about this, and we talked about it as recently as um only a few days ago. You can’t a therapeutic intervention won’t is unlikely to be successful if it’s done, if the we haven’t taken care of the environment first, that we haven’t created an environment around the young people for in which this therapeutic um intervention can um make a difference. So the reality is a th a therapeutic intervention may have no impact at all if the environment is not set up appropriately to um facilitate that. But the environment will always be therapeutic if if done according or if if established according to the principles that we’ve been talking about. So yeah, it’s good practice. I but I wonder about whether the just good practice diminishes the importance of it. I think it’s vital.

Tom: 59:32

I think you might be right. I’ve struggled um over, I don’t know, the last decade with the therapeutic as applied to uh children’s homes. Not not because I think it’s been misused a lot, and I think it turned into a marketing term. And um the you know, I have in my own mind a notion of what the threshold is for a therapeutic service. And I was repeatedly being introduced to services that were described as therapeutic, and I just didn’t think they were. It didn’t mean they were terrible, I don’t think they were bad. I just I just don’t think I think as I said earlier, there’s levels to this game. Yeah, and some a colleague of mine challenged me recently about this and said, well, you know, um if we’re creating therapeutic services, we should call them therapeutic services. And and I think she had a point because I think it is my own hack up, because I got I got quite uh resistant to using the word therapeutic because not because you know, for someone who’s kind of spent his career at that part of children’s residential care, um, I think it was because I felt it was being misused. And so I kind of stepped away from it a bit. But you you’re right to notice actually, what I’m describing is how do you set the stage such that you know relationship-based transformation can take place, and that it that that claiming process, I would say there’s so much about a placement can be set up in the way the admission takes place. You can you can you you can um cover a lot of ground in the admission process, and I think people underestimate what it means for the child to move from one world on Tuesday to another world on Wednesday. And and you you know, I I I’m uh loosely in touch with some people who were kids, they’re not kids now. They were children when I worked with them, they’re in the 40s now. Um, but they they can each tell me in absolute clarity about the day they moved into the uh it was a it was a service that I was working in. But they they can tell me with clarity about, you know, 30 odd years later, 35 years later, they can tell me with absolute clarity about what happened that day, because it’s a very significant intervention. And and and like I say, I think I think the there is a lot a lot of work that can be done in that uh admission process that sets the tone for uh a greater chance of a successful uh experience in in a children’s home or in a therapeutic service.

Colby: 1:02:31

Um I think you if I can jump in there, I just think that um it it is it is good practice to be reflective about our use of the term therapeutic and even our application of principles of therapeutic practice. Um I’m mindful Simon Benjamin was on the podcast uh some in the first within the first 10. I can’t remember, I think it might have been podcast number eight. Simon’s a social care consultant here in Australia, but he um he’s worked for a number of organisations. He was the CEO of the Lighthouse Foundation, um, and he worked at the Mulberry Bush School as well. And Simon talks about therapeutic from understanding where that that term comes from, and uh he talks about it coming from the medical profession or or medical science, and that therapy the the idea of what is therapeutic is not just um you can’t you have a set of principles or practices that you you just apply. Yeah. In in in medicine, therapeutic is the dose at which what you apply makes a difference. So where that then the crossover with that is that is that in our work there is probably a lot, if not most, services are applying therapeutic principles, therapeutic ideas, and therapeutic techniques. But are they getting the dose right? That’s that’s the lesson of what what Simon’s saying is that from medicine is that it’s only therapeutic in the right dose. And children, different children require different doses. Yeah, for that, for that therapeutic um effect. So that all that by way of it is a bit, um it’s not as simple as just setting, you know, implementing a set of principles, a send of uh a set of ideas and a set of practices. They have to be in the right dose. And that’s that’s part of the nuance of this work, it’s part of the complexity of it and the complexity of our children. I think it’s aided by by what you’re you were saying earlier about getting to know individual children.

Tom: 1:05:05

Well, I think I think and knowing what you’re there for, and knowing what you’re there for so so you you know that that you know you you’re getting to know the children in service of developing a greater understanding that is in service of those children experiencing connection and belonging, yeah. You know, I think one of the other things that that um I I as a younger man, I was very intense and very, you know, kind of looked at the work as kind of wanted to be good at the work. Um, but you have to remind yourself sometimes and your custodians of childhoods, you know. So so in as much as there’s work that needs to be done, and there is work that needs to be done, and there’s lots of um you know, the depending on the nature of the survey. There’s there can quite often be external pressures on what work are you doing, you know, the regular meetings to ask what work are you doing and what progress is being made, and can you show me your outcomes? But I think sometimes you need to be reminded, and your custodians of childhood. So you part of your job is to give these children a childhood that that they will remember fondly, you know. And so, you know, um such an important role finding opportunities to have fun and enjoyment along the way are quite important, you know. And um, and I think so, you know, for some people in the work that comes quite natural to them, they’ll they’ll just go and have fun with the kids, and for others, you need a reminder, actually, you know, this child is um not a project. Then yeah, it’s it’s all well and good that you’re being an amateur psychologist trying to help this child recover from their trauma, but sometimes they need a day off to just go and have some fun.

Colby: 1:06:56

Yeah, more than one day, I would say. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah. You know, you said I’m coming back to something that you said earlier, which is um fundamentally I would I would refer to it in the these terms, that the the experience of being heard and understood and acknowledged in your experience, and of being understood not just in the words, but in the actions and in the outward presentation and expressed emotion of an adult, of another person, I think is is probably our most powerful intervention. Um, I don’t know of a more powerful one. I often say there are things that you can’t change for young people. Like, you know, it’s the law that they have to go to school as much as the hate it, as much as we are unhappy with how the school are managing them. Um, but but you can still empathize deeply with you can still acknowledge with deep understanding the child’s experience with the fact that they have to go to school and they don’t like it. Yeah. Like something sometimes the only thing we can do is acknowledge the child’s experience with deep understanding. And I I think that that’s our most powerful intervention. And why I think it’s the most powerful intervention, which you’ve hinted at, well you’ve mentioned uh as we’ve been going along, it has to do with the child’s experience. That the child’s experience of being heard and acknowledged, validated in their experience is that my experience is real. I I am a person of worth. I am this person cares about me, this person understands me, I can trust this person, I can trust this space around me a little bit more and more over time. What a relief. What a relief that I’m now somewhere with someone or some people who get me.

Tom: 1:09:22

On the journey, because I was thinking back to okay, building up in layers from what are we here for, what’s our structure and routines, how do we bring children into this, what what’s the nature of the relationships we’re aiming to have? Because it the the the thing I think understanding is very important, but I also think that the nature of the relationships it might not be quite the same in a therapeutic community at times, but it but I’ll I’ll I’ll restrict myself to children’s homes. But in in children’s homes, the nature of the relationship is a parental relationship, and and I and again, I think there are um, particularly if you’re working with teenagers, teenagers will invite you not to be their parent. They will, they will, you know, um friends to be some kind of friend or you know, something else. And I think again, in the world of well, what what actually what actually works is to assume the position of a parent. And and you know, there’s a number of reasons for that. I think one of one of the reasons I would put forward is the idea of, well, if children are in care, it’s because in some way, shape, or form they’ve experienced a failure of parenting. And therefore, if the thing that has led you to being where you are is a failure of parenting, the solution should be some kind of parenting. Now it’s not you know, to your point about foster care and have you got a spare bedroom and love to give. The inference there is that all these kids need is a regular is is a is a parent figure. But actually, over time you find that well, no, they need a bit more than that. That that it and I and the the they need something beyond ordinary parenting. So um, you know, and sometimes it’s called therapeutic parenting, or but but ordinary parenting won’t work for these kids because ordinary parenting doesn’t factor in um the effects of trauma and the effects of neglect on development. So um, if not ordinary parenting, then something like extraordinary parenting. So so something that is parental but that goes beyond regular parenting, where there’s um, you know, the thing that would now be called trauma-informed, but an understanding of actually these um experiences in early childhood affect the development of the child’s brain to the extent there are things that they can and can’t do, and that might change at different times. So we go back to the example I gave earlier of the 12-year-old, he could function like a regular 12-year-old most of the time, but then when he was stressed by the routines in the home, um he could not cope with that, and that led to aggressive acting out and people getting hurt. And so understanding that’s partially about the way his brain’s developed, that’s partially about his ability to um or inability to problem solve and articulate himself, and um that the I don’t want to get too neurological, but the that there are different brain states that you know that the uh there are different brain states that are exaggerated by adverse early childhood experiences. And so that’s the additional knowledge you would need to be an extraordinary parent, but you’re still a parent, and so that the parent bit should still crop up in there, and then that starts getting complicated because uh parents hold authority, you know, and parents uh you know, going back to the beginning where we said, okay, you’re gonna need structure, routine, and boundary. Well, the boundary bit can be a bit complicated with our children because uh they push against boundaries and test boundaries, and the testing about whether you’re a safe adult or not, some of the time.

Colby: 1:13:59

And you look after me.

Tom: 1:14:01

Yeah, yeah. And so, and and how will you respond? You know, how if I do this, you know, um you can almost see sometimes I I can remember you know when I work directly with children, you you you’d almost see them like the test thresholds. Well, what are you gonna do if I stand here? What you’re gonna do, what if I pick this up and drop it? What are you gonna do? And then then looking, okay, what are you gonna do now? What you’re gonna do now, what you’re gonna do now. But the the I think the complicated bit for residential workers is you hold authority, but as a residential worker, it’s hard to work out how much authority do you hold and how can you express that authority safely in the interests of the child? Yeah, and that that’s you know, about if if if um if one member of staff says no to something, will the member of the other members of staff hold that same line? Will the management hold that line? Will other stakeholders from outside the system step in and say that’s not a reasonable line to hold? You know, whether it’s things like uh in the modern world, things like mobile phones, really good example. So um what are the thresholds around mobile phones? What age can you have a mobile phone? If you’ve got a mobile phone, should you have it all the time? Should you be able to take your mobile phone to bed with you? Should you, you know, do there’s you know, and to be fair, that’s something that you know regular parents battle with. But in in a children’s home, it gets really complicated because you go, okay, that’s a boundary, it’s got a threshold, and people may differ on what they think that threshold is, and that can be sorted out with a meeting and a discussion, and you can agree a threshold, but then people will vary on their ability to hold that threshold, and that’s where it starts to get really complicated, and um I think that’s uh people are not fond about talking about that stuff. It’s much easier to talk about curiosity and empathy and playfulness and uh things like that. It’s much harder to talk about sometimes we need to say no to the children because that’s what good parents do, and and that’s where it starts getting complicated, and that’s been particularly complicated in the UK um over the last since well, certainly since 2014. Um, so in 2014 there was a a case, there was a court case in I’m sitting in Cheshire, it was in Cheshire, Cheshire West, and it was about um it was actually about about an adult, it wasn’t about a child, but it was an adult in a caring situation. And were the question that the court was addressing was are these adults, carers, depriving uh this person of their liberty by saying you can’t go out whenever you want to, and by supervising them. And I think there was a two to one supervision ratio or something like that. But the this person was heavily supervised and there were restrictions on where they could come and go. And the court found that that was a breach of um Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights. And the fallout of that, and that gradually, it wasn’t an overnight thing, but that’s gradually found its way into children’s services, and there’s been various cases over the last, you know, since 2014, like 10 years. And so increasingly, what you’ll see, particularly in referral paperwork, is referrals of children who and it will say they have a doll. And a doll is a deprivation of liberty order issued by a court, and that’s where the court decides what the boundary is. And so the court will decide. You you it can be about things like it can be about things like mobile phones, it can be things about supervision, it can be about um whether they, you know, what to do if this uh child attempts to abscond. And uh that’s a well-intentioned um the court made a well-intentioned decision, and whenever deprivation of liberty orders are produced, they’re well-intentioned because their intention is to protect the rights of a of a in our case, a child in care. The problem with it is it makes it it’s caused a lot of muddles around who has authority. So if you and when local authorities are in doubt about what a threshold should be, they’ll apply for a doll. If they’re not sure, they’ll apply. And so since 2014, there’s been a gradual increase year on year in the number of dolls, and it’s kind of crept down for younger and younger children. So there are there are dolls you know uh being issued for children under 12. And so the the difficulty with that is is it creates it essentially says that a judge and a court decide the boundaries or some of the boundaries um that are issued in a children’s home. And I think that makes it really complicated for the staff. I think one of one of the other things, an unintended consequence of that um ruling, is it’s made residential child care much more expensive. Because where there is a deprivation of liberty order, it’s a court order, and the local authority has to be assured that whoever’s providing that care will adhere to the order because it’s a court order. So you can’t say, well, you know, we tried, but it didn’t work out. And so what that’s led to is higher and higher levels of supervision of children and an increase in the number of solo placements, and solo placements just by the nature tend to be more expensive. So it’s put a real strain on local authorities and it’s kind of shaping to I don’t want to overstate it, but to some extent, it’s shaping the market. Uh um that, and it’s certainly shaping um the confidence with which residential staff can take up that parental role and and and and issue a parental boundary um about whether a child, what what should happen if a child walks out of the door, for example? And you and you might have different responses. You’d you know, you could look at okay, what what do we do if this child runs away? You know, and there’s lots of different things you could do if you could go with them, for example. You know, but there’s an even an argument that, well, if you’re going with them and you’re constantly supervising that in of itself, even if you’re not preventing them from leaving or bringing them back, the fact that you are going with them is in itself a deprivation of liberty. So you you end up with, I think it’s created, um, like I say, I think it’s well intentioned and it’s there to protect children’s rights, but there are unintended consequences. The unintended consequence is the authority of the staff who are in the day-to-day parental role is undermined. Diminished. And there is confusion in the system about what you can do and what can’t you do. And a notion that’s relatively new of, well, we’ll need a court to decide that. Which, which again, you know, certainly when I was working directly with the children, uh, yeah, there were children on there were care orders and there was different different kinds of care orders. But it you certainly in um, if I thought a child was gonna run out of the building and put themselves at risk, I didn’t give too much thought to what are the legal consequences of me saying I’m not gonna let you do that.

Colby: 1:22:29

Yeah. Sounds like the subject of another podcast, Tom.

Tom: 1:22:36

Yeah, and I’m not I’m I’m not an expert on this stuff, you know. This is the the I it’s we’ll make it one. Yeah, it’s I’m I’m sure there’ll be people listening to the podcast that say, Oh, he’s not quite right about that. Uh um, but it but it’s certainly you know, and I’m making a connection between local authorities requesting it, almost seems universal that when when there’s a doll, they they they they will immediately interpret that in this child needs a two-to-one solo, which I don’t think needs to be the case. You know, I I’ve been responsible for you know, not in the non-too distant past for you know, a six-bedded service that had more than one child in it who was on a doll, and it was fine. We we we we just worked through it, but I think what it’s doing is it it over time it these things nudge practices, and practices get nudged towards um if if it if there’s a deprivation of liberty, it’s probably going to be a two-to-one solo placement that we’re looking for, and that you know that that trend, um that trend has increased. There’s and there’s certainly a place for two-to-one solo placements, but I would regard them as an intervention in order to allow something else to happen later rather than an end in themselves.

Colby: 1:23:59

Well, like I said, it it we could probably talk a lot more about using the parental role, I guess, and understanding the important aspects of the parental role that um is it’s it’s important to operationalise in children’s homes and therapeutic communities. You were using um the word enhanced, I think. I I use enriched, um and I think it’s the richness of it that you can adjust from child to child with the the dose that I was talking about a little bit earlier. Um, but before I let you go, because you need to go, because you’ve got a busy day tomorrow, early start. Um I I just wondered what you thinking about the children, what what do you think we would like for the children to say as graduates, as alumni, as as adults, say about the experience that they had in a children’s home, in a children’s residential care home?

Tom: 1:25:09

I think you’d want them to say they felt loved and cared for. You know, I think that love’s another difficult word um in residential. Um there’s a resurgence in the UK of of people using um the word love within practice. But you know, going back to that, a sense of belonging, you know, that the the that they feel or felt that they belonged, they didn’t feel that they were guests or or placements, they didn’t feel like a placement, they felt like no, this is a place where I belong and where I’m connected, and um, I think I’ve I’ve I’ve I’ve heard different in someone wrote to me a few years ago, wrote me a really long letter about um someone I worked with really early on in my career, and I I thought he he he’d had really positive experience, he had nothing bad to say about it at all. Now, whereas my reflection on it was, well, it was in the old days where actually staff ratios were really low. And um, you know, I think the I it was one of those situations where I was looking back and thinking we could have been way more sophisticated there. Yeah, he’d written to me saying, you know, he thought this was transformational and it set him up for life, and like really um got a lot from being there and the relationships, and he was, you know, and he was and and he was sharing memories. He was um, yeah, there was a there was a uh a game show on TV that we used to watch together, and it turned into a but we’d have like a little competition between us about answering the questions in the game show, and that was one of the memories I’d kind of forgotten about that, but he he talked at length about this experience of watching this game show and how fun it was, and we kept it like we had an informal scoring system, and um so it’s that you know, I’m I’m uh reminiscing on his reminiscence and smiling, and I think you know, you’d want that. You you’d want, yeah, I felt belonging, you know, and I’ve had other children talk about you reflecting on when they were difficult to look after and appreciating that the staff stuck with them through the difficulty. Um so I think it’s different for different children, but but his recollection was it made me smile because he was reminding me of things that were not that significant to me. I would, I would, I we did that thing, I don’t know, for however long. That quiz show ran for we had this little game on a Wednesday night where we’d all sit and watch this quiz show together and keep score and joke about who’d answered the most questions and so on. And it didn’t mean a lot to me at the time. I didn’t see it as particularly significant. But then, you know, 25 years later, he writes to me, and that’s his one of the bits that he presents and says, Look, this was this was really good fun, and I’ve thought about it a lot.

Colby: 1:28:25

I think there’s a message in that, uh, Tom, that um for for people who are just starting out in their in their practice in children’s homes, in being a a um a care worker for our children and young people, is that not to underestimate. Yes, years bring experience and knowledge and sophistication, but don’t underestimate the little things that you can bring to the life of a young person. Um notwithstanding that you’re you’re uh you’re an early career practitioner in this space.

Tom: 1:29:04

Yeah, I agree. I think um one of the things you know, we could have a long conversation about when placements break down. But you know, I I worked in a situation, I’m going back a long time now, where I a placement didn’t last long at all. It lasted like days, and then broke down that that home, uh, the location, and various things about the actual setup didn’t work. And the and I was I was a manager at the time, and I remember the staff being feeling like they’d failed. And the the thing that I kind of reminded them of is you you you you can’t judge that, you can’t judge that now, because what everything we do has the potential to be something that that child makes use of later, as an adult, that that that they might think back to a moment in time, like like the you know, like the quiz game, but um I’m I’m thinking about in more where it’s rockier, where it’s where it’s much more um much less fun. That there is always you you can’t judge what that child will think is relevant in five or ten years’ time when they look back, and and I think there’s a value to um our kids have a really good way of making us confused and lost, and and quite often what we’re doing is we’re struggling to find a way through, and I think that that struggle in of itself is worth something, you know. I think children have a sense of people trying even when they’re getting it wrong, yeah.

Colby: 1:30:57

Thank you, Tom. That was uh again a really thought-provoking and enjoyable conversation, and uh um I better let you wind up your day because as I mentioned a little bit earlier, I know that you’ve got a busy one tomorrow, so thanks again. And uh we might have to do round three at some stage.

Tom:

My pleasure, thank you.

Tom’s Bio:

Tom is an accomplished Consultant and leadership trainer with over 30 years in children’s residential care, specialising in innovative leadership and mental health support for young people. Through Elevate Professional Development, launched in 2025, he delivers UK-wide workshops to strengthen care leadership. With 20 years of boardroom experience, Tom has consistently driven strategic leadership and service transformation. Holding a BPS-approved Psychology degree, a Master’s in Psychoanalytic Observational Studies, and postgraduate qualifications in Management and Strategic Management, he blends academic and practical expertise. Currently, he serves as Non-Executive Chair at AMMA Childcare Ltd, Non-Executive Director at Cedars Childcare Ltd and Empathy CIC, and advises the leadership teams of a number of organisations in the third and independent
sectors.

Related Podcasts:

You may also be interested in Tom’s first episode on The Secure Start Podcast.

You can listen here:

You can watch here:

Support the podcast:

Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/c/TheSecureStartPodcast

Disclaimer:

Information reported by guests of this podcast is assumed to be accurate as stated. Podcast owner Colby Pearce is not responsible for any error of facts presented by podcast guests. In addition, unless otherwise specified, opinions expressed by guests of this podcast may not reflect those of the podcast owner, Colby Pearce.

What if Child Safeguarding Began with Love? A Podcast Interview with Carla Keyte

What if Child Safeguarding Began with Love?

What if the most powerful safeguarding tool isn’t another form, but a steady adult who shows up with love? That’s the heart of my conversation with Carla Keyte, founder of Lighthouse and a leading voice in UK residential care, as we unpack how safe, stable, loving homes are built—and measured—through relationships, not fear. We explore how love-led practice, not fear-based compliance, creates safe, stable, loving homes in residential care.

Children heal through steady, attuned relationships with adults who notice, co-regulate, and remain present. The challenge is aligning governance and inspection with that reality so felt safety is measured and protected, not crowded out by paperwork.

Carla traces how sector language has shifted from placements and behaviour management to family time and relational practice. Yet many systems still judge homes by incident counts and prescriptive rules instead of the child’s lived experience. Felt safety shows up as play, curiosity, and connection, not just fewer reports. A truly safe home is one where children feel seen and cared for, and where adults feel psychologically safe to do the work well. That means leaders commit to cultures that contain stress, enable reflective practice, and invite learning over blame. Compliance remains essential, but it must be the foundation we stand on, not the ceiling we reach for. When ratings and enforcement become the whole story, they can create fear that drives out the very conditions children need to recover.

A key idea is reframing inspection as a safeguarding partnership. Rather than branding a home inadequate, regulators and providers could ask two questions: is this a safe, stable, loving home for this child, and if not, what support is required to get there? This approach mirrors strong child protection practice—bringing multi-agency expertise around the child and the adults, and designing a therapeutic intervention rather than only grading deficits. Carla describes the Lighthouse model as a triangle: safeguard the child; stabilise adults with supervision, training, and reflective space; and strengthen the home’s culture and compliance. When all three are aligned, outcomes improve without diluting standards.

Professional boundaries often get misread as emotional distance, but neuroscience tells a different story. Children with trauma histories need consistent, regulated adults who can co-regulate and hold limits with warmth. Scotland’s Promise explicitly names love as part of care, correcting a drift that left staff afraid to comfort a crying child at 3am. Policies designed to protect children must not block the human connection that does protect them—daily observation, knowing the child, noticing mood shifts, and showing up with steadiness. Paperwork informs a network; relationships change a life. Fear-based systems can’t produce safety; only love can reduce fear and rebuild trust.

A love-led framework also builds social capital. Investing in high-quality residential care pays forward to future partners, children, and communities. The work is nuanced and resource-intensive, but the cost of children growing up feeling unloved is far higher. Extending relational support beyond 18 reflects how human development actually unfolds; care does not end at a birthday. Strong leadership is vital here. Leaders set the tone for psychological safety, create environments where staff can bring both heart and skill, and ensure compliance serves the mission, not the other way around. With clarity of purpose and relational metrics, the sector can protect love in practice—and the evidence shows that’s what transforms lives.

You can listen to the podcast here:

You can watch the podcast here:

About Carla:

Carla is the Founder and Director of Lighthouse, bringing extensive expertise in quality, compliance, and safeguarding across the residential childcare sector in the UK. With a background spanning Registered Manager, Head of Care, and Head of Quality & Compliance for an organisation operating over 30 homes rated Good and Outstanding, Carla has deep, practical insight into operational leadership, regulatory compliance, and governance. Carla has a proven track record of resolving complex compliance issues and supporting organisations through challenging regulatory actions. Her specialism lies in developing and embedding Quality and Governance frameworks that drive sustainable improvement and ensure the highest standards of care. Passionate about love-led practice and the power of meaningful relationships, Carla champions approaches that create safe, nurturing, and stable environments where children and young people can truly thrive. Carla founded Lighthouse to provide expert guidance and tailored support to providers navigating an increasingly complex regulatory landscape. The name Lighthouse reflects Carla’s vision: to act as a guiding beacon for organisations, illuminating the path through complexity toward excellence in care, safeguarding, and relational practice.

Related Podcasts:

If you really like This podcast interview, you may also like:

Patricia Sheridan

Listen here:

Watch here:

Links:

Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/c/TheSecureStartPodcast

Podcast Blog Site: https://thesecurestartpodcast.com/

Secure Start Site: https://securestart.com.au/

Transcript:

Colby: 0:00

Hello and welcome to the Secure Start podcast.

Carla: 0:05

I write a lot about my belief that love saves lives. Every child deserves a safe, stable, loving home and that our residential services need support to be able to do that. Children heal through relationships and yet the compliance is the kind of ground on which we stand upon, but not necessarily in the way in which healing can be measured. When we talk to engage with care, experienced young people, what they tell us is important to them are those relationships, are those adults that showed up consistently, calmly, attuned again and again, those adults that took the time to notice and spend time and build strong relationships. That’s really where safety is built and felt. As much as children need safe, stable, loving environments in order to thrive, actually so to adults. And if we think about homes and organisations as kind of organic structures, we need to be considering how not only do we provide safe, stable, loving homes, but how do we create safe, stable, loving organisations? How do we create an inspection framework because it is necessary and helpful that breeds love instead of fear? And we know that in order to create safe environments for children, adults need to feel psychologically safe and contained, and therefore the organisation needs to be the container. What we say is compliant is the foundation that we stand on, not the feeling that we reach for. The fact is that we have legislated ourselves and we’ve safeguarded ourselves against actually being able to love children. And the truth is that when we are so afraid to love children, the outcome is that children grow up feeling unloved. But the real safeguarding is the relationship that that child has with that adult every day who looks after them, who has an understanding of their needs, has an awareness in their changes, in their mood, in their behaviour. And what that looks like, that looks like love and that looks like care, and fear cannot drive out fear. Only love can do that, really.

Colby: 2:55

Hello and welcome to the Secure Start podcast. I’m Colby Pearce, and joining me this episode is an inspirational voice in the UK residential care sector. Before we begin our conversation, I’d just like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the lands that I come to you from, the Ghana people of the Adelaide Plains, and acknowledge the continuing connection the living Ghana people feel to land, waters, culture, and community. I’d also like to pay my respects to their elders, past, present, and emerging. My guest this episode is Carla Keyte. Carla is the founder and director of Lighthouse, bringing extensive expertise in quality, compliance, and safeguarding across the residential childcare sector in the UK. With a background spanning, registered manager, head of care, and head of quality and compliance for an organization operating over 30 homes rated good and outstanding, Carla has deep practical insight into operational leadership, regulatory compliance, and governance. Carla has a proven track record of resolving complex compliance issues and supporting organizations through challenging regulatory actions. Her specialism lies in developing and embedding quality and governance frameworks that drive sustainable improvements and ensure the highest standards of care. Passionate about love-led practice and the power of meaningful relationships, Carla champions approaches that create safe, nurturing, and stable environments where children and young people can truly thrive. Her expertise in implementing integrated therapeutic models enables her to support organizations to meet children’s emotional, social, and developmental needs with compassion, structure, and intentionality. Carla founded Lighthouse to provide expert guidance and tailored support to providers navigating an increasingly complex regulatory landscape. Her mission is to empower teams to deliver values-based, child-centred practice that goes beyond compliance, creating homes that are safe, stable, and loving. The name Lighthouse reflects Carla’s vision to act as a guiding beacon for organizations illuminating the path through complexity towards excellence in care, safeguarding, and relational practice. Welcome, Carla.

Carla: 5:53

Well, Colby, what uh uh an intro there. Thank you, and thank you for having me.

Colby: 5:59

Yes, well, you’re welcome. It is a good one. And what what isn’t in there, and I often ask people if there’s anything that they’d like to add. Um, but many people are just a little bit um uh overwhelmed by hearing hearing their life’s work read back to them. Um but I I kind of discovered you, although I did I discovered you for my must for myself, not in a talent uh talent identification uh way, but through through your writing, and you just you write beautifully um on uh social media platform. They’re not sponsoring me yet, so I won’t mention LinkedIn. Oh there you go, I did. They shed Yeah, so you you write beautifully on there about um the provision of care in residential residential children’s homes. And um yeah, and so that that’s how I I first I guess came across your work and uh and here you are on the podcast.

Carla: 7:05

Lovely, thank you, thank you, no, really, Colby. And I think for me is somebody once said the uh pen is mightier than the sword, and I do. I write a lot of poems and expression and emotion, and I write a lot about my belief that love saves lives, and that comes from my own personal experiences, but my experience of working in the residential sector and seeing how you know the relationships that we form with children, with adults supporting them and the network are able to really uh change children’s lives and help to heal their trauma. And I think it’s a very difficult time within the residential sector. We talk a lot about policy, procedure, practice, regulation, offset, all of these things are important, and no doubt we’re going to discuss them today, Colby. But you know, that forefront for me and summarising everything that we are keen to talk about is empowering safe, stable, loving homes for children. We believe genuinely with our whole heart that every child deserves a safe, stable, loving home, and that our residential services need support to be able to do that. And love uh takes a village to raise children, right?

Colby: 8:31

Yeah, absolutely. So um let’s just start with with that. What do you see as being the role and purpose of of children’s residential homes? And um have you noticed anything that’s shifted over the last over the period of time that you’ve been working in the sector?

Carla: 8:51

Mm-hmm. No, I have, and I I think it’s interesting because the core purpose of a children’s home is actually beautifully very simple. And it is to provide a safe, stable, loving home for children that cannot live within their own families. I think what has shifted over the last ten years is our understanding of what that really means. And so our children’s homes regulations 2015 are, you know, still very valid when you look through the lens of what children need, but our understanding over time, you know, 10 years ago we talked about placements and behaviour management and risk reduction and contact, and now we talk about home and family time and adults who love and and care for children, and so we, you know, in the sector have really developed an understanding that children heal through relationships, and yet the compliance is the kind of ground on which we stand upon, but not necessarily in the way in which healing can be measured. You know, we now know that kind of trauma lives in the body and that safety is a psychological experience that we develop through relationship, not necessarily just through kind of policy and procedure and tick box and uh healing is developed through emotionally attuned adults who are able to regulate with children and support them to make sense of their trauma. So I don’t think that the purpose has changed. I think potentially that our clarity has, our knowledge has, our understanding of neuroscience and biology and how trauma shapes and contaminates experiences for the children that we look after.

Colby: 10:55

Yeah, so the I guess the the as you say, the language and the the degree of focus on that that primary task or that purpose of children’s homes has become clearer and more more defined. And do you think that there’s been a change in the experience of the young people who reside in um residential homes uh associated with that?

Carla: 11:21

Yeah, absolutely. And when we talk to and engage with care-experienced young people, what they tell us is important to them are those relationships, are those adults that showed up consistently, calmly, attuned again and again, those adults that took the time to notice and spend time and build strong relationships. That’s really where safety is is built and felt actually in relationship.

Colby: 11:53

It’s interesting. I’ve had um a number of guests talk about um alumni uh as such of of children’s residential homes, going back quite a number of or spread through the podcast episodes and um uh interestingly, what they report is that children who have been in um residential homes generally and even uh the through specific ones that um I’ve had people associated with them uh on the podcast, is that is that they give they give generally give positive feedback about their experience, sometimes incredibly positive feedback about their experience in residential um child homes, that probably flies in the face a little bit of what policy makers think is in the best interest of children.

Carla: 12:50

I think we can’t be naive, you know, Kobe. The the facts still show that a lot of children, a number of high number of children who are up in residential care or looked after are more likely to end up in prison than they are in university, and that is a sad fact. But I don’t think it can take away from the impact of relationships, and what we hear consistently time and time and time again, is one person who uh shows up unconditionally with uh positive regard for a child who builds relationships can help to heal that trauma and change the direction of a person’s or a child’s adult’s life, actually, not just children. It’s true for us as human beings in terms of our understanding and knowledge in relation to trauma informed practice. Residential care often can be perceived as an institution or a last choice, or or especially a lot in the media of um money grabbing, or or we’ve got a lot of concerns around profiteering, and you know, I can’t take away again even from those concerns, Colby, but what I see when I work across the sector is resilience and passion and people who care and turn up every day to work with some of society’s most traumatised children, and what I also see is that the power of love and relationships can really shape and help children heal from traumatised experiences in their early years.

Colby: 14:34

So when you visit a home, what what do you see that um really I guess um encourages you or or or reassures you that this is a safe and stable, loving home for for the children and young people who live there?

Carla: 14:56

It’s primarily going to be about children’s voice, isn’t it? We talk a lot about beyond compliance. So, for example, if we consider what is good when we look at the offset framework, how do we measure good currently? The SCIF, the common inspection framework really sets out what that looks like for residential children’s game, but how do we measure what is felt? How do we understand if children feel loved and safe and cared for? Because often the measurement isn’t how many incidents we’ve had, but how we are supporting children through those feelings, through those experiences to uh manage and learn and grow from and through their trauma. So what does good look like? What does it feel like? It feels safe, it feels emotionally safe, it feels like children who feel safe in their bodies enough to play and experience and grow and engage in the community. It feels like children who are able to build relationships with adults and adults who are creating environments that feel and reflect on, where children genuinely seen, felt, heard, loved, and cared for, and where adults are supported with the psychological safety and security to be able to do that in a in a professional and containing way for children.

Colby: 16:32

And I wonder whether um the the the standards, the safeguarding standards um that exist in relation to or the regulatory standards that exist in relation to uh assessing children’s homes. And we see a lot on uh LinkedIn a lot about inspection outcomes. Um I guess I’m just wondering about what relationship you see between those inspection outcomes that that come through those through the regulation system and process and the children’s experience of the home. And is there a relationship between what what the um how how homes are rated by Ofstead and the children’s experience in those homes?

Carla: 17:27

Yeah. And you know, the the truth is a lot of homes are a great number, most number of homes are are rated Ofstead good, and and you would I would consider that are delivering safe, stable, loving homes for children. Um the lens again in which we look at that trauma-informed approach, the relational uh measurement of care, I think is the aspect that needs to catch up. So um often in the other end of the inspection cycle requires improvement, inadequate compliance. That’s not really particularly trauma-informed language. It’s not the way in which we speak to each other or or we talk when we’re coaching and we’re developing and we’re supporting homes on that journey of understanding. Because as much as children need safe, stable, loving environments in order to thrive, actually, so do adults. Um, and if we think about homes and organizations as kind of um organic structures, uh, we need to be considering how not only do we provide safe, stable, loving homes, but how do we create safe, stable, loving organizations? How do we create an inspection framework because it is necessary and helpful, that uh breeds love instead of fear, because I think a lot of the time the sense of judgment and negative language and narrative that we’ve created creates this sense of fear, and we know that in order to create safe environments for children, adults need to feel psychologically safe and contained, and therefore the organization needs to be the container for that.

Colby: 19:28

Yeah, it’s you make a very good point. We would never in trauma-informed work, we would never assess someone, a child, as being inadequate. No, as not meeting up to our standards. Yeah.

Carla: 19:44

And I I’ve thought a lot about this. I think safe, stable, loving homes at Lighthouse is the lens in which we look at everything, whether that’s a call for training or compliance support. Over the last five years, we’ve supported a number of organizations. Organisations that have been inadequate in compliance, primarily around Regulation 12 and safeguarding and Regulation 13 leadership. And what we see is this sense of kind of blame and finger pointing and failure. And I think that it sits alongside sometimes often this narrative around residential care that you know it’s profiteering. But when we think about children in the family home or foster care, and we have safeguarding concerns, what we do is we enact child protection procedures, we enact safeguarding structures, we enact working together, multi-agency support and development for children and families and homes. But uh within the current inspection framework, we’ve become um a much more enforcement-aimed perspective. And some of that is is absolutely necessary. But I believe that in order to have a much more um relational inspection process, we should be asking ourselves, is this a safe, stable, loving home for children? Or is this a home that requires support to be a safe, stable, loving home for children? And I actually genuinely believe that Offset should be a safeguarding partner. And where homes are facing a challenge, then we should enact similar processes to child protection procedures where we have a team of specialists, the inspectors, the local authorities, leadership team, residential specialists, uh, those with trauma-informed and therapeutic experience to help that home provide safe, stable loving homes for children, or to consider what needs to be done in order to develop that further. And you know, in some points that might be that children need different intervention and support, but overarchingly, when we have a clear common goal, when we take away that blame language and we reframe it as safeguarding partnership, we keep children much more at the focus and adults who are supporting them who turn up every day with a huge level of love and care and resilience, uh, to be able to uh provide children with safety, stability, and love in a regulated way.

Colby: 22:54

Yeah, they’re they’re all very interesting points, and in and it in some ways it taps into one of the purposes I had, or one of the intentions I had in starting the podcast, um, which was to change the language about around children’s residential childcare more generally. But I think also I have had long-standing concerns about the impact of how external bodies, whether they be a regulator, whether they be the media, the uh judiciary or or uh even the local child protection, statutory child protection authority, I’ve been concerned about the language that they is used about the workforce that they’re offering commentary, assessment, decision, you know, judgment about. And in residential care, um I when I see a children’s minister, for example, advertise on social media something along the lines of um we, you know, our government has uh established this new service family-based for bad family-based care of children and young people that will save save X number of children from residential care.

Carla: 24:18

Yeah.

Colby: 24:18

And and when I see that, it makes my blood boil because I just think whatever your views are about residential care, residential child care, um there are kids that are in it. And it’s not it’s it and it is quite a heterogeneous group. There are there are always examples of of not so good um residential child care homes. Yeah. Just as and and and there are also examples of outstanding uh um home experiences for children. And I guess now I’m getting on my my my soapbox a little bit, but I I think that if you’ve got if you’re the if you’re you’ve got the power to change, then because you do, and you’ve got concerns about our residential childcare sector, then then do something about it. Um and I but as just to finish my other point, which was I I’m always very concerned about the experience of the staff when when they are aware of those direct messages that residential care is something to be avoided at all costs, that it is is the option of last resort. And I think the the cost at all costs, that cost has that double meaning because I think you know it is perhaps more expensive in some ways than than other forms of care. Um but so what? You know, raising children is expensive. And I think that that whole language around it is the option of last resort really cheats cheats children, cheats homes and children out of being resourced to the level that that adequately, more than adequately meets their needs.

Carla: 26:06

Yeah. And and our sector has become driven by that fear-based language and experience. So adult supporting children feel that. We need a huge amount of resources to be able to support children who’ve experienced significant trauma, relational rupture, uh, exploitation at the hands of society. These are children who have been harmed and hurt, not what we often consider to be naughty children, or and you know, beyond that, our children’s homes have often been considered historically as kind of last resorts and institutions and places where you know we’re lacking love and support. And I think that’s a key thing for me in all of those roles, in all of those aspects, in all of the policies, procedures, practice, in every offset report I’ve read in every policy we’ve built, every role. The thing that stands fundamentally at the core of it, Colby, that I have always been is a love-led practitioner.unknown: 27:38

Yeah.

Carla: 27:39

I believe genuinely that love saves lives and children heal, and we can heal trauma and relational rupture and attachment uh disorder through building strong, safe relationships with children. And in order to do that, we need to have a frameworks that support us to boldly love children.

Colby: 28:02

So, what I’m taking from what you’re saying is that um the very things that um that support a felt sense of psychological safety, a felt sense of mattering, a felt sense of belonging, yeah. All of the a felt sense of connection to others needs to be built into any assessment framework when one is from a from a regulatory point of view, um turning one’s mind to the safety and well-being of children.

Carla: 28:42

Yeah, absolutely. What does a safe, stable, loving home for this child look like? Because you know, we talk about regulation, but actually the truth is called, we’ve got a number of children, foster homes, supported accommodation, we’ve got challenges with homes getting regulated, we’ve got children, more children now than we’ve ever had in unregulated care. So the question or the key question for me is you know, is this child experiencing a safe, stable, loving home? And if not, what do we need to do about it? Because, you know, this kind of finger pointing and blame culture of the residential sector, the demonizing is not the truth. There are aspects of it that need to be controlled. But the truth is when I travel across the sector in the 20 years I’ve worked in this um arena, but more so in the last five years where I’ve been supporting homes to embed safe, stable, loving homes model and to really consider what does that mean on a day-to-day? What I see is resilience and love and care, and people who are passionate and who are genuinely able to make a difference to children’s lives and even the national agenda, you know, things that are being said at a national level this week. I’m not going to involve myself in that debate so much, but they they build on this rhetoric that the residential sector is broken and that we’re you know not doing and that we’re costing, and but the cost of of not loving children is that children grow up feeling not loved, and the impact of that is so much wider than you know whether residential care should be the first choice for children or not.

Colby: 30:44

From my perspective, it’s about building social capital, it’s building good social capital by investing in good res good quality, high-quality residential care, which already exists out there, and looking at those providers that provide excellent high-quality care and how what we can understand about the way they work and the way they practice and how that can be um supported across the across the sector. Um yeah, I it is I always say when you when you improve the life of an individual child, you also improve the life of their life partner or life partners, their children and their grandchildren. That’s that’s the social cat the accumulating social capital effect of actually intervening um therapeutically with our children. And another thing that you said that I thought was really important and is we need and I guess it was it was uh it was a post that you put on in on LinkedIn about understanding that um that I has got uh drew my attention to your work, but is that what you just said just now about individualized care plans and assessing assessing homes perhaps, supporting homes. An assessment can be therapeutic. I mean, if you’re doing therapy, you’re always assessing. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So have a baseline. That’s right. An assessment is in a therapeutic sense is is about where are we at and where do we want to get to. Yeah. Where an assessment in other contexts can be about deficit. What are the deficits and how do we ri remediate those deficits? So if we if we want a system that is more is therapeutic, and we want that because um people perform better in the role where they have a regulatory system that is therapeutic. And that assess that system perhaps needs to uh assess the capacity of the home to meet the individual love and safety and belonging and mattering needs of the children. And I guess a point that has been brought up, and not to steal the the floor too much, is what do you do with the most unhappy, the most traumatized, the most complex young people? If we have a if we have a system that has rigid standards as such that don’t move with the individualized needs of children, then you’ll you’ll create a a certain category of children that become perhaps I’m tr I’m struggling to think of a better word, but a a liability or a threat to the standing of the home. So we never want a regulatory system that excludes certain children from care.

Carla: 34:04

Yeah, and and I think we have seen that a lot within the regulated sector. It’s why we’ve got such a high number of children in unregulated or unregistered, we’ve got a number of delays in the registration process for um offset registered homes. But I think what it comes back to me for each time, Bobby, is the same key question. What does a safe, stable, loving home look like for this child? And what do we need to do in order to achieve it? So often, you know, we get calls from uh across the sector in the last five years, homes that have been inadequate, compliant, children that are moving to and from unregulated care and needing those levels of support. And the first question that we ask, we use the lighthouse lens and we say that actually, in reality, safety, safeguarding, the foundation of everything we do is built on a foundation of safeguarding. In our model, we say on the left hand side we have a triangle and it’s quality and compliance or really equates to stable. And then we look at strategic intervention. What does that look like? What do we need to put in place? And often that’s where our love leg practice comes in place. So safe, stable loving homes for children. And if we think about Johnny, we say, what do we need to do to safeguard Johnny? What quality and compliance are we working within? What policy procedure is Johnny in a regulated, unregulated home? What do we need to put in place to support that? What strategic intervention, what support or intervention, trauma-informed therapeutic practice, love, leg care, keyword sessions, referral support for multi-agency services through effective assessment does little Johnny need? But we don’t stop there. We have to then say, what about the adults? What do we need to do to safeguard out the adults that are looking after Johnny? How do we help them to do that in the most stabilising way in terms of quality and compliance? What interventions do we need to put in place for them through supervision and training, reflective practice that help us create a sense of psychological safety for adults? But again, Colby, we can’t stop there. We have to say the home and then wider. What we’ve been saying is, you know, okay, as an organization, what do you need to do to ensure safe, stable, loving homes for children? And we’ve been embedding this model in children’s homes across the sector and children’s homes that have been under scrutiny through inspection that who are now long-standing, good and outstanding homes, not because they’ve learned to take the inspection box and framework, but they’ve really considered their culture, their purpose. What does it mean to provide a safe, stable, individualized home for children and to help adults to feel safe enough to love and care for those children on a daily basis?

Colby: 37:32

There’s clearly a role for leadership in that aspect of this conversation. But before I I moved there, while I was listening to you speak, it occurred to me that some people know that I have a history of nearly 15 years working in the regulatory sector, the health practitioner regulation scheme here in Australia, uh, in the psychology part of it. And sometimes in regulation the standards can either be you know broad principles, you know, appro that we we aspire to, or they c they can be quite prescriptive about the things that um we want to see. And I think I think with the latter if you if you look at the children that um that are cared for within um within residential child uh homes or children’s homes, then a a a fairly prescriptive model or or set of standards for regulation, I think, um will certainly lack nuance. It’s a very new very nuanced area, potentially. But also I I think about what the level, you know, what what is the what is the level at which we pitch it? Do we live a is it pitch at the level of the the bare minimum? This is this is the the ba the this is the um the let the standard of care we expect everyone to be in. And I don’t want to draw this similarity the the the relationship with Winnicott’s idea of the good enough parent, because I think his idea of the good enough parent is is is but this this i is a really good one in in some expressions, in certain, you know, for example in in assessing assessing on an individualized basis, if you apply it on an individualized basis, but if you have standards that try to I’m trying to come up with language that isn’t, and so I’m gonna say it, lowest common denominator in a sense.

Carla: 39:53

Yeah. I think for me, what we say is compliance. Is the foundation that we stand on, not the ceiling that we reach for. And so it’s beyond compliance. We do need a set of regulations, we do need standards, we still need a set of guidance, the way in which we look at that, and you know, how it’s framed, I think, needs to be more relational and really considering what does that look like for individual children? Is this a service that’s providing a safe, stable, loving home for children? Or in the same way as families, do they need support to be able to do so? And I think that frames that much more in terms of our kind of trauma informed support language assessment. You can’t have a one-size fits all necessarily, but what you can have is a commitment, a promise. And actually, we can see that you know, if we look at Scotland, Scotland have uh the national promise. And I think the thing that I could say to you, Colby, in my whole career that I am most proud of is that I am currently the lead for the Love and Care Network in partnership with our colleagues over at Children’s Homes Quality, and we are working to build a village to really communicate the power of loving relationships in children’s homes, to create the framework and the training and the modules so that we can stand loud and proud and say, actually, our children alert, the evidence basis here for it, the neuroscience supports it, the practice, the research in practice, attachment theory, whether we look at all of the layers of our evidence of care over the last 15 years since the children’s homes regulations were embedded, show us that children can thrive and do thrive in homes where they feel safe, supported, loved, and cared for, and we need to be able to provide the framework that supports individual homes for individual children at a time in which they need it.

Colby: 42:32

Yeah, the the the the promise is uh uh somewhat paradigm shifting, I think, in the sense that, and I think we’ve kind of moved a little bit around this topic, but um the idea of loving the children in in your care has been polluted in a sense by concerns around what what do professional boundaries look like.

Carla: 43:01

Yeah, absolutely.

Colby: 43:03

And if you so so that’s a really good example of where a safeguarding standard actually contributes to a poorer outcome for children and other people. It’s that that the law of unintended consequences in a s in a sense, you know, no good deed goes unpunished. We keep a professional distance, we keep bat we maintain boundaries, and then what what what what are the consequences of doing that for for our children in terms of their experience of whether they matter, whether they’re loved. What the promise Scotland really um um restores for us is our ability to to actually say that the ch the children need love and that’s and that’s part of our role. That that is it that’s not a boundary transgression that that’s not even an uh it’s not even um poor practice. It’s a it’s a fundamental human need. Yeah. And if we can’t provide that, then what what are we doing? What are we here for?

Carla: 44:22

Yeah, yeah. And you know, the the neuroscience supports this. And the um fact is that we have legislated ourselves and we have safeguarded ourselves against actually being able to love children. And the truth is that when we are so afraid to love children, the outcome is that children grow up feeling unloved, funnily enough. Um it’s interesting, isn’t it? Because a lot of these policies, this is the line I think between safeguarding and love. And I’ve what I’ve come to the conclusion of in all my research and thinking, Colby, is that the most purest form of safeguarding is love. Children need to feel safe, they need to feel regulated, they need adults that are going to hold boundaries, hold them in mind, and be able to, you know, hold some of those experiences that they have been through. When we safeguard against that, when we historically, when we think about compliance and safeguarding practice, we think about have you filled out the safeguarding form, have you informed offset, have you done a Reg 40? We think about safeguarding compliance, policy, procedure, practice. But the truth is none of those things actually keep the child any safer. They inform people of the safeguarding need, they put a network around, and of course, those things are very important. But the real safeguarding is the relationship that that child has with that adult every day who looks after them, who has an understanding of their needs, has a awareness in their changes, in their mood, in their behavior. And what that looks like, that looks like love and that looks like care, and fear cannot drive out fear. Only love can do that, really.

Colby: 46:30

Yeah, well, I think that’s a very well-made point. And my mind where my mind is going, you know, on the basis of what you’re you’re saying, is if we assess for performance, if that that’s that’s what that’s a bit like those two different types of assessment that that I was referring to earlier. The as one is the assessment of performance and capacity and and ability to do to perform us in a certain task or role. The other is about um assessing particular a person’s circumstances or an organization’s circumstances and turning our minds to where how what are we what do we implement, how do we support, what what what is the intervention to the intervention. And that the therapeutic intervention. And that’s a that’s a different type of safeguarding. One from one and and I I see this this is really relevant across safeguarding because of children, because people are talking about this in terms of what child protection system how child protection systems should function. That you know, so a lot of the time the way they function is that a parent a family is in deep trouble, and they assess them to be in deep trouble, and the children are un uh are unsafe, and they remove those those children. Yeah. But it but the dialogue part of the problem with that is is then we also know that governments and their and their art agencies struggle to provide the the the care that children need. That yeah, and they will always struggle, I would say. There’s nothing that they they cannot replace the birth-family connection by and large. So they’ll always struggle with that. And what what’s coming into the more and more I’m seeing it um in terms of what people are saying about our our uh child protection systems more broadly is that the intervention should be more a therapeutic one. Yes, we assess, we assess the si the layer of the land as we find it, and rather than making a judgment at that point in in relation to a line, what we say is what what are the therapeutic interventions here? Yes. They get the get this family, they get this foster care placement that you know where there’s been a care concern, they get this children’s home to a place. And and this is the the important thing is if that is if if that’s a philosophy that underpins our regulatory or our child protection system, then um it naturally follows that we’re looking for strengths to build on. We’re un we’re we’re understanding the circum what the circumstances here, not from a point of view of of judgment, of judgment and decision making, but from a point of view of how do we address those circumstances therapeutically. Yeah.

Carla: 49:55

And and I think in in a lot of ways that’s the same foundation and model that we and Lens that we’ve built at at Lighthouse. And now I remember a very old boss of mine, she said to me, Um, Carlish, said you, you you’re fantastic at safeguarding children. I was a residential manager. When the kids are in your care, they’re really safe. I’m working with high-risk young ladies, uh, young ladies at high risk of exploitation. And uh she said, it’s like you’re running around the country with a cage and catch these kids, and when they’re in your cage, they’re safe. But what happens when you lift up the cage? And then you start to consider okay, a lot of people work really hard to safeguard children. We’ve got Johnny, he’s safe. We’ve done the quality and compliance, we’ve told Offstead, we’re sold to the social worker, we’ve told the people, we followed the procedure. But what are we going to do? What’s the intervention? What’s the strategic intervention that little Johnny needs? Is that you know stronger keyworking, attuned adults? Is it, you know, referral pathway, mental health support, you know, is it that he needs uh education, different care planning aspects? But then not only what intervention does little Johnny need, what intervention do the adults need to be able to provide a safe, stable, loving home to be emotionally and psychologically contained and safe to do so. So the two things can’t be separate. We used to teach our adults, and and and there is a contrary to it in our safeguarding policies, in our professional boundaries, leave yourself at the door. Don’t be behind a closed door with a child, don’t hug a child, God forbid you tell them that you love them or that you care for them or you might buy them a small gift when you go on holiday. And all of these safeguarding policies and procedures, Gobby, they they were built to safeguard our children from predators through the last 15 years, where we’ve seen, you know, serious and significant um child protection cases in our media across our country, across the world, across our sector. Failure upon failure is if you would have it to believe that way. But we’ve created all of these policies that do safeguard children, but inadvertently they safeguard them from being loved and supported because 15-year-old boys aren’t sitting in the living room in front of numerous adults talking about their feelings and crying in their trauma, and they’re crying at three o’clock in the morning in their bedroom with an adult who’s taken the time to build a relationship, and the door probably is going to be closed, and you probably are going to be sat on the bedroom floor crying and feeling and experiencing. And once upon a time, we were told, you know, don’t bring the emotion, it’s not effective safeguarding. But children need adults that show up for them, that care for them, that love them, that hold them in mind, that build trust and build a sense of safety, not just in tick boxes, not just on paper. The paper that you, the poem that you read, I think, you know, we don’t require improvement, we require understanding, understanding that children have experienced trauma, understanding that adults holding that is messy, understanding that leaders need an incredible amount of resilience, and yet often we, you know, we fail to understand the trauma, the need for love, the investment that that takes to show up every day. It’s one of the most difficult jobs that I have ever done, and I am have never been so proud to stand here today in that capacity as my lead for loving care. I’ve been an effective safeguarding uh practitioner, I’ve driven changes in quality and compliance and offstead inspection. The regulatory framework is important, but at the heart of it all, if we don’t keep the love, if we don’t reclaim it, if we don’t say it out loud, if we is there in our regulatory framework and coming all the way back round, you know, Colby, we talked about the promise in Scotland. I believe that we should go one step further. And I call on, you know, the UK government to invest in every child having a safe, stable, loving home, whether those children are in foster care, whether those children are unaccompanied asylum seekers, children living in residential homes or supported accommodation. And I urge our government to go one step further and say care doesn’t stop at 16 or 18. Children, you know, we talk about transitions and independence, but actually the reality is children, adults, human beings need sustaining loving relationships. And one person who loves you unconditionally can build resilience, can shape your future, and can help to help children overcome the trauma that they have experienced so that they can go on to live, you know, really fulfilling uh lives and and to break that aspect of, as we talked about earlier, intergenerational trauma. It’s a big thing there, Colby.

Colby: 55:48

Yeah, yeah. So, Carla, it’s it has been a real uh pleasure, joy to have you on the podcast and discuss these matters with you. Is there any final thoughts that you would like to uh leave our listeners or watchers with?

Carla: 56:08

Yeah, I think that’s it. There’s one real message from this conversation. I hope it’s this, Colby, because children don’t heal in systems, they heal in safe, stable, loving homes, um, held by adults and leadership that feel safe enough to stay open and steady enough to kind of stay present through these experiences, you know, through the difficult times and to stand with them. So I think you know, we don’t need harsher systems, we actually need a more understanding one. We don’t require improvement, we require understanding because when we build homes where love is protected, we have clear evidence that love saves lives.

Colby: 56:54

Yeah. Wonderful, thank you. Thank you very much, Kamala, and uh yeah, thank you for coming on the pod.

Carla: 57:03

Lovely, thank you, Colby.

Disclaimer: Information reported by guests of this podcast is assumed to be accurate as stated. Podcast owner Colby Pearce is not responsible for any error of facts presented by podcast guests. In addition, unless otherwise specified, opinions expressed by guests of this podcast may not reflect those of the podcast owner, Colby Pearce.

Relearning Trust Through Relationships – A Podcast Interview with John Turberville

Join John Turberville as we unpack residential childcare reform, trauma-informed leadership, the role of culture, and what truly supports children to heal and flourish in out-of-home care. Insightful, honest, and deeply relevant for carers, educators and leaders.

Relearning Trust Through Relationships

Residential care is often framed as the last stop, the place you turn to when everything else has failed. This conversation challenges that reflex. John Turberville, CEO of the Mulberry Bush, lays out a humane, evidence-informed case for residential care as a placement of choice for children whose lives have been marked by trauma, rupture and repeated breakdowns. He traces his path from business into therapeutic childcare and explains how mentors, reflective practice and a clear psychodynamic approach shaped a charity that now stretches from its residential school to outreach, consulting and training. The anchor is simple but demanding: relationships first, because repair happens in safe, predictable, attuned relationships that children can actually feel.

A powerful thread is the role of family. Rather than treating the child in isolation, Mulberry Bush commits to working with birth, adoptive and foster families through therapy, peer groups and even residential family weekends. The aim is honest: build capacity, reduce shame, and create real pathways for step-down into stable home life when safe and possible. John describes the reality of term-time and 52?week care, the complexities of holidays, and the constant balance between modelling good care and avoiding competition with families. Alumni stories cut through rhetoric; adults return decades later saying the warmth, structure and belonging they felt taught them the “boundaries of life” and helped them become parents who can love well.

Why group care? Because the difficulties show up in groups—families, classrooms, communities—and that is where the work belongs. For some children, especially those who find family placements overwhelming or triggering, small, therapeutic residential homes provide the containment and relational density needed to rebuild trust. The episode unpacks how solo placements can stabilise acute crises, yet reintegration into group living matters for social learning. We hear of a seven-year-old with over 50 foster breakdowns; expecting another family try would likely entrench shame. In such cases, high-quality residential care across childhood is not failure—it’s a fit.

The conversation also faces the policy and practice headwinds. Staff need emotional resilience, reflective spaces, strong training, and permission to innovate. One-size-fits-all programmes do not work for children who do not fit the mould. Yet regulation can provoke fear that stifles creativity, pushing staff toward screens and paperwork instead of children. John advocates a healthier balance: clear standards for safety, coupled with trust in skilled teams to adapt, experiment and respond to complex need. If we get it right for the most vulnerable, we get it right for everyone.

Finally, the theme that ties it all together is belonging. Whether through a 38?week or 52?week home, a peer group, or a family network, Mulberry Bush builds a felt sense of safety and community. Alumni say the site looks different now, but it feels the same: people who listen deeply, boundaries held with care, and a culture of reflective practice. That aura—accessible, understanding, responsive, attuned—helps children relearn the world as somewhere they can trust, and themselves as people who matter. For systems chasing placement stability and better outcomes, the lesson is clear: invest in relationships, embed family work, back your staff, and make space for creativity to breathe.

You can listen to the full episode here:

You can watch here:

About John:

John is the Chief Executive Officer of The Mulberry Bush, a national charity dedicated to transforming the lives of people affected by trauma in their childhood. He leads the development & delivery of an integrated range of specialist therapeutic and educational services, with a focus on expanding the charity’s range and reach and ensuring the highest standards across all services — guided by its three core values: Collaborative Working, a Psychodynamic Approach, and a Reflective Culture.

John joined The Mulberry Bush in 1994 after a successful career in business in central London, bringing over three decades of experience in therapeutic practice, with an MA in Therapeutic Childcare and a certificate in Family Therapy. Formerly the School Director and Chief Operating Officer, he became CEO to further develop the charity’s ability to link teaching, research, and practice, aiming to deliver the highest quality services and excellent outcomes.

John is Chair of the Community of Communities Advisory Group at the Royal College of Psychiatrists, supporting quality assurance and accreditation for Therapeutic Communities & Therapeutic Child Care settings in the UK and internationally, and is a Therapeutic Communities (TC) specialist, auditing TC prisons.

John is also Trustee of the National Association of Special Schools (NASS) and Governor of a village primary school, reflecting his commitment to both specialist & mainstream leadership.

Related Podcasts:

If you really liked John’s podcast interview, I anticipate you will also like the following:

Richard Rollinson:

Listen here:

Watch here:

John Whitwell:

Listen here:

Watch here:

Transcript:

Colby: 0:00

Hello and welcome to the Secure Star podcast.

John: 0:05

And I’ve been sort of powerfully reminded by various children that no matter the level of difficulty when they were living at home, and sometimes it’s absolutely right that they don’t live at home, but no matter the level of difficulty, there’s still family and there’s still that very important bond that is there. But there is something about modelling the sorts of relationships that can be achieved and those experiences that can be had so that even if it’s not possible to have those at home, the children can develop a sense of what might be possible. That you have to have children on the experience that he had with the staff team at the moment. And from my family therapy experience, I also think there’s something about the intensity of the sort of family dynamic, which can be very challenging. And so expecting all to be able to sort of work through in the intensity of that sort of familial dynamic family relationship, I think is short-sighted really. I do think the children who get close to large tend to be those who are surrounded by the highest levels of anxiety and levels of anxiety at risk. And what we know of these children is that sort of they don’t fit the ball, if you like. A one-size-fits-all program doesn’t work. We need creativity, we need innovation, we need to trust our staff, we need to ensure that they’re trained and properly supported, and then we need to really trust and encourage this to creativity and innovation. We’ve had lots of girls with a lot of many placement breakdowns. So when I was a health manager, we had a girl placed up in two to seven. And actually had over 50 foster placement breakdowns before the aged to seven. And fundamentally, I think it was unrealistic to expect to give something that looked like that another girl. She firmly believed it was her fault, it didn’t, it was unlovable, nobody could really look after her. So I think for her it probably made absolute sense that she continued in residential care. Whereas for other children, you know, the opportunity to support them, to develop an understanding of what’s going on within the family, to work with the family and reintegrate them, I think is also really important, a great opportunity there. Residential care as a placement of choice, I think is really important. Fundamentally, the things that the children today are generally to do with the importance of relationships and the sort of love and care that they experience.

Colby: 3:50

Before we begin the podcast, I’d just like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land that I come to you from, the Ghana people of the Adelaide Plains, and acknowledge the continuing connection the living Ghana people feel to land, waters, culture, and community. I’d also like to pay my respects to their elders, past, present, and emerging. My guest this episode is John Turberville. John is the Chief Executive Officer of the Mulberry Bush, a national charity dedicated to transforming the lives of people affected by trauma in their childhood. He leads the development and delivery of an integrated range of specialist therapeutic and educational services with a focus on expanding the charity’s range and reach and ensuring the highest standards across all services, guided by its three core values a collaborative working, a psychodynamic approach, and a reflective culture. John joined the Moby Bush in 1994 after a successful career in business in central London, bringing over three decades of experience in therapeutic practice with an MA in therapeutic childcare and a certificate in family therapy. Formerly the school director and chief operating officer, he became the CEO to further develop the charity’s ability to link teaching, research, and practice, aiming to deliver the highest quality services and excellent outcomes. John is chair of the Community of Communities Advisory Group at the Royal College of Psychiatrists, supporting quality assurance and accreditation for therapeutic communities and therapeutic childcare settings in the UK and internationally. And is a therapeutic community specialist auditing therapeutic communities prisons. John is also trustee of the National Association of Special Schools and Governor of a Village Primary School, reflecting his commitment to both specialist and mainstream leadership. Welcome, John.

John: 6:24

Thank you. Lovely introduction.

Colby: 6:28

Yeah, well, um, and as I uh generally admit at this point in time, it’ll come it’ll come through lovely and smoothly with the wonders of me being able to go back and edit my little uh uh uh missteps as I was as I was going through the through your bio.

John: 6:47

Yeah, no problem at all. No problem at all.

Colby: 6:50

Now it’s a significant um it’s a significant work history you have, and you’re you’re leading up a um you know a very well-known and dare I say, even somewhat famous organization uh there in the Mulberry Bush. I’m wondering if we might begin by um further to that bio, if you’re just telling us a little bit about your journey to to becoming the CEO of such a highly esteemed organization.

John: 7:25

Yeah, yeah, sure. Thank you. Thanks thanks for reminding me of of of the sort of esteem in which it’s held. I suppose whenever people say that, I always makes me feel slightly sort of intimidated, and I often think of the word of my sort of current role of being sort of stewarding it for a period of time or um, I don’t know, custodian or something like that. But um, yeah, in terms of my journey to CEO, I mean it’s I mean, some of it’s sort of covered in the bio, I suppose, but it’s sort of interesting for me. I think my interest in this sort of field of work really started. Um, it was actually triggered by a documentary I saw once on TV in my teens, which was to do with working with um teenage young offenders and doing sort of outdoor education in in the great outdoors, which was a great passion of mine in my sort of teenage years. Um, and I think from quite an early age, I was quite a sort of fragile child, if you like, and and my parents sort of discouraged me from going straight into this sort of work. They didn’t really think probably that I would be resilient enough, which which I often reflect on. Um, and I ended up going into charter surveying actually in in the West End in London, and I worked for a big sort of professional firm for for five or six years. But in that time, I I worked with a charity in the east end of London called the Stepney Children’s Fund, with who who looked after and worked with similar children who are those placed at the Mulberry Bush, really. And there was a guy who led it called Bob Lavallian, who was just one of these most incredible, sort of inspirational leaders, um, really led from the heart. And um so I was involved in running um camps and weekends um for mostly boys but some girls from East End schools from really, really quite challenging, uh deprived backgrounds. And again, that sort of spiked my passion to do more in this sort of field. And then um I was actually made redundant up in London and ended up thinking, okay, this is a time to make a change in my career, to do really where you know, to follow my passion, I suppose, and my my interest. And I I looked around the country, I visited various sort of schools and settings, and actually ended up at the Mulberry Bush just to come and have a look. I was linked up with Richard Rollinson at the time, who’s who was at that time the the principal of the school. Um, and when I visited, I suppose something just clicked for me. It just felt it felt right. There was something about the place and the sense of community that I intuitively sort of understood. Um, and so I started there as a volunteer uh and then really sort of worked my way through the care side of the organisation. Um, so I became a therapeutic childcare practitioner, then I ran one of the houses for a period of time, probably I don’t know, about six six or seven years. One of the things looking back often, I’m terrible with the dates, so um I often forget the dates, but sort of six or seven years. Um and in that time, that was when I did the MA and Therapeutic Childcare at Reading, which was an amazing course run by um Adrian Ward and Lynn McMahon, and had a reflective group, and it was just inspiring, really. Um so yeah, really enjoyed that course, learnt a huge amount, and realized that sort of my intuitive approach to the work, you know, there were there was a sort of theoretical underpinning and background that it was important to learn. Um after that, I yeah, I I sort of carried on progressing through my role. So I became the head of residential therapy, which was a role at the time, um, down at the school, and was actually I was the first head of residential therapy who wasn’t residential on the site. So prior to me, it was a residential post, and that it felt like we were sort of moving with the times um to move move beyond that, and then became the school director for about 10 years, a post which I really enjoyed. But at that time, the we were really sort of challenged to grow the work of the charity. So at that time it it was the school, and the school working with the children and the families of the children placed at the school, and so the challenge really was to grow the work of the charity, and we developed some other services, um, which I’ll go on maybe to talk about. But um in doing so, we sort of reorganized the leadership structure and set up this post of sort of COO and COO, sorry, chief operating officer and a chief executive officer. And so I became the COO at that time. Um and we really started to develop our sort of range of outreach services, um, working particularly with schools initially and then with social care organizations. And then about three years ago, John Diamond retired, who was the current CEO, and I applied for that that role. Um, and that seemed to make sense in terms of sort of my personal progression through the charity, through the organization. And I still felt and still feel hugely ambitious for the charity. Um, and so the last three years as CEO have really been about sort of developing that role in the work um of the charity more broadly.

Colby: 12:50

You mentioned a couple of people in that, and thank you. Thank you for the the breadth of that that um um that response. You mentioned Richard Rollinson, who I’ve already had uh on the the podcast. Uh was back in the teens, uh might have been about podcast 14, I think, off top of my head. And Adrian Ward, who’s also been ref I haven’t had him on the podcast, but he’s been referenced um by by other people as um having run or delivered a a very um highly thought of um training in therapeutic um therapeutic childcare. Um Richard Rollinson’s a great one for stories. Uh I wonder whether I might spring uh spring on you a uh whether you whether you have a a good little Richard Rollinson story, uh or at least um the impact that he has had on you, your development um uh as a professional and also as a professional within the Mulberry Bush organization.

John: 14:05

Yeah. So my right smile is I’ve got sort of quite a few amusing stories. Maybe I’ll tell you one of those as well.

Colby: 14:11

But in Sunny De Thomas, remember.

John: 14:16

Thank you for reminding me of that. Yeah. Um I I I think I mean Richard was really has been key to my my own sort of progress and development, and that partly was because when I started at the Mulberry Bush, actually it it it was undergoing quite um a radical change, moving from dormitories upstairs and classrooms downstairs, so really everybody living on top of one another, so to speak, um, and building residential houses, and so moving uh as it was termed at the time, move to small group living. Um and because of that sort of program and my experience in surveying up in London, um, and and I suppose I’d like to think maybe something uh about my approach to the work. Richard was really encouraging of me and got me involved quite early on at quite a high level in the organization. I often look back and think that must have felt quite complicated to some, but it really was, it sort of did inspire me. And it I often think of it when I think about newer people coming in and the sort of strengths, knowledge, and the qualities that they bring, and trying to encourage those and sort of capitalise on those. So Rich was absolutely key to me feeling really authorized to have a voice and have a say in the charity, so that felt really, really important. And I think over that period of time there was something about the way that Richard managed that period of change, which was um sort of determined, focused, clear, um, but in some ways gentle as well. And I think that um that feels important at the Mulberry Bush. That I suppose I always have in mind when we’re managing periods of change that you know there are a group of um very sort of vulnerable children placed in that setting, and so we need to manage everything quite really quite carefully. Um, so I think over time, um, what Richard has really the the one phrase that comes to mind actually that I that I raised often in interviews when I’ve had interviews about career progression within the charity has been about think the importance of thinking spaces. Um and I think although Richard um will acknowledge that um he never uses uh uses sort of one word when a hundred would do, um that that uh that actually providing spaces to sort of think and reflect about things is really really important. So I’ve always seen that sort of that’s that’s one of the key um key things for me to remember in all my roles is to provide spaces to think. Um my right smile when you were asking the question was that when I was a Richard’s a singer, I don’t know whether he sang for you on the podcast. Um from listen from thinking back. I don’t think he probably did, but um, and yeah, he loves a story. And when I was the house manager of um I was house manager of Sunset House for a number of years, um Rich Offin used to come in um and he used to always have a song to sing. And one of the songs he used to sing was um it was it was it was called Love Potion Number Nine, which is a very old song, um, and it just used to wind all the kids up, and we used to have to sort of usher him back up back out of the door to just to try and calm the place down again. Um, but yeah, no, an amazing guy, lovely guy. Um, and I still regularly meet with him. He’s on our board of trustees still at the moment, so he still very much is um an important sort of voice for me in terms of the the sort of therapeutic community model and um uh something important about the sort of heritage and legacy that that we carry with us as we continue to develop the the Mulberry Bush.

Colby: 18:03

Yeah, yeah, he he was I I absolutely loved interviewing him and hope to do it do so again soon. Um yeah, a couple of things that he said that have never really um stuck in my mind was um uh was about at the Mulberry Bush children live learn to live with uh with others and with themselves as well. And then the other one was uh and this one came up actually really I was doing some work recently and and it um it reminded me of of what Richard uh said during the podcast, which was about and I’m hoping I’m not gonna butcher it, but it was I can always edit it, of course. Um but it was um if children if children are not on your mind they’ll behave in a way that may uh that puts them in your mind and if they’re neither then they’ll be out of their mind.

John: 19:10

Yeah.

Colby: 19:11

But uh yeah, that really captures so much.

John: 19:17

I think Rich often is able, although he likes lots of words, he he often finds these sort of phrases which do capture something very important. Um and I think one of the things that’s been important to me over the last three years, these three years of CEO, one, and it and it’s again it’s a rich Rollinson phrase, has about been about um the importance of the the equal importance of the the business of treatment and the treatment of the business. Um and and certainly it’s been a key focus for me in the past. I think as a charity, it’s been very focused on on the business of treatment, which of course is you know why it exists and it’s all important, but fundamentally, if you if you don’t get the treatment of the business right, then you’ve got nothing. And so there’s something about that balance over the last three years, which I’ve been trying to ensure as we grow remains a little more equal, um, that we focus on the importance uh of the treatment of the business and make sure the business is solid and sound so that we can deliver high-quality treatment. So, Rich, yeah, he’s he’s great with words. Indeed, he is.

Colby: 20:29

And um while we’re sticking with the the topic of the business, um the Mulberry Bush School, uh, for those who know a little bit of its history, started off um uh as I recall, um back in the 1940s with um Mrs. Mrs. Docker Drysdale and her husband, and she ran something of a nursery school at that at that time. And um and then it’s it’s kind of developed from there. It’s it’s it’s um what is it must be getting on towards 80 odd years that it’s been operating in one form or another. And um and it it it’s more than just a school now. And uh yeah, I’m interested to hear and and how you would um yeah, uh your summary of of um the work that the Mulberry Bush School does in each of its areas of endeavour.

John: 21:31

Yeah, no, sure. Yeah, absolutely. In 1948 was when um when it was founded, um down on the site that’s it’s still on, down in in Stanlake, um, by by Barbadr Drysdale and her husband Stephen. And and in many ways, it’s the work of the school that that remains the source for all we do. So the sort of model of practice developed in the school, the way in which it was thought about and is thought about remains of of key importance to the growth of the charity. Um and really what the the the school still very much runs um many ways as it did, uh, although we’ve sort of adapted and changed over time, modernized, um, and we always look to embrace new thoughts, new ideas, theories, and practice to try and ensure that we remain at the sort of cutting edge of of what’s going on and practices evidence-based. Um, but really it’s been about trying to adapt those that sort of learning, that knowledge, or those sort of golden threads, if you like, um, for different settings. Um, and so back in uh sort of 2011-2012, we we recognized that we needed to try and do more. And actually, the trustees were also sort of challenging us by saying, um, uh if you’re good at what what you do, then you should be reaching more children. You should be trying to do more. Um, and at that time there was a reduction in the behaviour support service for schools in Oxfordshire, and um, so we recruited one of the lead practitioners um for that support service, um, and we set up this thing, it was a sort of working title which stuck at the beginning, which was it was just called Mbox, which just stood for Melbourne Bush, Oxfordshire. Um, and what was interesting was that the the what schools were used to was having a sort of an expert come in and work with an individual so-called sort of problem child. Um, and right from the beginning we decided that’s not what we were going to do. But what we would do is we would go in and we would observe that child in the sort of setting, and then we’d meet with the staff team, and the work would really be about sort of skilling the workforce, so about supporting the workforce in schools to work more effectively with with the the children with the level of challenge. Um and over time that sort of model has grown. So that that still is a sort of key focus. Um, certainly um schools locally across Oxfordshire, we have um quite a team working there, but also um nationally and a little bit internationally. But um so that started off with schools, and at a similarish sort of time, and as I said earlier, I’m not very good with dates, but a similar sort of time we we recognised that the the training we were offering to our own staff, it was the time when government were asking um um staff to complete a level three qualification, and we just felt it was not training our staff to work with the sort of level of complexity um of the children placed at the Mulberry Bush. And so we we accredited a course with the University of the West of England, it’s a level five qualification um in therapeutic at work with children and young people, and we’ve been running that ever since. So I forget the number of the number of the recent cohort, but it’s something like 19th or 20th cohort. Um, so that’s a two-year qualification, and we we um require all of our staff to pass that level five qualification, so that’s a sort of contractual obligation. Um and that has uh led to us also accepting external students onto that course. Um, so that focused us as well as working on schools but working in sort of social care, and we’ve also had um practitioners from fostering organizations placed on that course. And then over the years, that led to the writing of a level four qualification that we’ve been delivering in in one of the local authorities down in the south of the country for the last three or four years now. So that’s ongoing. Um, and then more recently, that was then adapted for youth cust uh a youth custody setting in this country. So it was the first therapeutic secure setting for the country. Um, so we’ve been delivering there. And then more recently, so that’s our sort of outreach. So Mbox morphed into sort of what we called outreach, it became a national teaching school for a period of time when that was a um that was uh something that the govern uh government introduced. Um that became our outreach team, and we have about 11 or 12 staff working in our outreach team at the moment. And then back in 2018, we set up Mulbury Bush Consulting. So we recruited somebody who has been actually the programme manager up at the Royal College of Psychiatrists of the network that I chair, the community communities. Um, and so she has come on board to develop uh organizational consultancy for the Marlbury Bush. Um so our services have really developed over time, and then at a similar time, we took on another site over in Toddington that was uh an archive and study centre called Mulbury Bush Third Space. So the real sort of journey, I suppose, has been developing uh the range and reach of of the charity across schools, social care, um youth custody and prisons and probation. And really the next phase is looking to how we extend those things and um add new uh specialist therapeutic services. So we remain ambitious. It feels like we’re doing an a lot more than we were, but there is a huge amount of need out there, and ultimately we’re a charity um you know here to deliver social purpose and therefore are always looking to meet need. Um yeah.

Colby: 27:30

Yeah. And it’s uh it’s a residential school, um as it at its at its heart. And uh I think in our pre-meet, we we mentioned briefly that I’d uh also had on the podcast Simon Benjamin, who who had worked at the Modern Bush School, and you you um you were yeah undoubtedly there at that time. And I I recall him uh also talking about his role, which was to s um provide outreach to the families while the young people were resident in the school. Um which um coming from you know my jurisdiction that’s I mean we don’t have here in South Australia, we don’t have therapeutic communities like that, where there is one in Victoria, a neighbouring state that I am aware of. Um yeah, but um tell us a little bit of the thinking behind that about having a that outreach to birth family.

John: 28:31

Yeah, sure. So the the work I mean working with families just is uh such central importance really to the work going on down at the school. And and I suppose from when I started, there was a there was there was a connection obviously with families in the school, um, which was important. But in terms of sort of direct work, there was little going on. And what we started to think about at that time was that that so these children were being placed at the Mulderbush um school from all over all over the country, mostly from England, although we have children from from sometimes from Wales and sometimes from Ireland. Um and it felt as if there was a sort of disproportionate burden of responsibility being placed on the shoulders of the the children who were placed to deal with often uh patterns over sometimes over generations of issues from their families. So that just I suppose in my mind felt really unfair, it felt really unfair. And there is a reality that when children are placed, you know, they they carry their family with them, if you like. Um, and if we are to try and support children back into family, it felt clear that that the family also need to engage in some way and find a way of working to perhaps make some changes or to understand some of the challenges a little differently so that they can live together. at home. So the work of the the work with families, it’s now called the therapies and networks team. So for a time we had a a therapy team and a family team if you like. But the work with the families are is of key importance and it’s and it’s not only with birth families but also foster families and adoptive families. So the school has um quite a number of uh adoptive family sort of breakdowns um so children placed from from adoptive breakdowns and actually one of the the most uh well received sort of interventions if you like I’m not sure I like that word particularly but one of one of the things that the team does is to provide sort of peer support groups very often our experience has been that the families feel um quite ashamed I suppose by the situations that they’re in quite isolated um often overly assessed uh sort of assessed to death a bit um and so being alongside their peers and those that have been felt themselves to be in similar situations can feel very very supportive and helpful but over time that that team that the the therapist networks team have uh you know they’re constantly looking at different ways of supporting families so sometimes it might be a sort of couples therapy or it it may be um as one of the one of the groups that the child that the family get involved in we’ve also had residential family weekends where we bring a number of families in um to live alongside one eat one another in the school for a period of time and we work with the parents and the siblings and the children. And there have been a couple of examples where um at the sort of family’s request we’ve put a team into the family home when the child goes home and work with them in their home setting to try and sort of shift something at home. So so I suppose I hope what that sort of gives an image of is is the the the um the the encouragement to innovate I suppose and come up with different ideas and think about well what what could really help there. And I suppose the ambition behind all of this is is about really trying to enact a step down provision so really trying to support children back in to a stable home base.

Colby: 32:19

Yeah and um I think you know we what it what it says to me is that it it is it’s it’s not the case of the children being sent off to the Mulberry Bush school and and residential homes uh in order to be treated and and return to their family be they foster family, adoptive family or or birth family. But rather it recognizes that um treating the child in isolation is not um going to necessarily be the the most effective way of um achieving that outcome as you said of of um successfully reintegrating them back into that uh family environment from which they came. Yeah and um it is a school and schools have semesters and terms and and um where do the where do the children go on term breaks on semester breaks.

John: 33:25

Sure. Yeah so it is a school it’s interesting isn’t it that yeah it is a school you’re absolutely right but often when I’m showing visitors around I often feel like the name slightly misrepresents what it is because it is a school so it has an education area which certainly over here would be what most people would think of as a school so it has classrooms and and and so on. But we all it also has uh residential houses where the children you know live evenings and weekends and and for some of them during the school holidays and then it has the therapist networks team which have a group of therapists um and a um and family network practitioners working with the families um but in terms of the the where the children go so that there are sort of two sides to the service so uh traditionally um the Muller bush was a 38-week provision so a term time only provision children went um home where whatever home is during um the school holidays and then um in between those sort of school holidays every third or fourth weekend there was um a family weekend which felt like an important opportunity for the children to go and reconnect with home but also uh an important opportunity for work between the the school staff and the family um back in 2018 we we moved from being just 38 week to also having a 52 week service so it has always been the case that there were a number of children who were referred who weren’t able to be placed because they didn’t have a family to return to or well I maybe they didn’t have a family to return to or they weren’t allowed to return to their family. There are a whole sort of host of individual circumstances there. And so back in 2018 we set up our first 52 week house and in fact last year um we opened our second 52 week house. So we now have three 38 week houses which look after up to six children each and then two 52 week houses similarly which look up look after up to to six children. So um so the children so that introduces a different complexity I suppose to to the way that the setting runs um the 38 week children have they will return maybe to a foster family to their adoptive family or some to their birth family on those weekends home or school holidays. And for the 52 week children um some of them do have families that um that visit them or that they visit and and again going back to the sort of step down model for for for those children in the 52 week service our ambition still would be to um support them back into into family if that is possible. And that may be through our 38 week service or it may be back into family. But there’s certainly there’s a whole area of work going on trying to support that sort of step down model.

Colby: 36:28

It’s interesting it it was something that is entirely foreign to me so I never even thought to ask so um I’ve been aware of the Cotswold community for you know a number of years I talk regularly to Patrick Tomlinson who’s something of a silent partner in uh in this podcast. The notion of children going home from a however you think of it it’s a therapy it’s a residential uh care service going home to uh a family based setting is just completely foreign to me in in my jurisdiction here in Australia. So I when I when I interviewed John Whitwell on the on the podcast early on um he referred to the the the boys at the Cotswold community going home um to to their families um during um well week some weekends and and also term breaks holl school holidays and um and that there were as you say there’s some complexities around that. Suffice to say I never really thought of the question until I’d spoken to John Whitwell but I’m inspired by the idea that that children can go back to a place where relationships have been ruptured ruptured or where there’s been uh concerns about um the the level of care that they uh are experiencing um that that that that could happen with a view to um amongst other things support as you say that that set step down to to a success to I guess a safe and successful um replacement or return to that family environment.

John: 38:23

Yeah I mean I I suppose I think I’m absolutely not saying that it’s right or proper in all circumstances or all cases but but one of the things that I think we often forget and I’ve been sort of powerfully reminded by various children um that no matter the level of difficulty um when they were living at home and sometimes it’s absolutely right that they don’t live at home um but no matter the level of difficulty there’s there’s still family and um and there’s still that very important bond that is there. And so for many of many of the ex-pupils who come back um have have found ways to you know if if they haven’t in their sort of younger lives reconnected with family or or or been back with family they have found ways to connect and and for many of them they’re continuing their sort of journey to try and understand what happened and and why what happened happened. And I think that’s really important. I I always remember a um um a child I key worked talking to me who who um for me it was an important part of my learning really and because of what happened to this this young person um I really sort of vilified the parents and um I remember this this young person saying to me one time after um a few years um we were sitting playing a game I think playing a game of connect four or something um and they just said um why why does nobody ever ask me whether I love my dad um and I can remember I can remember my heart sort of sinking really and thinking you know you know we’ve missed something really important here. You know no matter all of these awful things that have happened um actually there’s still a love there. And this this young person wanted to talk about the good times they’d had together and I don’t know dog walks and going to the park and um in equal measure you know and so I think it it it’s really important that we remember the the importance of of family no matter the the those sort of earlier very difficult circumstances.

Colby: 40:54

Absolutely and I I this is a real passion project of mine I would say that all therapeutic endeavor is um enhanced by uh and successful outcomes are um made more likely in circumstances where the children where where we’ve been able to achieve some level of relational repair at least and in connection with birth family. If you think about it if the pri if the children remain uh if their relationships with their primary attachment figures remained remain fragmented, damaged disordered however you want to talk about it, then um how why would they ever you know put themselves out there again i to to subsequent carers and and we we operate under a misapprehension I think in child protection jurisdictions in at least in the Western world that I’m aware of that that all you know these these terrible things have happened in in the family of origin. But the the main therapeutic endeavor needs to be to create a new family or provide a new family for them where we can provide we can develop a new template for them. And and I just think that that’s misguided. It’s not particularly understanding of the task that foster parents and other other adults who come in um to the frame to work with these children are faced with the the the mere fact that um these children find it really hard to trust again when trust has been lost or broken and the like so yeah so you can you maybe you’re starting to imagine a little bit my enthusiasm when I heard things like you know they go home you know like they get hopefully they go home for Christmas you know like these important types of um um periods and events I I think it’s really important and and uh I I suppose just hearing you you you say those things made me think about some of the things the ex-pupils say when they come back but uh which which I can say a bit about but also it made me think about this I think one of the real challenges in working in residential provision is um where the and where there is a family is uh this sort of competitive um element which can come in and sort of who are the better family really or you you can get you can get into sort of competing or providing something that’s that’s um that within an organization like the Mulderish queue can afford and home can’t afford so you so you so you actually sort of work against that sort of reintegration um but there is something about modeling the sorts of relationships that can be achieved and and those experiences that can be had so that even if it’s not possible to have those at home the children can develop a sense of what what might be possible.

John: 44:16

And it makes me think of um an ex-pupil so so one of the fantastic things about um our ex-pupils we we have an ex-pupil’s uh network and an ex-pupils advisory group and each year we have an ex-pupils open day um and increasing they’re becoming more and more involved and one of our ex-pupils um well over this last year we’ve had three different ex-pupils who’ve joined us on this sort of stage at events presenting and one of the ex-pupils who was actually in in my house um back in sunset back in the day um was presenting um alongside our outreach team to a group of a hundred um educators um school leaders uh teachers and so on and what she wanted to say about her experience of the Mulberry bush so she’s now in her 30s she has two children she’s married and what she wanted to say was for for her so she was at the school when she was um between about eight and eleven something like that eight um the age of eight and eleven she wanted to to to be very clear that the relationships that she experienced at the Mulberry bush she believes are the only reason um that she is today able to be a mother and she very much models the the sorts of care and can love care and concern um that she has for her children um on the experiences she had with uh the staff team um at the Marbury bush and of course those sorts of things are enormously powerful um you know that and so what you’re saying is absolutely right really that there is something of central importance of of modelling that you know what might be possible for the children um while they’re placed at the mulberry bush modeling those sorts of experiences trying to be conscious and aware of not competing with family um but trying to to nurture sort of meaningful relationships and and at the guts of I suppose all of the work that we do it it is all about sort of relational practice you know the the the the central importance of meaningful sort of interdependent type relationships and the the opportunity to to build those with with people who are deeply mistrustful um for right you know often rightly so it’s interesting that one of the one of the sort of we’ve we’ve got some sort of short videos that were um were taken of ex-pupils on the ex-pupils open day and one of the the children and that’s on YouTube so I’ll I will use his name so Chris um he talks about the impact of the Mulderish on him um it’s a really reflective piece which is really fascinating and I think there’s something of the qualities of the the environment that comes through often in in how how the um ex-pupils present themselves but he talks about it being a safe environment um and the importance of it being safe um and he talked about how uh sort of dysfunctional his home life was um and what he reflects on are the the yeah his deep mistrust in all those around him and he and he and he says within the video that it took him a couple of years to realize um that the stop at the Mulberry bush weren’t just trying to make things worse. And he started to he he’s he talks about it changing his view of people um of children of adults and of the world around him and so there’s something of that sort of process of change. So yeah he often springs to mind but I think it’s a common feature of the children they are um deeply mistrustful because they do feel that they have um been let down I suppose um in the past um in their formative years and so building trust and trusting relationships is is hard I think it is really hard in some instances um the the parents um have had extremely challenging lives themselves and in many ways were mulberry bush children themselves and there’s something about the sort of the the cycles over generations that the families have had to contend with um really difficult challenging sort of stuff and and wanting some help to try and sort of interrupt that sort of cycle um and establish change. I think for others I struggle to think of a circumstance where they don’t want the best or they aren’t trying to give of their best I suppose and um and very often um whatever has been done to try and help hasn’t helped and people are feeling let down by um the the authorities by the professionals and so the they come to us often with a mistrust I think of are we just another bunch of people who are who are going to sort of judge them let them down. And so it really is important to to to try and help them feel a valued part of the team you know you know that they ultimately will almost always know the children better than anybody else. And so it’s very important that we we talk to them we listen to them and I suppose the one of the the a parent comes to mind actually as I’m as I’m saying that to you who who I worked with who was feeling very challenged by something that we were talking about in the school in relation to to the home life was quite upset about it and I end up going out to visit to try and sort of mediate a little bit between the work that the the school were doing at the time this was some years ago and the family and the and the child. And I remember talking to to the this um mother um and saying look we might not be right either you know you may be right we might be wrong but there’s something about holding onto this sort of notion well could this be true you know just just the sense of there’s a possibility that that this different way of thinking about it might be true. And I think holding um holding a space for that thought can allow different things to emerge and different ideas to to to move forward. So um I suppose I think that’s often the situation is is trying to to to get alongside parents to build um trust um that we’re not here to judge we are here to try and help the notion of you know could this be true? Is there a different way of thinking about this feels yeah just feels really important. And you know as a parent myself parenting is difficult. It’s not always easy and well it’s rarely easy really I would say probably I think parenting is difficult.

Colby: 51:13

Yeah I think what you talk about there in terms of people’s feedback the particularly the young people who have um been through the Mauberry bush and their feedback and I think is really powerful and in some ways um hopefully challenges the the narrative that residential care settings are really the option of last resort for um for children and young people who can’t safely be cared for at home wherever home may be or that you know that um relationships have broken down to the point where they can’t be at home for a period of time.

John: 51:57

And I’m um I’m wondering what your thoughts are given your your experience but also the the feedback of young people who have been through the Mulberry Bush program around this idea of of residential homes being being you know across the gamut of care options the the one of last resort what we often think about when we think about the children placed at the school and I think it is it’s very similar for many of the the people that we work with in schools and social care settings, prisons from promotion and um and youth custody is um generally those children young people are struggling to function in a group so and so whether that’s a school group or a family group um and so part of the importance for me of residential care places like the Mulberry Bush is is if that’s where the problems are then that’s where the work is so the work is in groups and and ultimately in in the wider world um we all have to function in groups you know in in out in the community and so I think that’s really really important and I suppose from my family therapy experience I also think there’s something about the the intensity of the sort of family dynamic which can be very challenging and um so putting so expecting all to be able to sort of work through in the intensity of that sort of family familial dynamic family relationship um I think is is short-sighted really and so for me that the role of um of residential care is is sort of cuts cuts through that really so you’re in a group setting where there’s a number of staff you you it sort of dissipates slightly the intensity of that family dynamic but you you have an opportunity to recreate it in in pockets or or to work at it rather than it just being ever present in the daily life of the house. Certainly in the UK there is a there’s been a real move to to much smaller numbers of children placements and even solo placements and fundamentally I mean I think there are a small number of children who at times of crisis probably need that um you know solo placement to sort of stabilize but I do firmly believe that that a reintegration back into some sort of group setting feels really really important you know ultimately I it is where the work is and um and so I absolutely believe it’s got a central role to play in supporting um certainly those children who’ve really had a rough experience in family or really cannot struggle with that family dynamic. And maybe you know I think it has a role a play to play for them throughout their childhoods. You know I don’t think there’s necessarily anything wrong at all with good quality residential provision for some children throughout their childhood and certainly we’ve had lots of children placed at the mulberry bush for whom there have been too many placement breakdowns. So when I was um a house manager we had a a girl placed with us when she was seven um and she’d had over 50 foster placement breakdowns before the age of seven um and fundamentally I I think it was unrealistic to expect her to to give something that looked like that another go. I just don’t see why you know it will have been so entrenched that she was um you know she firmly believed it was her fault that these things you know she was unloved unlovable nobody could really look after her um so I think for her it probably made absolute sense that she continued in residential care whereas for other children you know the opportunity to support them to to develop an understanding of what’s going on uh within the family to work with family and reintegrate them um I think is is also really important there’s a great opportunity there so I think um residential care as a placement of choice I think is really important um really important I suppose the other thing that comes to mind in this country there’s a big there’s often a big thing about um the residential care should be within a certain sort of geographical radius of family um I understand the argument um but my experience in the mulberry bush has been it depends how the family are looking to engage and an example I often give is at one time we had a family who um a child placed of a family who whose family was about um six or seven miles away from from here um and then we also had a child placed whose family was about 250 miles away from here and at that time the family who was very local then they might as well have been on the other side of the world um in terms of their engagement and their willingness to sort of work with us the family that were 250 miles away if there was an issue and we wanted them to come down or I wanted them to they would they were there within moments. And so it is about the sort of emotional engagement and connection with the work rather than geographical distance also. So I think yeah I I I think we misunderstand that often in this country.

Colby: 57:30

But yeah certainly the role of residential provision I think is is of central importance as a part of um the picture I couldn’t agree more if I could summarize a couple of the really key points that you made one which one of which is that when children have been hurt in and these are my words now but but um when children have been hurt in relationships with with adults from on whom they depend um yes they it would be um in their interests at some point for for them to have a different experience of uh of um care from an adult to to that which they’ve had and if they can have that different experience with the their their parent if they if indeed it’s a parent if they we can change the dynamic of that relationship then that I think is an even better outcome as well though they may not be able to safely go back and live with their parents. The reality is that there is there is a significant not insignificant group of our children who find going into a family placement really confronting triggering in fact they’re not ready to go into a family environment and so residential care as an early placement option as a as a place to as Richard says you know help them to uh live with each other and with themselves in a way and you went and you also talked about you know providing examples of um again I’m gonna use my words a bit but examples of what a safe and nurturing child to adult adult to child relationship feels like without that being um kind of in the child’s face you know 24 hours a day seven days a week that so there there there’s that um which I I think is uh incredibly important. So I do think of residential care uh as something you know something that should be tried earlier rat rather than later. If you if you really understand the children that we’re talking about and the experiences that they’ve had. And I think part of and while you’re on the topic you’re on the topic or on the run of of trying to understand the children together better, then I think our authorities need to turn their mind to what what is it, what harm is being done with this blind allegiance to the idea that that a family-based placement is always and in all circumstances the superior option such that you have these children who just go through placement breakdown after placement breakdown after placement breakdown. And the harm that is done to children in those circumstances is incredible. And you know I’m I’m in my day job I’m a clinician. I’ve worked in this space for 30 years and you know and it’s horrifying to hear of people who have had young people who’ve had more than 50. I have a young person that I see who’s more than 50 but they’re towards the end of their care journey not seven years of age. So which children do you think really benefit from a residential care placement like what is uh offered at the Mulberry bush but also more generally um other therapeutic communities in the UK?

John: 1:01:20

Yeah yeah so so I think um certainly the children that come to the mulberry bush tend to be those that um create the sort of highest levels of of anxiety and risk in their local authorities. So I do think we’re at we’re at a point at the moment really and and it does relate to cost there’s no escaping the fact that it’s it’s a high you know it’s a high cost option for local authorities. But that yeah the children who are placed are those that create the sort of high le highest levels of anxiety and risk um to those around them and very often it’s those for whom all other options have failed. And I think that’s one of the real challenges in this country is um it it feels wrong that everything else has has to have failed before you get placed. But I understand the sort of cost-based reality of that. So the children who come to the Mulberry bush yeah sort of highly complex lives that have surrounded them and they are children who as I sort of said earlier had have struggled to function in a group setting either in in education or in social care. But it’s interesting that I’ve been involved in a couple of groups more recently looking with the Department for Education but also up at the Nuffield Family Justice Observatory who’ve done some research on on children who find themselves on deprivation of liberty orders. So those are children for whom it’s felt residential care can’t look after them, but we have a full youth secure estate. And part of the research was around looking at the care principles for these children and do they have different needs from those within residential care. And in the most recent group that I was talking really what we were talking about was we don’t necessarily believe that they do but it is something about the capacity of those around them to manage the sort of risk and anxiety that’s that that’s created by the complex lives in which they live and and so it is more to do with the need for adult staff sorry staff support and staff training rather than different care needs. And fundamentally also then the regulator has a role there. And when you were asking the question I was thinking about a a child we had recently so so I I do think the children who get placed at Arborish tend to be those who who are surrounded by the highest levels of anxiety of levels of anxiety and risk.

Colby: 1:04:05

I wouldn’t want listeners to feel that or or or think sorry that the children who you are serving there at the Mulberry bush are different to um in a in the sense of being lower risk lower concern you know especially in consideration of some of the things I’ve mentioned like going home for the holidays you know being going home at Christmas that sort of thing I think it’s I think it speaks volumes that you these are children about whom there is significant concern significant worry and yet you pro you can continue to provide this service yeah in in in the pursuit of their recovery it’s remarkable but sorry I I broke into you where you were talk you’re talking really about you started to talk about staff attributes and and the role of the regulator as well yeah so so I mean I I think in terms of staff capac staff’s sort of emotional resilience and capacity to work with um risk and anxiety is is really vital um and also for those sorts of children at those highest levels of of um who present the who are surrounded by the most complex lives if you like and present um the highest levels of sort of risk and anxiety this there’s it’s really important that staff maintain a a capacity to to feel able to sort of to innovate to to to do things differently you know it’s so often for the children who are placed um many people have tried the same things over and over again and wondered why nothing has changed.

John: 1:05:48

And so that I think there is a role for the regulator in terms of supporting innovation in the sector you know the the I mean it it’s it’s interesting that sort of the whole issue of sort of standards um regulation and standards you know standards do lead to standardization and and what we know of these children is a sort of um they don’t fit the mold if you like a one size fits all um program doesn’t uh doesn’t work um and certainly one of the groups that I was talking at up in London I was referring to a child who was placed with us um who was with us for a couple of years um very challenging young person um and um at one of the inspection experiences the there was real focus on this individual and what was going on around them the work that we were doing the sort of the ways in which we were trying to innovate um and it was quite there was a high level of scrutiny really and it felt very uncomfortable um and um I won’t go into all of the details of that but it was it was a really difficult time um the child then left um when they were due to leave at the end of their placement um about four or five months later and in the following nine months this this young person um had um nine placement breakdowns and ended up in a secure unit um and I was saying at the group up in London there’s a key example here of of somebody who we need providers to be really sort of creative and innovative um in finding ways of connecting and looking after containing um developing meaningful relationships with with with the the sort of young person that’s so deeply mistrustful and and um and challenging you know and and I think we’re getting that wrong you know I I do think things are starting to get better um there’s a sort of change in the narrative around it at the moment and and just the fact that we’re having these conversations in these sort of high level groups um gives me some hope and faith that things are sort of moving forward and changing. But we do yeah we need creativity we need innovation we need to trust our staff um we need to ensure that they’re trained and properly supportive and then we need to sort of really trust um that they the and encourage this sort of yeah creativity and innovation.

Colby: 1:08:16

Yeah and I I people who know me and know my career well know that um in until the middle of last year and for the previous 14 and a half years I was very involved in the health practitioner regulation scheme here in Australia and um in with a particular focus on the psychology um side of things and rose up to chair and deputy chair roles for for for for Australia in in the regulation of the psychology profession. When I talk what we what we know is that people practitioners in in many if not most or or indeed if not all endeavors find regulation and indeed regulators anxiety evoking. And I when I talk to people in the UK and they talk about Ofsted they they’re and these are providers you know at the level of the the the you know the managing director or the CEO they’re they’re truly um terrified of of an off an offstead inspection and in particular one that that finds that their their uh standards are low. And um and I the problem we have and I think this is perhaps a little bit related to your concern as well is that if we have that our children children in this space do require us to be flexible and innovative and and reactive responsive yeah and um anxiety is the enemy of exploration. Anxiety is the enemy of innovation. So it’s almost like a case of no good deed goes unpunished. You know we need regulation regul regulation is about keeping the the the the public safe in this case you know keeping vulnerable children’s safe um but at what at the if it’s at the expense of innovation if it’s a if it’s at the expense expense of justified and justifiable justifiable risk taking trying something new then then unf yeah unfortunately um it’s it’s one of those unintended consequences but a consequence nonetheless that actually can have a negative outcome for the services that we’re trying to deliver.

John: 1:10:51

Yeah. Yeah no I think that’s right. I mean the the the phrase that comes to mind is that I think the sector for quite a long time felt like the uh I remember seeing at a conference there’s the phrase that the flogging will continue until morale improves sort of and I think and I think that you know there is a sort of there has been a sense of that and um I suppose two things sprung to mind. I think you’re absolutely right I think anxiety and the sort of fear uh of inspection is deeply unhelpful and um and one of the things that um our research has has sort of shown um that that’s taken place at the charity has been about the the the sense of shame for children the sort of children and families that come into our services or or that we work with in the schools and all these other settings there is a sort of um endemic sort of sense of shame for them in the situations in which they find themselves. And I do wonder what um there’s something about the sort of the way in which sort of regulation and inspection um is has been managed which is about sort of shame the shaming and the sort of role of sort of shame in the sector or shaming into improving and I and I’m not convinced that that’s helpful. And certainly within the staff team we would be conscious all the time of of not getting caught up in in um shaming um shaming staff members shaming families shaming children um we we really need to find a way forward from that and I suppose the other thing that I I think needs tackling um somehow is the whole notion that that if it’s written down then children are safer. And one of the real worries and and the challenges we have is that the increasing amounts of sort of bureaucracy that surround um meeting the demands of regulation and inspection draws staff away from children and um to sit in front of laptops. And that’s difficult because you know I I absolutely agree and accept there’s a really important role for regulation. You know we need to know that children are safe and I absolutely accept the importance of that and the role that the regulator has for the government ultimately in in establishing safety of children. But somehow we do need to um we we need to allow creativity and the and the phrase I think it was at a similar conference to that other comment but there was a phrase that came up that somebody said which I I do wonder whether it’s true which is that you can regulate to to get inadequate services to good um but to allow to to enable um outstanding practice you have to set creativity free. And I and I like that sort of notion that somehow yeah we need to know people are safe we need to train people properly and then we need to to really yes allow creative practitioners to engage with children and and to find um yeah to to set that creativity free and I and I think that’s I think that is true. Yeah we have a there was a saying that was used here but in indeed including by our um national chair of the psychology board of Australia uh that lot about talking about light touch regulation regulation needs to be there but it it can’t be getting in the way of of the work that we do I I was just gonna say I do think that the the the most recent narrative from the current um HTMCR Martin Oliver around if we get it right for the most vulnerable we get it right for everybody then you know I I do think that’s true. I think it’s a helpful helpful narrative.

Colby: 1:14:44

Yeah um there’s so much I can talk to you about John and uh um your day is only beginning mine’s mine’s closer to the end um couple of things that I wondered we you’ve talked a little bit about what the children um say about their experience of the mulberry bush I’m wondering if there’s just any any other message you would like to share around that around what your your your alumni group or or uh other um returning um adults who’ve who’ve had experience of the mulberry bush are saying and um uh you’ve also talked about what you know the the the message that you would like to put out there to the world that the mulberry bush would like to put out there and I I’m just wondering if we’ve kind of bring it to a close around either one or other or both of those those two things what the children say and and the voice that that you want the mulberry bush to be projecting to the world yeah that’s a big question um I suppose it it makes me think about um I think fundamentally the the things that the the children say um it are generally to do with the importance of relationships and the sort of love and care that they experienced and um it makes me think that the so we we had a few years ago um a lady called Sally Finch um came back to visit ex-pupil from 1948 to 1951 so right at the beginning now lives in in Christchurch New Zealand um and one of the things that she said and and a number of others have said the same thing when they’ve they’ve come back to visit the school has said this place is just completely different but it’s exactly the same and so there’s something about that even though she didn’t recognize almost anything of the buildings on the site that what resonated for her was the sort of experience of how people related to her the sort of warmth that sort of sense of community um the importance of relationships the love care and concern that that she she witnessed and and I think that’s what the the the ex-pupils would often refer to um even if their experience was tough at the time and one of them you know the there’s again there’s a video um on YouTube uh uh of the ex-pupils open day when one of the ex-pupils it’s her first visit back and she talks about it having been tough but it teaching her the sort of boundaries of life is the is the phrase that she uses um and and says that it helped her a lot so there is something about the you know on the is interesting on the on the foundation degree there’s a phrase that we’ve often talked about which is the phrase sort of growing up is tough at the mulberry bush and that’s whether you’re a child whether you’re a member of staff whether you’re the CEO there’s still a sort of you’re still learning you’re still there’s a sort of growing up process which which is difficult. And I suppose our the message for the world if you like I I I the single most important thing I think is um the importance of relationships and all of the work that we do is really about um that sort of relational practice and the importance and the the the therapeutic with a small t if you like importance of um relationships getting alongside one another understanding um really listening not just hearing sort of really really listening listening and hearing what people are saying to us um and um yes developing relationships with with people in that sense of community and I think what emerges from that um and is so clear um within the ex-pupils comments is um that sense of belonging that that they then experience and um having ex-pupils come back and visit there is still that sort of sense of belonging to that wider mulberbush community and I and I think that’s something that that can be can be developed um in other organizations in other communities in other settings um in other countries um so yes that’s you know developing that sense of belonging is of central importance really um and I and I think I suppose what emerges from that is a confidence um which I one of the things I love to read when I read this sort of ex-pupil’s comments that’s that that sense of confidence which I think leads to that you know a sense of agency in the world so um the the the young people now adults um have a sense of confidence in their own agency in um making decisions about the world in which they then inhabit yeah yeah I have a I have a little acronym that I use um it’s part it’s just because I’m a little bit mischievous um I was I was lying in bed one Saturday morning and I was because I love acronyms and I was thinking of um um what would be a good acronym for the the milieu of a place you know that that felt quality of a place which I think you know you’re referencing and and it as it turns out there’s there’s a really obvious one which is aura so the milieu is also the aura of the place the aura is the felt quality of a place or a person you know it’s aura and uh aura stands for for me in my writing um being accessible understanding responsive and attuned so uh I love to talk about auras maybe that can be what happens in the different uh conversation between us but uh just because it’s a it’s a little bit mischievous uh a psychologist of my stature talking about auras but uh anyway it’s been it’s been a fantastic conversation John I you know I feel like we probably could have uh gone on for another hour or so um but thank you very much for agreeing to be part of the podcast.

John: 1:21:22

Pleasure well thank you very much lovely lovely talk with you.

Building Healthy Birth Family Connection – A podcast interview with Adriana Dias

How a Reflective, Respectful Approach Helped Families Choose Healthier Relationships

Child protection is often described with neat outcomes and rigid timelines, but the lived work rarely fits those lines. This episode explores a project in Portugal, Revira Volta, that set out to build healthier relationships between girls in residential care and their birth families by widening choice, deepening respect, and anchoring practice in reflection. The team challenged the linear idea of “turnaround” and leaned into non?linear change: shifting direction, trying new strategies, and making room for different destinations. By forming an external, dedicated team separate from daily residential routines, they protected role clarity and created space for a systemic approach. Families were treated as holders of meaningful knowledge shaped by their own contexts, not as blank slates. That stance changed the relationship in the room and opened possibilities that standard interventions often shut down.

The project was built on three intertwined layers of reflection. First, case reflection: building systemic hypotheses about each family’s history, strengths, and vulnerabilities, and selecting tailored strategies rather than defaulting to one-size-fits-all solutions. Second, project reflection: using supervision and expert input to adjust phases, session numbers, and methods as the work unfolded, allowing the design to evolve with evidence rather than forcing families into a preset program. Third, self-reflection: examining personal values, biases, and resonances as practitioners to avoid enmeshment, hold boundaries, and model the relational health they hoped families would internalise. This triad of reflection served as the engine of ethical, responsive practice, keeping the team thoughtful under pressure and aligned with a core aim—supporting healthier connections.

A striking insight was the shift from “reunification at all costs” to “healthier relationships as the true north.” For some families, full reunification remained right; for others, partial reunification—weekends at home, shared caregiving, stepped transitions—proved safer and more sustainable. The power lay in helping parents think clearly about their situation, tolerate hard feelings, and choose for themselves. Containment was crucial here: a trustworthy relationship where overwhelming fears and grief could be expressed, processed, and returned in digestible form. With containment, families felt seen rather than judged, which fostered self-worth and reduced defensiveness. From that steadier base, parents could weigh their daughters’ needs against their own constraints and opt for contact patterns that preserved connection without overwhelming daily stress.

Time emerged as the hardest challenge. Children’s developmental windows are short; adults often need longer to shift entrenched patterns or stabilise life conditions. This mismatch forces systems into blunt decisions. Ribeira Volta navigated the tension by being honest about limits while preserving dignity—naming children’s urgency, acknowledging parents’ pace, and crafting plans that balanced both. Reflective supervision proved vital: it prevented burnout, widened perspective, and protected therapeutic stance. Supervisors didn’t hand out answers; they created thinking space. The team mirrored that with families: not dictating, but partnering, validating, and co?creating next steps. That parallel process matters. When practitioners admit “we don’t know yet,” families are invited into genuine problem-solving, which is both respectful and effective.

Integration set this project apart. Rather than operating as a distant service, the external team worked closely with the residential staff while maintaining distinct roles, ensuring consistent messages and coordinated care. That alignment made practical differences—smoother contact, clearer expectations, and less role conflict. Funding as a pilot encouraged learning, and the team finished with sharper hypotheses about what to change next time: start with “healthy relationships” as the explicit outcome, keep structural guidelines but allow flexible pathways, and invest more in practitioner self-awareness from day one. These lessons speak to systems far beyond Portugal. When we treat families as partners, protect reflective space, and expand the definition of success, we don’t just improve metrics; we help people reclaim choice, dignity, and pathways that fit. That is the kind of non-linear change that endures.

You can listen to the podcast here:

You can watch here:

About Adriana:

Adriana graduated in Psychology from the Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences of the University of Porto in 2006. She later completed a Master’s degree in Special Education – with a Specialization in Early Intervention, from the Institute of Education of the University of Minho, in 2011.
 
Adriana is a Full member of the Portuguese Psychologists Association, is specialist in Clinical and Health Psychology, and has advanced specializations in Psychotherapy and Psychology of Justice.

Adriana also holds a Postgraduate degree in Child Protection from the Faculty of Law of the University of Coimbra, and is currently undertaking a PhD.

Adriana recently led the Revira Volta project that sought to build healthy relationships between young people in the care of Livramento, and their birth families. 

Related Podcasts:

If you liked this podcast, then Sally Rhodes’ podcast is another ‘must listen’!


Transcript of Adriana’s Interview:

Colby: 0:00

Hello and welcome to the Secure Star Podcast.

Adriana: 0:04

And Rivira Volta um have a more complex meaning. It means that you choose some pathways, some circumstances, and that aren’t um fitting quite well, that aren’t um uh going well, and you do something. Um sometimes you improvise, like the Portuguese love to do, and you um you achieve a different outcome. And most of the times these families, these parents didn’t have the fair conditions to develop, to um um to to develop their competences, to develop their um their dreams, and uh we thought that they deserved um have that fair condition to flourish. We saw ourselves, the team, the the professionals, we saw ourselves as facilitators of church. Um as facilitators of uh of dreaming. We are uh sharing and we are listening to them, listening about uh their knowledge, because they have knowledge, lots of knowledge. It’s a different kind of knowledge. It’s uh knowledge learned in different countries, but they have knowledge. Sometimes they choose um not to be all the time with their girls because they understand that they have uh conditions to learn. The self-conscience, uh the self-monitorization, the self-conscience, the self-knowledge about ourselves uh that can help us to choose what we want was one of the most beautiful uh goals that we achieved. When we are um when we have um we have this power of choose uh and we choose our pathway uh and we um have this how to cheat, um then we are um pacified with our choices and with what have happened in our lives. But when we uh feel that the the context um robbed us uh degrees of freedom, we are not good. And this was very important for us, um and we cannot uh uh forget that our residences can have um can limitate us if we don’t have um self-conscious or can be um very important uh um tools to work with the families because we know uh um who we are. I think that’s very important in enough in future projects of this nature.

Colby: 2:55

Hello and welcome to the Secure Start Podcast. I’m Colby Pierce, and joining me this episode is a fellow clinical psychologist in Portugal who led a project on an aspect of child protection work that is close to me and close to my heart and my head. Before I introduce my guests, I’d just like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land that I come to you from, the Ghana people of the Adelaide Plains, and acknowledge the continuing connection the living Ghana people feel to land, waters, culture, and community. I’d also like to pay my respects to their elders, past, present, and emerging. My guest this episode is Adriana Diaz. Adriana graduated in psychology from the Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences of the University of Porto in 2006. She later completed a master’s degree in special education with a specialization in early intervention from the Institute of Education at the University of Minho in 2011. Adriana is a full member of the Portuguese Psychologists Association, is specialist in clinical and health psychology, and has advanced specializations in psychotherapy and psychology of justice. Adriana also holds a postgraduate degree in child protection from the Faculty of Law of the University of, and I’m struggling with this, Coimbra. That’s a I know I’ll get Adriana to correct me on that in a moment. Adriana is also currently undertaking a PhD. Adriana recently led the Rivera Volta project that sought to build healthy relationships between young people in the care of Livermento and their birth families. Welcome, Adriana.

Adriana: 5:13

Hi, Colby. I want to thank you.

Colby: 5:17

Oh thank you for coming on. Now, there were two, there were the names of two universities there that I probably should have checked beforehand how they were pronounced. Uh and I didn’t. So one was is it Min? How would you Minho or how would you pronounce that university?

Adriana: 5:37

Minho, Minho, Minho. Yes, Minho.

Colby: 5:40

That’s one person Portugal. Minhos. Yes, I’ve got one from one. The other one I I I’m pretty sure that I failed at. What was the the the one where you did the um the other qualification in the faculty of law? What what’s that university called?

Adriana: 5:59

Coimbra. It’s the uh major yeah, the the third major um city in Portugal and the one of the most ancient um universities in Europe, Coimbra.

Colby: 6:13

And I I think of myself as a an amateur historian. I love history. How I’m embarrassed that I got that name. I didn’t know that. I didn’t know that, and I got that name wrong in the pronunciation. Um never mind, never mind. Now I also said Rivera Volta. Did I get that correct? Yes, yes, so Rivera Volta, yes.

Adriana: 6:47

I can’t do um that the the the R there.

Colby: 6:52

Roll the R. Yeah, yeah. We took I think we call it rolling the R, and I can’t do it. I I and that noise that you just made, uh, my mother and my sisters can do it, but I can’t do it. With your tongue that roll with the R the vibrating tongue. I can’t do that. No, but anyway, Rivera Volta is as good as I can do now.

Adriana: 7:16

Yes, the Portuguese have the Portuguese the Portuguese have some sounds that are a little bit difficult because they are very specific.

Colby: 7:27

Yeah, that noise, that noise, you can’t do that. Yeah, yeah. So Rivera Volta was the name of the program that um that I was mentioning, um, that I’m really keen to speak to you about. In in English, what does Revere Volta mean? How does it translate?

Adriana: 7:51

Um the translation, um the bad uh translation I I found uh was turnaround. But um this is very this isn’t very accurate because I think turnaround means that you go and you come back and have a more complex meaning. Uh it means that you choose uh some pathways, some circumstances and um that aren’t um um fitting quite well, that aren’t um uh going well, and you do something. Um sometimes you improvise, like the Portuguese love to do, and you um you achieve a different outcome. Um you have you you do um you um move these uh the pieces of the the circumstances and you can have a different outcome. Um uh we hope a better outcome. So is that you mix all the things, you do different things, you uh experience uh different uh strategies, and uh then you have you have maybe you have a different outcome. Um turnaround, it’s a more linear um process. You go and you come back.

Colby: 9:08

Um so Javira Valtis is that well work with birth families, um, work in this space, child protection is never linear, it’s it’s always um uh follows follows a non-linear course. Yeah. And and if I understand you correctly, what you’re saying is it it’s not turnaround and come back to where you started, it’s changing direction, more like changing direction, taking a different path.

Adriana: 9:41

Yeah, yeah. And maybe you have we will have a different outcome. Um in this context of the project, um, we thought that families deserve uh fair conditions because the system isn’t always fair, and life isn’t all isn’t always fair. Um, and most of the times these families, these parents, didn’t have the fair conditions to develop, to um um to to develop their consciousness, to develop their um their dreams. And uh we thought that they deserve um uh have that fair conditions to flourish, to give them their their girls, because uh livramento um is a residential care home that have only girls. Um they they deserve uh that right conditions, right in comments, um to flourish.

Colby: 10:41

So the project was very much around supporting birth family, birth parents to be a better the best version of themselves that they could be. Yeah. So that and and and my other my other understanding of the project was that part of helping them to be a bit a better version of themselves as parents was about re positively reconnecting or facilitating healthy relationships um with their girls young people, yeah. They’re girls that reside in Livermento. Yeah, yeah.

Adriana: 11:24

We are sorry.

Colby: 11:26

You go ahead.

Adriana: 11:27

We always uh we thought about uh sorry, we um we thought uh most of um of the times uh give them um more degrees of freedom to choose. And that’s very important because we are not educators uh in this project. Of course, we share with them knowledge, scientific knowledge, because that’s important. Um, but we were um we saw ourselves, the team, the the professionals, we saw ourselves as facilitators of change, um, as facilitators of um of dreaming. Um, because dreaming is um achieving uh a more um degree more degrees of freedom to choose. And most of the time these families, these parents didn’t have lots of degrees of freedom to choose in their lives.

Colby: 12:25

Yeah, so you are as I understand it, you were opening up choices and new pathways for them to follow. How were you doing that? How were you how was the project uh uh being delivered? How were you were you um giving those those additional or those extra choices to birth family?

Adriana: 12:50

Um first of all, um we thought that we have to have uh an external uh team. Um Livramento, the resident residential care home, and uh have uh a team that uh work directly with the girls. Um in they are they were they are uh their educators, uh they um they um organize their daily routines, um the they are they go to school. So this team uh work as the educators of the girls, but this internal team um cannot um work with their families without having a conflict of roles. Um because if they do the both roles, they have to um change all the time the hat of the role. I I I um use this metaphor. I have a hat is a role, I take off the hat, I take on um another another hat and is another role. Because when we work with the families, uh we have to have um uh a systemic approach. Uh all the elements uh have to be considered. Um we can focus on one or another element uh for some time, but we have to have the the whole vision. Um and we need a team, an external team, that worked specifically with this approach, this systemic approach. Um we included the girls, of course, because they are part of the family, even if they in that moment they were uh they aren’t with uh living with the families, but we have to focus on the wall, the whole system. So um we um thought that we need an external team. So we created this team, the team of Rivira Volta that worked uh with the families. We work with 10 families because this was um uh pilot project, um, and that 10 families were chosen uh with the the the internal team. Um um that uh because the that families, uh that girls, um the life project of that girls uh was um the reunification. We thought that the better project, the better life project for that girls was the reunification, because there are um lots of girls that are in the in Livramento, um that uh the the project isn’t the reunification because um the system, the the team uh doesn’t uh understand that um the family um can be um secure for that girls, uh can be um minimal conditions of uh security to to that girls be in the family. So we uh worked directly with the internal team, but we were we we had uh different roles, and that was important because families um had to have um a therapeutic um uh relationship with us uh uh with um confidence um trust, sorry, uh with um um a collaboration uh approach. Um they work with us and we work with them. We are not teaching anything, we are uh sharing and we are listening to them, listen about um their knowledge because they have knowledge, lots of knowledge. It’s a different kind of knowledge, it’s uh knowledge learned in different contexts, but they have knowledge. So um this help us to work um with them uh at with this uh approach, with this collaboration approach. Uh and that was a very important point of this project. The other point, uh, very important point was reflection. We have um to have to be all the time reflecting about the um the the way we are conducting the project because uh of course we didn’t uh invent anything. This project wasn’t new uh in their um approaches, um, in their basis, because we had lots of information of the previous projects, but this one we wanted that um was adapted specifically to this context, and that was new because we had to think about the kind of families we had, we had the kind of context that families uh were, and we have to um think about uh the possibilities, but uh all the time we had to adjust what we were doing so we uh reflect lots with the internal team, uh we reflect um uh within the team uh of Vina Volta, we reflect with our supervisors. We have um um a supervisor, uh Patrick, um and um we have some experts of Portugal that uh helped us to reflect. And the reflection was um a base point of this project.

Colby: 18:29

It uh the way you describe it, Maria. Sorry, I can edit that bit out.

Adriana: 18:37

I am I am Maria, I am Maria. Adriana Maria is my name, so you are you are good.

Colby: 18:45

I it I know it’s I’ve just got I I got that stuck in my head at some point, and I’m not sure how, but yeah, I’m pleased to hear that it is, you know, one of one of your names. Um anyway, what what I was gonna say is that listening to you, it it sounds like there were there were those two key elements. It was it was very much a reflective project and a reflective process that was happening, and I can imagine one in which um you didn’t see birth parents as um how would I put it you didn’t you didn’t see them as non-experts in their own life. If I yeah, you rather you saw them, you met them where they were where they are, yeah, and you collaborated with them to open up possibility new possibilities for them in their life. And it strikes me that it was it’s it’s a very respectful approach to the birth parents. Um child protection systems um often struggle to help birth parents feel restricted through respected through um the process and a child’s journey through care. So it was a very as I’m listening to it, it was very respectful, it was very collaborative. Um you were attempting to change the course of the family’s trajectory as yeah. Um and part of that was um about fostering healthy connections with with their with their girls, with their girls in Livermento. Yeah, and you you mentioned that there was a a reflective process, perhaps with with reflective supervision with Patrick Tomlinson as well as um within the Tomlinson. Yes. Perhaps um tell me what you think was the importance of it being a reflective project and there being that reflective supervision that occurred.

Adriana: 21:18

Uh this reflection uh as some um points, uh some main points. Um in one uh one hand we had the reflection about the cases. We had to think about the specific cases, um, the ten families that we were working. Um and we thought about their um characteristics, um uh we construct um systemic uh hypotheses about what was happening, about uh uh their pathways, the previous pathways, and the the strengths and the fragilities. We uh thought about this, and we use um uh an instrument that was uh that it was created by um um a Portuguese um teacher and and and um um Madalena Larcan um that is um in Portuguese is Imias, um that helped us to have a um a world vision about the the conditions of the family. Um and um this kind of reflection helped us to uh work directly with the families uh and use the right strategies, the right uh strategies, what we thought was the right strategies, um, improve dynamics, uh etc. And there was another kind of reflection that helps us to think about the project, the the phases of the project, the number of the sessions, the um the main strategies that we can we could use in the um in uh each phase of the project. Um and this was um uh a kind of reflection that we have with uh with Patrick, but also with the other experts, um, the design of the project. Uh that’s what what I I mean. Uh and uh a third um group, I can uh of uh of sessions of reflection was about ourselves because we thought that the team um uh had to reflect about um about um we we have to to reflect about ourselves as professionals and as persons. Um we have to uh reflect about our values, our uh vision of what is a family, because uh our um our core um visions of what is life. Um and we we did um um um some um exercises um of reflection about ourselves that help us to um to um to improve our competences, personal competences, social competences, and uh therapeutical competences that um we believe uh help a profession to work better with the families. Um Patrick uh said once that the the way we behave with each other as a team will model the way uh the families will behave with the um within them themselves and within us because they are always like like a child uh a child um when we have a child is always observing the parents, um the families are always observing us as a team, as a person. So we have to improve ourselves as a profession, professionals to uh do a better job with them, um, but also to model um the uh some things that we believe that will help to construct um healthier relationships. If we model that healthier uh relationships with the family, the family maybe will um um can um build that healthier relationships within the elements. I don’t know if I explain myself well, but very well. These are three um parts of reflection.

Colby: 25:48

So I’ll I’ll tell you what I what I took from that, which was that there is there’s the reflection on the family and their circumstances and their needs. There’s the reflection on the project. So it starts off uh as a project with I’m I’m guessing with with a certain with certain understandings and certain processes, but they’re always subject to review and and and following a different path. And that fits nicely in the definition of Rivera Volto, as you talked about, you know, that there’s it’s a cry it’s not set in stone, it it’s not just the families we’re wanting to um go to help to go in, have choices about uh other directions that they can go in. The project itself can develop and grow. And and and again, it this there’s this link, as you say, between you you put it about how we uh as how we interact with a team model something for the families about how you how you interact. But I also but but you were it was like you were all on the same voyage of discovery, you were all learning, developing changing path, perhaps. And and the third element of of the reflection was in in reflective supervision and thinking about your own experience of the work and your own values, your own thinking about family, what is a family, parenting, and you were being more consciously aware of biases, I guess, or or the and blind spots, but but you were more self-aware, um, more able to think about your own experience of the work. You’re to to approach the work in a very conscious, deliberate thinking way. Which I can see again is something that we you you you weren’t necessarily telling the parents how they had to be, what they had to do. You were what you were modeling uh is a different approach to life, and you were modeling that individually, collectively, and relationally with the families.

Adriana: 28:48

The the the idea of giving them more choices to choose, but uh in the end, uh the ones who choose are them, not us. They did they don’t do what we say it’s right because we don’t know what is right, um we know what is um what the the science tells us that is wrong, and we share with them the consequences, but uh in the end they um they choose what is right for them, and sometimes and and happened this uh in this project, sometimes they choose um not to be all the time with their girls because they understand that they haven’t uh conditions to that. That and that happened uh in some of the families. Um in the end of projects, uh maybe the the in the at the beginning the the idea was the reunification, the the whole reunification. In the end, uh some of the families understand uh understood that um um the old reunification wasn’t the the the better outcome. we have a partial reunifications. The girls go to the family at the weekends and they stay at Livermento um in the the the rest of the days or they go to the family um some days or uh half of the week and they stay at livramento uh um for some days and this was um a better outcome because uh the the intensity of the the the relationship um make our uh that relationship healthier because they don’t didn’t struggle with uh so many challenges daily challenges and um this conscience that would the the um the parents um um gained uh was uh one of the for me was one of the more um beautiful uh goals that we achieved because um the change the the the the the changes are important uh but the self-conscience uh the self-monetrization the self-conscience the self-knowledge about ourselves uh that can help us to choose what we want um was one of the most beautiful uh goals that we achieved um this um when we we thought uh in this project we thought about uh some uh main principles we wanted to to um to apply one of them uh was auto chip the auto chip is very important for us because uh when we are um when we have um we have this power of choose uh and we choose our pathway uh and we um have this how to chip um then we are um pacified with our choices and with what have happened with in in our lives but when we uh um feel that uh the the context um um um robbed us uh degrees of freedom we are not good and it this was very important for us yeah yeah there was one word that you said that i i i didn’t quite get but what i’m understanding you’re saying is that it was and this is in when child protection authorities become involved with families it’s a it’s an incredibly disempowering experience for them and though families may already be struggling the child protection the child the intervention the intervention to keep children safe often enough maybe almost universally further disempowers the family because it’s a state intervention we we we we are going to take the children into our care for a period of time because we believe that you can’t do that and that’s an incredibly disempowering uh and and parents don’t give a good account of themselves in those circumstances they’re not they’re not they’re not they often struggle to relate to child protection authorities uh in a skillful thinking way yeah they they’re more reactive and defensive because they’re hurt yeah and what one of the concepts that we talk about on this podcast fairly regularly of late is is the concept of containment and containment being the the relationship that um that we develop with people whereby and it’s a bit like a supervisory it’s a bit like lots of relationships it’s like the parent-child relationship it’s like a a a mentor or supervisory relationship but one of the core um component or aspects of um containment is this idea that when you’re interacting with someone they can share with you their most overwhelming experiences fears sadnesses and that you can then feed it back to them in a way that is more manageable for them yeah you can help them so in that doing so you can help you help families make sense of process and make sense of the experience that they’ve had now why all this is important is because of something else that you said which was um that one of the outcomes of the project was that what that you that was you loved the most was that parents were able to think about what was the best part.

Colby: 35:17

Yeah so a containing relationship is a relationship that helps people to be able to manage difficult overwhelming situations and and and be able to then think about what is the most appropriate path.

Adriana: 35:38

Yeah so that I mean that’s as you say it’s beautiful that that families were able to think about what was best for them for their girls and for themselves and and be able to make decisions along those lines a very a very good outcome yeah Adriana I was wondering um you said that there you you referenced that there’d been previous projects but why why did this why do you think this project needed to be done as a you know at when it was done and how it was done because um this projects was uh we did this project within the residential care home um there are other services in Portugal um that work with reunification but um uh they are um based in CAFAP um the centers of family support that uh do different kinds of of of work they work with the families um when the children are within the families they work with the families that the parents are divorced and they have to um manage the the the the con the connections and the contacts within the the the two progenitors um and they work within the reunification um but they are more uh general uh they work quite well but they are more general and we wanted a project a team that worked specifically uh within the the residential care home uh a work uh a team that works specifically with this within this context uh a team that work um very closely uh within the the the another the the other team that that um work with the girls um and uh we thought that uh this kind of project could be uh uh different from the um the other services that are um being doing in portugal because um they um serve a more um um more uh communication that is more um um close uh that’s can that can we can uh work the two teams can work uh directly daily uh and uh the the the attention we give to the families to the girls to these dynamics could be more um more specific yeah it it sounds like it was an integrated project integrated between where the families were at where the girls and where the girls were at right as opposed to uh yeah you know the girls live here and the families live here and there’s a service over here um there was much more integration between the three yeah yeah yeah but do you recall any particularly significant challenges that you you faced in um in delivering on this project and its aims yes um some of the challenges was uh i i I tell you uh um a while um was the we have to reflect about the the um the path of the the the project we have to um do some corrections to the number of sessions dynamics the strategies that was uh some of the challenge but another challenge that i didn’t uh talk about um yet was the what i i i don’t know if i can explain myself but what we um called the time of the family uh and the time of the children um these two times uh weren’t always the same uh the same compass um because we know the time of the of a child is very short they just have a window of a window of opportunity to to develop some kind of competencies um and we have to rush um our our intervention with the children because they don’t have time that kind of time uh they have lots of time in life but they don’t have that kind of time of to develop some um some some competences and um and the time of the family uh the time of the um the adults is a different kind of time and sometimes um we know that the fair conditions for an adult to develop is here two years because they have to have time to think to reflect to talk about to uh experience experience some different kinds of uh um of uh circumstances of uh um of um um situation situations uh to change but the time that the that girls their children have isn’t one year two years three years and this this compass uh between the two times was a challenge for us because sometimes we had to take difficult um decisions um with the parents and the um with the the internal team because the two times don’t don’t don’t match um and the the parents deserve this fair time but the girls didn’t have that time um and this this is a very for me as a professional this is one of the greatest um challenges of interventions because sometimes this um make me I don’t know if I can use this word but we are persons that this make me sad because I I I I realize that sometimes we cannot achieve all goals we cannot achieve all outcomes we have to choose between what is the better outcome for a children um and what is a better outcome for an adult and for the whole family that have this time too I didn’t know if I I explained myself but this is one for me one of the greatest challenges of the project.

Colby: 42:28

Yeah I won’t repeat what you said but um it did come through very clearly what you were what you were basically saying was that um the children the girls and their families were out of sync out of synchrony in I guess we would just say out of sync in terms of where they’re at in their development yeah and um and sometimes to I guess uh for the parents to get to that place where they are the best versions of themselves as parents is is is going to take time longer than the length of I guess a project like Rivera Volta.

Adriana: 43:13

Yeah and I I was wondering while you were talking about it Adriana um about the role the role of supervision the role of the reflective supervision in terms of um coming to understand that and and whether there are other particular um insights important insights that were gained as a result of or uh as a product of that reflective supervision process um the the role of supervision um I guess it uh has uh two main goals and we we get in love a lot with supervision because our supervisors uh have um a different experience and a larger experience of course so they can give us different inputs um about the design of the of the project about the um the um the conditions and um the hypothesis of the uh of of cases uh and that was very important for us because sometimes we are not uh um we are not uh um seeing something uh that they they they they give us a different input and we can we could uh change our vision of what was happening uh within the family but um the supervision uh especially the supervision with patrick because it was um more um personal uh the the our uh the the the the other team that helped us uh help us more with the the reflection of cases or um and the with the the design of the project but patrick helped us to reflect um in a more personal way and it was very important for us to give us this self-conscious of our resonances uh of what was happening with us as persons and as professionals that were uh that were uh facilitating or that were not facilitating the work that we were doing with the families and that was important very important for us as a team um for me as a as a profession but for us as a team we were three uh three psychologists if i i didn’t say that um but uh was very important for us because we could um understand sometimes that some resonances about our visions about life about our visions of our preferred visions of about families about life about parents um our expectations about what we wanted to uh to achieve because sometimes we we work so hard with the families that we sometimes I think we we we become uh in in certain way part of the family uh and that take us take us off the therapeutic um our in some way take us the therapeutic um um capacity and uh and the the supervision help us to to be with the family but um um without losing this therapeutic capacity i you understand what i mean yeah it it it’s about i mean i would say it’s about being able to think about the circumstances of the family in a i guess i we would say a metacognitive way but it’s really um it’s it’s about being one step removed may maintaining a position one step removed and observing the goings on of the family but also observing what’s hap where our own interactions with the family our own and and where we where we sit in this dynamic with the family so I think that yeah the role of supervision there as as I understood it was that it helped you maintain perspective about the family to help maintain perspective about your your own part of that dynamic with the family that working dynamic yeah and um I mean we I think one a theme of this podcast Adriana is about supervision and the the absolute importance of it that it it’s that it’s so critical to work in complex um endeavors like this um where that that it where it’s quite confronting for us and it also can really tug on the the the emotional heartstrings we would say like it it yeah it’s so so yeah supervision I think is vital and in particular as you describe it it the fact that it in it doesn’t necessarily have to give you all the answers it it it just needs to help you be able to think yeah and in the same way like we do with the families.

Colby: 49:14

That’s exactly what I was going to say we don’t have to tell the families exactly how to live their life or they should be living their life or or what all the answers are. In fact uh another theme of this podcast has been I don’t know or another another element of the discussions has been this idea that we don’t have to know everything. We don’t have to know all the answers when we admit that we don’t know then we create a space where you can have a meaningful conversation and work things out with people. And that’s when you’re doing that with your colleagues and with your clients that’s such a respectful way of of conducting that interaction and I could and if you did nothing else treating your those pet those families with respect yeah would change their life course to some degree just treating them with respect treating them as partners in an endeavor in a journey treating them as people of worth my own apart from my my big interest in attachment uh Adriana my other a big interest at the moment is or has been uh for a long time is in self-worth and and I think all therapeutic endeavour that improves self-worth will bear some pretty good outcomes for people because the alternative to self-worth is worthlessness and people make really poor decisions about their life when they feel worthless.

Adriana: 51:18

You talked about over the um the course of the project um your own thoughts changed the project changed um but in our pre-meet when we when we met beforehand you you talked about how your own thinking changed over the course of this project um I wonder if you could tell us a little bit more about that what changed in your thinking mostly um I think that when we started the project we thought that we were working with the families to the reunification to the wall reunification um and um we um uh designed a project with the um a certain number of phases that uh was um was uh implemented or will be implemented with that uh uh order uh and then at the end the the the the outcome was the reunification i guess it’s um when i think about that uh in risk in um looking um back i i think that uh we have a a kind of i uh idealistic view about uh uh about this and can i can i just jump in and say that’s a very can I just jump in and say that’s a very much a psychologist way of doing things yeah very strands and all of and you were three psychologists yes yes yes yeah yeah yeah I I agree with you um and and it was um yes a beautiful and idealistic view about the the the things but when we were um um implementing the project we started to think that reunification can be a more um a less strict uh concept um because we we started to think about healthy relationships more than reunification yes reunification is important and maybe it will be an outcome in some um situations but the most important uh most important thing that we could work with the families was working uh within the the healthier relationship relationships between them and then we thought and we reflect lots about what is a healthy relationship we did um lots of exercise um um in the context of supervision and uh then with the uh with the families uh thinking about what is a healthy relationship what that means what mean these concept what uh includes a healthy relationship and at the end uh um for us the better outcomes was when the the the families gain this um self-conscious again um uh of what is a healthy relationship and um within their specific family uh what is a healthy um how can we operationalize a healthy relationship sometimes a healthy relationship a wealthier relationship in that family was uh the girl um go uh to the family again and live uh with them and uh we have a total real uh reunification sometimes the outcome the better outcome for a healthy relationship was the girl stay at livramento start study um for more years uh and go at the weekends to the family and that was uh a um a good outcome for a better for a healthier relationship so that changed that idealistic view of the the the phases the orders um the number of the sessions uh the a clean project very uh very um very tidy project i i guess um that that change in our head um and the um the the concept of healthy relationship uh become more important i think that was the great um change in my mind in our mind yeah wonderful wonderful outcomes um of course um from from my perspective um if you know that the a a really terrific outcome as you you’ve talked about it is um these best connections the best possible connections at the at the time um that were possible that that certainly also though um that um that capacity to think and reflect on what what was a good outcome for for them as a family yeah I think that that’s that’s remarkable because um in my own experience um the way in which parents feel like they are treated in child protection matters then they become they can the that treatment that disempowerment can make them really struggle to be able to think about what’s in the best interest of their children yeah they become much more inward focused so yeah so the you know being able to achieve that outcome is is remarkable and well done do you think there’ll be further projects like this um either with livramento or or um um in Portugal more generally we want to uh replicate the project um maybe first uh to Libramento um so we can uh uh have more um uh more specific data um because uh like I said it was a a pilot project and we was um we thought a lot about uh how we can uh implement the project and at the end we feel that we we need to start again to do some things differently um to um um to see if uh how what we thought previously uh will have different uh um outcomes um but we don’t know yet if um it will be possible yeah you had my understanding is you had funding you had some uh external funding for the project as well is that right yeah yeah yeah it was like um bp like aisha yeah it was uh an external fund an external yeah like it’s a bank oh it’s a bank yeah yeah yeah so it’s like um almost I’m thinking philanthropic but it’s not not that’s not the right word um but it it’s it’s like social funding I guess a bank yeah yeah a bank uh yeah okay so that have a bank that have a project of social funding yes it’s like that yeah yeah so if you did a project again you would you would you you would take on all of this learning from this pilot project and you would you would um start in a different place I guess um yeah yeah but do you do you I I’m interested to know whether you it would there would be a different outcome to the one that you achieve that you would be looking for maybe we start um because when we realize this kind of uh of uh things i i said to you uh we are at the middle of the project maybe if we start from the beginning we have uh more time to do things like we thought um of course the guidelines of the phases of a project the number of the sessions the stretches the dynamics these are always uh uh this is um all uh important things we have to have that we have to have limits we have to have guidelines because we cannot live and this is this is true for everything in life we cannot live without limits and without guidelines but um if we start with this vision that the the better outcome is the healthier relationship not the to respond to the expectations of a system that wanted to uh on off um answer that oh oh we have uh reunification or we don’t have a reunification uh this black and white response um maybe we can have more time to um do things with families differently and maybe we can go for um go further um in the outcomes uh in the the results um and another thing i think is very important in the in in future projects is the um this reflect reflection about ourselves as a professionals as professionals because i think this uh was um a very important point of this project um of course um we know from the for our formation uh based formation that uh we have to have um professional skills uh therapeutical skills but we forgot lots of the a lot of times um of uh develop our personal skills uh as persons and when we are in uh with the families uh with persons we are the professionals of course but we are the persons too um and we cannot uh forget that our resonances uh can um have um can limitate us if it we don’t have um the a self-conscious or can be um very important uh um tools to work with the families because we know uh um who we are i think that’s very important in enough in future projects of this nature

Colby:

yeah well i i really hope that there are future projects of this nature i hope you get an opportunity to um put into practice some of these key learnings um that you you that you made from this pilot project but i i guess i i think that the the outcomes that you achieved are are really good outcomes anyway so that you the any subsequent projects the outcomes are gonna be that you’re going to look for are going to be very similar these best most healthy relationships between the children and their families i would add um growing um empowerment in the birth plan in amongst the birth families growing their sense of their own worth growing their sense of their own uh importance in the lives of their girls or their children um I would add um achieving an outcome where parents are able to truly reflect on what is in the best interest of their children which is really quite different to the circumstances in which um child protection authorities place children away from parents so I think there’s some all of those things are such worthy outcomes for a project like this um I I wouldn’t change the outcomes with the subsequent project you might change the process but I think the I think the outcomes are great and um thank you very much for coming on and um um english is not your your your first language obviously so um very brave of you to come on and um communicate with uh uh with uh an English uh podcast in this or English speaking podcast in this way as we mentioned earlier my Portuguese is nothing like your your command of English I know two things in Portuguese so thank you again.

Adriana

it was it was my pleasure Colby very thankful for for the invite

Building Trauma Informed Schools – A podcast interview with Megan Corcoran

How supporting adults creates the safety children need to learn, belong, and heal

Belonging sits at the heart of healing, and this conversation explores how schools can become places where children recover, learn, and feel seen—without asking teachers to be therapists. The core idea is simple: when adults in education and youth services feel supported, regulated, and connected, they create the conditions that allow young people to build trust and thrive. Megan Corcoran draws on nearly two decades in alternative education and leadership to show why adult wellbeing is not a luxury but a necessity, especially in environments where secondary traumatic stress is common. When leaders normalise vulnerability and model practical strategies—naming stress, regulating, seeking peer support—they reduce stigma and make it safe for teams to speak up early. That honesty strengthens consistency, and consistency builds belonging, which in turn creates the relational safety necessary for learning to stick.

The path forward blends trauma-informed principles with the realities of busy classrooms. Rather than overcomplicating practice, we begin with Tier 1, universally applied supports that help everyone: morning check-ins that tune the room, predictable routines that lower cognitive load, regulation strategies available to the whole group, and a tone of unconditional positive regard. These are not therapeutic sessions; they are ordinary, repeatable habits that send a clear message—adults are safe, fair, and present. Children may arrive each morning carrying the unknown burdens of their lives; we cannot control that. But we can control the experiences they receive before the bell goes home, day after day. Name them, greet them, notice cues early, and respond before escalation. Over time, those micro-moments add up, reorganising expectations about adults and planting seeds of security.

Leadership sets the weather. In high-stress settings, the old culture of “be tough and get on with it” isolates staff and amplifies churn. Megan describes creating communities of practice for leaders—spaces to debrief, compare notes, and build accountability. That network effect matters. When leaders show they are impacted by crises and share what regulation looks like in real time, they legitimise healthy coping and weaken perfectionism. Supervision, where available, becomes a protective factor, slowing reactivity and reinforcing ethical practice. These supports reduce professional dangerousness by addressing vicarious trauma before it distorts judgment. Policymakers often want numbers first, but retention and relational continuity are the data that matter most for children who cannot afford another goodbye.

At the coalface, a simple compass helps adults act before behaviours spiral: AURA—Accessible, Understanding, Responsive, Attuned. Be accessible by noticing who is wobbling and stepping in early. Be understanding by naming the young person’s felt experience with warmth and clarity. Be responsive by offering practical help proactively, not only when pushed. Be attuned by matching affect enough to convey empathy, then regulating toward calm so the child can co-regulate with you. None of this is exotic; it mirrors how we care for infants, and it scales when done consistently by a whole staff. Consistency is the antidote to chaos. Children who have learned to mistrust adults do not need dramatic new programs as much as they need the same steady signals, delivered by many people, across many days.

When schools hold learning and wellbeing together, the results ripple. Regulated nervous systems learn better; connected students tolerate challenge longer; excluded students re-enter community with dignity when belonging is prioritised over banishment. The wider social cost of burnout—teachers who are also parents, carers, neighbours—demands attention. A school that invests in adult wellbeing invests in public health, crime prevention, and future workforce capacity. The work is incremental and deeply human: build staff safety, strengthen leadership containment, align on simple Tier 1 practices, and let AURA guide daily interactions. Do this long enough and the culture changes. Classrooms become places where young people learn to live with themselves and with others. Healing hides in the ordinary, and belonging lights the way.

You can listen to the podcast here:

You can watch here:

About Megan:

Megan Corcoran is the founder of Wagtail Institute, where she works alongside schools, youth services, and complex settings to strengthen wellbeing and build trauma-informed communities. With nearly twenty years’ experience teaching and leading in alternative education, Megan brings both professional expertise and lived understanding to her work.

Her vision is simple but powerful: that every child has a safe and magical childhood, supported by adults who believe in their future. At Wagtail Institute, Megan partners with those adults—educators, carers, and practitioners—helping them to feel supported, heal, and thrive, so they can continue doing this important work.

https://wagtailinstitute.com/

Related Podcasts:

If you want to hear more about trauma informed practice in schools, you might also like:

Learning to Live with Yourself and Others: Insights from Therapeutic Residential Care – A podcast interview with Richard Rollinson:


Transcript of the podcast interview with Megan:

Colby: 0:00

Hello and welcome to the Secure Start podcast.

Megan: 0:04

Belonging could be the key to healing childhood trauma. This is challenging work. There are some risks to it. So let’s have some open conversations about it. And I think a real crucial part is the leaders actually just modelling. Hey, this was hard. Here’s what I’m doing about it as well. So it’s like, you know, I felt this, but I actually have some strategies in my toolkit as well. I think there’s no lonelier position sometimes than being a leader. Yeah, and that peer support becomes incredibly important when we find ourselves in a position like that. Was when an old colleague reached out to me who was also leading, but in a different setting, who reached out to me and just said, can we start grabbing coffee together and unpacking what’s going on? Um, and it was just such an incredibly helpful space talking about education in a way that supports that notion of I’m a teacher and I’m here to support human beings and they’re going to come in with their complexity. So I just think anyone who’s working with young people has the opportunity to provide therapeutic moments without being a therapist. The curriculum’s not the centre, the young people are the centre of the work that we’re doing. And lots of trauma-informed practice lines up really well with some of our tier one setup for our classroom. We don’t know what experiences these young people have had over the weekend or that morning before they come into our classroom. But we know what experiences we can give them before they leave for the day.

Colby: 1:23

Hello and welcome to the Secure Start Podcast. I’m Colby Pierce, and joining me for this episode is a fellow podcaster and trauma-informed well-being consultant. Before I introduce my guests, I’d just like to acknowledge the traditional lands of the Aboriginal people that my guest and I come from. For me, it’s the Ghana people of the Adelaide Plains. For my guest, it is the Warajari and Bunerong people of the Kurlum Nation. And I’d just like to acknowledge the continuing connection the living Aboriginal people feel to land, waters, culture, and community. I’d also like to pay my respects to their elders, past, present, and emerging. My guest this episode is Megan Corcoran. Megan is the founder of Wagtail Institute, and she works alongside schools, youth services, and complex settings to strengthen well-being and build trauma-informed communities. With nearly 20 years’ experience teaching and leading in alternative education, Megan brings both professional expertise and lived understanding of her work. Her vision is simple but powerful. That every child has a safe and magical childhood, supported by adults who believe in their future. At Wagtail Institute, Megan partners with those adults, educators, carers, and practitioners, helping them to feel supported, heal, and thrive so that they continue doing this important work. Welcome, Megan.

Megan: 3:13

Thank you so much, Colby, and thank you for such a lovely introduction as well.

Colby: 3:18

You’re welcome. Um, I’m really pleased to have you on. And um I’m wondering if we could just begin if you just can uh tell us a little bit about yourself, how you um at the Wagtail Institute, perhaps your podcast as well, because we’re fellow podcasters, and uh and how you gain how you came to start all that, found all that.

Megan: 3:40

Yeah, thank you so much. Yeah, so as you mentioned, I spent quite a lot of my career working in schools. Um, so yeah, I was a good old graduate teacher quite a while ago, um, working at the Berry Street School here um in Melbourne in the southeastern suburbs. And back then when I started, um the Berry Street School was actually set up just for young people in out-of-home care. Um, so you had to actually be in out-of-home care to be a student at the school. So that was quite a complex start to teaching, that’s for sure. Um but I thought I had one of the best jobs in the world. I absolutely loved working in education and loved teaching these young people. Um, so I worked at a couple of different alternative settings as a teacher across the Melbourne area and then eventually uh moved my way into school leadership, which was never on my radar. It was never something I was thinking deeply about. Um, but it came from a bit of a values place, I guess, where um, you know, I was really passionate about supporting the young people and I loved my time in the classroom, but it was a bit of a chance, I guess, just to have a bit of a further impact and support other teachers to do the same and have those wins with the young people. Um, and so I went back to Berry Street actually to start my leadership um journey there. So I kind of came full circle and came back to the same campus and went into leadership at a pretty pivotal point for the campus too. There was a lot going on, a lot of change. They’d had a pretty rough year the previous year, so we were sort of re-establishing some safety in the campus. Um, yeah, and then I worked, yeah, worked there for a little while, and then I was an assistant principal and then worked at a really large alternative setting in leadership as well. So we had like the next school I was at, we had like 360 students enrolled, um, and all of them experiencing some sort of disadvantage and quite a few of them in out-of-home care. And um, yeah, so I got really passionate, I guess, about supporting the practitioners and the professionals in these spaces. Um, I was leading through the COVID era and really saw just how much we really needed to wrap around the adults who were supporting these young people. Um, so I got really passionate about it and I studied my masters in um in well-being science and positive psychology as well. And in that I actually explored um belonging. So I was looking at belonging being, I guess, a pivotal thing for young people that experience trauma. So I sort of was exploring the fact that belonging could be the key to healing childhood trauma. And then I got really curious because I’m like, the only way we can do that and establish places where young people belong is by having adults who are consistent in those spaces. Like we feel a sense of belonging when we know the people in that space. Um, and I was looking at all the turnover happening and all the people that were really struggling to stay in schools and youth settings and out-of-home care spaces. Um, so Wagtail really was dreamed up in that way, I guess, at looking at well, what can we do to support these adults? There’s kind of a bit of a two-pronged approach with what we do at Wagtail Institute. Um, one is enhanced trauma-informed practice so that they actually know what to do with the young people. Um, but the second is enhancing well-being for the adults as well. So we need to know how to look after ourselves, how to look after each other, and to make sure our services and systems are actually helping the adults in that space as well, so that they feel like they can stay and they can do this work with the young people. Um, so that’s really how it all began. And I’m a few years into it now and working alongside lots of amazing settings and organizations and loving every step of the way. Um, and the Wagtails podcast came came pretty early on in the journey as well. So I think I just realized that some of the best learning I ever have as a professional is when I get to sit down with people and pick their brains and just dive into really good conversations. And I thought, well, what a great way to actually share that learning with a wider platform. So just doing what you’re doing, really, Colby, is inviting people that I’d love to have a chat to, and then just having that opportunity and that privilege to share that with a wider audience and learn together through the questions we get to ask on these podcasts.

Colby: 7:47

And that that’s uh you bring up a great point, I think, is that it’s it is actually a great way for us to learn. Well, at least, yeah, I think that’s what you’re suggesting, and I feel that way too. It’s such our people that we interview are often such great resources, not only to our listeners, but but also also to ourselves. And uh yeah, it’s like like doing it’s like the best professional development you ever do in a in a way. Um, although some people may actually call it that. Um, and I I think I think your journey is an interesting one uh in the sense that what you’ve you’ve recognised is the need, if we’re going to deliver trauma-informed practice well to children and young people, we the adults need to be um supported uh as well as the children. And in actual fact, we go so far as to say that um what we want the adults to be doing with the children, we want them to experience themselves so that it kind of um transmits through them, yeah.

Megan: 9:00

Yeah, makes it so much more real too. It’s I feel like with trauma-informed practice, we sort of um as a field, it started off very much as an applied practice to other people. So it was sort of like we’ve got some traumatized young people in front of us, we need to apply this work to them. Um, but we are like developing as a field now to really understand it more as a way of being and a lens to see the world through and a way of showing up and just making sure we’re also preventing harm with anyone we’re interacting with, not just the traumatized young people.

Colby: 9:30

Yeah, yeah. And and I think you’ve also alluded to the fact that it is it it is difficult. Well, it can be difficult and confronting work. It’s not good for the children and young people that for people to come and go uh in the high volume. So I’m just wondering, what are your thoughts about the kind of the scope um of well-being challenges, uh vicarious trauma for the adults that that work in this space and what do we do about that?

Megan: 10:04

Yeah, great question. I feel like it’s an area where we’re just starting to scratch the surface. Um, like if I rewind back to when I started in the field, um, there wasn’t a lot of permission to share how we were tracking. Like we obviously cared about each other’s well-being, we’re really supportive. But if you were to put up your hand and say, I’m really struggling here, there might have been a sense that like she’s maybe not going to make it. She maybe shouldn’t be here. Like back then, that’s sort of how we approached it. And so even for me as a graduate teacher, I was sort of learning how to just suppress some of that challenge and um believe that I’d get like the language wasn’t this, but really I was learning to desensitize my reactions to what was going on around me. Um, but it comes up at some point, you know, and it’s something to be aware of. So I feel like we’re really just starting to scratch the surface, and there’s starting to be, you know, a lot more research happening around secondary traumatic stress, um, you know, and looking at what’s actually happening, what does that look like, what does that feel like? And there is starting to be some really good research around what we can actually do about it as well. So I feel like just stage one really is having permission to name that and be okay that it is actually a risk factor in our field. And if we’re more comfortable in naming it and talking about it and sharing that challenge, um, we’re actually starting at that awareness level, which is where we need to begin. Like if we go into it blindly and just think, you know, you’ve got to be pretty tough to do this work, well, we’re not really helping the young people to have those consistent adults because we need to acknowledge this is challenging work. There are some risks to it. So let’s have some open conversations about it. Let’s be aware of how it may impact us. Let’s track some of those emotions and those sensations that we might get throughout the workday when we are confronted with some of the challenges. Um, and like that’s just really step one is just I know it’s I know it exists and I’m aware of it. Um but there’s so much more we can be doing as well around just peer support, like making sure we’ve got really good wraparound with each other at work. Um, yeah, and just like sort of implementing the trauma-informed principles at the adult level as well. So making sure we’re actually working in trauma-informed ways. So far, if there’s any leaders listening, it’s like, well, what do we do for the young people when we know they’re stressed and we know they’re impacted by trauma? We can translate that absolutely up to the adult level and work in ways where we acknowledge there is stress. We acknowledge that there may be some behaviors from the colleagues that we’re supporting that might be in fight or flight mode, but it just looks a little bit different at the adult level as well. Just making sure we’re putting in supports where people feel really safe, where we’ve got really trusting relationships, um, you know, all of those like really good practices, and that we are actually like working on regulation as well. So just knowing I am stressed, going to do something to regulate, then I’m gonna go back in and support the young people again. Very long-winded answer there.

Colby: 12:52

Well, no, uh no, I think it it’s a good answer. And it I found myself thinking as you were talking about what you’re what the reaction might be when you go into a complex environment like a school or or um you know residential uh care provider for for children. Um you go in and say, Don’t worry, don’t worry about what’s hap what happened to the kids. Tell me what’s happening for you in the first instance. I I don’t know if you if they’re the words that you use, but I I wonder about the re some of the reactions that you may uh get to the adults, I guess expecting to be told what to do with the kids and perhaps not so much expecting to have to talk about their own experience of the work.

Megan: 13:44

Yeah, absolutely. And a key part of that, I think, is um the leaders modeling that as well, because we don’t want to be the new person who comes in and has to be vulnerable in front of our peers straight away, but we need to see it’s actually part of the culture and part of the fabric of the way of working in this space as well. Um, and so the permission sort of comes when we see others doing that too. And I think a real crucial part is the leaders actually just modeling, hey, this was hard. Here’s what I’m doing about it as well. So it’s like, you know, I felt this, but I actually have some strategies in my toolkit as well. And that is something I’m saying from I think neglecting to do that when I was in leadership as well. I’ll never forget a day where I had um, you know, there was a bit of a some sort of crisis and we had a debrief. And afterwards, one of the teachers came to me and she said, How are you okay with everything that happens here? Like you never look like you’re impacted by it. And I was thinking, well, I’m doing a huge disservice to the team if I’m not actually expressing how I feel and modeling what I’m doing about it as well. Um, because they don’t need a robotic leader. Um, like, you know, well, I had great strategies in my toolkit, and they don’t need a leader breaking down every day something happens, but they need to hear that there is permission to talk about it and that we all feel the impact in some way. Um, no matter how experienced we are, you know, we’re we’re supporting young people who it’s their life and something big may happen. And it actually upsets us when we see a young person in crisis, and it’s okay to be upset by it, but it’s also really good to have some strategies to nurture ourselves and to look after ourselves after moments like that.

Colby: 15:12

How can it not be upsetting? I I think it was something that uh dawned on me very early in my career that um the way to desensitization in a sense, if it if it if it stops bothering you, then you need to stop doing the work, really. Um but I think you but so if you kind of practice with heart, you need you need to be able to not lock all those experiences away, but have uh opportunities to discuss them, to be held in mind by a leader at who walks the walk and talks the talk. I think I got that right. Yeah, but you you you need uh you need we talk we’ve talked in previous podcasts on on the Secure Start Podcast about the role of leaders in containment. And maybe we’ll talk a bit more about containment in a bit, but um you uh you’ve really I think hit the nail on the head in relation to leadership, the the the important role that leadership play. And um again that that’s a theme that’s come through um uh many times, and it includes um the importance of leaders having their own person or uh to to go and talk to about um they about their own experience of the work. Yeah. I wonder if that is that kind of something that you get yours get involved in as well in terms of just being that sounding board and that person who holds space for leaders.

Megan: 16:47

Yeah, it’s a really interesting area. I think there’s no lonelier position sometimes than being a leader.

Colby: 16:53

Yes.

Megan: 16:53

Yeah, and that peer support becomes incredibly important when we find ourselves in a position like that. Um, and something I found really helpful, um, which, you know, a couple of years into my leadership journey was when an old colleague reached out to me who was also leading, but in a different setting, who reached out to me and just said, can we start grabbing coffee together and unpacking what’s going on? Um and it was just such an incredibly helpful space because it was like, here’s that peer support that we all need where we have similar experiences, we can validate each other, um, and we don’t feel so alone in the journey. And then from that, we actually developed a community of practice. So we now host, and it’s now five, six years into that community of practice, um, where it’s a space for leaders to just come together four times a year, meet each other, learn from each other, hold space, you know, connect, share details, stay in touch if they want to as well. Um, so this work becomes incredibly important, I think, is just that idea that we need to just have someone to validate and listen to us. Um, and if we’re feeling isolated or we’re feeling like we’re in a space where, you know, maybe we don’t have that peer-level support, supervision is incredibly helpful. Like if we can get good supervision set up, cannot stress enough how important that is.

Colby: 18:09

Yeah, one of my one of my past guests, Lynn Payton, she’s a leadership consultant in Northern Ireland, she she made the comment that leaders leaders can’t debrief, probably butchering it a little bit, but the the general point she was making is that is that because of their role in an organization, the leader can’t uh have this mentoring relationship or this debriefing relationship with someone who is junior to them in the organisation, you know, because ultimately that you that person’s gonna be um self-censoring what they see and observe and acknowledge in the leader. Um, and so yeah, I’m really uh interested to hear about this community that of leaders that um that you set up and I and again um very much consistent um with with with what’s been talked about more in the I guess the social care and child protection organizations specifically uh on this podcast.

Megan: 19:17

Well, yeah, the the um the community of practice we have is um for leaders in alternative education. Um so it’s for any leader who middle leader, you know, executive leader, working in a school with young people impacted by trauma. Um so that’s the key um, I guess, thing that they have in common. And yeah, over the years it’s it’s growing, it it takes different shape. It originally was going to be all in person um around Melbourne, so it was kind of an invitation for anyone in Melbourne. Um then, you know, good old COVID teaches you to do things in different ways. So we ended up in those lockdown years doing it online, and that meant people from regional Victoria started joining, we had people from Tasmania join. We had someone move to the Northern Territory during that time and stay in it. So now we do a hybrid thing where we go, all right, there’s need for in-person, and we still host those, and it that the whole community is welcome, but obviously it’s hard. Um, but we will do three online a year just to make sure that that that can still be available to everyone.

Colby: 20:18

Yeah, that’s fantastic. And that’s that’s one of the the great things that has emerged out of those COVID years is that we were we we we had to trust in technology and and the worth of still being able to connect over this. Yeah, yeah. When you talk about it, it reminds me in in the residential child care space, therapeutic residential child care space in the UK, they have a uh an entity called the Community of Communities. Now the the community of communities uh these are therapeutic communities, um and they do a um they do a lot of things uh about which I’m not uh an expert. Um I’ve just had some conversations. But but one of the one of the good things, I guess, that arises out of that is not just the opportunity to um support each other, but also there’s a there’s a there’s almost like an accountability um aspect of that experience that everyone keeps everyone else kind of on the on the right track, so to speak, in in those circumstances. Um because that they are vulnerable children and young people that we’re talking about, and uh the old concept of professional dangerousness arises where where people are you know experiencing their own vicarious trauma and then they can it can has a possibility of leading people into pref professional dangerousness. Um so I think a a community of communities as with the community of leaders that you’re talking about is actually a really ethical uh space. Um, yeah.

Megan: 22:09

And it’s an important point you raise as well, because if you think about it, the cultures of these workplaces for so long have been about that idea that it is hard work, but you need to just be tough and come and do it. And what we’re kind of talking about here is breaking that mold. And that takes time and that takes a bit of courage as well to put up our hand and say, hey, I’m actually finding this really challenging, or I’ve had a I’ve had a reaction to what happened yesterday. Um, whereas, you know, in the past it’s been a bit of a like, you know, something happened, like, you know, you’re tough, you can handle it, come back in the next day, we’re all okay. And we’re just trying to shake it off and pretend we’re all okay. But as you said, it’s that level of accountability and just keeping an eye on each other and making sure we are okay and that there is permission to go, you know what, it’s okay to have support, it’s okay to raise a challenge, um, and you don’t need to like we can break down that culture together of that tough come in and be tough and just you know shake it off in this industry.

Colby: 23:02

You’ve got to be pretty tough in this area. Um, the other the benefit, one of the benefits that we that it would be good if there’s not already to have really good stats that demonstrate this, um, because policymakers just love numbers. Um But I would imagine that uh staff retention um would be a a really uh um achievable outcome when you when you start from a place of supporting staff. It sounds counterintuitive, doesn’t it? Really? You’ve got vulnerable children, children in need, and the first thing you do is you is your is your work with the staff.

Megan: 23:45

I know it sounds like it’s counterintuitive, but it’s oh not this is the thing. Like, how can we show up and do this work as well as we can if we’re not coming from a place of strength and feeling well and having good processes in place? Um, but this is the hard thing of my work, Colby, I think a lot of the time is I feel like I’m trying to sell it to people and be like, you know, this is why you need this. Um and it feels a little bit crazy sometimes where you know I’ll meet with people and they’ll go, we don’t actually have funding for that. We need to put the funding into the kids. I’m thinking, well, if you’re having a revolving door of staff walking out, you know, that funding is just, yeah, you’re being yeah, you’re spending it on recruiting and hiring and you know, starting from scratch over and over.

Colby: 24:26

So yeah, it it probably and and you perhaps I guess do it, it it needs there to be some clear definable outcomes that you’re looking for with with um intervening at the staff level first or even at the leadership level first. I’ve got I’ve got a I’ve got a theory about this. Well, I it’s I mean all of my theories are based on experience, including the experience of others, myself, and things that I’ve read. So I wonder if anything is truly my theory. But one of the things that I’m aware of from the literature, um relevant literature uh on thinking is that we are um we’re problem solvers. We’re really good at identifying problems and and then trying to we’re very good at identifying the problems, but we’re you know, and then trying to come up with a solution. Now the solution may not always be um successful, but but we do we do notice problems. We’ve adapted in that way. Um and we’re not so good at noticing the things that go well correspondingly. We focus a lot on problems and fixing problems, and we don’t focus so in any kind of endeavor where you’re trying to achieve an outcome, people need to know what that outcome looks like, or else they won’t see it. You know, I’ll just see I’ll just see the problems that persist.

Megan: 25:59

Um, so I think it’s I think to add to add to that as well, if you look at the nature of this work when we support trauma-impacted young people, um, it’s a little bit crisis-driven, if we’re honest, you know, and so we become very reactive. And so we look for a problem, we solve that problem in the moment, and then our like it’s almost like we’re addicted to that fight or flight adrenaline as an industry where it’s like problem, problem, problem, you know, reacting, solving, and we’re not so good, if we’re honest, at slowing down and looking at strategic work and looking at the long-term impact of some, you know, some implementation of different things. Like, I know we are definitely in a better place than we used to be, and there’s lots of good work happening in this space. Um, but we can get a little bit addicted to the reactivity, and our decision making is sometimes pretty quick. Um, yeah, and I’ve seen that from a lot of leaders in this space as well, where you know, they’ll be like, all right, we need to implement this change and we’re doing it tomorrow. And it’s like, how about we slow down and look at you know what outcome we’re trying to do and how we’re going to measure that?

Colby: 27:03

Yeah, and ultimately trauma traumatised organizations uh are not good at um responding therapeutically to traumatised children. Yeah. But yeah, I can see what you mean about it’s it’s almost like it’s a sales, a sales job to to, I mean, leadership, leadership is the I guess in schools is the target, primary target. Um because leaders, yeah, set the tone of the of the school, as you say. Um have you worked out what works with the cell job that you’re prepared to share?

Megan: 27:39

To be honest, I’m not I’m definitely not a sales um motivated person when it comes to business, but I think ultimately um it’s just like just being out in the field and just talking to the people and sharing and having case studies, and like that’s that’s my approach, really, is like if I can share things that are helpful to people, whether it’s an article, a blog, a podcast, uh a little idea that’s worked in a school, um, that’s my approach. So it’s not very sales for sales focused. Um, but you know, if someone finds something helpful, then they’re more likely to think about well, how can we do this on a bigger scale?

Colby: 28:13

Absolutely. Yeah, and I think yeah, being a resource to school leadership um is a great place to start. Yeah.

Megan: 28:20

Yeah, yeah.

Colby: 28:21

Which is a nice we can I can segue a little bit away from that into what what do you think is the role of schools in helping children recover from early adversity, family trauma?

Megan: 28:35

It’s such a good question. And I find that this is a really interesting part of the work. Um, and I’m gonna start by saying I feel like a lot of empathy for teachers at the moment. Um, there’s so much different discourse around what a school does and what the role of a teacher is. And I think we haven’t started from the right place around what it what is the work, you know. When we look at being a teacher and coming into a classroom and supporting a group of young people and often a very large group of young people at one given time, we’re we’re supporting human beings, and those human beings are coming in with all of their complexities. Um, and I think initially what we should have been doing is actually thinking about talking about education in a way that supports that notion of I’m a teacher and I’m here to support human beings and they’re gonna come in with their complexity. Um, so yes, teachers want to teach their curriculum and they they absolutely want to execute those amazing lesson plans, and that’s what they’ve signed up for. Um, but I just think we’re doing a disservice in talking about education as solely that when we look at the complexity of human beings that come into classrooms. So I want to say that teachers do not have to be therapists, and it’s not about adding therapy training to a teacher’s workload. Absolutely not. Um, but I think it’s just about learning ways that we can work in a trauma informed way while we deliver that education. And I just wish that that was part of um. You know, pre-service teacher degrees and training is just a bit more knowledge around trauma-informed practice. Um, and then that way we would come in understanding why children might be behaving in particular ways in our classroom. So for some young people, school might be the safest place. It might be the place where they come in and they actually feel seen and heard and they feel loved by the teachers at the school. And so teachers can be doing life-changing work without even being 100% aware of that notion as well. So I just think anyone who’s working with young people has the opportunity to provide therapeutic moments without being a therapist. And so I just think if we all can put that hat on and just remember, young people are at the center of the work that we’re doing. The curriculum’s not the center, the young people are the center of the work that we’re doing. Um, yeah, and I just feel for teachers, I just really wish, you know, we spoke about it in ways where they understand that complexity before they sign up.

Colby: 30:56

It’s it’s kind of like in my in my uh field, the psychology of individual differences. So it’s that tension between um this is what we know about everyone, and this is what we know. So, you know, we could apply these general theorems or you know, uh this general knowledge to everyone. Um, but perhaps perhaps the the best of those statements is that everyone’s an individual. We need to tailor and adapt and and yeah, I mean it’s it’s what I think what you’re what you’re getting at, um, or what I’m hearing you’re getting at is that um early on it’s important to not only think about what you want to deliver, but just to think about the role. Think about the the role that you put you’re playing uh in the in the lives of the of the children and think about their experiences and how best to um adapt for each child. And uh I feel sorry for teachers too, because I could just imagine if I came in as a psychologist into a school and said, Well, you’ve got to adapt for each individual child, they would say we have 30 children in our classroom and half of them are experiencing this and other yeah, and so you know, and um that’s the thing as well.

Megan: 32:23

Like I feel like we don’t have to get overly complex about it. Like when we look at some trauma-informed practices, we can actually look at what’s called in education, like multi-tiered systems of support. And when we at tier one, that’s universally what we want to do for the entire class. So like we don’t have to make adjustments in tier one. Tier one’s what we provide for everyone. And lots of trauma-informed practice lines up really well with some of our tier one setup for our classroom. So things like having a circle time in the morning and having a chance to actually engage with everyone and see how they’re feeling, do a pulse check, regulation strategies for the entire class, just using unconditional positive regard in how we, you know, respond to behaviors that are coming up, clear expectations, predictable routines, like lots of these things will actually just support all of the young people in our class without overcomplicating it and going 50% of my students need this and 50% need that. Like if we can just get some of those basics right, we’re gonna see some change happen in classrooms as well.

Colby: 33:22

How did what’s the response you get to that?

Megan: 33:25

Well, to be honest, this is actually where I think I do get a lot of positive response from teachers because they are incredibly overwhelmed when they think about I need to do trauma-informed practice and curriculum and this and that. Whereas when I get a chance to actually map it with them and go, let’s map these tier one things that you can do for your entire class, like it’s almost like a sigh of relief of going, oh my gosh, I’m actually so relieved to hear there’s some things I can do just in my daily practice without getting too individualized and overwhelmed.

Colby: 33:54

Do you think it matters who delivers that message? Um, so I’ll give you two examples. You delivering that message, or me as a clinical psychologist with 30 years experience working with these children, developing that uh delivering that message. Do you think it makes a difference?

Megan: 34:13

It can for sure. I think because I’ve walked the classroom experience that sometimes it lands because of that. Um, but I I’m just imagining the power of us delivering that message together, Colby. That would that would be so impactful.

Colby: 34:28

I dare say, um, I always say when I’m when I’m working at school, and just just just to let you know that I’ve written a program for schools. I have I have rolled it out here. It is rolled out, it’s not rolled out widely here. In fact, um when I applied as part of this SA government’s um, they had a scheme to deliver trauma-informed uh practice across schools. Um I’m I’m I’m happy to put my hand up and say that I I didn’t win the tender. I wasn’t a successful tenderer um for that, which um I think there’s a bit of a story in relation to that. But net nevertheless, I have still worked with schools um a lot over the past 30 years, um, less so these days because of that initiative. But but I have a program that is rolled out in schools in Ireland.

Megan: 35:23

Amazing!

Colby: 35:24

Yeah, it’s like but you know, an artist is never known in their hometown.

Megan: 35:30

I find it’s quite funny. Australia’s funny like this, actually. Like I I agree, like there’s sometimes where I’ve seen some um some colleagues who’ve been really successful in the UK, yeah, um, but they’re Australian-based, and then they, you know, there’s certain networks they try and get on in Australia, and it’s like nut, but the UK said yes. And I think, yeah, there’s just different processes and approaches, I think, to to yeah, how we go about it in Australia. We’re very very red tape over here.

Colby: 35:56

I yeah, and also though, I think I just think that whatever’s exotic, you you know, we’re drawn to what’s exotic. So I I I can’t I I feel conflicted when I hear that someone is coming from overseas and they’re rolling out something in my local jurisdiction that I could do, I’m conflicted because I’d like to be doing it in my own local jurisdiction. One, but I also know if I went to their jurisdiction, they would probably find me more attractive in a sense, in an exotic, you know, from overseas sense than than that person that’s come to my jurisdiction. And certainly I find that in Ireland and the UK, and especially in Ireland, um, you know, some of the most validating work I’ve done has been the overseas work because yeah, I think there’s that that bit that goes through it. Anyway, I think I think we digress. What I was going to say is also like I think it’s really important to just ignore. I think part of what’s helpful for someone like me to engage uh teaching staff in a school is to first acknowledge the limitations of my experience. So I’ll I’ll often say, look, I I’m not a teacher, I didn’t train as a teacher, I have never, it’s not true that I’ve never ever taught a class in a school, because I have. I’ve been invited into my my son’s school to in their psychology, year 11 psychology, but for a little bit. But basically, I’ve never taught I’ve never taught in a school, I’ve never worked in a school. That’s also not quite true. But anyway, my point is I’ve I’m not, I haven’t lived and breathed what you have.

Megan: 37:42

Yeah, but you you bring up extra knowledge as well, though, that like that’s the thing. So we can learn from so many different people from so many different angles as well. Um, and I’m sure there’ll be teachers sitting in your training that will like that light bulb moments will be taken. And as long as like part of the message or just one practice is taken, then you’ve made a big difference as well.

Colby: 38:01

Yeah, so well, thank you for saying that. What I what I do say is that I know the children very well.

Megan: 38:07

Yeah, absolutely.

Colby: 38:08

Because I’ve been working with them therapeutically for 30 years, yeah. That’s my primary work, and um yeah, and but I still, you know, it’s still I guess we all would get the people that we meaningfully engage, and then there’s the ones that um yeah, that it it would be harder to achieve that.

Megan: 38:28

Yeah. Well, I’m curious, Colby. What’s your main message to teachers? If you can like I’m I’m now firing questions back to you, but I’m just curious what’s this is my podcast. But what’s your main message if you can sum it up like briefly to teachers, you know?

Colby: 38:43

I thank you, because um I love to talk on my own podcast. Um it’s interesting. I what you said about um you’re always you’re already doing things that will help, it really resonates with me, and really I’m a I often say I’m a simple man with a simple message. My I think that um change changing your approach. So if I’m talking to foster parents or kinship carers or or residential childcare workers or social workers, you know, any of those audiences that I might speak to, teachers, it’s very hard for them to change their habitual approaches to the work. And in fact, their habitual approaches to relationship and relational connection and how we how people approach their roles. And in action, there’s a there’s a statistical phenomenon called regression to the mean, and I sometimes talk about it in this term, which is which basically means that people you can get some people to mobilize a bit of extra effort to change a behavior. The most likely outcome, though, in any behaviour change process is that people will end up back to where they started slowly, they’ll make a change and then they’ll slowly tail back to where they started. And so the message of that for me has always been well, you’ve got to work with where people start. What do they already know and do that helps? So my message uh can be summed up in the acron several acronyms, but the one that people seem to like the most at the moment is aura, where I’m not talking about aura in a well, it is a metaphysical sense, but not the new age sense. That an aura is is def is defined as the felt quality, uh, the person’s experience, one person’s experience of another person or a place, how it how it feels to them. And it it’s also really I I actually came, sorry, now I’m on the I feel like I’m on the Wagtail podcast, but um I came up with this. I was laying in bed one morning and I was just thinking about the concepts that I routinely think about in this space, and and and it dawned on me that you could put them under this aura acronym. Accessible, understanding, responsive, and attuned. Um paying attention to children, teachers do that. Yeah. They know and part of being accessible is noticing or anticipating that a child may be having difficulty and getting in before the child does anything to um to secure attention or get out of what they’re doing. Uh, understanding means just you know acknowledging the child’s experience in our words, in our actions, and in our expressed emotions, our actions, responsiveness, it can be um uh turning our mind to what a child needs from us at this time and just and and offering it proactively. With children and young people who are recovering from a tough start to life, proactive is much better than reactive if because because they feel often feel like they have to control and regulate adults. Your cut through that is that you do things proactively so that they have a different experience. So it’s not you only did that because I did something to make you make it so, rather, it’s um oh, you noticed that I needed that from you. And the last one uh the A in aura is attuned, which is about empathic acknowledgement, really. Just you know, not don’t try and um present an entirely different uh affective presentation to that of the child. The reality is we all have instinctive empathy, well, just about all of us do. Um and so when if a child’s upset, we’re likely to be upset. If a child is happy, we’re like to be we’re likely to be happy. We don’t have to suppress our emotions. What we do though is we we show a bit and then we regulate back to a karma space, and children will follow that. So the that that is a very and these are all very natural parts of of um relationship building and caregiving, being accessible, being understanding and not uh responding and being attuned. We all do it. We do it we do it when the kids are younger, especially we do it for babies. Yeah, and then as babies grow up, they go we say use your words, yeah, and we start to we we we start to be less proactive and more reactive, and it’s part of just socializing our children in the ways of the world. But traumatized children, hate using that term, but children have experienced trauma in the home, their uh their their uh development is start often start way back. Or they’ve got this kind of Frankenstein development in a sense where there’s all these holes in it. You know, they they’ve never that for example, they’ve never had um consistently enough, often enough, the experience of being in the mind of an adult. You know, that they’ve never had um the experience that adults come when needed, that you can tolerate being separated from them because you know that they exist and that they will come when needed. There’s all sorts of ways in which early family trauma and neglect is part of that, impact development, and so they end up with this kind of weird hybrid level development that I think just start at the beginning basics, which is I think consistent with what you’re saying. Start at the basics, yeah, and progress and see how you go from there. And I I think you get along, you go a long way, easier for the staff, and the kids are less reactive to it because it’s all it children who go all children have experienced some level of care, they haven’t been raised by dogs or whatever. Well, you know, that maybe um dogs make I don’t dogs don’t make good parents for children, they make good parents for dogs, but and good companions, but not necessarily parents. Yeah, that’s right. So I I mean, if you start at the basics, they’re not unfamiliar to children.

Megan: 45:28

Yeah, yeah.

Colby: 45:30

If they’re unfamiliar, if someone tell comes in and says you’ve got to do this suite of really, you know, newfangled, sophisticated things, one teachers or f teachers, foster parents, kinship care, anyone will find it hard to implement and sustain over time. And the problem with it not sustaining over time is inconsistency. Inconsistency just rolls the kids up.

Megan: 45:54

Yeah.

Colby: 45:54

So if you start doing something, then you give it up, they’ll they they don’t know what to expect of you. The other thing is that the kids don’t like change, they’re reactive to it. So the teachers go, that this idiot Colby Pierce, he told me to do this, and then we, you know, and then we had to evacuate the classroom as you know when chairs started flying and whatever, it’s just too much. It’s too much. So dose is important. Okay. So maybe we should release this podcast under both Wagtail and Secure Start.

Megan: 46:32

Brilliant answer though. And I like a lot of what you were sharing, like I often say to teachers is um we don’t know what experiences these young people have had over the weekend or that morning before they come into our classroom. But we know what experiences we can give them before they leave for the day. And if we do that every single day, so if we’re just having a couple of positive interactions, we’re saying their name, we’re greeting them in the morning, where you know, we’re pretty consistent in the way we’re supporting them when they’re having a challenge. We’re actually helping to send those messages to them that adults can be safe. Because here’s an adult doing it five days a week, week after week. And over the course of a year, you’ve actually sent some pretty strong messages to that young person that’s going to change their perspective and their experience of adults.

Colby: 47:16

And I think, yes, uh, look, there’s there’s so much going through my mind, and I don’t want to go off onto a long, uh, a long answer, but um I recently had um Ben Perks on the podcast. Now he’s the global head of policy and advocacy and child protection at UNICEF. And he he’s written uh his book is fantastic. It’s just a cracking read. I love it. And but one of the things he he grew up in children, he was relinquished by his parent or parents and grew up in children’s homes in pretty kind of the it sound without going into a lot of detail, it sounds like you know, some of the worst experiences of being in children’s homes that young people can have. And he’s got a you know, he’s got a a massive global role now in UNICEF. Yeah, he’s he’s had a spectacular career from kind of like children’s home, young offender, delinquent kind of uh thing to to here. And anyway, the the the punchline in this story is it started with a teacher. And and and I I think it star it it does start with one adult who just stops and um thinks thinks about this child, holds space for them, keeps them in mind, responds to them proactively. And now and if you can get a whole school focused on this is how we’re going to be with any child we interact with in the school, simple basic things, acknowledging, empathic acknowledgement of their experience, uh responding to their needs proactively before they have to ask. That that that has great power and and you need it because often parental in child protection out of home care, too often um the relationship with birth family is is fra which is fractured is not repaired.

Megan: 49:24

Yeah.

Colby: 49:25

So you need lots of good relational experience for young people to compensate.

Megan: 49:33

Yeah, I heard someone refer to it actually as needing a like a patchwork quilt where we’re all adding a patch to the quilt. And that that’s what a young person who’s had a fractured home life and has lost that sense of the birth family. It’s a patchwork quilt approach where they need multiple people adding to it.

Colby: 49:51

Yeah, yeah. You’ve said a little bit about what you recommend. I’ve I’ve said a lot, too much. Some people will say, we come on and listen to this podcast, Colby, to listen to your guests, not to you. Uh, I know so I can already anticipate one particular person who uh uh regularly I regularly speak to about this podcast, who’s gonna say, Colby, won’t you just, you know, not but you did ask the question.

Megan: 50:17

I did ask the question.

Colby: 50:19

Yeah. Do you is there I wonder if there’s anything else that you think it would be important to say in the as part of this conversation about how we make schools places of healing as well as learning?

Megan: 50:33

Yeah, it’s such an interesting one. I feel like the education system likes to do a bit of a pendulum kind of swing where we focus on one thing and then something else. Um, and I feel like about 10-15 years ago, we’re getting really good at going well-being’s really important, and now we’re pendulum swimming back the other way and going, let’s do rote learning again, and science of learning is the main focus. And it’s like they both coexist, they both have to be there. Um, so I think just giving teachers a chance to hold both, and the priorities don’t have to keep swinging from one to the other. But the most important thing I think I will say is we need to change the discourse around teacher well-being to start, and here we go again about it. But ultimately, it’s hard work, like teachers are, you know, it’s a challenging job. And here we are talking about trauma-impacted young people coming into their classrooms as well. And so I think we actually need to be proactive around thinking about teacher well-being. And there was some research that came out, I think it was in May, from um Adam Fraser and a couple of other people at Deacon around secondary traumatic stress being really high in educators. Um, and so, you know, like we need to acknowledge that and say this is real, this is part of what teachers are facing. So let’s plan for that. Let’s not just assume that that’s not going to happen to the teachers in our school. The stats are showing it’s happening to the teachers in your school. Um, so let’s like acknowledge that that’s a real thing and plan for that. And let’s actually look at how the industry could have more effective debriefing, more effective, you know, peer support circles, like we’ve spoken about. Um, you know, supervision would be a dream for educators. And but I don’t want to plant seeds that can’t be watered or grown in any way. But I know principals, some principals have access to that, and some alternative schools have been implementing supervision. So just making sure we’re actually putting supports in place and then we’re training teachers effectively to actually navigate trauma-informed practice in their classrooms, they’re going to feel a lot better for it. So I think that that’s the starting point, really.

Colby: 52:33

Yeah, it’s hard, it’s hard to get across that uh kind of like a primary prevention method uh message, isn’t it? Where, you know, so one thing, you know, there’s a number of things that came up in in what you were saying, but one thing is that if if let’s say if you want to focus on learning outcomes, you need to acknowledge that children learn best when their central nervous system is regulated and they learn best from people that they feel connect relational connection to. Correct. And so some children some children resist relational connection, and uh so we need to find ways to connect with them. And and I also so that’s you know, with learning outcomes, I also want just wonder about the the cost to society of teacher burnout. And even if not teacher burnout, see again I come back to Ben Perks and his book, and he t he tells lots of stories about parents and and children, some of which are factual and others are um uh fictional, but but making a point. But you one of the kind of things that gives you chills when you think about it is you’ve got a teacher who’s burnt out at work but is a parent themselves. Like that’s it, there’s social costs in all of these things, and they don’t necessarily uh fall nice and neatly into all the buckets that that that you know that the government has, and this is the education bucket, and but if you if you burn out teachers or you know, or burn out child protection workers notwithstanding the their their best uh endeavors, you you create a scenario where they’re not at their best in all walks of their life.

Megan: 54:29

Yeah, yeah. And this is what we ignore sometimes too, is just like how trauma is actually we’re very interconnected. And like the way our systems and our society is structured and set up is actually, you know, perpetrating trauma into our society as well. And we have parents who are quite isolated while they’re trying to parent because our structure of society is all this independence and you know, managing the full-time job and then managing the household at the end of the day. And you know, people are actually, yeah, quite isolated a lot of the time too.

Colby: 55:05

Yeah. Only we can change the world.

Megan: 55:10

I know, but we can bit by bit, we can change, you know, maybe just the experience for one child at a time, and that’s changing their world at least.

Colby: 55:18

Well, this is um well, a point that I would make further to that is that if you can change that child’s world, you can you you have uh there’s a strong possibility that you’ll change the the the life and experiences of a life partner, of their children, and of their grandchildren. So that it by intervening there’s that there’s a social capital. I had an earlier guest who was very interested in social capital, uh, Graham Carrige, um, another good podcast to listen to. But he, yeah, the what came out for me out of that conversation was just that that ongo, you know, that ongoing benefit to society. And then on the flip side is that if you don’t if we don’t do anything about this. I was only thinking about it this morning, actually, that with child protection systems is that each child who comes in to child and and and grows up in in child protection system in a child protection system and out of home care system. How many child and and if nothing therapeutic, if they’re if their life course is not um changed and you we’ve got that intra intra intergenerational transmission, that it’s a big problem. Then child protection will never shrink as a problem because they’ll have uh multiple children, likely they’ve all gonna have similar histories, and it and it just it’s like a snowball, it just gets bigger and bigger. And I do, I personally do think that school it’s been very difficult for me over the years at times to to get the message across, but school is is after the home environment is is is the place where children get the biggest dose of relational connection, not just with teachers but with other kids as well. The the original notion of the takes a village included the children in it. We’ve kind of uh truncated a bit to say a village of adults, but it was a village in the true sense with with children as well, and that’s got implications, I think, for you talked about belonging earlier. Um, it’s got implications in terms of how we manage children’s behaviour, you know, what are the consequences and how do we foster belonging in a system that excludes children for misbehaviour?

Megan: 57:53

Yep, absolutely. That’s exactly why I dived into that area in my masters, really. Wanted to prove a bit of a point that, yeah, just that sense of belonging can be a life changer. And it’s the same when we look at out-of-home care as well, when young people are moved from home to home, house to house, when we have what would call placement breakdown. I hate the word placement as well. Um, but just the impact of that, if we’ve got children moving from home to home and then school to school or excluded from school altogether, well, the impacts are actually, yeah, really, really awful.

Colby: 58:24

Some would say they’re the worst, they’re among the worst things we can do to children. Placement or, you know, homesetting breakdowns, family, yeah, over and over and over. Yeah. And and you could equally, not equally, but you could similarly apply that to school.

Megan: 58:42

Yeah.

Colby: 58:42

I remember um um my father my father was expelled from school. Um many, you know, back he’s not alive anymore, but many, many um decades ago, in the atten, for the the teacher threw a chalk duster at him and he threw it back at the teacher and he was expelled. So this is back in the 1950s, late 1950s. Yeah, and that that never left him. That that was like an attachment injury. He he yeah, he ne he was he was always highly sensitive about that.

Megan: 59:20

Mm-hmm. Yeah, and what an awful experience too, and it just really highlights that dangerous power dynamic that was very strong in the 50s, but can still play out today, where the teacher had the power and was okay it was okay for them to throw something at the at the child, um, but then the child does something that we don’t like, and it’s you know, that power imbalance is huge.

Colby: 59:40

Yeah, yeah. Um Richard Rollinson, he he ran uh and has continued to be a significant figure in the mulberry bush, the uh therapeutic community in the in the UK.

Megan: 59:54

Yep.

Colby: 59:54

Um, he says he talks about how the schools help children. helps children to live with themselves and to live with others.

Megan: 1:00:06

I like that line.

Colby: 1:00:07

And yeah, I like it too. And he um and he talks about the power of we. We don’t this is not something that we do here. You know what we do is this. This is how we treat other people. We we where whereas so there’s that always that sense of in our language of community.

Megan: 1:00:31

Yeah. Yeah. And what’s okay for young people is okay for adults and what’s you know what I mean? Like it’s we have these like sort of unfair expectations sometimes of young people that we think the adults are immune to and it’s like no in a re in a true community we just have values and we operate by those values. And that’s everyone.

Colby: 1:00:51

And although it’s a very powerful way to intervene what we want is people to be we we want people to be motivated to can to um follow the the the norms of the of the group rather than to be fearful of of um exclusion from the group. That’s always there. That’s always a bit of a but you want the predominant thing to be you know I want to I want to stay part of this group. I want to be motivated I’m motivated to be part of this group. Yeah. Yeah. Any final things that you’d like to points you’d like to make about um this discussion or the or the work that you do?

Megan: 1:01:38

Yeah really good question. I think um I mean we’ve covered so much today but just if there is anyone listening that is doing this work it’s I think we’ve planted a few good seeds that like it is such important and beautiful work um and that you are you know making a difference in young people’s lives. So just make sure that you do have those um support systems in place and just thinking about you know the way that we’re showing up and how we’re looked after in the work as well and just so we can sustain ourselves to do it long term would be the main thing I think. Yeah great terrific well thank you Megan for being on the secure start slash wagon thank you so much Colby honestly it’s such a privilege to be invited and honestly yeah sorry for firing questions back you as I said I like to learn from people as well so I was picking your brain I think that I think the most uh uh telling thing was that that you only asked one after my response yeah there were no more well thanks again thank you might speak to another time sounds good

The Science of Prevention: How We Can End Child Maltreatment, with Benjamin Perks

The Importance of Attachment and the Science of Prevention in Child Development

In a recent podcast episode, Benjamin Perks, Head of Campaigns and Advocacy at UNICEF, shared profound insights about child development, attachment theory, and the global effort to end child maltreatment. His personal journey from growing up in residential care to becoming a leader in child protection provides a powerful narrative that underscores the importance of positive relationships in childhood development.

Ben emphasizes the concept of the “Four S’s” – secure, safe, seen, and soothed – as essential elements that every child needs to flourish. When children receive these four elements from their family, they develop resilience that protects them from adverse experiences in other environments. When family support is lacking, schools become the critical secondary buffer. The ideal situation, according to Ben, is having all three systems – family, school, and community – committed to ensuring every child experiences these four essential elements. What makes this particularly significant is that we are the first generation in history with the knowledge and resources to ensure universal access to these developmental necessities.

The podcast highlights the alarming prevalence of Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) and their long-term impact. According to the Center for Disease Control in the United States, each adverse childhood experience significantly increases the risk of negative outcomes across 40 different well-being indicators, from addiction to poor mental health to involvement in crime. This intergenerational cycle of trauma creates what Ben refers to as “relational poverty” – the inability to form healthy relationships due to lack of early relational skills development. This pattern is observable not just in humans but across species, where similar patterns of attachment and development have been documented.

One of the most compelling arguments Ben presents is that child maltreatment can be ended through a public health approach similar to how child mortality was dramatically reduced globally. In the 1980s, when 14-15 million children died annually from preventable diseases, a targeted approach implementing four simple interventions (vaccinations, oral rehydration salts, growth monitoring, and breastfeeding promotion) reduced child mortality by 61% over a decade. Ben proposes that with similar determination and a few key interventions, we could achieve comparable results in reducing child maltreatment.

These key interventions include universal access to evidence-based parenting programs, extended parental leave, universal preschool from age three, and widespread public education about child development and trauma. According to the UN Special Representative on violence against children, while child maltreatment costs societies up to 12% of GDP through various social costs, implementing these preventative measures would cost less than 1% of GDP – making it not just a moral imperative but an economic one as well.

The podcast also explores the complex nature of intergenerational trauma, including collective trauma experienced by communities that have faced historical oppression. As Resmaa Menakem notes, people maladapt to contexts that are passed through generations; the context is forgotten, but the adaptations become culture. This perspective helps explain how trauma patterns persist in communities long after the original traumatic conditions have changed.

Ben’s’ own healing journey demonstrates that recovery is possible at any age. After recognizing the impact of his childhood experiences on his adult life, he underwent therapy that transformed his world “from black and white to color.” This personal transformation enabled him to break the cycle of insecure attachment with his own son, demonstrating that with appropriate intervention, intergenerational patterns can be disrupted. His book, “Trauma Proof: Healing, Attachment and the Science of Prevention,” combines scientific research with personal narratives of healing from around the world, offering both inspiration and practical approaches to addressing childhood trauma.

You can listen to the podcast here:

You can watch here:

About Ben:

Benjamin Perks is the Head of Campaigns and Advocacy in the Division of Global Communications and Advocacy at the United Nations Children’s Fund, based in New York. He leads public and policy advocacy on the development and protection of children. He previously served in human rights diplomacy roles as the UNICEF Representative and UN Resident Coordinator ad interim to both the Republic of North Macedonia and the Republic of Montenegro. In both capacities he advocated for reforms to fulfil international human rights commitments and realization of the Sustainable Development Goals. He has served in Georgia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, India and Albania. He coordinated the Back-to-School campaign in the Northern Afghanistan which brought 3 million children, including 1 million girls, into school-most of them for the first times in their lives. He has led work on demobilization of child solders, deinstitutionalization of children in state care, addressing child poverty, pre-school expansion and disability inclusion.

Related Podcast Episodes:

Professor Julie Taylor:

Listen here:

Watch here:

Transcript:

Colby: 0:01

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast.

Ben: 0:04

This teacher took me under her wing and made a connection with me, and I say in the book that she’s the first adult that I think I really had a proper conversation with. If you grew up without family, your relational skill you have relational poverty. Your relational skills are poor often. Poverty, relational skills are poor often. So family is the primary buffer in that, when family is not able to provide that buffer, school is the next best option.

Ben: 0:34

And what’s really important in relation to my work is that we got the first generation history that can ensure that every parent is able to give the child the four S’s and that every school is able to do that too. But we now know that with three or four, similarly, with three or four simple interventions, we could dramatically reduce child trauma, child maltreatment, risk of trauma. I also think that child maltreatment is something that drives a number of social costs. According to the special representative of the Secretary General of the UN on violence against children, he says it costs us up to 12% of GDP, but the interventions I’m suggesting we make globally available will be less than 1% of GDP. We must be the last generation to see violence against children, maltreatment and trauma as being insurmountable social problems.

Colby: 1:33

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast. I’m Colby Pearce, and my guest for this episode is a global leader in child development and protection. Before I introduce my guests, I’d just like to acknowledge the Ngarrindjeri people of the Lower Murray Lakes and Coorong, on whose land that I’m coming to this podcast from, and I’d like to acknowledge the continuing connection the living Ngarrindjeri people feel to land, waters, culture and community. I’d also like to pay my respects to their elders, past, present and emerging. My guest this episode is Benjamin Perks, benjamin Perks.

Colby: 2:28

Ben is Head of Campaigns and Advocacy in the Division of Global Communication and Advocacy at the United Nations Children Fund, based in New York. He leads public and policy advocacy on the development and protection of children. Ben previously served in human rights diplomacy roles as the UNICEF representative and UN resident coordinator at interim to both the Republic of North Macedonia and the Republic of Montenegro. In both capacities he advocated for reforms to fulfil international human rights commitments and realisation of the Sustainable Development Goals. Ben has served in Georgia, kosovo, afghanistan, india and Albania. He coordinated the Back to School campaign in northern Afghanistan, which brought three million children, including 1 million girls, into school, most of them for the first time in their lives. He has led work on demobilisation of child soldiers, deinstitutionalisation of children in state care, addressing child poverty, addressing child poverty, preschool expansion and disability inclusion.

Colby: 3:47

Ben is Senior Fellow at the Jubilee Centre at the University of Birmingham in the UK, which researches education policy on character, social and emotional development of children, and he is an Associate Faculty Member at Oxford University Department of Social Policy and Innovation. Ben is recognised as a public speaker and campaigner on child development and protection. His book Trauma Proof Healing, attachment and the Science of Prevention is out now.

Ben: 4:22

Welcome, ben. Thank you very much, colby. It’s great to be with you, connecting from New York to you in Australia. I’m very glad to be on your podcast.

Colby: 4:34

Yeah, thank you, owen. Thank you very much for agreeing to be on, and I was just wondering and I give all my guests this opportunity is there anything that you’d like to add to that bio of your work?Ben: 4:48

yeah, a couple of other things. I I lead globally for the un on international day of play, which is a new ua, the outcome of a new un resolution, and obviously play is central to child development and child protection. So I’ll be talking about that, I guess, a little bit in the conversation today. But also just to add that everything I talk about today and everything that I’ve written in my book is in a personal capacity. I’m not speaking on behalf of the UN or UNICEF or anybody apart from myself today, so I just wanted to to be clear on that as well. Yeah, excellent.

Colby: 5:23

Terrific. So, ben, tell us how you got into this work that you’re, this really important work that you’re doing and have done across your career.

Ben: 5:34

I think there are three kind of major turning points. I think the first one is that I was in. I grew up the second half of my childhood in residential care in children’s homes. I was in. I grew up the second half of my childhood in residential care in children’s homes. I was in Birmingham and in London. I lived a lot on the streets, I ran away a lot, I was involved with gangs and other kinds of kinds of activities. And then suddenly at 16, I had the opportunity to become an activist in London for the rights of young people in care. And that’s my first job, my first serious job at the age of 16, a full-time activist. Um, so, so that was how I became a campaigner. That’s how a campaigner was born, I think.

Ben: 6:15

And then, secondly, a few years later, when I was at university, it was very rare for somebody from a children’s home to go to university in the UK. Uh, in those days it’s still quite rare, but it’s uh, the prospects are a little bit better now than they were back in my day. But I was really passionate at university about Martin Luther King and the civil rights movement and Gandhi. I read endlessly about their work to change the situation of segregation and structural racism in the United States. Also the effort of Gandhi to build a movement against colonialism, the passive resistance and all of this very well-disciplined campaign work, and that made me really think that I want to dedicate my life to real change, not performative work but real change that delivers outcomes. And one of my heroes in the civil rights history of the United States was a guy called Ralph Bunch who was a big figure, an African-American guy who became a big figure in the early days of the United Nations and he became kind of a hero to me and I then thought about a career in the UN.

Ben: 7:29

So at the end of my first year at university I somehow managed to organise to go to Croatia and there was a middle of a conflict Croatia and Bosnia and Croatia. I somehow went on the bus to Croatia and kind of talked my way in to a role, a temporary role, in UNICEF, and took a year out and worked on that and I was hooked. So I I had very much of like a bog standard UNICEF kind of career. I I did very well I, when I finished my master’s degree a few years later I went back to the organization and, you know, worked my way up towards being a head of office and all of that.

Ben: 8:12

But finally when, when I became a head of office, you know, in a formal diplomatic UN role I was at a meeting where there was a conversation about deinstitutionalization and somebody was talking about attachment research and I heard it for the first time. I was sitting there and I realized the guy who was talking, the professor, was talking about the outcome, the adult outcomes, of insecure attachment in childhood relationships. All of that and I saw myself in everything that he was saying. So I went into a period of therapy for a year and then I became a passionate campaigner on issues like child trauma, attachment, and that’s the journey that brought me to write the book and that added another very personal stream of work to the work I’d already been doing on children’s rights. Very long-winded answer, but those three points were crucial in bringing me to where I am now.

Colby: 9:13

Yeah, that’s awesome and I also am a little bit interested in attachment as well and written a bit about it. But do you remember the name of the fellow who who, um, first introduced you to attachment?

Ben: 9:28

but that’s yes, you know, I’m getting to an age where I think that I forget things, so it’s uh, it’s uh, it’s professor from uh university of nottingham, and it will come back to me during the course of the conversation and I’ll probably blurt it out when it comes back to me okay, awesome, so I’m just queuing your recall for that, perhaps at a later date.

Colby: 9:50

You’ve talked a bit about influences in terms of your circumstances and the roles that you’ve gotten into. Are there any people that really stand out for you as having played a role and been a big influence over your career development? And you’ve mentioned attachment. Maybe you can tell us why you think attachment is so important in your work as well so well in terms of, um, in terms of people that have influenced me.

Ben: 10:23

I write a lot in my book. My book tells lots of stories of different people, but I write a bit about my own as well, and one of the things that was transformative for me was I had a teacher when I was 15. I’d been thrown out of school. I had a best friend who’d been killed in a knife fight. I I had, uh, I was in a very tense inner city poverty care, you know situation, no parents or anything like that. But this teacher, um, somehow, in this, in his school for kids that have been kicked out of school, this teacher took me under under her wing and made a connection with me, and I say in the book that she’s the first adult that I think I really had a proper conversation with as a child.

Ben: 11:08

I was 15. And her name is Jan Report. And when I had this moment, when I listened to this professor from Nottingham giving this talk about attachment, at the end of it I went into this process of therapy. But I also tracked down my teacher in that process, because I wanted to go back and tell her what I’d done with my life and I would have done none of it without her. And so I went back and met her, having not seen her since childhood, and that was incredible. And now now every year when we go back to the UK, we go and see her. I took my son to meet her last year and so so that’s a really pivotal person.

Ben: 11:52

I also had a great social worker. At one point there was a good residential social worker in the children’s home. I had a couple of good friendships when I was young and also eventually also became kind of connected to a family that had reached out over some campaigning work that I was doing. I think that makes all the difference, because if you grow up in a without family, your relational skill you have relational poverty. Your relational skills are poor often and so you know, because you just don’t. It’s like a muscle. You have to grow relational skills and I hadn’t so many things that people learn in a family. I hadn’t really learned them.

Colby: 12:35

I grew up in a, in a survival mode, um, but somehow I managed to have these friendships and uh, attract this support and engagement, and I think all of it meant the world to me and I wouldn’t be here today without those people yeah, that’s an awesome story and it puts me in mind of two things the, the idea that comes from the one good adult research, that that all the child needs is one adult who believes in them, who’s’s there for them, who truly listens to them and helps them. And then there’s the other idea, which is that it takes a village. Now, I think both of those concepts they may be seen as being mutually exclusive, but I think that they sit comfortably alongside each other. The one helps the other, particularly the one good adult helps the other. I do think that when children grow up in adversity relational adversity the more good relationships they have, the better the outcomes.

Colby: 13:40

And I was speaking to someone relatively recently and apologies if you’re listening, and it was you and I can’t remember who it was, but he talked about that it takes a village. The construct at the very beginning was referring to, or at least meant to take into account, peer relationships, so that the important role of peers in children’s up, children growing up and and and I can see how that fits with with social learning theory, for example. So I guess, attachment theory what is it about attachment theory that has influenced your, your career since that introduction?

Ben: 14:24

I want to come back to what you were just saying about peers, community, trusted adult and then lead that into the conversation about attachment and how that influences my work. So I think that you know Dr Daniel Segal and Tina Penny Bryson have this brilliant expression of I think it comes from them the four A’s, sorry, the four S’s. So it’s to be secure, safe, seen and soothed. And the idea is that for children to flourish they need to have those four S’s. If a child has them at home with the family, that’s really important, particularly for early development, uh, early childhood development, to set that secure base and safe haven. We know that early experiences we don’t remember things that happened to us before the age of two, but they are disproportionately and massively influential on the way we see the world for the rest of our life and for the opportunities that we will have and the constraints that we will have.

Ben: 15:32

So that’s really important in the family.Ben: 15:34

But if a child is not safe, seen, soothed and secure in the family, then if they have the four S’s in school, that can help to some extent to heal and prevent them going on a trajectory that is driven by trauma and toxic stress and help them to build relationships and so on.

Ben: 15:58

That’s why the teacher was so important to me by reverse, if children are safe, seen, secure and suited at home and then they go to a rough school, that resilience that they get from the forest is at home will protect them from the trauma of the school or a war zone or a gang infested neighborhood. So family is the primary buffer um in that when family is not um able to provide that buffer, school is the next best option. Certainly it’s the community um. But the idea, the ideal world is you want to have all three of those things family, school, community, committed to, intentional about ensuring that every child is secure, safe, safe, seen and soothed. And what’s really important in relation to my work is that we are the first generation in history that can ensure that every parent is able to give the child, the four S’s, and that every school is able to do that too, and we know that that can be achieved for a fraction of what is lost by not doing it. That’s how it influences my work, yeah.

Colby: 17:12

Awesome. I understand from your work you have a powerful belief that we can end child maltreatment. Tell us a little bit more about why you think that to be the case.

Ben: 17:27

Let me tell you another story that brings me back to this. In 1980, and I talk about this in the book in 1980, in University of Birmingham in the UK, an American public health professional delivered a paper in which he argued that we could I think 14 or 15 million children die every year from preventable disease that if we could just do four things if we could vaccinate every child globally, if we could provide oral rehydration salts to treat diarrheal diseases which can be deadly, if we could monitor the growth of children and if we could promote breastfeeding, then we could dramatically reduce that. Unicef and WHO got hold of that paper and had a really complex internal conversation with many people against the idea, but some of them championed the idea of making this a reality. And over the next 10 years they mobilized a coalition of royals, of heads of state, of community organizations, of religious leaders all around the world and they increased vaccine coverage, for example, from 15% of the world’s children to around 85% of the world’s children and in the decade that followed, child mortality under five mortality reduced by 61%. Everybody thought they were crazy in the beginning. Everybody thought that this was insurmountable, but they did it. And if you look back on every single um global achievement, whether it’s a massive expansion of education, whether it’s massive expansion of availability to um, to to clean water, or prevention of child labor or child marriage. There has been a really audacious drive to do that.

Ben: 19:21

Um, child maltreatment is something that is a problem everywhere. It’s not just in the global south, it’s a problem everywhere. But we now know that with three or four, similarly, with three or four simple interventions, we could dramatically reduce child trauma, child maltreatment, risk of trauma, toxic stress, all of that. Things like universal access to evidence-based parenting programs, a minimum package of parenting programs that we now know, through systematic review, can improve child outcomes, reduce risk and maltreatment and even improve parental mental health outcomes. Secondly, parental leave making parental leave a universal norm, dramatically increasing parental leave, recognising it as a public good. Thirdly, ensuring that children from the age of three in preschool are in schools where they are safe and secure and seen and soothed.

Ben: 20:22

And fourthly, making people aware. If you think about it, people are aware of influenza or the common cold or how to manage a knee injury. Right, they know this stuff. It’s part of family conversation, it’s something that’s common knowledge. Really, child maltreatment, trauma and all of that is no more complex than the transmission of influenza. It’s not more complex. It is shrouded in taboo and stigma and shame and myth. But we can break all of those myths. We can break all of those constraints and make it something where everybody’s aware of the basics to underpin those changes.

Ben: 21:01

With those interventions, I believe we could dramatically reduce child maltreatment. I also think that child maltreatment is something that drives a number of social costs, right From addiction to poor mental health, to risk of being a perpetrator or victim of all kinds of violence, from gang violence to political violence to domestic violence. It puts us at risk of poor health and poor learning outcomes. And all of that, according to the special representative of the Secretary General of the UN on violence against children, says it costs us up to 12% of GDP, but the interventions that I’m suggesting we make globally available will be less than 1% of GDP. So we lose trillions by not addressing problems before they occur at scale, and that’s something I think we’re the first generation to be able to do that, and I think, because of that, we must be the last generation to see violence against children, maltreatment and trauma as being insurmountable social problems.

Colby: 22:09

Yeah, yeah, that’s terrific. While you were speaking there, my mind was going to what the universal parental education would look like, what the intervention into schools might look like. I wonder if you would comment on each of those things.

Ben: 22:39

Sure. So in terms of the parental parenting programs, they can be delivered in a number of ways In some countries because they already are available in about 25% of countries targeted not universal Right and what? The most common format is a home visit. That home visit often it’s bundled with a health visit, and so a home visitor comes and talks to you about health things like vaccines and nutrition, but also talks to you about play, engagement, positive discipline and all of that, and often a minimum package of that. A few visits in early childhood and then, like booster sessions, critical milestones like before adolescence can make all the difference. You know as an attachment expert that Bowlby and Ainsworth said that when a parent is able to either process their own insecure attachment or come up with a strategy for parenting, they’re much less likely to transmit it. And who and oxford university and unicef and others have done a vast systematic review with um hundreds of random I think 460 randomized controlled trials all over the world and found that parenting programs really make a difference. So there should be a minimum package of visits, but then progressive, in the sense that those that need more support can get more visits. This can also be backed up by things like group sessions. In South Africa, for example, they have group sessions for parents, but also grandparents, to talk about how they can ensure the best outcomes for their children. Also, apps are beginning to show real breakthroughs. There are some apps. I think there’s an app in India that reaches 20 million people. Unicef has an app called Bebo. There are many different apps which are actually really helpful for parents who are trying to access evidence based information. So I think you can have an ecosystem that has all of these things, with quality control supported by organizations like UNICEF, who and others.

Ben: 25:11

In terms of parental leave, I think every country in the world should be having a very minimum WHO standard of six months for the birth parent and four months for the other parent, but it could be all foster parents as well, or adoptive parents. I think it should be much more. The Scandinavian countries are showing a really good model for that um. I think that’s really important. Then, having family-friendly workplaces attached to that is also a part of that, that package.

Ben: 25:29

And then schools really having um systems in place where teachers would create a system where where where children are seen and safe and secure, and where teachers are aware of trauma. They’re aware of the prevalence of trauma, because in an average classroom of 30 kids, half of the kids have experienced an adverse childhood experience, a risk factor for trauma and toxic stress. So you know, this idea from the past that you know it’s one or two kids in a class that are in touch with the social work system that are the really vulnerable kids is wrong, recognising that it is across the board and what we need to do is make sure that kids have a strong sense of belonging and uh, um and you know uh, connection with a teacher and, as you mentioned earlier, peers.

Colby: 26:28

the peers thing is really important in adolescence because, of course, in adolescence, it’s peer relationships that are the most important thing for children yeah, yeah, thank you, and um, have you had an opportunity to observe or otherwise get a sense of what the uptake of these measures might be across Western and non-Western countries, jurisdictions, western and non-Western?

Ben: 27:01

countries, jurisdictions. Yeah, I think there’s a lot of enthusiasm, very little resistance to parenting programs, which is interesting because a parenting program often is like going into the house, going into the home, but there’s a lot of hunger for parenting skills. You know, I think increasingly the world is talking about the fact that many of us grow up with intergenerational issues of trauma or or neglect at home. Um, and then even people that haven’t got that want to know what’s the best way of securing the best future for their kid. So I see a lot of um support and interest and very little resistance. I I speak to people that I interview, people in the book that are receiving parenting programmes, people that deliver them, for example, and there’s a lot of interest and I think it’s just a question of making it a normal thing, normal part of childhood, a normal part of parenting, the way that vaccines is or the way that schools are.

Colby: 28:02

Yeah, sometimes I talk about how birds don’t have bird parenting experts that teach them how to raise their birds, and neither do wolves or, you know, even the other great apes. So there is that view that parental advice and guidance is really not necessary, that we are meant to be the most sophisticated, uh, of at least of the great apes, if not of the whole entire animal kingdom, on this. How, why, why can’t, why do we need parenting experts? We, we’ve, you know, we’ve been parented ourselves. We’ve learned from the things that our parents do well and the things that our parents don’t do so well. Um, and we, we must have a, an inbred instinct, just like other members of the animal kingdom. Do what? What would you say to that?

Ben: 29:14

well, they do research on rats I think it’s. My community does research on rats and what they do is they see the same patterns of poor attachment in other animals and they see that those that are licked and groomed by their parent have much better outcomes, are much more likely to go out into the world and be a success by rat standards, right, and so it’s the same as humans. You know it’s the same as humans. We know that humans that don’t grow up with a strong sense of being safe and loved are more likely to have poorer interpersonal relationships, are more likely to do poorly in school, to be addicted, to have all of these problems.

Ben: 30:03

You know the Center for Disease Control in the United States, the major public health institution, has an index of 40 different well-being indicators, from suicide to osteoporosis to addiction, everything, everything, and there’s almost a step increase every risk of negative outcome for every adverse childhood experience a person has had. So somebody that has been suffered emotional neglect emotional via verbal violence, for example, and physical violence and witness domestic violence, for example these are four things quite common, all of them very common is multiple times more likely to have a poor outcome across all of those 40 well-being indicators. So that’s why really I think we do have an instinct, that’s why really I think we do have an instinct, but for maybe at least 40% of us, that instinct is driven by intergenerational trauma, toxic stress, neglect and violence.

Colby: 31:18

And we, now that we know because we didn’t know throughout history, now that we we know, we should be able to stop that cycle and make people you know, ensure that people can flourish yeah, it put me in mind of when you were talking about the rats, because when I’m delivering training, I’ll uh, I will talk also about another group of rats, the rats that were in skinner’s operant conditioning experiments. And people go oh, aren’t you supposed to be an attachment person rather than a behavioural person, when, in actual fact, there should be a lot. In my view, and this is what Bowlby did there should be a lot more cross-fertilisation of ideas and theories and knowledge, rather than siloing of ideas and theories and knowledge, rather than siloing Skinner with his rat experiments and the operant conditioning paradigm. It was really quite interesting because, though he didn’t go down that path at least not that I’m aware of there is a group of rats and pigeons in his research that are very much like our children, who’ve experienced grossly inadequate care, and they’re the rats and pigeons who are in an inconsistent reinforcement paradigm. They got their needs met inconsistently in response to a gesture, and the gesture was to either peck a button or push down on a lever, and the operant conditionings paradigm teaches us a lot about learning and adjustment in those circumstances. So and I also, while you were talking, I was thinking about a conversation I had with a previous guest. It may actually have been a YouTube video, I’m not sure which.

Colby: 33:07

But talking about these now, I’m hoping I’m not going to butcher it, but I think they were mosquitoes. You can put mosquitoes into a jar and they try to get out of the jar. You put all these, but if you, and if you so, they kind of go up and down in the jar. Now, if you put some clear film halfway up the jar, that prevents them going all the way to the top and and getting out after a while, you can take the clear film away and they’ll never try and jump out of the jar. They just go up and down, and that’s really interesting, I guess, until and you think, well, you know, they’ve just learnt that that’s as high as they can go.

Colby: 33:58

Well, this is where it gets really interesting, which is that their offspring also only jump as high. So their offspring don’t go out of the, notwithstanding that there’s no longer a clear film to stop them from getting out. They only go as high as their parents do, and I think that’s. You’ve spoken a little bit about the cost of child maltreatment, but that seems to bear quite significantly. Uh as well. Uh, on that, that issue, that, um. You know, what are we transmitting down through the generations?

Ben: 34:39

the, the positive psychologists, I think, would describe what you’ve just described as learned helplessness, seligman would. That’s what happens. I think that happens often with communities already beaten down. Yeah, I think that. Yeah, I guess that it’s obvious now from psychology, from neuroscience, from population level data, that a lot of these things are intergenerational, that you know they are acquired characteristics from you know that are transmitted through the culture of families.

Ben: 35:28

And, of course, resmei Mannequin, who’s a leading scholar on mental health and race in the United States, says it really well. He says that you know that people respond. He’s talking often about racism and slavery in the United States, but people respond. He’s talking often about racism and slavery in the United States, but people respond they maladapt to a context that’s passed on through generations. The context is forgotten and it becomes the culture, and I think that’s something that is often seen in communities that have been oppressed and affected by collective trauma, if they don’t have the, the holocaust and slavery and also the situation of the native American Indians and the boarding schools, which would have a lot in common with um, with with the um, aboriginal, uh and Torres Strait Islander community in Australia I hope I’m saying that correctly in Australia, um, I think, I think there’s a there’s also. We think, as well as thinking about individual, um trauma, we also need to think about communal trauma.

Colby: 36:48

Yeah, yeah, and I think the the other thing that was, I guess. Well, the thing that was going through my mind as well in relation to the, the mosquito story is I is that we can’t do nothing If we do nothing. It just gets, as you say, transmitted, transmitted through the generations. But if we can but it might be too simplistic to say this but if you can change the course or the trajectory of one generation, then you end up with perhaps a multi-generational change of trajectory. So when you talk about we had the opportunity to end child maltreatment, and the impact of doing that and the importance of that endeavour really is not just for those children and young people who otherwise would have had quite an adverse experience growing up, but you’re changing the trajectory for their life partners, their children and their grandchildren. So yeah.

Ben: 38:06

So if you look at an issue like crime, if you go to most juvenile justice facilities, the young people that are involved in crime continuously, and serious crime, over 90% have four or more adverse childhood experiences.

Ben: 38:29

If you could, um prevent adverse childhood experiences before they occur, um, from what we can see, it would have a dramatic increase on propensity to commit crime, to be involved in violence, to take risk, because risk is related to the adolescent brain.

Ben: 38:49

You know it’s adolescent brain development, right? So you have. If you have this toxic combination of poor attachment and trauma in early childhood crashing against the really complex process of adolescent brain development, you have this really high risk and almost all children at very serious risk of being exploited or being involved in crime or violence are coming from those kind of backgrounds. If you speak to people that dealt with the Epstein case the girls that were targeted or if you look at radicalisation, or look at the kind of people that end up in far right groups or people that end up addicted or victims of grooming, almost exclusively coming from very high ace backgrounds, if you could eradicate most forms of adversity by ensuring that children have the four S’s in both the family and school and community early on, then you’re going to completely transform all of those risks across society, making society a much better place for the future and for future generations.

Colby: 40:08

Yes, yeah, and one of my earlier guests was Graeme Kerridge, who has had perhaps a not dissimilar career history, as you have, except in other organisations, but he was very interesting. We’ve had a number of people who have an economics background on this on this podcast, who, um, who moved into the, this social care, uh, into the social care arena and but anyway he, graham carriage, was very interested in human capital as part of his economic background and again, this really ties in with what we’re talking about. This idea of human capital is the human capital gains of reducing or eliminating the prevalence of adverse childhood experiences is significant. Yeah, yeah, you’ve mentioned your book. Well, I mentioned it first, but then you mentioned your book a few times Trauma proof, and let me read the healing attachment and the science of prevention. And let me read the Healing Attachment and the Science of Prevention.

Colby: 41:33

I think I’ve butchered it every single time. I’ve tried to say it. But tell us about your book. Tell us. You’ve mentioned stories. I’m getting really excited about reading it now. So there you go. I haven’t read it yet, but I only just recently learned that it was already out, so I’m looking forward to it. But tell us a bit about your book and who you think it would be of most interest and usefulness to.

Ben: 42:07

Well, the first thing is I probably need a new title if it doesn’t slip off the tongue so easily, because it won’t get that kind of contagion, don’t worry about it.

Colby: 42:18

It’s not unusual for me to struggle with verbal fluency. It’s pretty, it’s a bit embarrassing being both verbose and not particularly verbally fluent.

Ben: 42:34

Oh, you’re doing fine, yeah. So I wanted to write a book that would present this argument that you could end child maltreatment, and you bring all the data together, the economics of it and all of that and all the science. So I talk about the history of attachment theory and, and, uh, the evolution of aces and our understanding of toxic stress, um, some of the economic arguments about return on investment. That comes from james james heckman at university of chicago. Loads and loads of science, but I also do lots of storytelling. Um, when I went to the agent and the publisher and said I want to do a book about how you end child maltreatment, they said that’s great, but you need to include something else as well, which is you’ve got something to say about how people heal, right, how you healed and how others heal. So it has to be about healing and prevention and attachment. So the book, in addition to putting forward the idea that we can end child maltreatment, it also argues the case that we can heal at any age. Almost everybody can go through some kind of healing process and, as a result of that um have a much better quality of life. So every chapter tells a story of somebody and the stories are from all over the world, um. So the first part of the book is really focused on kind of the, the, the, the prevalence of uh, child maltreatment, the parameters of it, what we know about it. The second part is really focused on parenting and talks about parenting programs and parental leave, but through stories. So, for example, the one on parental leave. I do a comparison between two different families, one in Alabama in the United States, where they have really harsh policies on parental leave, and one in Estonia where they have the most progressive policies in the world, and looks at what happened to the parents through both different processes. Then there’s a part about schools and community and crime. And then there’s a part about collective trauma, societal issues like myth and stigma and taboo. And the final part is really my call to action on what we should be doing about all of this. And it tells something of my own story as well.

Ben: 45:06

My own story about intergenerational the issue of healing and intergenerational trauma is kind of this you know, I lived most of my life as an outwardly successful person who was really not having um. You know the quality of life I would have because of the way that I felt inside, which is completely normal if you grow up without parents. You know, viol, the quality of life I would have because of the way that I felt inside, which is completely normal if you grow up without parents. You know Viola Davis says you grow up with this sense that you’re wrong Not that you’ve done something wrong, but that you are wrong and living with that inside me the whole time, while being outwardly successful and doing well and suppressing it. You know, it was something that I kind of thought was normal and then, when I realized that I lived with all of that trauma inside of me, um, I went through a transformation, through healing, uh, seeing a therapist and changing my life. It felt like the world went from black and white to color, and then when to colour. And then when I got married and we had our son, I held my son in my arms and I just instinctively knew or felt that what happened to me as a child was completely unimaginable to myself. The cycle had just broken. I got what you experts would call an insecure attachment, like I would walk to the end of the earth to protect, love, nurture my son. And that’s something that I thought very consciously of because I’d had to go through a lot of work to become, to become the kind of person that could instinctively feel that um.

Ben: 46:56

So that’s my healing journey, but I talk about lots of other people’s healing journeys as well. There’s a guy that was a gang member in Glasgow who was in prison and went through a process of change. There was a, a woman here from new york that was born into um to a crack affected family. Her parents died, which is very young, um, and she had a teacher that helped her and now she’s a big-time campaigner in washington dc for disadvantaged kids.

Ben: 47:23

All these amazing people, scottish member of parliament, um, who had post-natal depression, who talks publicly about it. All these different, amazing people. I got to interview them also on the Holocaust and slavery and other things, all of that. There’s a famous saying by the writer James Baldwin and I can’t quote it exactly, I’ll probably butt-tread. But you think your suffering and pain is personal, pervasive, pervasive, permanent, personal to you. But then you read dostoevsky or tolstoy and you realize that a couple of hundred years ago elsewhere in the world, people going through the same thing and like putting together these different stories of healing and trauma from all around the world, completely different cultures, but people going through broadly the same thing, I think was really cathartic for me and I think for the people I interviewed as well, and hopefully it’s uplifting for people that would read it.

Colby: 48:21

Awesome. Where can you get a copy most easily?

Ben: 48:26

Well, you know, it’s on uh. It’s on uh kindle audible audio and a hard copy. It’s available, I think, through most good bookshops where you are in australia. I get feedback from people that read in australia and in most places there is a different version in North America because there’s a different publisher. There’s a different audible audiobook in North America and the one in North America went through a second round of editing, came out a bit later, so it’s slightly different, but they’re probably the same thing. So it’s available everywhere, I think.

Colby: 49:07

I hope yeah, if it’s not, let me know you haven’t gone on done what I did. I mean, not long after my first book came out, I was on the internet to look where it was coming out and what people were saying about it.

Ben: 49:20

Yeah, yeah, I do do that. You know it generally had good reviews so far. This has been a very busy year in my regular job with the UN. You know the UN’s gone through a lot of changes and so I haven’t had as much time as I wish to promote it. But I’m going to be doing a bit more of that now. I hope it just came out at the beginning of this year. It came out in April in North America, so it’s relatively new, yeah, yeah terrific.

Colby: 49:51

It’s been awesome to have you on and have a chat to you, Ben, about your life and work. I’ve asked you a lot of questions. Is there anything you’d like to ask me before we wrap up?

Ben: 50:03

What do you think about? You’re an attachment expert. What do you think about the idea that we could be the first generation to end child maltreatment if we have a public health approach to it?

Colby: 50:18

I think, in considering my response, I think we live in slightly different worlds, and what I mean by that by saying that, is that I think where I live and work and I’m not talking about here in Adelaide, south Australia, I’m talking about the level of where I sit in terms of exposure to child maltreatment I think it can be really hard for people to think and believe or even consider that what we’re dealing with every day, what we’re seeing, what we’re immersed in, I would say, can be ended or at least significantly reduced in some way. I think we all believe that if that happened and that happened and that happened, you know we’ve all got ideas about how you could end it. I think the benefit of the argument that you’re making is that it’s a bit like the difference between thinking and metacognition. So thinking is just thinking, as we always do, the thoughts that come into our head, and those thoughts are very much linked to what’s happening, you know, to our experience of ourselves, of our surroundings, of our life, that our thoughts are very much linked to emotion. Metacognition is thinking, about thinking, and it’s that higher order thinking where we’re noticing what we’re thinking, where we’re noticing what we’re experiencing, and at that level, we are less emotionally attached to what we’re noticing as such, and this is the foundation of certain therapeutic traditions that exist now, the foundation of certain therapeutic traditions that that exist now. And so I think the benefit of what you are advocating and talking about is perhaps, um, you’ve had, you you’ve had direct personal experience and I think direct parent personal experiences is very important but you’re able, you, you’ve risen above in a way. You’ve risen above and been able to take that more, that meta view, um, and I think so, I think probably a lot of people in who work in it, in this, in those systems, I think if they had time to be able to go to a metacognitive place, to be able to, and maybe your book will help, maybe your book will be a source of tremendous comfort and inspiration for the workers on the ground.

Colby: 53:32

That’s who I’m really referring to and who I count myself one amongst, is the workers on the ground. I think the book, as you describe it, perhaps will present some hope that there are things that can be done at a systems level or a government level, a country level, an international level, that can make a meaningful impact on child protection. So that’s how I would say it is that I think. I think it’s. It’s probably hard for the people at the coalface to, but uh, but necessary for them to feel like something can be done, because when you’re at the coalface you just think, oh, it’s very hard, yeah that’s a brilliant point.

Ben: 54:31

I gave a talk recently at oxford and do a lot of practitioners there and I was describing this public health approach that I’m promoting. They said, well, what about the family that doesn’t respond to parenting? Or what about this? You know this or that, and they won’t get it? And I think it’s not.

Ben: 54:49

I think what you’re doing with the public health approach is a long-term process. Yes, right, like you, you started off in like 1980 where people thought it was normal, insurmountable, that millions of children died and then, gradually, as pieces were built on the audacity of saying that we can end this, there was a whole system, a public health system in place. Uh, that could protect you, I think. I think it’s like that. I think that you’re, you’re gonna, you know you’re gonna have, with a kind of really public health approach, you can have improvements across the board over time, but you’re always going to have those hard to reach kind of parts of the community that need more work. And I think it’s a long-term process where you change the whole culture of society around the issue over a generation. Yeah, I think that’s the approach, but we have to start the work.

Colby: 55:41

Yeah, look, and I think that in my own jurisdiction here and many jurisdictions, people at the coalface who are on the ground doing child protection work all the time. Morale is often compromised and there is a risk of people becoming quite cynical about the work, and I think it’s and that’s a shame. It’s a shame for them, but it’s also a shame for the people who come into contact with them and you know the families that are struggling, the children who can’t, for a period of time, be safely cared for at home, and I think everyone gets involved in this, wanting to make a difference. We all want it, but sometimes there’s a risk that it can seem like it will never end and there’s a degree of hopelessness.

Colby: 56:49

I think one of the power, powerful thing, messages of what you’re talking about is we’ve done it, we’ve done it before, we’ve done it in other, in other ways, in another, in other areas.

Colby: 57:02

Of course, we haven’t reduced it to zero, we haven’t eradicated all diseases, but we have had a. We have had a good and sustained crack at a number of things and seen a global, a significant global reduction, if not elimination, of um certain ills that that beset us in this life and why not? Child protection as well. And the other thing I think about that message and I often ask guests this later in the podcast I’ve avoided asking you any questions that might come hard up against your role in the UN and not wanting to be seen as speaking on behalf of the UN and not wanting to be seen as speaking on behalf of the UN. But I think a book like yours should be inspirational at multiple levels of the work and in particular, I would say, at the level of the policymakers, the level of government, the level of the policy makers, the level of government. So I think, hope, hope in a direction to get us out of, away from and towards a better future for our children, their children and grandchildren as well.

Ben: 58:27

Thank you very much and, on the back of what you just said, can I just end by saying massive gratitude to all the people that work in the child protection workforce, both in Australia and all around the world. Yeah, terrific.

Colby: 58:43

Thanks, ben, and hope to speak to you again at another time.

Ben: 58:49

Absolutely Thank you. It’s been a real pleasure. Thank you very much, Colby.

Building Hope: Lighthouse Foundation’s Legacy of Love

The Lighthouse Foundation: Transforming Youth Homelessness Through Relationships and Community

In a world where vulnerable children and youth often fall through the cracks of support systems, the Lighthouse Foundation stands as a beacon of hope. Founded 33 years ago by Susan Barton AM, this Australian organisation has pioneered a therapeutic approach to youth homelessness that focuses on healing through relationships, community involvement, and long-term support.

Susan’s journey began over four decades ago when a life-changing experience in Sri Lanka opened her eyes to the suffering of vulnerable children. Witnessing malnourished babies in dire conditions prompted a profound personal transformation. Upon returning to Australia, Susan discovered that while Australian children weren’t dying of severe malnutrition, they faced different challenges, with youth suicide rates among the highest in the Western world. This realisation sparked her mission to create safe homes for homeless youth, beginning with fostering teenagers who had nowhere else to go.

What started as Susan opening her home to vulnerable young people evolved into a comprehensive therapeutic model. The Lighthouse model isn’t merely about providing shelter; it’s about creating healing communities where young people can form meaningful relationships and begin their journey to recovery. Their approach has yielded remarkable results, with 87% of young people leaving Lighthouse never returning to homelessness again, effectively breaking the cycle of intergenerational trauma.

Central to Lighthouse’s success is their understanding that relationships are the primary vehicle for healing. Their therapeutic residential care homes provide young people with consistent, emotionally available adults who don’t just “do to” but “be with” children and their families. The organisation supports young people up to 25 years of age—far beyond what most services offer—and continues relationships through their “On For Life” program, recognising that healing takes time and that young people need ongoing support, just as they would in a family environment.

The Lighthouse model incorporates several unique elements that distinguish it from traditional approaches. Community committees surround each home, creating a network of supportive adults who act as surrogate extended family. Regular reflective practice helps carers understand their own emotional responses and how these might impact their work with young people. Their psychosocial screening ensures that everyone in the organisation, from therapeutic carers to board members, aligns with their values and approaches.

Perhaps most revolutionary is their approach to birth families. Lighthouse understands that children who have been abused by their parents don’t stop loving their parents—they stop loving themselves. By working non-judgmentally with parents and involving them in their children’s healing journey, they honour the importance of family connection to identity and recovery. Their Young Parents and Babies Programme supports young parents to heal from their own childhood trauma while raising their children free from inherited emotional wounds, embodying their philosophy: “We care for the parents so they can care for their children.”

The Lighthouse Foundation demonstrates that therapeutic residential care can be a powerful intervention rather than a last resort. By focusing on relationships, community involvement, and long-term support, they provide a model that challenges traditional approaches to youth homelessness and offers hope for meaningful, lasting change.

You can listen to the podcast here:

You can watch here:

About Susan and Ben:

Susan Barton AM founded Lighthouse Foundation 33 years ago and has dedicated her life to helping the most vulnerable children and youth. Her mission is to change the way Australia looks at the issue of child and youth homelessness towards a more therapeutic approach where we create caring communities where all young people – from babies to young adults – can feel safe, form meaningful relationships, and begin their journey to recovery.

Susan has co-authored two books on childhood trauma, was awarded an Order of Australia for services to youth in Australia, was named Melburnian of the Year in 2009, and was inducted into the Victorian Honour Roll of Women for her significant achievements and contribution to the Victorian community, in 2012.

With over fifteen years of experience in therapeutic residential care, residential communities, and educational settings, Ben brings a wealth of understanding and passion to his role at Lighthouse Foundation.

Ben honed his reflective skills at Fairways, an award-winning children’s services charity in the UK. It was during his time there, that Ben encountered Therapeutic Residential Care for Children and Young People: An Attachment and Trauma Informed Model for Practice, written by Susan Barton, alongside Rudy Gonzalez and Patrick Tomlinson.

Inspired by the Lighthouse Foundation’s values and vision for high-quality care, Ben joined the organisation in 2018 as a Therapeutic Carer, supporting children, young people, young parents, and babies in need of a secure base.

In 2021, Ben became the Manager of Youth and Family Services; leading Lighthouse Foundation’s nine therapeutic residential care homes.

Related Podcast Interviews:

Adela Holmes

Listen here:

Watch here:

Kiran Modi

Listen here:

Watch here:

Transcript:

Colby: 0:01

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast.

Susan: 0:04

And children grow in the love of someone. If you can hold with them and stay with them during that really difficult time, they’ll usually find a little spark of hope and see it through and get out the other side. Every time we open a home in a community, we build a community committee around that home and the um. The importance of that is that they’ve got all these surrogate parents and brothers and sisters and aunts and uncles and there’s a really deep responsibility that I’m a conduit for the young people who can’t tell their story to those who don’t know their story.

Ben: 0:45

And we contract all our forensic carers to engage in reflective practice. Children have been abused by their parents. They don’t really stop loving their parents. They stop loving themselves and we really see parents as an integral part of their identity and their healing process. And that was all the child needed. Really. He didn’t need to affix, he just needed to be heard. We care for the parents so they can care for their children. When I was a child, playing was very terrifying because it it meant abuse. Um, you’ve, you’ve taught me how to play with my children, so she was very grateful for that.

Colby: 1:23

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast. I’m Colby Pearce, and joining me for this episode are two representatives of an Australian endeavour providing homes and therapeutic care to the young people who need it, where they need it and for as long as they need it. Before I introduce my guests, I’d just like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the lands I’m coming to you from the Kaurna people of the Adelaide Plains and the continuing connection the living Kaurna people feel to land, waters, culture and community. I’d also like to pay my respects to their elders, past, present and emerging. My guests this episode are Susan Barton and Ben Pryke of Lighthouse Foundation.

Colby: 2:13

Susan Barton AM founded Lighthouse Foundation 33 years ago and has dedicated her life to helping the most vulnerable children and youth. Her mission is to change the way Australia looks at the issue vulnerable children and youth. Her mission is to change the way Australia looks at the issue of child and youth homelessness towards a more therapeutic approach where we create caring communities where all young people, from babies to young adults, can feel safe, form meaningful relationships and begin their journey to recovery. Susan has co-authored two books on childhood trauma, was awarded an Order of Australia for services to youth in Australia was named Melburnian of the Year in 2009 and was inducted into the Victorian Honor Roll of Women for her significant achievements and contribution to the Victorian community in 2012.

Colby: 3:09

With over 15 years of experience in therapeutic residential care, residential communities and educational settings, ben brings a wealth of understanding and passion to his role at Lighthouse Foundation. Ben honed his reflective skills at Fairways, an award-winning children’s services charity in the UK. It was during his time there that Ben encountered therapeutic residential care for children and young people, an attachment and trauma-informed model for practice written by Susan alongside Rudy Gonzalez and Patrick Tomlinson. Inspired by the Lighthouse Foundation’s values and vision for high quality care, ben joined the organisation in 2018 as a therapeutic carer, supporting children, young people, young parents and babies in need of a secure base. In 2021, ben became the Manager of Youth and Family Services, leading Lighthouse Foundation’s nine therapeutic residential care homes. Welcome, susan and Ben. Thanks, colby.

Ben: 4:23

Thank you, colby, thank you for having us.

Susan: 4:24

Can we acknowledge the traditional owners of our land, the Wurundjeri people, and thank them for the beautiful country we live in.

Ben: 4:34

Yeah, we pay respect to elders past, present and emerging and we extend that respect to Aboriginal children, young people and families who entrust lighthouses with their care.

Colby: 4:43

Yeah, well, thank you for that. Now, was there anything about either of those bios or anything that you would wish to add at this point?Susan: 4:53

I don’t know, I’ve placed over a bit of time.

Ben: 5:01

Oh God, would that add to the bio? No, I was thinking Colby. It made me think about, uh, the podcast you had with lisa cherry recently, I believe it was, and it reflected on being a parent. Um, so just to add, that’s our professional roles, but, um, I’m also a father and a husband and take those roles with the same level of seriousness and care that we give to Lighthouse Foundation young people.

Susan: 5:27

Yeah, okay, and if you want a more personal one, I have six grown-up children and 12 grandchildren, and I would like to push for a 13th if my kids are cooperative.

Colby: 5:42

Well done, that’s lovely. I know if you’ve listened to a couple of the other podcasts. It seems to be excruciating for some people to sit and listen to their bios. Yes, on the one hand, and on another hand, there it’s almost an opportunity to reflect on how much you’ve done across a career in this space, and we do spend a lot of time, I guess, focused very much on the task that is at hand, what’s right in front of us, and don’t always have the opportunity to sit back and reflect on the span of our activities. Yeah, so I thought I’d just get going by asking, perhaps starting with you, susan, if you could tell us a little bit about Lighthouse Foundation, the work that you do and perhaps even how you came to found Lighthouse Foundation all those years ago.

Susan: 6:52

Yeah, thanks, colby. Well, it’s a bit of a long story so I’ll try and encapsulate it very succinctly, but I actually started probably 43 years ago. But I actually started probably 43 years ago showing my age, and I happened to. A group of Australians were supporting a project over in Vietnam, and then there was the fall of Vietnam. So we had to refocus somewhere else with our wish to make a difference, and that place ended up being Sri Lanka, and we found out in Sri Lanka they needed a nurse to help and set up a nutritional crèche for all abandoned children, and so we sent money over and the French nurse was employed, and then she arrived and realised there was such an enormous task to set up. She put out an SOS to the global community for anyone that might be able to come and help her, and so I’d never been out of partly my suburb, let alone my country, before, and I strangely put my hand up and found myself over in Sri Lanka.

Susan: 8:07

My mum was minding my two sons and I thought it was going to be a very short stint and it ended up being a little bit more elongated. But what happened there was she asked me to take a really sick baby to the infectious diseases hospital. While I was there I noticed a severely malnourished baby with abscess, scabies and flies sucking on it. I was just stunned that that would happen to children, because that doesn’t happen in our country. And I in that time also saw many babies languishing in cots three at a time in excrement, and it so shocked me that that happened in my world. And I looked at myself and I wondered couldn’t I be doing more about this and shouldn’t I be doing more about this? And who was I as a human being that was allowing this to happen? And I was looking at it and had no power to intervene. And I found out that one of those little babies died and I came back to Australia a really different girl, one that knew that I couldn’t live in the world and see that going on in my watch and do nothing about it.

Susan: 9:32

And I knew then that I needed to find out more about myself and what was holding me back. And I started then looking at what was happening in Australia around homelessness and realised, although our children weren’t dying of severe malnutrition, we had one of the highest suicide rates in the Western world. And that stunned me and I thought but I love teenagers so much and I guess that was a seed that germinated and to the point where I thought, oh, I can foster children. And I found out that kids over 16 that didn’t have money attached to them was so easy to be fostered. You know, they’re almost pushed at you and before I knew it I had a home full of children. It started with a little Aboriginal sibling group and then it grew to having including my own children. I had 16 kids living with me and was looking at fostering another one and went oh my god, I’ve run out of bedrooms. And when I started eyeing off the bath and thinking I could put a mattress in there, I knew that I was stepping out of what I was doing, which was loving these children, to really setting up another orphanage.

Susan: 10:54

And at the same time I happened to my cousin, thought I needed help and sent me to a course called Money Anew, run by Robert Kiyosaki, who wrote the book Dad, rich Dad, poor Dad, and If you Want To Be Rich and Happy, don’t Go To School. And that kind of sung to my heart a little bit, because I’d only gone to year 10 and my stepfather then pushed me out into the workforce before I was ready, and so going to that course changed my life. He taught me about the processional effect. You know, the honey doesn’t really know what they’re doing, they’re just going from tree to tree, but it makes honey, and so if you’re on course, what you’re meant to be here on the planet to do the rest falls into place. He taught me about policies and procedures and, most importantly, he taught me about franchising. He said so you need to do what you’re doing. That is having such a strong outcome compared to the system that you need to duplicate that. Well, I thought he was mad and I thought, oh, how am I ever going to do that?

Susan: 12:08

And at the time we got some funding from one of our philanthropy supporters and they paid for a psychologist to come on board.

Susan: 12:20

And so Dr Sarah Crome, our first psychologist, followed me around for a year and looked at what I was doing organically with the young people, which is really just loving them so much.

Susan: 12:32

And my measurement was how much I love my own children and I’m so territorial about my kids. You don’t come. I say you don’t fuck with my kids or you deal with me. That’s how you know kind of territorial I am, and it was my measurement to know if I was doing the best job I could is to measure my love for them against that of my children and to make sure I kept working on that until I did that. And Sarah Chrome really was the first person that put all that I was doing into a framework that had a psychological underpinning and references to it, and really it was just attachment and relationships, loving and object relations, and so that was really. The rest is history. We went from there to having an independent report done just a couple of years ago that 87% of our young people leaving us never into homelessness again and changes the trajectory of intergenerational trauma.

Colby: 13:42

Wow, that’s wonderful. What an inspirational story. And Ben or Susan, one of you, I wonder if you’d like to just kind of expand a bit on what the Lighthouse Foundation is doing at this time, what their services encompass? Yeah, thank you.

Ben: 13:59

Cobby, certainly so. Ultimately, lighthouse Foundation is a trauma informed organisation that supports children, young people and families here in Victoria, australia. Our key modalities of healing are through relationship. We support with caretakers who don’t do too, but be with children and their families. And, as Susan explained, time is a critical component to healing to allow deeply ingrained expectations of people and self to change. It can be very slow but deeply meaningful work. I believe we provide a sense of belonging. The community helps young people to feel safe and accepted and part of something meaningful. We’re purposeful with intention. We respond with empathy and understanding that you know.

Ben: 14:47

Children, young people, may have had a bad experience, but they’re not bad people and through season susan’s vision and values, we we believe in you and we put great thought into everything we do.

Ben: 14:59

I’m privileged to work alongside young people and carers in our therapeutic residential care homes. So we have a Young Women’s Freedom Programme which supports young women who are survivors of forced marriage and modern slavery. We provide them a safe therapeutic environment to heal. A Young Parents and Babies Programme which core aim is to support young parents to heal from their own childhood trauma in the hope that they can raise babies free from those inherited emotional wounds and we support young people who’ve often experienced complex trauma, who are unable to live with their biological families currently, and we support them up to 25 years of age within therapeutic residential care homes, which is a different experience to many organisations who are kind of maybe forced to stop providing care at 18. We continue to provide care to 25 and actually much longer through our on for life program and sense of belonging so our on for life is really important to us and probably what sets us apart.

Susan: 16:03

Um, we we were, because we didn’t at the time get any recurrent funding. We were able to create Lighthouse, really in the way we thought was best practice for young people, and really we looked at what families do. It’s a family system and you know my kids, god, they come back when they’re 40. I don’t think I’ll ever get rid of them. You know, with six of them, there’s always someone at home or someone that needs moving or someone that’s broken, their washing machine’s broken down or all the sorts of machinations of what a real family is.

Susan: 16:42

And exactly like our young people, some of our young people now on our Alan for Life program are in their early 50s and it’s such a joy for us to see them coming back, even if it’s because of relationships broken down. How, you know, we can walk beside them to help them, give the time and space for them to think and see what their next steps are, but also to celebrate with them when their child’s growing up and getting married themselves or having a child or um, you know, we’ve got a couple of our kids that are millionaires now and and then we’ve got other kids that have got, you know, know mental health issues, but we see them shortening the time each time they have a whoopsie. The next time they’ve learned something. So the time to get back on their feet and get going again is shorter and shorter each time. So it’s really, like Ben said, a privilege to walk beside them and sharing that joy of their parenting and breaking that cycle.

Colby: 17:50

You said something very interesting in a couple of spots in there, susan Talking. Initially you were saying how, if you’re kind of doing what you’re meant to be doing on the planet, the money tends to follow. And you’re not the first kind of founder who I’ve had on the podcast who’s said something very similar to that. If not, you know the same, maybe with some slightly different words. And I always, I mean mean, in my own practice, I’ve always followed the motto that you, you just make sure you provide a good service and uh, and money follows. It doesn’t always. It can be a bit of a bumpy ride at times, it doesn’t always follow like that, but but overall, um, it does, um, yeah, and then you and then I think, if I understood you correctly, you were, you were kind of saying um, because you didn’t have recurrent funding from, I guess, from um government funding bodies you were able to create a service based more on what you thought a service should look like in this space. You weren’t constrained by funding bodies and their requirements.

Susan: 19:15

No, I wasn’t constrained by the quantitative exercises it might be, it was more qualitative for me, but I also always did it alongside a psychologist, either clinical or community, who understood what I was getting at and could always relate it back to a framework so that it had real rigour to it.

Susan: 19:43

And I think that was probably, know, really important for me, that, you know I wasn’t just going off going doing, oh well, I’ll just love every child, and that’s what we do, but also that it had had something to um, harness to, that was of value in the community and I guess hence the book.

Susan: 20:06

You know we’ve had some fabulous psychologists I mean I shouldn’t name any because then I’ll get stuck but Dr Sarah Crome in the beginning, you know, rudy Gonzalez and Taimur Hussain had a real influence on the place. Laura Petrie, ben beside me, simon, who is our CEO, and I think you’ve had on before Simon Benjamin they’re all people that played a large role in bringing forward everything they know and adding to it. So it’s not a static organisation. We keep learning and growing and as we branch out to different um I guess for one of the better word young people or cohorts as some people call them um, we have to change and grow and think more and think differently. So I think that’s also important that we can then relate it back to well, how does that have an underpinning with a psychological framework?

Colby: 21:09

Yeah, and you referred to attachment theory and being one of those significant frameworks. Yes, yeah.

Susan: 21:17

Yeah, well, I used to call it love and I get myself into trouble all the time, so it’s much better to say attachment.

Susan: 21:24

But it’s really about a relationship and children grow in the love of someone. You know, I think it was Chilton Pierce that said it only takes one person to love a child and they’ll usually make it through and that’s always been my experience, even young people that are suicidal. You know, if you can hold with them and stay with them during that really difficult time, they’ll usually find a little spark of hope and see it through and get out the other side. So I always see us as a containment. You know, a great big glass bowl of holding and the young people, you know a great big glass bowl of holding and the young people, you know, grow and learn in that until they’re ready to do their interdependent living, you know, outside that containment area. So for us it’s about giving them the opportunity and the time, as Ben said, to grow and learn and have hope. You know, and I think if you can find a spark of hope for them, that’s really what will. You know, see them through, and that’s love and attachment.

Colby: 22:36

And, I think, especially suicidal young people. You know having that experience of being a person of worth. When you love a young person, their experience of that is that I am an adequate, worthy person. Yeah, and young people, indeed everyone who has a healthy sense of their own worth, or has at least some semblance of a healthy sense of their own worth, or has at least some semblance of a healthy sense of self-worth, do tend to make better decisions for themselves in their life. Going forwards, ben, I want to go over to you because we kind of skipped past you a little bit, but you have an accent. You started your career in the UK. How did you come to be working in this space?

Ben: 23:31

Yeah, thank you, colby. Yeah, that’s correct. Yeah, so I actually started off in play in primary schools. I couldn’t believe my luck when I was offered the chance to be paid to play football. It wasn’t quite the Premier League but I was having a great time in primary schools, great joy alongside the children, and it was one of the head teacher there saw my kind of ability to be with children and help co-regulate I wasn’t quite sure of that terminology at the time. She invited me to work in the primary school and support children.

Ben: 24:18

At the time it was in the UK, there were music professionals who had social, emotional, behavioral difficulties and social, emotional, behavioral made sense to me. The social experience of where the trauma may come from. Then the emotional impact. Then we see that through behaviour and I was unsure on the difficulty part, like maybe difficulty for the young person but certainly difficult for the school to tolerate and accept as well. And it was in the school environment. A wonderful school and a wonderful head teacher who was really focused on community, would integrate families. They would have alternative educational on a Friday, cooking and play experiences.

Ben: 25:00

But I saw a young child steal food from a lunchbox during. I think she’d excused herself from the class and I witnessed that and I saw a teacher and I saw that experience and I thought, oh, clearly the child’s hungry, maybe they need some food or have not had breakfast or I’m not sure what’s happening in their home life. I saw a teacher come out and I expected them to provide that level of care but instead they shouted at the child for stealing and it just didn’t make sense to me and it just didn’t make sense to me and I thought I think I need to work in an environment, more in a home setting really. So I found myself working in a 20-bed residential care community setting. There was three homes on site. It’s like a developmental process where the children would move through homes on site. It’s like a developmental process where the children would move through.

Ben: 26:01

We had a school in the middle, mechanics, um vegetable patch and you’d live there for a week alongside the young people. Then you’d have a week off and that really gave me an experience of the importance of relationship and containment and living alongside that, what that can offer. And it’s a beautiful setting, not too dissimilar to Hurstbridge farm, like adela holmes spoke about, but there wasn’t the systemic levels of holding for staff to process, being that close to uh, expressions of trauma, and I noticed I was starting to get quite physical symptoms of back pain, um, which I thought was from a, an injury, um, but had a, had an MRI scan and, um, there was nothing physically wrong. So it got me thinking about, um, the unconscious, really, um.

Ben: 26:47

I moved to another organization called Fairways and there was a mentor there called Michael Crutchley, who was a mental health nurse, um, and we go out and ride our motorbikes together and each share stories with me about high quality forensic residential care, which included, uh, the book that susan rudy and patrick um published, and, and we also spoke a lot about pepper harrow, which was so interesting. But richard rollinson was on there and had a community, had decision-making together and involvement, and I believe that the only this is my interpretation the only kind of expectation is that you came to a community meeting every day and ruptures were repaired. So, after reading the book that Susan had published, I convinced my I was assistant manager at the time at Fairways and convinced my wife to quit our jobs and fly to Australia, and I was lucky enough to become a therapeutic carer in 2018 at Lighthouse Foundation.

Colby: 27:48

Wow. Well, that’s an incredible story as well. Thank you, ben, and we’ve obviously had a bit of a chat before this podcast, you and I, ben, so I’ll come to a couple of things from that, but I couldn’t, I couldn’t leave behind. Move on. I guess, before just going back to something that you were saying, susan, about in in the correct parlance it would be after care, but the decision that has been taken by Lighthouse to continue to provide support, direct support, right through to 25 and indeed subsequent support it reminded me a lot of what Kieran Modi, who was on the podcast from Udayan Care, was talking about in terms of they support through to 25, and then they have alumni and she does a lot of work, or her organisation does a lot of work in terms of supporting care leavers. It was also mentioned by the Livramento people in Portugal, but if you can just tell us a little bit more of your thoughts behind how, I guess how Lighthouse went in that direction of supporting young people beyond 18.

Susan: 29:15

Funnily enough, I’ve been over to Kira Modi’s place and she’s been over here, probably about eight years ago, to look at what we were doing, and we talked about the importance of On For Life and having a psychologist with your team to make sure that the frameworks, to make sure that the frameworks keep evolving. And our book’s been translated into Portuguese and Japanese, so now I know the link, which is good. But for me it was really again modelled on the way I cared for my young people. And you don’t stop being a mother and a parent just because they’re moved out people. And you don’t stop being a mother and a parent just because they’ve moved out. In fact, they’re at age 16, 18, 20. Even if they’ve come from a really good enough family life, they still aren’t always quite ready to do it alone. They always need an attachment or that umbilical call that brings them back to ask questions or check in and all that sort of thing. And so it was really important for me for us to develop that against a lot of pushback at the time, not so much at Lighthouse but with the system. You know the Australian system and how they operated but I was determined that we were going to do that, and so we just pressed on.

Susan: 30:40

But we also developed from there our community committees, because I think young people need not just their mum and dad or one parent, they also need a network of people, like you do when you come up in a family, you know you’ve got your school parents and your parents have got friends, and so you become part of a strong, resilient group, and so I wanted to build that for the young people.

Susan: 31:12

So another unique thing about Lighthouse is every time we open a home in a community, we build a community committee around that home, and the importance of that is that they’ve got all these surrogate parents and brothers and sisters and aunts and uncles and what I call corporate parenting, where everyone can take some responsibility for caring and nurturing and developing these young people.

Susan: 31:43

So on the community committee there might be a school teacher or a policeman or a person that’s lost a child to suicide or the local I call it the butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker and they all come together to parent that child. And it’s just been quite amazing really, some of the things. Some of them have become foster parents of a 16 or 17-year-old and said well, before they transit into, you know the community. Why don’t they come to live with me for a year or two and let them see parenting as we do it? So when they become parents they’ll have learnt something. So they’ve all you know there’s been some amazing stories of people. I keep saying I’d love to write a book about all the people that have been part of those community committees, that have got stories of their own and what brought them to help me parent these young people.

Colby: 32:43

That’s remarkable, and how do you access them, susan?

Susan: 32:50

Again that processional effect. I just go out and tell the story, anybody that reaches in or anyone that donates, even if it’s a dollar, to me they are the king and queen of the place. If it’s a dollar or if it’s a million dollars, I love them all the same because all that helps. But going to Rotary meetings I’m a Rotarian myself going to talks at corporates, just I say yes to everything because I think I was saying to you at the beginning, there’s a really deep responsibility that I’m a conduit for the young people who can’t tell their story to those who don’t know their story, and if I can share part of their story with their, okay, then most Australians want to help in some way. I’ve just got to provide that pathway for them to be able to do that.

Susan: 33:49

And everyone’s pathway is different. Some don’t want to have any contact with the young people. Others want to be right in there and helping the house and doing a barbecue every week, or you know things like that contact with the young people. Others want to be right in there and helping the house and doing a barbecue every week, or you know things like that. So just finding unpacking what it is they want to do to help this young person. An example might be the ANZ in August are putting on a big Diwali event and there’ll be thousands of people all doing Indian and Sri Lankan dancing, and that funding will come to Lighthouse and we’ll be able to promote and tell our story there. So I’m not just telling it for the day, but there’ll be people there that then want to do workplace giving and donate $5 a month, you know and so they become a surrogate parent in their own way.

Colby: 34:39

So there’s all sorts of ways you can parent, I believe, and so we just have to find that in each person that comes forward again, it reminds me of the work that Kieran and Udain Care are doing as well, the way the, the way in which they use volunteers in their model of care. And you know, I just highlight the similarity between the two to make the point that it is possible to one access people who are concerned and committed and really want to be part of facilitating better life outcomes for children and young people in need, and there are really positive ways to utilise those people for the benefit of the young people.

Susan: 35:35

Yeah, and just on that. I think the important thing to then remember is that the level of support and screening you give and so we do psychosocial screening, and to me that’s a real key to keeping the organisation safe, just to mention that, yeah.

Ben: 35:56

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, and that’s a really important integral function of the forensic care we offer. So we don’t really ask of young people what they’re not willing to do for ourselves, and a psychosocial screen really allows us to understand people’s unconscious motivations to be in the work. Do they have a reflective capacity, emotional capacity and are they willing to ask for help, which we think is a really important component? Some of the committee members we have a chair of our Young Women’s Freedom Programme who I believe has been 14 years but before her her brother looked after it for about five and then all her family are involved.

Susan: 36:34

So it’s like her home and I’ve almost got to put my hand up to see if I want to tiptoe in. And there’s Rolf Tedisco, who’s an immigrant from Italy. He wanted to open a home. I said, oh, the governance around it. Rolf is so overwhelming, why don’t you do it under our umbrella? So he’s got the Springvale home who takes care of most of our really pointy and young people and he’s proud as punch and he’s been with that probably 25 years now, you know. And so when people come in, their loyalty and long-term commitment is probably what we look for, and honour in those people and the emotional intelligence of our staff really is what we look forward to that warmth and humanistic qualities.

Ben: 37:25

Yeah, it’s interesting. I’m sorry, colby.

Colby: 37:27

No, I was just going to you first, because people want to hear more of you and less of me.

Ben: 37:34

I was going to say that chair I was speaking about uh katherine. She’s also on our care subcommittee, um, so the the openness of communication goes throughout the organization. So she’s there to uh hear stories, share stories of the young people, what she sees, and provide a voice to the ceo and the care subcommittee. Members of the board, just to help us keep on track really and monitor for drift.

Colby: 38:02

Yeah, yeah, well, that, yeah, it’s interesting. It seems to be an opportune point to bring in that, and I have flagged this with you that we’ve started a little an aspect of the podcast where we get the previous guest to think of a question to ask the next guest on the podcast, and so I’ll be making, or have made public, patricia Sheridan from the Moore Group’s podcast today. Now, the question that she put to me, apart from she wished me to pass on her best wishes to you and your organisation, what really was around this issue of fidelity, which I think you’re starting to touch on in what you’re saying now, ensure that the carers that you have in the organisation remain aligned with the values of the organisation.

Ben: 39:07

Yeah, thank you, colby. Well, I think the psychosocial screen is a fundamental component of that. I think it sends a real clear message to therapeutic carers and it’s not just carers, everyone amongst the agency. I think it sends a real clear message to therapeutic carers and it’s not just carers, everyone amongst the agency. I think Simon spoke about that. We expect the same from our finance team and our marketing team that the primary task is the children and young people. So we’re interconnected to make sure that we remain focused to the quality care of children and young people. And the psychosocial screen sets us apart there. I believe you know it’s communicating to young people, to carers. We take this work seriously, um, and with kindness. Uh, so if you enter lighthouse, that’s the expectation a deep level of thought and care, um, I’m happy to share a little bit about my own experience of psychosocial screen, where I’d said to Andrew, who was the manager of clinical services at the time, I said, oh, I’ve done something similar to like this before at Fairways.

Ben: 40:11

It was a print profile, because they ask you what do you think your unconscious motivations may be? And this was, you know, was seven, eight years ago. I hadn’t done as much internal work or thinking at the time and I said, oh, it said I had a desire to feel special. And he said, oh, why do you think that’s where that’s come from, ben, and I wasn’t aware at that time that I am. Now I said, oh, I’m not sure, it’s just a test. And he said, oh well, lighthouse, we encourage you to think into those parts of yourself. And that’s really important actually, because as a therapy carer, I need to be aware of my own emotional availabilities and what might light me up to make sure that doesn’t impact the work of the children and they remain focused. So I mean, that’s an important, a really important part of my learning. Really, we’re a learning organization.

Colby: 41:07

It expects deep, deep thought and I think all my podcast guests, who are representatives of well-respected and, I guess, successful however you might define that have talked about the need for fidelity, the need for alignment through the whole organisation. Simon talked about Simon, benjamin talked about. You know what we do with the kids? We do with everyone in the organisation. There’s that alignment all the way through.

Susan: 41:45

And particularly, you know it has to be the board included. And to get you know a whole lot of professional people to talk about their feelings is hilarious. However, we’ve managed to hold on to that probably more challenging aspect of it. But it’s really interesting that once people get into the habit of it, after three or four months they actually they’re the ones calling for it. They actually they’re the ones calling for it and there’s something intangible about the warmth and connectedness you get from sharing your feelings at a board level that they feel and take away with it. It’s actually they don’t want to leave the board and we have board members 12, 14 years.

Susan: 42:38

You know that long-term loyalty, which is fabulous, I know, from a governance perspective, they like changing you. You know there’s three year on three year, but there’s something to be said for. You know, having those grandparents around as well as new blood staying on board and holding the culture throughout and having that emotional intelligence and then having to share the journey alongside the young people in that way that they’ve got to do the same practices, I think holds us all together. And when you do get wobbly because there’s always times no matter how great you are, you know you have different leadership and different people coming into the organisation and you grow wider and so you’ve got to make sure even more that you hold tight to those. You know different practices that we have and hold them dearly.

Ben: 43:40

Now I can speak to that a bit more, colby, if you like, because, as we spoke about, the model of care has kind of evolved and adapted. It’s like a living thing and it’s kind of since Susan and Patrick and Rudy, yeah, it kind of developed the model. It was co-designed, youdesigned with Patrick Tomlinson, which I think was really important because it shows a level of involvement and ownership for the organisation, and since then it’s kind of evolved to four key domains really, which is the home, a home environment where you want to provide a secondary care experience where the home is a warm, beautiful home. That is maybe different to what our children and young people have experienced of feeling worthy. We have young people interventions, so that could be a daily, weekly and monthly intervention. So we have daily reflections that the carers are involved in. We have weekly one-to-one times where the carer or the psychologist are solely available for the child for that time, whether they wish to step in or not. We will hold that space and that’s the same for the carers.

Ben: 44:46

We have weekly clinical and operational supervision, depending on the program and the level of need required for those children. That may be fortnightly of program and the level of need required for those children. That may be fortnightly, um, but I’ve recently gone weekly, uh, and so has the clinician in in the focus of central care program. So we’re trying to um step in early, really, before feelings get too big for staff, um, and understanding young people. When you say it out loud, an hour a week, there’s only 52 hours, you know. A year it’s not actually very much, but people seem to think that’s too long to sit and be with, yeah, and then, as I said, we have community, which is an important component as well, and we contract all our prognostic carers to engage in reflective practice. So you can’t extend the clear communication, communication really. Now, if you want to be part of this organization and care for young people, we expect that practice of you, um, and I can share an example from this week, if that’s of helpful around focus on feeling and how that supports, uh, our understanding of children, young people go ahead, yeah.

Ben: 45:57

So we’ve just recently opened a new Fremont residential care home, so the young person has recently returned to the area, which can be quite scary. We believe it to be of great benefit to be closer to family and we’re hoping to interconnect in with family and bring them into the residential care home, but ultimately still a scary experience to leave people that you’ve, you know, the safety of their old residential care home in those relationships, to come to somewhere new. And we had a phone call on the weekend where the young person had asked I’m out with my friends, can you come and pick me up? And then he he said, oh, I have a weapon. And I was unsure, you know, did he have a weapon or was he just feeling very unsafe? Because I’d read in the referral previously that when he changed homes before you know, he was found with a weapon on him or seemed to have a weapon, we believe, communicating this feeling of unsafe. So the group really took it serious. Um, and I spoke to the carers directly on the on the uh in the home and they said no, benny, it sounded like um, he didn’t sound like he was joking. We need to take him seriously, which we did, you know. We enacted a process to go up and make sure he was safe and our carers were safe and brought him home and he fell asleep in the lounge and they put a blanket over him.

Ben: 47:18

Um, and then I still attend the reflective practice space alongside the carers, uh, fortnightly in in the home, um, and they were speaking about a razor. They were saying, oh, we’ve seen that, we’ve noticed the razor in the shower and it was getting quite big for them, the razor. They were saying, um, you know, he’s moving into adolescence. It’s quite an important part of development. It’s something you sometimes do with your own father. And then they say, but we want everyone to be safe.

Ben: 47:46

And then they were coming up with a uh, an intervention of like well, maybe you know, we could get a lock box and he can have a key and we can have a key and we can lock it up. And I, we’ve asked him to focus on the feeling. What is the feeling that the razor has given you? And it’s one of um. You’re feeling quite unsafe and scared, and that gave us an insight into how he may be feeling in his world.

Ben: 48:08

Where we hadn’t focused on the feeling, you could see how that, you know, intervention of the razor could really escalate.Ben: 48:14

But that wasn’t the case.

Ben: 48:15

We were able to bring in one person, brought in the feeling of um, how he may have felt like a black sheep of the family was his words many years ago, another one was able to hold on to like the empathy and hope, um, and then so the group could hold that and tolerate that distress, um to respond with empathy.

Ben: 48:34

So when he called a couple of days later and said, you know, started to give him and his friends started to give the character a bit of grief, ultimately, on the phone they were able to say, oh yeah, if Billy’s there, let him know we’re thinking about him and we care about him, which was a really important message not just to him but also to his friends. There’s adults out there who show you care and think about you, where if we hadn’t had that space on feeling they may have been reactive or put the phone down. And actually the fact he was calling us when he’s outside the home, when he’s new, was a wonderful win for us. It shows that he’s holding us in mind when he’s not in the home and that’s what you know we do as well. We we hold our young people in mind.

Colby: 49:20

Yeah, lovely yeah, there’s so much we could talk about um.

Colby: 49:27

I wanted there was something just going back to to what you were saying as well, susan, before um, talking about um reflection, holding, you know, holding people in mind, but also reflecting on what’s happening for us and having that experience of sharing and other people connecting with us around our experience.

Colby: 49:56

And you talked about how people, for example, on your boards or committees hanging around for a very long time and other family members getting involved, and the thought that was going through my mind is that this jurisdiction is probably more characterised by staff just going through the system at a rate of knots. Yeah, that there is a lot of changeover in the workforce in these jurisdictions, maybe not in your organisation, but certainly in this jurisdiction, and what I had in mind listening to you talk about um, your experience there at lighthouse, was the importance of um not just the children being feeling heard, but but the staff, or the everyone connected with organisation, feeling heard and acknowledged and valued around their experience, which is, I guess, another way of talking about you know what we do with our children, with the children we should be doing at all levels of the organisation, as Simon said. There’s one thing, though, that I really wanted to also speak to you guys about, which is the involvement of birth family.

Ben: 51:26

One of you mentioned that I think it was you, ben no families.

Ben: 51:31

Yeah, families, and from our pre-meet conversation, ben, you talked a little bit about that and I think it would be really useful at this juncture to hear a bit more about how Lighthouse connect with involve birth families. You want me to go? Yeah, yeah, thank you, colby. I guess we really ultimately think that children have been abused by their parents. They don’t really stop loving their parents, they stop loving themselves and we really see parents as an integral part of their identity and their healing process. We all entered the world attached to our mothers, as Susan said, and a lot of the time we crave that attachment to our families to remain. We work non-judgmentally with our parents and we really try to understand their own history and involve them in the young person’s experience and their own experience and clear that we’re not the parents that they are.

Ben: 52:36

When I was a care in our secure base program, every Monday I would meet a father in the park so he could play with his son and play on the swings or ride bikes together, and I was just there in the background providing support to them both. That was enabled to transition into one of our residential care homes where he was able to get the experience of really he would like own the barbecue cooking for his son. Read his son a story. Kiss him good night to bed, um, and then him and I would just, you know, sit together once his son was asleep, you know, have a cup of tea and chat. And he would also come to Youth Resource Centre here, which is the heart of the organisation.

Ben: 53:27

He may do parental courses, like Circular Security, alongside some of our other staff members, and there was an experience once the sense of safety was kind of formed with all of us, that the child was able to sit alongside his kind of key carers not not myself, but some really important people in his world in the living room and he was able to say to his father um, you know, where where were you? Why didn’t you keep me safe? Um, and the child was crying and the father was crying, and whilst the father couldn’t give him an answer, he was able just to acknowledge it and apologise and that was all the child needed. Really, he didn’t need a fix, he just needed to be heard.

Ben: 54:08

And once that young person was ready to kind of fly the nest from lighthouse, we also created a book for the father of memories that we had together and stuff that we’d learnt from him, and he was able to say you know, I wish I had a lighthouse when I was a child, so really we’ve got great respect for families and, yeah, really think deeply into their own experiences and try to involve them as much as we can. Yeah, really think deeply into their own experiences and try to involve them as much as we can.

Colby: 54:39

Yeah, yeah, I am on record as saying the most healing relationship for our children is the relationship with their parents. Yeah, the most healing relationship. Yeah, that leads into Ben. We also talked a little bit about the Mothers and Babies Program, and I was keen for you to talk a little bit about that as well in our time together.

Susan: 55:10

And keeping our siblings together too. Yeah, the White House.

Ben: 55:14

Yeah, of course. Yeah, yeah, I’ve been lucky enough to work in our Young Parents and Babies programme. I believe it was started with yourself and Vicky Vidal, Susan, is that correct? Yeah, and really at. Its aim, as I said, is to support young parents to heal from their own childhood trauma in the hope that they can raise their own babies free from these inherited emotional wounds. Ultimately, we’re trying to provide an environment where we care for the parents so they can care for their children, the developmental programme, so as the young people kind of attach and join, we’re just really trying to see if they can seek support and receive care for parents. It’s a really wonderful programme.

Ben: 55:59

You get to see changes very quickly, as you know, in the first two years of life, and we’re similar to what we were saying in reflective practice. We’re there with kindness and boundaries, but we don’t rush things. We allow things to kind of percolate and come to fruition. So an example of that is we had a young mother who I’m very proud of. The experience that she received of what she gave her children is very different and when she first joined she was unable to play with her children. But we just noticed that and we would role model, play ourselves, you know cues and um, bedtime routines and things like that. And one time she was able to say, um, yeah. Then in time, we saw her starting to push the child on the swing or, you know, play with the trucks, etc. Take an interest in their world, and she was able to, you know, many years later, reflect to us that, um, when I was a child, playing was very terrifying because it it meant abuse. Um, you’ve, you’ve taught me how to play with my children, so, uh, she was very grateful for that um. But if we’d rushed that in the early stages, if we kind of thought, why is she not playing with her child? And tried to make that happen too quickly, we would have missed that opportunity and not playing with her child and trying to make that happen too quickly, we would have missed that opportunity and not had given her that experience.

Ben: 57:23

We have young mums, uh, now that they kind of form a little community together, don’t they, susan? They’ve, uh, they live together now in the community and the two of them have started their own business together, um, and that they pop back. I think we currently have about 13 families uh being supported closely through One for Life in terms of like their own little community that comes together. And just a couple weeks ago I looked after one of the uh, a little boy who was six months old when I first looked after him and now would be five years old, so his mum could attend a business course on beauty just in the community. So really able to kind of come back and reach out for support when needed, yeah.

Susan: 58:09

I think that we’ve got 1,350 young people that have graduated the program now and that’s long term. So it doesn’t sound like that it is. You know, I often think you know if a young person’s been abused for 10, 15 years, that needs to be equalled on the other side of you know that good parenting another 15 years. So for me, you know, when Ben talks about about you know we shouldn’t be quantifying time, it’s when they’re ready. So I think that’s an important thing. You know, you’ve got a lot of abuse to abuse to unpack and it will take as much time as it takes and not to rush that process.

Ben: 58:56

Yeah, we had yeah in there. Something we really wrestle with in the programme is phones, you know, and the gaze that we all have towards our phones and we ask of our young parents, during kind of bath time or dinner time, that we have a little kind of clear container on the side and we ask them to put the phones in. And that can be very difficult in the early stages but, um, I’ve seen so many times after eight weeks or so, but, um, yeah, you, you notice them just being left in there overnight so they can respond to the baby. And that’s a lovely kind of it doesn’t feel that big but it’s a lovely little measure that I I take in of growth one of my previous podcast guests, um, said something very chilling, uh, at the time or it is chilling, she.

Colby: 59:49

I mean, she was talking about, um, this attachment relationship or this, this relation, relational dynamic that exists for young children, that has three parties to it the child, the parent and the device these days, and what is going to be the longer-term implications of that? I think we just yeah, we will see, but it is. Yeah, it gave me chills hearing her talk about that.

Susan: 1:00:22

Well, I think the mental health issues will skyrocket. Really, you know, unless we have some boundaries around it, you know some positive ways of dealing with it.

Ben: 1:00:33

It’s probably worth mentioning Colby that we’re realistic in our task and sometimes we may work with parents who have kind of 10 out of 10 of adverse childhood experiences on the study In time. We wish for their children to have less and their other children to have less. It’s not always realistic that we might not have an instant quick fix, but we want to give people an opportunity. Yeah, and I think that’s where that program is philanthropically funded, because it’s very hard.

Susan: 1:01:11

We don’t get a lot of recurrent funding. The government have partnered with us now and we’re very excited about that and I think they’re keen to look at our model of care. We’ve got a CEO, brenda Boland, who comes from Child Protection and I think that as a leadership, she’s showing them the work we’re doing and I think they’re really excited to hear about our work and partner with us. So that’s great. But, as Ben was saying previously, we’ve really done it from philanthropic partners and to pay for two living carers, a salary you know that’s a couple of hundred thousand to run the program, couple of hundred thousand to run the program. So, um, but if you look at you know incarceration and that long, long term consequence. We’re much better doing that early intervention piece and putting the time and money and investment into our young people early.

Susan: 1:02:13

But it is always a challenge for organisations that aren’t recurrent funded. So one of the things probably in our world and of interest to you is that we’re looking at how do we self-fund into the future. So we’re looking very much at getting a futures fund established so that we’ll be able to live off the interest rather than continually go cap in hand, and we still want to do that. We want to reach out because we believe it’s community that help heal our young people in that kind of resilience membrane that they all belong to us. But also we want to be able to, as good parents do, be able to afford. You know what we, how we live, and so we need to demonstrate that ourselves. So we’re looking at developing. We’re going out to developers to help us find lots of land. We’ve got a corporate that will build houses for us. So we’ve got a whole range of projects we’re working on to be self-funded, but it’s a long-term strategy.

Colby: 1:03:25

Yeah, yeah, that’s wonderful. I just wonder you raised the issue of government being interested. It kind of leads me into what you know if you could sit down with them and I’m sure you will what are the key things that you would want to be communicating to them about how to deliver therapeutic care to young people in need and their families?

Susan: 1:04:00

Well, I think we understand their constraints and the governance that underpins what they do, and so, really, I’m excited to work alongside them to come up with a way of working that really focuses on the best practice for young people Do you want to?

Ben: 1:04:25

Yeah, for me as we were speaking, I truly believe in residential care. I think, as we’ve spoken about, a lot of the trauma experience where our young people experience this is in a home with unsafe adults. We want to give them a secondary strength of a safe home and emotionally attuned and available adults and I find, as we spoke about, the young parents and babies program is a wonderful way of providing high quality preventative care. If the money was invested early in programs like that, you may not see the significant distress or complexities that we see in adulthood. But what I find is that often government are willing to put the money towards 16, 17, 18 years old when they’re leaving care, but not so much the preventative space of parents and children. I really think that would make a huge difference to society.

Susan: 1:05:22

Yes, so we’d encourage that as much as we can, and for us it’s about like Vicky Vida has paid for our mums and bubs home for the last probably 15 or more years, and their family have donated this building we’re in, so they’ve really given us that foundation underpinning. That is just. You know, you can’t put words on that or understand how that’s really been able to formulate our way forward but also give us a sense of empowerment to actually build a model of care we believe is second to none, and about those trauma-informed practices rather than the roof over their head. The roof over their head isn’t the main story, it’s just part of, isn’t the main story? It’s just part of. It’s the trauma-informed practices.

Susan: 1:06:23

And if we can have an impact on the way young people are cared for in out-of-home care in a much more, you know, empowered and loving way, that would be amazing for us. So, you know, and also we’re learning things from government too that we may need to put in place as well, because we understand that we’re, you know, in a lot of cases, the guardian of these young people and it’s a huge responsibility. So working as a team for us, with government as a partner, is really important for us, you know and and our next steps to have had an impact in that arena would be amazing for us.

Colby: 1:07:05

Well, I’ve really enjoyed our chat this morning and hearing more about Lighthouse, and I’m sure the people who will listen to this podcast will take a lot from it as well. So thank you to you both for coming on and for all that you’ve shared and your continuing endeavours on behalf of children and young people and families in need. I do give my guests an opportunity to ask me a question without notice. At the end, I wondered if there was anything that you particularly wanted to ask me before we sign off.

Susan: 1:07:46

Well, I just wanted to give a shout out to Patrick Tomlinson, who helped us or co-authored the book and gave us an opportunity to be global in sharing our model of care, and also Mulberry Bush for opening their place to us when we visited, and for me it’s having that global sense of community I think is very empowering for trauma, informed practices and the more we can share with each other and promote what we do I think is important. But do you want to answer that next question?

Ben: 1:08:25

No, I guess I’ll give you a talk about it the other day and you were wondering with Colby whether there’s an opportunity to create like a free music community or a group process where we could all come together to think and share our experiences.

Susan: 1:08:39

Yeah, like every two months is there an open forum where we can all share and have an agenda. But you know whether that’s possible or not.

Colby: 1:08:49

Well, it’s interesting because you will have heard, I guess, from the podcast that I’ve done with people in the UK, and Simon brought it up as well, was the community have heard, I guess from the, from the podcast that I’ve done with people in the uk, that they there’s, and I and simon brought it up as well was this the community of communities?

Colby: 1:09:03

yes, that they have yeah that they have in in the uk where there’s a number of org, social care organizations, that um meet collectively, I look, as I understand understand it, I should say and that they kind of order each other as well to kind of keep yeah, keep in a supportive way to keep everyone you know on track and maintaining the vision of those organisations. I think it’s a really interesting point that you raise, susan. Let me first say that Patrick and I talk a lot about this podcast and he also puts me in contact with a number of the podcast guests that we’ve had on, in contact with a number of the podcast guests that we’ve had on. He’s a remarkable individual who has a global network, and so I think that question is probably one that I would like to have Patrick’s input into about a global, would like to have Patrick’s input into about a global. I think what we’re trying to do with this podcast, amongst other things, is establish, in a way, establish a place where global, good or great practice, informative practice, kind of comes together, is is collected. I understand what you’re saying it would be good to to have a forum. Oh, I think it, I think it’s possible.

Colby: 1:10:49

I I think everyone who’s come on this podcast has, you know, been really excited to come on and be a part of, amongst other things, changing the story that exists around therapeutic residential care or around residential care. I do think that there are residential care being seen just as the final resort. You know the place. You send kids that you can’t send anywhere else. I think it’s got hairs all over it, as we would say. It’s a real. Even if we, even if policymakers, just continue with that thinking about residential care and its role, I think it is highly problematic. You know, like we need to. If that’s what your thoughts are about residential care, then it needs to change. You need to invest in and be a part of the change. But I, you know, the reality is, through this podcast, is that we can easily show that there are, is that we can easily show that there are fantastic therapeutic endeavours occurring in residential care worldwide. There’s more guests that I’m really excited to have on from organisations like your own who demonstrate that.

Susan: 1:12:15

So yeah, I think, yeah, it’s about having that groundswell where there’s enough of this that force policy to change because there are better outcomes and, collectively, when you evidence all that, then you’ve got. You know. Robert kiyosaki always said to me so you need to have artifacts, artifacts, artifacts a bit like like Patrick and all these books and talking about it. So you need to have that collective. If we all did something together, collectively, and it was on the global stage, then that’s when you make real change, I think, you know, rather than working in silos and pockets. But I think, as you said, your podcast is a really big part of getting that sort of you know, your kind of the linchpin to get us all together and maybe, you know, get that happening.

Colby: 1:13:09

I think it would be really exciting to do that, and all of my podcast guests, I think, who I’ve had communication with about wanting to, are willing and wanting to reappear and talk more. So I think that what you have kind of proposed is probably another way in which we can ensure that the voice of people who you know, who have substantial experience and expertise in this sector, can come together and influence.

Susan: 1:13:47

Yeah, what about a world conference with each of us speaking? Sorry, I’ve gone a bit wild.

Colby: 1:13:58

If you’re asking me, me, what I what, what I think about, I think it, you know. Look, I think I think we’re heading in a direction of their. You know we’re making these connections between good practice, um endeavors around the place. If you’re asking for me to organise it, I’d need a little bit of help. This is not my day job. I think my wife, who also manages our practice, would have a bit of a. I hope she wouldn’t have a heart attack. She’d be very supportive, but she’d be asking me where the money comes from. You know, susan, as you say and not just you, others have said as well, if it’s the right thing to be doing, if it’s the right thing to do, then yeah, the money will come, the support will come for it. Yeah.

Susan: 1:14:51

But also Robert told me about also. You’re on purpose, but you’ve got to take action as well. Robert told me about also. You’re on purpose, but you’ve got to take action as well. It’s to be, you know, be and do and be and do and be and do you know in equal measure, is you know?

Colby: 1:15:08

Yeah Well, we’ll definitely rope Patrick in to such an endeavour and others, but look, thanks again for agreeing to be on the podcast A great pleasure. Yeah, pleasure was mine as well. Thank you Ben, thank you Colin, and yeah, I’ll look forward to speaking to you another time.

Susan: 1:15:31

Yeah, well, now Ben’s not nervous anymore and me will be right, that was my question.

Ben: 1:15:37

Patrick’s very encouraging of us to come on, but I’ve not seen him on Spotify yet. I’m still waiting, yeah.

Colby: 1:15:46

I’m going to treat that as an observation rather than a question.

Ben: 1:15:51

Thank you, colby, lovely to see you in person.

Susan: 1:15:54

Thanks, colby. Thank you, bye-bye Thank you.

Leadership Alignment: The Backbone of Therapeutic Practice

Everyone Needs Reflective Space, Even the CEO

The concept of therapeutic practice in social care settings is often misunderstood or diluted, yet it remains one of the most powerful approaches for creating meaningful change in the lives of vulnerable young people. Simon Benjamin, with over two decades of experience across various care models, offers profound insights into what makes therapeutic practice genuinely effective.

At the heart of therapeutic practice lies a simple yet revolutionary concept: alignment throughout the entire organisation. As Simon explains, therapeutic care cannot be compartmentalised to frontline workers alone. The approach must be embedded from the CEO to the receptionist, creating a cohesive environment where everyone understands their role in the healing journey. This alignment is not merely about following procedures but about creating a culture where reflection, vulnerability, and trust become institutional values.

Simon’s journey from cleaning houses as a support worker to becoming CEO of the Lighthouse Foundation demonstrates how witnessing therapeutic practice at various organisational levels provides unique insights. His experiences at the Mulberry Bush School in the UK and the Lighthouse Foundation in Australia showed him what truly effective therapeutic environments look like. In these settings, policies weren’t just administrative documents but thoughtfully crafted guidelines that read “beautifully,” as if someone was speaking to you. This attention to detail reflects the depth of consideration given to every aspect of care.

Perhaps most revolutionary is Simon’s emphasis on reflective practice at every level of the organisation. He describes how even administration teams at the Mulberry Bush School had reflective spaces, despite having no direct clinical work. This practice acknowledges that everyone in the organisation contributes to the therapeutic environment, whether they’re working directly with clients or not. For leadership teams, these reflective spaces serve as mirrors, allowing them to examine their decision-making processes and reconnect with the core purpose of their work.

Simon offers a powerful metaphor for understanding why these structures are necessary: working in social care, particularly child protection, is like navigating rough terrain. Without proper supports like reflective practice and ongoing training, it’s like “stripping off the increased suspension” from an off-road vehicle. The result? People get “bashed up” – they burn out and leave, often without citing the true reasons for their departure.

What’s particularly challenging about implementing therapeutic practice is that it requires vulnerability from everyone involved, including leadership. Simon describes how, as a CEO, he maintained mandatory reflective spaces even for his director of fundraising and head of finance. Initially uncomfortable, these spaces became essential for ensuring all departments understood the work happening on the ground. During COVID-19, rather than reducing these reflective practices due to increased pressure, Simon’s team doubled them, recognising their critical importance during times of stress.

For organisations looking to implement therapeutic approaches, Simon emphasises the importance of leadership buy-in and understanding change management principles. Rather than imposing changes, he suggests engaging the entire organisation in the process, modelling the very approaches used with clients. This participatory approach not only increases buy-in but embodies the therapeutic principles being implemented.

As the social care sector continues to evolve, Simon’s vision calls for agreed standards of what constitutes therapeutic care. Without such benchmarks, the term risks becoming “a bit of a cheap word,” diluted to the point where any organisation can claim to be “trauma-informed” after minimal training. True therapeutic practice, like medication reaching its therapeutic level, must provide enough positive care experiences to actually impact lives and facilitate healing.

You can listen here:

You can watch here:

About Simon

For two decades, Simon experienced a wide range of care models in disability, mental health, special education, out-of-home care and Aboriginal childcare services.

This included caring for deeply traumatised children in both community-based and state-run residential care homes. More than 10 years of this time was spent immersed in the well-established therapeutic milieu workplaces of The Mulberry Bush School in the United Kingdom, and Lighthouse Foundation in Australia, having been CEO for more than five years at the latter.

Simon now draws on this rich career experience, together with the latest research and evidence-based approaches, to empower organisational leaders, teams and frontline workers to better manage their own wellbeing and deliver optimal outcomes.

While his work supports a broad range of clients, Simon specialises in Out of Home Care, Mental Health, Homelessness sectors.

Simon’s vision is to see people, organisations and the human services sector deliver the care that vulnerable people need to enable them to reach their potential.

Related Podcast Interviews:

Lynne Peyton

Listen here:

Watch here:

Tom Ellison

Listen here:

Watch here:

Transcript:

Colby: 0:00

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast.

Simon: 0:03

That, for me, is the key of how therapeutic practice really works. Is the stuff that you would do with a child actually happens through the whole organisation?

Simon: 0:10

The senior leadership team had a reflective space, a clinical supervision space that was held regularly I think it was monthly and that was held right through. Even the administration team had a reflective space. I think that was the key thing in maintaining a therapeutic environment. The alignment has got to be through the whole system, from top to bottom, and the way I often describe the need for this in a leadership team is if you don’t, especially for a group supervision for a team, if you don’t provide the a group supervision for a team, if you don’t provide the space for it, people will talk somewhere, um, they’ll talk with their spouse, or they’ll talk, um, by the photocopier or, you know, have a private zoom with each other. The conversations will happen, but it’s best you bring them into an environment where they’re contained and you can have them as a group and, you know, get everyone’s perspective.

Simon: 1:04

I know, then, being as a CEO, the distance you feel when you’ve got suddenly a board to report to budgets, to meet financial pressures and you’re not in the day-to-day is not in your mind as much. A leader having supervision, enabled time to reflect on work things, that’s just for you. It’s not, you know, because you can talk with one direct report and you’ve got to be mindful what you’re sharing, you talk to your partner or whoever, and you’ve got to. You can’t share everything, but this person can share whatever you want and um, it’s just, yeah, it’s, it’s a bit of a release valve and many other beneficial things, I think, and it also connects you a bit with the work. You then have it. You see its benefits. You think actually I need to have this through the organization because everyone needs this.

Colby: 1:54

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast. I’m Colby Pearce, and joining me for this episode is an experienced leader and consultant with cross-sector experience. Before I introduce my guests, I’d just like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the lands we’re meeting on For me, the Kaurna people of the Adelaide Plains and for my guests, the Jagera, yugara and Turrgal people. And I’d just like to acknowledge the continuing connection that the living Aboriginal people feel to land, waters, culture and community, and pay my respects to their elders, past, present and emerging. My guest for this episode is Simon Benjamin.

Colby: 2:44

For two decades, simon experienced a wide range of care models in disability, mental health, special education, out-of-home care and Aboriginal childcare services. This included caring for deeply traumatised children in both community-based and state-run residential care homes community-based and state-run residential care homes. More than 10 years of this time was spent immersed in the well-established therapeutic milieu workplaces of the Mulberry Bush School in the United Kingdom and the Lighthouse Foundation in Australia, where he was CEO for more than five years. Simon now draws on this rich career experience, together with the latest research and evidence-based approaches, to empower organisational leaders, teams and frontline workers to better manage their own wellbeing and deliver optimal service outcomes, while his work supports a broad range of clients. Simon specialises in out-of-home care, mental health and homelessness sectors. Simon’s vision is to see people, organisations and the human services sector deliver the care that vulnerable people need to enable them to reach their potential. Welcome, simon. Is there anything you’d like to add to that summary of you?

Simon: 4:11

Oh no, that’s quite a good roundup. I think I probably need to condense it a little bit more. But yeah, no, that sounds fine with me. Yeah, I probably would add. Actually, just on thinking of it, just my main focus in my consultancy, working with kind of social um organizations and social care is therapeutic practice. Yes, the uh it’s the recognition of the importance of therapeutic practice and how to adopt it and integrate it into regular service delivery, regular interactions with children, youth and families. Yeah, Awesome.

Colby: 4:48

Well, let’s get into it. So the first question I have of you is a fairly large one, so hopefully it doesn’t feel too much, but I just wanted to ask you what led you into a career supporting leaders and teams deliver best outcomes for their clients, including in the social care sector, and who and what were your major influences?

Simon: 5:16

Okay, well, look, it started for me around 23 years ago. I was new to Australia well new-ish. I just got married, I just got my visa to work here and so I’m from England originally and I was looking at different options. I had an honest degree in psychology from the UK options. I had an honest degree in psychology from the UK and I just felt right moving into a career where, into the care industry basically.

Simon: 5:51

So I started out as a home carer for my local council, working supporting families who had children with a disability. It started with house cleaning. So here I was with my degree and everything else, cleaning houses, which my father thought was just a disgrace um, but that soon progressed into becoming a respite carer for the, for the families, and and then I also started working in disability um and then, after a couple years of doing that, I went into youth mental health um and then adult mental health in day programs and residential um facilities and it just started progressing from there. Then it worked into a subacute unit where adults who had been in a psychiatric facility. They went into this place for about four weeks to kind of begin the transition back into the community.

Simon: 6:40

So I had a kind of varied experience, so I had a kind of varied experience, and then it was when I started working in residential care in Melbourne predominantly, that I kind of started to feel I found my niche and I then moved over to Perth for a year and worked in their first therapeutic group home. That was run by the Department of Child Protection it’s still running, that’s the same home and we had a team leader there who was from the UK it was quite recent and he’d worked in therapeutic facilities in England and actually was a, was a consultant, was kind of consulting, went around helping group homes that weren’t functioning too well, and so that was where I kind of had my first taste of therapeutic interactions one-to-one with, you know, children who were these were children up to age 12 quite violent presentations, and I was in that for a year and then from there I went to the UK and worked, worked at the Marlborough School for four and a half years um, which really um was an amazing experience to see how a well-developed, well-established therapeutic organization works um and where their practice is, from the receptionist to the ceo and everything in between um all fully aligned, and that gave me just a you know, just a great experience. I was actually working in the team that worked with the families. So while a lot of work was done with the children while they were at the residential school for 38 weeks of the year, then they went home and sometimes they went home to a family where the dysfunction originated from. So my work was to work with families to help them make progress. Progress also. And then when I came back from there, I spent a year at the Victorian Aboriginal Child Care Agency and then I went to Lighthouse Foundation working in that relationship with children and youth, where you actually build trust and take them on the journey or walk with them while they’re experiencing their own change and self-discovery about things that have impacted their lives.

Simon: 8:55

So then, when I moved into a CEO role, it was quite different. I was no longer, you know, interacting, or you know supervising carers or directly working with youth and children. Interacting, or you know supervising carers or directly working with youth and children and um, I then, you know, we went as a leading organization. It’s a whole different set of skills to learn and um, coming out from the other side of that, I mean it was a great experience. We grew the organization. It kind of doubled in size, financially. We went into, we started a foster care program, but that was new to the adopting a therapeutic approach. That was new to the sector. It had some variations to existing programs, and the core work of therapeutic practice, which is about the interactions really the interactions with children, youth and then within teams, is based on things like establishing trust.

Simon: 9:54

So you need to establish trust with your client or your participants, or just the child or youth or family, and to do that you have to have a level of vulnerability yourself to demonstrate in a professional capacity, um, and then from that trust you can then engage in and go through difficult experiences with them where they push your boundaries and challenge you and they feel your boundaries and vice versa.

Simon: 10:17

And and through that um relationship there’s trust built and then things can be started to overcome.

Simon: 10:24

And what I loved is um you know is is translating that into a management situation where, uh, I work with leadership teams now to help them be vulnerable with each other, to help them build trust so that they can actually thrash out the things they need to thrash out and make good decisions.

Simon: 10:40

Because the um work you do with with um with children, youth or families is is gray, it’s there’s no clear answer as to what you know. You’re personally working with needs in that particular moment and um, and so you need to have, build that relationship to help them, so you know what you can do to be of assistance and you know they know what they need from you and vice versa. And it’s not it’s difficult to articulate. The same is true of a leadership team of an organization. They have to work in the gray because they have to make decisions where there’s no, not necessarily a right or wrong answer, and they need the same set of skills to be able to work with each other. And that’s why I work in two different spaces that seem unrelated but actually have similar challenges. So that’s kind of how I’ve got to where I work here now.

Colby: 11:31

Fantastic Quite, the varied history. I mean really, basically, in a journalistic world it would be from the, I guess, from the floor up, you know, the mail person or whatever, right up to the editor of the newspaper and then freelancing after. That would be a similar kind of metaphor. You mentioned two in there, two very probably well-known, particularly the Mulberry Bush School and also the Lighthouse Foundation, which is well known to many of our listeners and to me. Um, you told me a little story a bit earlier about how you came to work in um, your first two jobs, uh, in when you returned to australia. I don’t. I think people be interested. Find that a little bit interesting to hear that story told.

Simon: 12:25

So I was at the Mulberry Bush School.

Simon: 12:31

The team I worked in was often the team that showed people around, when we had visitors, because the care workers or the teaching staff were often engaged with the children, obviously. So I’d showed many visitors around, but two visitors in particular. I firstly I think halfway through my tenure there I showed around Susan Barton, who’s the founder of Lighthouse Foundation and one of the executive directors at the time, and they said to me because you know through conversation I was with them for about an hour and a half that you know I’d been living in Melbourne for eight years, ten years, and I was intending to return at some point. And they said look, whenever you come back, please get in touch. It would be lovely to see if there’s an opportunity for you to work with us. So that was that Two years later, when I was actually put in my resignation, I was due to be leaving in a couple of months to come back to Melbourne.

Simon: 13:20

And I then showed around Adela Holmes with a friend of hers, and she’d been to the Mulberry Bush before, but she was having a second visit and I said to her oh, you know, I found out she was from Melbourne. I told her I was returning there and then she said oh, look, do you, have you found a job here? And I said I haven’t started looking. And then, long story short, I ended up working with Adela for just under a year at the Victorian Aboriginal Childcare Agency. So yes, there’s two people who I showed around and ended up working for both of them.

Colby: 13:50

Yes, and of course Adela has already been on the pod and yeah. So through that process of acquiring experiences and working in some really quite interesting places, were there any particular influences over your development that you would be happy to share with us, both the work environments that you were in and their approach to the work, or thought leaders, I guess, in the sector.

Simon: 14:33

Sure, I think probably there were some workers that impacted me that you know. I don’t remember some of their names just their approaches.

Simon: 14:45

But I think probably the first one to impact me was um, the um team. There’s house supervisor in the house in in Perth where I worked and um, he just had a very matter of fact um kind of approach and um, I think uh, gave me confidence in what I was doing. I’ve been working, um, I think this is one thing I’m going to say here’s probably quite key for some residential care workers, because when I first came into residential care, I didn’t as and I hadn’t been a parent at that point, I hadn’t had my first child, and I think actually being a parent puts you in a good stead to some degree, because I didn’t know what normal was, what should a normal, what normal child be doing, and how do I engage with this person. That’s a basic level of training that I didn’t have. I had no training actually and he really helped me develop my own person, to interact, which really was to encourage me just to be me.

Simon: 15:41

And I think that because I saw all these other kind of youth workers and they were really hip and really cool and I thought I got to be like them and I just I just wasn’t me. I just, you know, wasn’t quite hip and cool and um, and I then found in time that, um, uh, just through his encouragement, that actually they just needed a person, um, who, just a person, who is predictable, reliable, and it really encouraged me to be myself. So he was one influence Danny Burnett was his name in.

Colby: 16:12

Perth.

Simon: 16:13

Give him a shout because he was excellent. I think he’s still a year or two ago. He was still there, from what I recall.

Colby: 16:20

I was just going to jump in and say in authenticity is really still, I guess, talked about as being very important in this sector, because the kids see through fakeness very, very quickly and easily.

Simon: 16:38

That’s right, yeah, yeah, and I completely agree. Let me think yeah, and I completely agree, let me think, I think from there. When I worked at the Marlbury Bush School I can’t really point to any particular individual, but just the whole approach of that school really resounded with me and gave me again even further confidence to be who I was, to raise my voice in forums where to challenge ideas, because that’s what they did really well. There was one situation I remember there was one particular child that was causing, amongst you know, thirsty children that were all high, complex presentations. One was really pushing the boundaries of you know the different things the school was trying to do. And I remember the director of the time calling a meeting with some key individuals to kind of say we’re calling for different approaches as to what people think. And it was really amazing that, you know, the senior people were actually kind of saying we want everyone’s input here because this is a difficult situation for us to manage. And that really gave me like wow, this is a great way of just coming up with ideas. Brainstorming, decision-making really shows the nature of therapeutic practice that everyone’s involved. We want everyone’s skills on the table, everyone’s ideas, and so that was a good experience, a good influence there.

Simon: 17:59

Adela was also, I think, helped refine my approach a little bit. I think I love her dogged passion for the work and how. You know it was much more than a job for Adela and others in particular, and I think I probably found the same in Susan Barton as well, like you know, incredible commitment, um, and would fight, you know, for the kids um, tooth and nail if she had to. Um, yes, and um the other others on the journey, um, but they’re probably some of the, the main ones. I can probably list a few more names, but I’ll leave it there.

Colby: 18:41

It’s interesting because, um, you mentioned everyone being making a contribution and and kind of like a an open and flat structure in a way in terms of putting heads together. And, um, my most recent past uh podcast guest was Graeme Kerridge and he’s had a long and distinguished career in healthcare management internationally. But he started his professional career at the Cotswold community where Barbara Docker-Drysdale, who started the Mulberry Bush School, was the therapeutic consultant there. And what you just said about the Mulberry Bush not surprised or unsurprisingly is very similar to what impressed Graham about his work at the Cotswold community. So there’s an alignment between, um, those, those two places, and their practices. That, um, you know when you think about it, if you were exposed to that, I think, in around about the year 2000 or thereabouts, early 2000s. Is that correct?

Simon: 19:58

uh, no, for me it was at the Mulberry Bush uh.

Colby: 20:00

2009 to 2005 well, even even mean there’s 30 years difference between what Graeme’s describing at the Cotswold community.

Simon: 20:12

It really speaks, I think, to the enduring wisdom of Barbara Dockard, rysdale, really, and others who through those two seminal ventures, the Mowbray Bush School and the Cotswold community, yeah, and, if I can pick up on that, I think just to pinpoint because the articulation of, I think, what the keys are, there is a confidence in the approach to kind of say I don’t know, I don’t know what to do, I need to consult with others, and that’s what I loved about that that was really encouraging in the mobile brush was there was a lot of teamwork where people were just being really honest and vulnerable I don’t know what to do, or I’ve tried this and even people who experienced the people of at Modigrish have been there like 20 years but would still consult, and that, for me, I saw some of the best teamwork I’ve ever experienced where, in one of the teams I was in, it was actually at the point when I knew I was leaving and I was in the midst of thinking, oh, I’m going to so miss this, because you had real people of a lot of experience just pondering and discussing ideas and how are we going to do this, how are we going to break it through?

Simon: 21:33

And you know, there was so much thought that went into the children’s lives that it made such a difference. It was, yeah, incredible. So I think, yeah, that vulnerability of to be confident enough to say I don’t know, that’s consult.

Colby: 21:50

Yeah, yeah, yeah. It’s wonderful. I love for people to be thinking about what they’re doing. Too often they, you know, in the pressure of these complex work environments, people are in the pressure of these complex work environments. People are looking for the procedural response, or, you know, the easy solution or the straightforward solution suggestion. And John Whitwell was funny and I know you listened to his podcast when he said, when he made the transition from being the principal at the Cotswold community over to the UK’s first therapeutic foster care program and in his initial experiences there, staff would come to him with a question and he would say, well, I don’t know, I’ll have to think about that. And the staff were like, what? You know, you’re the ceo, we should be able to come to you for an answer. So, yeah, it’s, I think.

Simon: 22:52

I think adopting that stance that um, all, all humans, all, all young humans, and all situations, um, deserve a bit of thought, uh, about, you know, in terms of how we we’re delivering a service to them yeah, that’s right, and unfortunately it flies in the face sometimes of a government funding system than once um at um detailed outcomes of what will happen if they invest in a certain thing, and it can be, and meeting those two is another point of discussion.

Colby: 23:32

Yeah sure, Simon. We’ve heard about your work in a number of organisations, including those with an overarching therapeutic model or approach. I’m really interested to hear from you about what challenges you encountered or saw in maintaining a consistent therapeutic approach or practices across organisations, and how these were overcome.

Simon: 23:59

Sure, I think the challenge is really, if you have buy-in at the top, yeah, organisations that. So the Mulberry Bush and at Lighthouse it needed the leaders to say this is how our organisation is going to roll and to maintain it. I think probably the strongest, the strongest, this was done probably um strongly at the mulberry bush, where they had detailed policies written up that described how they would do things, even to the point of um. At the mulberry bush they were able to certainly in my day, but I was the physical restraint of children if need be, and they had detailed policies that described how and when they would you know, use this and why. And the policy read beautifully Like it was a very well thought out and it was as if it was like someone speaking to you giving you guidance and training. That’s how the policy was written, so you can tell it had been formed after you know a long time and been refined.

Simon: 25:11

And another practice that they had was that the senior leadership team had a reflective space, a clinical supervision space that was held regularly. I think it was monthly, and that was held regularly. I think it was monthly um, and and that was held right through. Even the administration team had a reflective space and they had no. They were doing no clinical work, no therapeutic work. They had interaction with the children because the children would walk through reception, so they were. Even the way they interacted had had importance, which is why they were part of the supervision process so that structure was right.

Simon: 25:44

The way through the system and that structure was right the way through the system. The policies were right the way through the system and I think that was the key thing in maintaining a therapeutic environment. The alignment has got to be through the whole system, from top to bottom. I’ve seen in other organisations where I’ve worked where it’s just the program is the therapeutic program and the rest of the organisation doesn’t have the therapeutic parts to it. That doesn’t work so well and I’ve seen one example I can recount, I won’t name names.

Simon: 26:16

I was a therapeutic advisor to a residential care program and I didn’t have the final say, I was just the advisor and I gave some advice on a situation that was of a young person and there’d been a number of like them leaving the home and it was getting a bit more dangerous and you know different things were being tried. I made some recommendations that they should do this and not that and blah, blah. Someone two levels more senior than than than even the person I was working with, um vetoed that suggestion and went with their um. You know their direction on things, having not really much contact with the day-to-day and what I said would happen if they did that ended up happening and that for me, is just an indicator of what happens when the whole organisation is not in alignment and in the same systems. I know then, being as a CEO, the distance you feel when you’ve got suddenly a board to report to budgets, to meet financial pressures, and the day-to-day is not in your mind as much. And then so you have this pressure and you kind of think, okay, I need to make this decision.

Simon: 27:36

And then I found then having that reflective group where we’ve got the director of care and the therapeutic input in the room helped ground my thinking and bring me back to the key of the work. And I can see how you’ve got great workers on the ground, great social workers, who then become senior leaders, how they lose touch, and I know that some of them. You know one CEO I met. He was going to a residential care home every month at least to go and have dinner with them to stay in touch, which which I thought was just fantastic, but that that can ground you to a degree. But I think having a regular thing through the system is the thing that actually holds it. And the challenges are you get very busy and often the first thing to go when you get really busy is the reflective practice, because no business is being exchanged other than just each person’s well-being, which is very important, and so it’s the first thing to go.

Simon: 28:33

Now. What we had at Lighthouse is one I instituted the leadership team having a regular space. It was recommended to me by my director of care and I completely related to it, having been in her position, um not long before. So I agreed and I maintained it the whole time I was there, um, and it was mandatory space even for our director of fundraising, even for our head of finance, and for them it was an uncomfortable space at the beginning because they had no idea what it was all about, but you know, essential. So even when they were signing off you know large invoices, they had an understanding as to what was going on because they were a bit more in touch with the work. So I think, and just to give one example, when things got more difficult, like especially during COVID I was CEO during, you know, during the first part of COVID we actually doubled our reflective practice as a leadership team rather than reduced it, because we had some more critical decisions to make and we knew it was important that we um were having the the buffer effect of having a space to think properly as a team.

Simon: 29:37

The way I describe it to people is like this um, I describe the work in in care, especially in child protection type work, as it’s like you’re working in rougher terrain and you wouldn’t take a normal road vehicle in an off-road environment and effectively the kind of work is off-road environment. You would have a vehicle that’s got a four-wheel drive with higher suspension, and I find what happens is if you don’t have things in place like reflective practice through the whole system, ongoing training not once in a year training, ongoing training as mandatory things for your team, then you’re basically stripping off the increased suspension, you’re stripping off all those features and you’re sending a road car into an off-road environment. And what happens? It gets bashed up, basically, and people leave and they get burnt out and they don’t tell you that’s the reason they’re leaving. They give another reason, but that’s often the case.

Colby: 30:33

I think there’s so much in there in your response there, simon, that I also have had varied experiences and I have been involved in delivering as a consultant, external consultant in therapeutic care.

Colby: 30:50

I’ve also been involved in the delivery of a therapeutic care program and I just want to maybe get you to expand a little bit more based on my experience. And my experience would be that management want something, they want a program to be rolled out, a program of training for staff. So it comes from management, but that’s where it ends, that’s where you don’t hear further really from management, but that’s where it ends, that’s where you don’t hear further really from management. You then, and in my case I’ve been left to just roll out the program, the therapeutic caregiving, training and implementation with a particular program, and that just didn’t work from my point of view. It didn’t work out well at all. So it needs more than just to be management approved. It needs to be as you described. It needs to be part of the whole structure, rolled out across the whole structure of the organisation, at every level.

Simon: 32:11

And I’m not.

Colby: 32:13

I was just going to say I’m not sure. In the bigger organisations. I’m interested to hear your thoughts on how management might be more involved in the rollout of a particular endeavour or program, given that some of our bigger organisations are so multifaceted you know especially our statutory child protection organisations.

Simon: 32:40

Well, I know, look, I don’t uh a lot of the detail behind models like, for example, the sanctuary model. I know that their process has a lot of change management features in, where they they consider it a change management process, which is actually really what it is. So you’re effectively bringing in a cultural change to an organization, of the way it works. So it it kind of requires the leadership to drive it, and if the leadership aren’t really involved, then for me I just, you know, make very clear what will happen if they’re not involved, that it will be an investment that will peter out after a certain amount of time and they’ll end up cancelling decisions that they kind of initially went ahead for and not see how they’ve got from A to B. But they’ve got there. So, yeah, it is very much because it’s a different way of working, it’s a retraining, it really is, and I think the intention is often good.

Simon: 33:36

We want these children healed or we want them on a better life trajectory, or to start on a better life trajectory. So go and do that. But there’s often, sometimes the the you hear this a lot for people who don’t know the implications of things is there’s a, sometimes a notion of can you just go and fix these children, and this program will fix them and and it’s, and it’s just not to do that Like you don’t go to the doctors to get fixed, you go there to be healed and treated, and that’s actually the. You know, we kind of use that kind of language and yeah. So I think there’s a lot more involved. It has to come from the top and I think sometimes, you know, in terms of engaging with an organisation, it’s if a consultant I’m not saying I do this or that others should she could say if your leadership don’t buy into this, I won’t work with you because there’s no point it’s a waste of time.

Colby: 34:30

exactly I, I and and that was exactly what you were reading my mind I was thinking there’s no way I would go in and as a consultant to or even to roll out um program without the leadership participating in it. Again, yeah, because you put so much of your wisdom, your knowledge, your acquired knowledge and you put so much heart into the endeavor and when it doesn’t work out, that’s very painful. I guess it certainly was for me to have that experience in this sector.

Simon: 35:15

Yeah, and I think also saying no when they want you to say yes is you know, is in some ways, you know, when you say no to them, it’s kind of saying actually no. This this takes you to, even if it takes another six months or a year to decide if you probably want to do it, it takes your full commitment, otherwise you know it’s not going to work I think, yeah, I think they’re really awesome points.

Colby: 35:44

Yeah, how do you reconcile that? Sorry, these are questions without notice, but you know, there’s also and I’ve been guilty of it at times a school of thought that is that you achieve change bottom up, or that you try to and I kind of try to do that in my work. I try to capture the I I kind of try to do that in my work. I try to, I try to capture the hearts and minds of the work of the workforce in this sector through not just podcasts like this but youtube videos that I make writing books, you know that sort of thing and try and facilitate something you know an embryonic, bottom-up, ground-up progression towards a more trauma-informed organization well, I think I mean it.

Simon: 36:30

Look, it really depends on the organization.

Simon: 36:31

I think, you know, if you don’t have the buy-in from the top, you start working on the ground, it could be that the, the whole organization starts to shift in that direction.

Simon: 36:38

It’s just whether the leadership provide the authorizing environment for the said program to do what it needs to do, and I think then it then needs the people in that program to be able to articulate what they’re doing in such a way where it’s properly communicated and received to the leadership. Um, so I think, yeah, I mean, you know, I wouldn’t turn away if someone said, look, we want to train this thing because I think, like you say, there’s a hope that it will start to progress through um, and it really would be on um, things being properly, you know, documented, recorded, and and they’re being, you know, um, the, they’re being some um, not results, but some progress in the lives of the children. We’ve actually we’re seeing, like instance, reduce, we’re seeing people the school attendance picking up, you know if that’s been an issue or different things, and then kind of go okay, what is this, what, how is this? Just turning around, and then it could be that that will start to enthuse the more senior levels.

Colby: 37:40

Yeah, yeah you’ve, you’ve had a I mean across your career, of which spans decades. You’ve you’ve worked from yeah, all the way from down, uh, at cleaning homes, right through to ceo and consultant, um to ceos and organizations and leadership teams. I’m just wondering if you, with all that wisdom that you’ve gathered, is there something that you would like to see happen in a cross-sector way that will help to realise the ambitions of all involved of better outcomes for the young people that we deliver services on behalf of?

Simon: 38:25

Sure, I think you know, I think when being the role of CEO, I was fortunate enough to be recruited in Victoria to like a working group of 12 leaders. At the time it was 2016. It was under there was a roadmap to reform, to reform the child protection system, and it was originally designed. It was like a co-design. It was actually probably in the end we were more consulted as opposed to designing, and it gave me I was on that for a few years, a number of years, and it gave me an overview as to why the sector looks at different things to different models and everything. And what I kind of realized was that, um, therapeutic care is not really understood um in in, um in among, even among ceos, um, there’s the people that kind of sit through the training, kind of they might say that you know that we’ve got trauma-informed programs and it’s trauma-informed and the whole thing, and I think that’s that’s become a I’m sad to say, a bit of a cheap word now, because any, most people can experience a bit of training and say that they’re trauma-informed. It’s whether they I mean I know there are other organizations who’ve broken this down I think it’s been good that you know you can be trauma aware, um, but then are you actually you know trauma practised and those different things, and I’ve you know, I did some work myself on what actually does therapeutic mean? Because one forum I was in the government minister at the time wasn’t in the forum, but I was told by someone who connected with them quite frequently that the government minister didn’t believe therapeutic practice worked and I thought how has that happened? Obviously, what’s been represented to them it must not have been genuinely therapeutic. And what that shows to me is, among many other things I’ve seen, is there needs to be some agreed standards of what therapeutic care is. What I did like in England at the Marlborough School was there was the Marlborough School were involved back then. I’m not sure if they are still now. It’s called the Therapeutic Communities and I think it was called the Community of Communities and they basically peer reviewed each other on a regular cycle to check their policies, to check their different parts of their practice and everything to actually be accredited as a therapeutic community. I think that needs to be happening, certainly in Australia and probably internationally, where there are agreed standards that if you’re not following these standards then you’re not therapeutic, because for me, therapeutic and not just trauma informed, but therapeutic.

Simon: 41:12

And by therapeutic I mean it’s kind of borrowed from my understanding, is borrowed from the medical term relating to medication. When you take a medication, it reaches its therapeutic level when it’s starting to impact and it has an impact on the disease or condition it’s treating or fighting. And that therapeutic level is dependent on how much you weigh and different things. I could take the dose of a child for a particular medication and it won’t reach its therapeutic level. For me it’s the same.

Simon: 41:46

I believe, when working with people who experience trauma, are they receiving enough of the good care experiences to actually start to impact their lives? Where they start to, you know, there’s repair of their attachment style, there’s repair of their experiences. Where they don’t respond in the same ways, they learn new ways of responding. That’s when the healing starts to take place. That’s when the therapeutic is having an impact. I think a lot of places that call themselves trauma-informed or therapeutic, if they go to the level of calling themselves therapeutic, aren’t actually reaching that what I call therapeutic level. And I think that’s what’s needed, because then you’ll have a minister who will start to see programs that are actually working and bringing change and will then say, okay, it’s worth investing in. So I think there needs to be, across the board, some standards that are set, and then I think the number of organizations or programs that are called therapeutic will drop off and the real ones will emerge. That are called therapeutic will drop off and the real ones will emerge.

Colby: 42:53

And I love that idea that you were talking about with the community of communities in the UK getting together and probably collectively agreeing some standards against which they reviewed each other, yeah, and kept each other accountable in the process in doing that and kind of. That allows me to segue, I think, a bit into. You’ve mentioned a number of times already about leadership having the opportunity to have their own reflective practice groups. I’m just wondering what you would see as being the key benefits that are derived from leadership of social care organisations having their own supervision group supervision, reflective practice supervision. You’ve talked about the benefit for the program in terms of implementation and alignment through the organisation, but what do chief executives and others get out of supervision?

Simon: 44:10

I think it provides a mirror. I mean, can you imagine going through weeks and weeks and weeks but never looking in a mirror to see how you look, to see how you’re responding, how you’re doing things? Because for me, clinical supervision is someone reflecting back to you what’s coming out of you and to have that reflected back for you to then go. Is this the way I want to be making decisions? Is that you know, and you know I’m pleased to say, a lot of the time, or some of the time, what was reflected back to me, I thought, oh, I’m quite pleased with my approach on that. But it also allowed me to refine some things and I think that’s probably what’s missing. I would say for a ceo who’s come from more the business world and comes into an environment there’d be hang on, what’s all this? You know fluffy stuff I need to get involved in. It’s probably similar to them having a coach, because a coach I’ve had I had a coach as a ceo and incredibly helpful because, um, they get to. It’s like a sounding board and it’s many different things and I think probably the clinical space is similar in many respects but also gets down to you know, you being in touch with what’s going on inside with you, especially when it comes to decision-making. You have a lot of tensions to hold, your communication has to be very measured in different forums and um, and you’re holding on a lot of stress that you’re often not aware of or you are aware of but not how much is impacting different things that you’re doing.

Simon: 45:45

And the way I often describe the need for this in a leadership team is, if you don’t, especially for a group supervision for a team, if you don’t provide the space for it, people will talk somewhere, um, they’ll talk with their spouse or they’ll talk um by the photocopier or, you know, have a private zoom with each other.

Simon: 46:05

The conversations will happen, but it’s best you bring them into an environment where they’re contained and you can have them as a group and, you know, get everyone’s perspective and and I think the same as a leader, having supervision enabled time to reflect on work things. That’s just for you. It’s not, you know, because you can talk with one direct report and you’ve got to be mindful of what you’re sharing. You talk to your partner or whoever, and you can’t share everything, but this person can share whatever you want and it’s just yeah, it’s a bit of a release valve and many other beneficial things, I think, and it also connects you a bit with the work. You then have it. You see its benefits. You think actually I need to have this through the organisation because everyone needs this.

Colby: 46:48

Yeah, that’s.

Colby: 46:50

Yeah, that’s really a very important point that if um, um, modeling the model is a, is a, um, a term that is used, I guess, um in in our work a lot um, that, that idea that you just presented, that um of supervisors modelling the model but if they can see and feel the benefit for themselves, then perhaps hopefully they’re more likely to say this should be happening all through the organisation.

Colby: 47:31

And again, I say there’s a tremendous benefit in people just having the opportunity to think about what they’re doing. Yeah, and the other thing that I really liked in what you said there was about that people will talk anyway, but what people probably need is the benefit of a containing space, is that you have that person that structures and manages the interaction in such a way that people can be vulnerable and hopefully it doesn’t invoke defences that mean that they shy away from deep and accurate self-reflection as well as reflection on the work. Yeah, love it. So my final question to you would be if you were asked to give advice to an organisation that was just starting out on developing a therapeutic milieu and a therapeutic model and practice in it, what key advice do you think you would be wanting to give them.

Simon: 48:53

Okay, the first thing, based on probably what I said earlier, was um, just to ensure that the leadership are on board um and to um. So, yeah, it was to be very clear on for the leadership you know, I and um I on board with this and just to make sure that they understand that the investment is obviously going to take time and probably to kind of educate them a bit on what it is like to change a culture and to do a bit of work on change management practices. Because, I mean, one thing I saw in change management once I attended a masterclass on it once was actually to was to will, be to the organisation, was for the leadership to go to the organisation to kind of say we need to make this change and, you know, explore why, to get the buy-in and then kind of go to them how do you think we should do this change and open it up? Obviously, there’s going to be parameters, there’ll be things that we suggested that we’d know, but they need to be explained as to why. Because then you’ll be taking the organisation on a journey with you and they’ve been able to contribute to the process and I think because in doing that you’re actually modelling the way you’d interact with a child, which is really the way that that, for me, is the key of how therapeutic practice really works is the stuff that you would do with a child actually happens through the whole organization. And so you would say with a child look, there’s this.

Simon: 50:30

You know, I’ll give an example of a challenging behavior. There’s this behavior that’s going on and we can’t keep doing this. Do you understand the reasons why? Oh yeah, because thingy gets hurt and you’re doing things you don’t want to do. How do we help you with that? And it’ll be the same thing you do with the staff.

Simon: 50:45

We need to make this change.

Simon: 50:46

How do we go about doing this in a way that’s going to work for everyone as best as we can do it and, be honest, not everyone’s going to like this. Some of you may want to leave, and that’s all right, but how can we leave in a really good way if you are going to leave and and just talk it through and then start to introduce things you need to introduce? Look, we’re going to need some training, we’re going to need to rewrite some policies, we’re going to need to do a whole change and it’s going to take time and we’ll check in with each other as we go and just take it on that kind of journey and that’s, that’s really like a just a thumbnail sketch just to some of the things that are involved. I believe, um, but it’s, I think also in the same thing of working where you work with a child you meet as a consultant, I’d meet an organization where they are and and take them where they are and map out. Map out the steps and make it realistic with a constant review process.

Colby: 51:38

Great, well, look, there’s so many takeaways in there for me and, I hope, for the people who are listening to this podcast as well. Thank you very much for your time and being gracious enough to accept the invitation before you go. I do give everyone these days. I didn’t the first couple of podcasts, but then I thought I’d be a good thing to do give you a chance to ask me a question without notice. I’ve asked you a lot, um, so I’m wondering if there’s a question curly or otherwise, otherwise that you might want to ask me before we finish up.

Simon: 52:18

Sorry, I think probably the. I guess one thing is I like to learn off of people is what’s the greatest thing that you’ve learned in this sector? So it could be an error you made or something like that. What’s something, that kind of really a situation you went through that you learned. Wow, this really taught me a huge thing. What did you learn?

Colby: 52:47

There’s quite a few different things. I’ve learned about what I think is fundamentally important, and I’ve talked about what I think is fundamentally important, and I’ve talked about that in previous podcasts. I think that the way we manage a person’s felt self-worth is really important, but I think the thing that is really jumping around in my head and I’ll speak it is that not all problems can be fixed, but at least they can be understood. Yeah, so what I mean by that is that, and particularly when you’re working and interacting with our children and young people, we can’t even, we shouldn’t even pretend. And when you said earlier about people who say, well, you know, I’ve got this program or whatever and it’s going to fix the trauma, as I said, I always tell people to avoid those ones like the plague.

Colby: 53:55

But, yeah, when you’re working with children and young people, there’s a number of challenges that they have, not least of which is the challenge of going to school every day that we can’t just say, oh well, we’re just going to remove that from your life, you don’t have to go to children. Just say, oh well, we’re just going to remove that from your life, you don’t have to go to children. There’s a legal impediment for us doing that, but at least we can acknowledge the experience of the child, of how their experience of going to school, the challenges that they face of going to school, the challenges that they face, and we can turn our mind to how we can respond therapeutically to those challenges. I think what I’ve, the greatest intervention, I think, is to be able to communicate understanding of the person in our thoughts, in our actions and in our sorry, in our words, in our actions and in our expressed emotions.

Colby: 55:05

I think that’s what I’ve learned acknowledgement, validation, empathy, therapeutic actions they’re, they’re the things that I think um, that I’ve you know, learned, are the most important yes, I think, just maybe I’ll put it in a bit of a reframe.

Colby: 55:28

I think what you’re saying is just um, for people to be um, felt that they’re, they feel they’ve been properly experienced for the true people that they are and understood that they’ve been understood that school is difficult and yeah, there is somewhat mischievously, because I’m a little bit of a mischievous person, I started thinking of acronyms in relation to the content that I, not a long time ago, but the content that I write and, um, I was thinking about the term aura now, and aura has got a whole kind of new agey vibe about it. But the actual aura really in the dictionary sense means it’s that distinctive quality or atmosphere of a place or a person. Right, and I think when I do my next edition or do another book, if, when and if probably a bit more of an if, I will probably structure it more around at least the therapeutic care side of things, more around this acronym of AURA. So not only is AURA the felt experience of a place and the people in it, but it means that those people are accessible, so they’re present, they’re with you, their facilitating feelings of being heard and understood, acknowledged, important, a person of worth in their words, understanding, in their actions, their responsiveness to the experience of the young person and in their outward expressed emotions and through attunement, facilitating attunement experiences.

Colby: 57:32

So I think, yeah, aura probably encapsulates a lot of the responses. I also am the author of the AAA model, which is a published model and is about my learnings about the inner experiences of the children. But I might talk about that when I get a similar question in another podcast. But yeah, that’s probably enough at this stage. So again, thank you very much for graciously accepting the invite to be on this fledgling podcast. And, yeah, wish you all the best and maybe our paths will cross again another time.

Simon: 58:19

Yeah, thank you for the opportunity. It’s been great. Thank you, yeah, it’s been good to talk about stuff.

Beyond Management: Why Culture Flows Downhill, with Lynne Peyton

Leadership is about creating confident practitioners who change lives

Leadership in social care isn’t just about managing teams—it’s about creating environments where practitioners can thrive and ultimately deliver better outcomes for vulnerable children and families. This profound insight emerged repeatedly during my fascinating conversation with Lynne Peyton, a former senior manager in health and social services who now runs her own leadership consultancy focused on transforming organisations from the top down.

Lynne’s journey into social work wasn’t planned. Originally intending to become a language teacher with dreams of working in Paris, her path changed dramatically after working at a holiday camp in England where she encountered people experiencing homelessness, those recently released from juvenile detention, and individuals struggling with various challenges. This exposure to life’s harsh realities sparked her curiosity about human stories and redirected her career trajectory. “I’ve just been fascinated by people’s stories ever since,” she explained, “and I have loved being a social worker.”

Perhaps most compelling was Lynne’s experience managing services throughout North and West Belfast during Northern Ireland’s political unrest. She described navigating extraordinarily challenging conditions where staff safety was constantly at risk, community tensions were high, and children’s wellbeing hung in the balance. Yet even in these circumstances, Lynne witnessed exceptional commitment from her teams who prioritised good practice despite the dangers. This period taught her valuable lessons about leadership under pressure and the importance of community partnerships in delivering effective services.

The core of our discussion focused on Lynne’s leadership model aptly named CORE, representing Communication, Optimisation, Relationships, and Evaluation. For communication, she emphasised that listening skills trump talking every time. “The most important bit about communication is listening, and to be a great listener, you have to be a great question asker,” she noted. Optimisation involves making the most of financial resources, but crucially also optimising staff potential and one’s own mindset as a leader. Relationships form the foundation of effective leadership across all stakeholders, while evaluation ensures accountability through measuring outcomes and constantly refining approaches.

One particularly striking observation was Lynne’s perspective on work-life balance. Rather than seeking perfect equilibrium, which rarely exists, she advocates for “life-work integration” that acknowledges the natural ebbs and flows of both personal and professional demands. Sometimes work must take priority; other times, family needs demand full attention. The key is flexibility and integration rather than rigid compartmentalisation.

Another valuable insight concerned the limitations of internal leadership development programs. While many organisations implement such initiatives, Lynne pointed out that middle managers can’t effectively coach senior leaders. Her independent perspective, backed by decades of experience, allows her to work with executives in ways that internal staff simply cannot. This external vantage point creates space for honest reflection and growth at the highest organisational levels.

Perhaps most powerfully, Lynne articulated the connection between empowered staff and empowered clients. “If we empower staff to be more confident in their practice, they’re willing to do more to empower families.” This ripple effect demonstrates why leadership development isn’t merely an organisational nicety but a direct contributor to better outcomes for vulnerable children and families. When practitioners feel confident and supported, they’re better equipped to support those they serve.

You can listen to Lynne here:

You can watch here:

About Lynne

Born and educated in Belfast Northern Ireland, Lynne’s spirit for adventure was fostered in the Officers’ Training Corps where she participated in a wide range of adventure training and leadership activities, including a transfer to the Virginia National Guard during a temporary social work position in a family crisis centre in Richmond in 1980. She also gained her Private Pilot license during that time.

A qualified Social Worker, Lynne is a former senior manager in Health and Social Services, having held both operational and strategic management responsibilities for mental health and services for children and families. She was the director of a not-for-profit children’s charity for a number of years. She is also a master practitioner in NLP and neuro strategies, which she believes are essential to building rapport and great communication.

Since establishing her consultancy almost 20 years ago, Lynne has been passionate about helping organisations working with vulnerable children to get better results. Her CORE Leadership Programme (Communication, Optimisation; Relationships, Evaluation) simultaneously targets executive teams as well as managers at all levels in organisations to bring about changes in attitude, culture, confidence, performance and outcomes.

In the words of one CEO, ‘Lynne has an amazing ability tounlock individual potential and bring out the best in people and inorganisations’.

Related Podcast Interviews:

Simon Benjamin

Listen here:

Watch here:

Andrew Isaac

Listen here:

Watch here:

Transcript:

Colby: 0:00

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast.

Lynne: 0:02

And I have loved being a social worker. I manage services all over North and West Belfast, which was a real political hotspot at that time. There’s no such thing as life-work balance. There’s days when you have to be just working all the time and then somebody gets sick and your family demands your attention. What we have to do is life work integration. I like a whole agency approach, because culture flows downhill and very often programs workforce development programs are run by middle managers. Middle managers can’t coach and empower and work with and be the confidant for more senior managers. So what I bring is the independence and the years and years of not just experience but expertise in working with senior people. And one of the things I found out recently Colby, just because I’ve been probing it a wee bit more not everybody has somebody like that in their corner and I think it’s critical that we do.

Colby: 1:08

Hi, welcome to the Secure Start podcast. I’m Colby Pearce, and joining me for this episode is an experienced leader and consultant in the social care sector. Before I introduce my guests, I’d like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the lands I’m coming from the Kaurna people of the Adelaide Plains, and the continuing connection that the Kaurna people feel, and all Aboriginal people feel, to land, waters, culture and community. I’d also like to pay my respects to their elders, past, present and emerging. My guest this episode is Lynne Peyton.

Colby: 1:50

Lynne is a former senior manager in health and social services, having held both operational and strategic management responsibilities for mental health and services for children and families during the 1970s to 1990s, a time of political unrest in Northern Ireland’s history. Since establishing her business consultancy almost 20 years ago, Lynne has had major successes in helping organisations and senior managers to get better results. Her core leadership program simultaneously targets the top team as well as managers at all levels in organizations to bring about changes in attitude, culture, confidence, performance and outcomes. In the words of one CEO, Lynn has an amazing ability to unlock individual potential and bring out the best in people and in organisations. For more than 30 years, she and her husband have invested in property, initially throughout the UK, then expanding to commercial properties in the USA and more recently in Australia. Nowadays, business has to be integrated with spending time with their three sons and their families in Perth, Australia, Charlotte, North Carolina and Cork, Ireland. Fortunately, they love travelling and growing as part of JT Fox’s Global Entrepreneurs Network. Welcome Lynne.

Lynne: 3:23

Hello Colby, it is so good to see you again.

Colby: 3:27

And you and a little bit about that. In a moment I wanted to just bring up how we met. But was there anything that you thought needed to be added to that little summary of you? There’s probably loads, I guess.

Lynne: 3:41

Oh, my goodness, my goodness. It’s like I’m always trying to think, Colby, what’s going to be the next chapter? So maybe the next time we talk there’ll be something else.

Colby: 3:53

Okay, no worries, and I was. I’m pleased to have you on the podcast because we’ve known each other for a number of years and I think it’s only been my first podcast interviewee who was a practitioner from here in Adelaide, where I am, who I’ve known. So all my other podcasts I’ve been kind of meeting people for the first time, but we met in 2015 in Castle Blaney.

Lynne: 4:26

In.

Colby: 4:26

Castle Blaney I remember it well. Yeah, and just yeah, we were. I was there just talking about my therapeutic model of care and I remember you arriving and I remember we had a person, a foster carer, with lived experience of the rollout of the program I think that might have been in 2016, actually, who you found very impressive at the time?

Lynne: 5:00

And, of course, just to add to that, I was there for an entirely different reason, but I am so curious about everything I’m thinking who is this guy? Came from Australia. What’s he got to say? So I popped in and I was blown away by your insights into how best to work, not just with traumatized children, but how to enable and empower the people who work with them, and so often we think of that in terms of the social worker and the psychologist. But really, what really intrigued me was your hands on advice for the hands on people, and that foster carer, as you say, lived experience of the difference the techniques that you had taught were making in the life for her and for that child who was so insecure and I remember at the time it was attachment to food, it was clinging behaviour to her, and you had helped her to see that’s just what he needs in this moment. You know, colby, I still have goosebumps thinking about that, because that was such a powerful intervention between you and that foster carer.

Colby: 6:20

Yeah, well, thank you, you’re very kind and you’d probably be pleased to know that they’re still rolling out my program in the Toosler fostering service in Donegal. They’re not as the primary therapeutic model of care. I think for the last year or so They’ve gone back to. They’ve had a change in management and it’s gone back to circle of security um. So for a long time I had a very strong support, uh, there in with the um. Now, what was her? What was the position that they called her just my social worker the principal, social worker the principal social worker yeah.

Lynne: 7:03

Yeah, there’s been many, many changes because they’re restructuring again. I would just say that we can all learn from different models. The important thing is that we constantly ensure that our practice is influenced by tried and tested models by tried and tested models, and I think it’s so important that you are persistent, because we know that model works. So you know, people change, but we have to just keep trying to encourage them to do more of what works, and we’ll talk about it later. But one of the elements of the core program is evaluating, constantly evaluating. The elements of the core program is evaluating, constantly evaluating the impact of everything we do and doing more of what works, and sometimes, with changes in leadership and changes in ideas, we experiment again instead of staying grounded in the things that work well.

Colby: 8:03

I do hope, um, that it still continues to be rolled out and I’m really looking forward to being able to return to Ireland sooner rather than later. It’s been a lot. I haven’t been back since 2018 with you know, the advent of world events in the intervening period. But, yeah, hopefully, fingers crossed, we’ll be back there again in the next year or two. But look enough about me and what I’m. You know what I’m doing or not doing at the moment. I really wanted to just start off by asking you what led you into this career, supporting leaders and teams to deliver best outcomes for their clients, including in the social care sector, and who and what perhaps were your major influences in that?

Lynne: 8:55

I’m going to start a wee bit further back, because I never wanted to be a social worker. I always loved style and glamour and I wanted to be a French and German language teacher and I could see myself in Paris as an assistant. But my first job away from home was in a holiday camp in England and there were people in the kitchen who worked, who always had to get a job that had accommodation with it and of course the summer season was easy. But then they didn’t often know where they were going to go next and I thought, oh my goodness, how does anybody live with that level of insecurity about not having a home? And then there were people who were just out of Borstal, which was the juvenile offenders centre, were just out of Borstal, which was the juvenile offenders centre, and there were people who were on the game and in the early days it was alcohol was the issue, because drugs weren’t really an issue at that stage, and I thought I have had such a sheltered life, there’s a whole world out of here that I know nothing about and it’s so interesting. So it was really back down to that curiosity. So I got the boat back from England because nobody flew in those days and I changed my course from languages to social science and psychology, and the rest is history. I’ve just been fascinated by people’s stories ever since and I have loved being a social worker and progress, progressing through all of the levels, um to the point where um in, I think, one of my most exciting jobs. Although I loved working in Belfast and running services, sometimes in very difficult times, I really enjoyed the strategic management role where you were focused on working with all sorts of partner agencies to better understand needs, to look at where services currently were and to see which ones were having the greatest impact so that we could map those and then look and see where were the gaps and how could we fill that gaps. And from my days working in Belfast I knew we could only fill those gaps in partnership with local communities. And, interesting, the organisation in the Republic of Ireland that I do most work with is now reshaping towards an integrated care model where it’s small, localized teams that do sort of from front door right through to children in care and work more closely with families and communities. So in 40 years it’s gone back to where I started.

Lynne: 11:41

The leadership bit came about because there were several reasons why I felt I wanted to start my own consultancy in 2001. And I’ll talk about the influences for that later. But I did a lot of work at that time, chairing multi-agency reviews when things had gone horribly wrong. Either children died or were very, very badly injured, and the goal was for all of the involved agencies to get the learning from that.

Lynne: 12:16

I got frustrated because in every single review I was going and we need to strengthen the environment within which people are doing their job Because staff retention was an issue that put more pressure on the people left behind. Balls got dropped but people forgot that when they were writing about what went wrong. So for years and years and years I tried to encourage that strengthening of leadership, empowerment, staff well-being and I kind of felt, while it did get some attention, it was always the things at the front door they wanted to fix first and the practice issues and the interagency issues. So I just decided well, I’ll write my own leadership program and I’ve been delivering that for many, many years in all kinds of contexts. And the beauty of it is I make it bespoke to whatever organization or team I’m working with at that particular time.

Colby: 13:16

Yeah, wow, and it’s been quite the career really, hasn’t it? I remember part of your response there. You mentioned managing services during some very particular, very particularly difficult times in in Northern Ireland, and am I right in thinking that that you? I once heard you talk about managing a residential care home on that. That was on the Falls Road.

Lynne: 13:44

Oh, I managed services all over northern West Belfast, which was a real political hotspot at that time.

Lynne: 13:54

I mean, it was such a challenging time because kids were taking and driving away cars it was something called joyriding at the time and there would be you know, there would be dreadful accidents, and so the IRA tried to control that with a process called kneecapping. And of course the kids that we were most worried about were inevitably the kids that were tied up with all the antisocial behavior, and kids would turn up by appointment sometimes and they would give them their Valium and tell them what to tell the hospital. So it was dreadful, and there were times when we had to negotiate for the safety and well-being of some of the kids in care or children in the community that we were worried about. So there were areas we couldn’t go into some days. And then you add to that all the other problems of the Friday night money lenders and the you know some of the kind of other influences. So it was a tough time. What was amazing was the staff were just incredible. What was amazing was the staff were just incredible. We prioritised safety.

Lynne: 15:09

We were sensible about what we did and how we did it, and we made a commitment to uphold good practice, to uphold good behaviours, to respect everybody we were dealing with. But we got real creative sometimes, colby, about how we got things done. So it was interesting times and I would still pay tribute to the amazing staff who worked through those incredibly challenging conditions.

Colby: 15:38

And I think the reason why I bring it up is because those kinds of adversities really do have the potential to bring out the very best in people and to bring out the creative solutions that are part of people’s growth and again, working with communities was absolutely essential and we were fortunate because every time a government minister went walkabout we had a dose of proposals ready to pitch to him and we did get.

Lynne: 16:15

We did get lots of funding to try creative things. We also got funding which brought communities together across the divide and led a legacy for some brilliant work that continues today. We also did some in the next role, in the strategic development role. We did a lot of great cross-border work and again we were creative about pitching for European peace funds, which allowed us to partner with organizations in Denmark and Italy, because their family, their, their policies were, I think, much more family friendly than ours. So it exposed us to learning about how people did it in different cultures and countries.

Colby: 17:03

Yeah, yeah, fantastic. And were there particular people or particular theories or ways of working that were influential in your development through your career?

Lynne: 17:18

I think it’s so important that we remind supervisors, and especially your first ever supervisor, just how important they are, and I look back with fondness and still thankfulness and gratitude. I had the most amazing early team leaders and supervisors, and it was for one of them it was her that knowledge was everything that you had to know, whether it was the benefits that somebody was entitled to or the nature of their condition. You had to research and have the knowledge that equipped you to work with people. And then I had another team leader who his calm, quiet way of getting everything done was so inspiring, and someone else who, no matter how frustrated you were, she had this capacity to bring it down a level and always ask great questions, and one of those is well, ok, so what should we do? You know, it’s the simple question isn’t it that sort of cut through the drama and the crisis? So I think early influencers are so, so important.

Lynne: 18:37

And then and then I had some people I worked with that I wasn’t so aligned with and that could be very uncomfortable, and I’m quite outspoken, so I would say what I feel. And then that didn’t always work so well, and I’m fascinated these days with people like Gabe Karp, who talks about conflict resolution, and I’m saying that conflict is inevitable. If you have good, strong minded people with good ideas, the chances of them butting heads is really quite good, and that’s back to what you were talking about earlier. Somebody thinks a different model may be more relevant than Sure Start, secure Start, so that’s good and it’s healthy. What we have to do, then, is learn to have healthy conversations about it, and I wasn’t sure, um, at some of those times.

Colby: 19:35

I was mature enough to have those healthy conversations, and I think I’ve got a lot better at it over the last maybe 20 years yeah, and I think it highlights that, um, we’re we’re always continuously developing, we’re continuously growing, and it doesn’t really serve too much of a purpose to reflect back and think, oh, I wish I knew this or that at that point in time. And when you were talking about your first supervisor, it put me in mind of my own first supervisors. And the first one particularly shout out to Professor Tracy Wade if she’s listening, and I think what they instilled in me so first Tracy, and thereafter fellow by the name of Ken Kobayashi was confidence. They had confidence in me until I had confidence in myself and I thought, you know, and I think that was, it’s been a tremendous legacy from them, as it sounds like yours have been as well.

Lynne: 20:45

And that’s the number one benefit that people feed back to me for the core leadership program, that it has helped them immensely with improving their confidence. And, as you and I know, confidence comes because we’re more competent. So you know, we need the skills and the knowledge and the experience in order to be competent skills and the knowledge and the experience in order to be competent. But it also comes from the ability to risk, assess and make decisions. So the choices we make and the impact of that helps improve our confidence as well. So I think confidence and competence go so well together and I totally agree with you. You we must never stop growing and developing and learning. And what my influencers for the leadership part were, I did my first fire walk um at the unleash the power within event with Tony Robbins in Geneva, I think in 1999.

Lynne: 21:50

It was either 1999 or 2000. Everybody still talks about it because there were so many people in the room and Tony has people jump up and down with excitement and the engineers structural engineers told us we had to stop jumping or the ceiling was going to come down into the room below. So we used to do the jumping in a mexican wave across the room. But because he still wanted to keep the thing. But the thing that that tony always, that he taught so many wonderful things that the one that is really relevant, I think, is the six human needs, and the four essential housekeeping needs are certainty, and we talked about that earlier.

Lynne: 22:32

People need a basic level of certainty and security in order to, in order to, thrive. So, um, certainty, uncertainty. We need a bit of variety. That’s why, when people stay in the same job for 30 years without growing and learning and developing, you know they get tired and switch off and become dissatisfied, and that can dissatisfy the rest of the team, because we all either affect or affect the people that or infect the people that we work with. And then he talks about love and connection, and that’s so, so important as well. So, the human needs, but he also talks in about that’s not enough, because the spiritual needs are for growth and contribution, and that’s why you know, you and I and others like us, we get so much back from the work we do, because we feel we’re making a contribution and then because how we contribute has to change over context and time. That’s where the growth element comes in as well. We have to stay relevant, colby.

Colby: 23:43

Well, that’s part of the reason why I’m developing, I’ve been doing these podcasts, because I get to talk to all these leaders in the field who, and I, um, learn and and and I I reflect. I think it. One of the big things I think is that we should never stop thinking about what we’re doing, and and the podcast gives me that opportunity to hear and understand and reflect on and integrate what I’m hearing in my own work. And, lynn, you’ve mentioned a number of times, you’ve referred to core, which is your leadership model. I wonder if you might just share a little bit more information about it.

Lynne: 24:27

I’m still so passionate about it, colby, because it works. So what I thought was what are the core elements of leadership? And when you think about it, they really come down to the C’s for communication. As leaders, we have to be effective communicators. Now, that doesn’t mean about talking. It’s good that when we talk, that we can you know doesn’t mean about talking. It’s good that when we talk, that we can you know, we can convey what we want people to hear. But the most important bit about communication is listening and to be a great listener. You have to be a great question, asker. So it’s all about learning the art of being present when you’re talking to someone else, really listening to what it is that they’re saying, what are the issues, why are they upset, why are they taking this position? And that’s why I think curiosity comes into it as well. But I could only have one C. If I could have had a second, it would have been curiosity. So it’s been effective communicator. And then I think that’s everything that’s involved in communications it’s using your facial expressions, your body language, not just your words. And one of the things I say to people nowadays is, when you’re on a Zoom call, you have to remember there’s no hiding place. It’s not like the long end of a table where you can roll your eyes. It’s something the boss said. When you’re on the Zoom screen, everybody can see that eye roll. So you have to look and you have to continue to be interested and you have to continue to be present when you’re on Zoom calls. So communication is critical.

Lynne: 26:00

The O is for optimisation. Whenever people talk about resources, they always talk about budgets and staff, and we’ve got to definitely optimise those. So that means that you have to have good financial scrutiny so that you minimise waste. You’ve got to be creative with your budgets as well. You don’t want money sitting there doing nothing, so you have to make sure it’s invested. And the other thing we have to optimize is our staff, but also it starts with us. So, as leaders, you have to optimize your mindset. You have to convey that sense of confidence and self-belief and belief in the people that you’re working with, but also belief in the plan and belief in the potential outcomes. So, and we’ve got to optimize our time. The potential outcomes so, and we’ve got to optimize our time.

Lynne: 26:51

If there’s one thing I teach over and over and over again, it’s time management and energy management. So some people might put in their time, but if you don’t bring the energy and the enthusiasm, you’re not optimizing who you are. So I see, be yourself, be the best version of yourself and optimize everything that is you and time management for everybody listening. The number one thing you can do to improve your time management is do a stop doing list what are all the things you’re currently doing that are just a waste of time and stop doing the hours for relationships. It’s like you and I just talked about. You said the reason for the podcast is to meet and learn from other people who have expertise in certain areas.

Lynne: 27:40

Relationships are fundamental to leadership, whether it’s the relationships with our top team, if we’re a senior manager, the relationships with all the organisations that are essential to us doing business, the relationships within our family, because we want to make sure we get that life work integration. There’s no such thing as life work balance. There’s days when you have to be just working all the time and then somebody gets sick and your family demand your attention. What we have to do is life work integration. So once a project’s due in, ok, we might have to work extra hours to get it done, or if a client needs us or a child is not safe, and then we have to learn to take the time out to rest, recuperate, whatever later on. So optimising our time is so important, but the relationships in there are what restore us and keep us going, and that includes the debriefing when people come back from what has been a difficult situation. So relationships have to be worked at all the time and the E is for evaluation. We have to measure everything we do.

Lynne: 28:49

I was coaching somebody for a senior position yesterday and I was going. Evidence means that you provide the data. When I started it was this. When I finished, it was this and the change was down to me because. So you’ve got to be able to evaluate, but at its most basic it’s evaluating what you’re doing that works and do more of it, and what is it that you’re doing that’s having no impact, and seriously question why you’re still doing it. So, in a nutshell, the value of it is, I like a whole agency approach, because culture flows downhill. So there’s no point in me fixing, empowering, sorting the kind of words that sometimes get used frontline managers if the culture doesn’t change and the culture starts with the CEO and the top team and one of my joys at the moment is coaching CEOs and not-for-profit organisations.

Colby: 29:48

I’m really, really enjoying the impact that that’s having on the organizations yeah, it’s a consistent um message really that that any change process, any endeavor, um therapeutic model, implementation or other, really starts at the top. I must admit, I’ve always been a bit of a supporter of the bottom-up approach as well, probably because largely in many of my endeavours I’ve never had the interaction with and support from the very top, the interaction with and support from the very top. But you know, I try to influence practice through things like this podcast, through YouTube videos, through my writing, through books, that kind of embryonic development of people’s knowledge and capacity.

Lynne: 30:53

And your books are really influential because they’re like a toolkit, and I think that’s what people need. They need something that is grinded in theory but gives them the tools and the resources.

Colby: 31:07

Yeah, a lot of contributions in this space are very much focused on what you need to know. I guess I’ve always tried to ensure that I’ve got plenty of information in there about what you need to do when you do it, and you’ve always been incredibly generous on your website as well Over the years.

Colby: 31:27

I’ve always told people to go to your website because there’s lots of free stuff on there that are are brilliant tools and assessment kits and things, so thank you for the contribution you’ve made with as regards to those tools over all these years yeah, well, thank you again, and I think I’m going a bit red, but the important thing is that there are good outcomes for children and young people, and I was speaking to a very interesting guest a little while ago a week or so ago about human capital, and we were talking about what is lost when we don’t intervene successfully with our young people. Intergenerational trauma persists. If we are able to turn a life around, we’re turning a life around for that person, but also their children and grandchildren, potentially. So, yeah, so, but it’s not all plain sailing trying to roll this stuff out, and I do wonder, even with rolling out a leadership model, are there any particular challenges that that you’ve you’ve faced in doing that and, if so, how have you overcome them?

Lynne: 32:52

you’ve faced in doing that? And, if so, how have you overcome them? Oh, the usual ones we’ve no money um, we’ve got our own um. So you just have to help people work through that. So if people are saying we haven’t got a budget right now, I I very often say, well, let me do a taster session so you can see what the benefits would be. And it’s also good to ask them well, if you had money, what would be your priorities?

Lynne: 33:16

And I think another thing is how many social workers did you lose last year? Because the fallout it’s like you, it’s like you know, it’s like a funnel where the policy is to create even more jobs but they’re still dripping out the bottom and the attrition rate can be really quite significant. It is around looking at well, how many more social workers can you afford to lose? Or, as one person told me recently, nobody will take the senior positions because it’s just not worth it. So how are you going to run the service without senior people? I can help you to empower your senior people so that they are more effective. So staff feel valued, so they they stay. And, of course, happy staff, confident staff, are much better practitioners. So everybody, everything that I do and everything you do. The end result is so that young people and their families get a better service. But empowered, confident staff, competent staff, always provide a better service than people who are exhausted or overwhelmed or not sure they want to be here anymore. So that’s one. The other one is well, we’ve got our own leadership program and I go. That’s great and I’m so glad that so many organizations are focusing on that. The challenge is that they don’t have anything like the level of experience I have, and very often programs workforce development programs are run by middle managers. Middle managers can’t coach and empower and work with and be the confident for more senior managers. So what I bring is the independence and the years and years of not just experience but expertise in working with with senior people, and so I think that’s it. You have to keep at it, because people will take the path of least resistance and it is important that you and I people like us keep actually ensuring that we do so. And the other thing I do, like you, the podcast.

Lynne: 35:42

I’ve just finished 50 episodes of Success is Never Accidental. Episodes of success is never accidental, and I’ve interviewed not just people from our sector, but people from all over the globe and from all different sectors. And the theme has been what is it that has made you successful? What have you learned about being successful? What would you pass on to other people? What happened when you hit a bump in the road? Other people, what happened when you hit a bump in the road? How much is mindset an issue? What would you tell your younger self? And it’s amazing, because there’s a formula for success and there are themes.Lynne: 36:18

Now everybody might do it their own way, but you’re not going to get there if you don’t work hard, if you’re not persistent, if you’re not passionate, if you’re not clear about why you’re doing what you’re doing. In other words, like Simon Sinek, if you’re not living your purpose. And so often the work I do actually helps people see that they’re a square peg in a round hole, and if we can get them into something that’s more aligned with their values and their passion, they do so much better. And that’s a really important thing about leadership.

Lynne: 36:52

Not everybody who takes a leadership job is equipped to be a great leader. A lot of leadership skills can be learned In fact, most of them and if you’re not naturally a good communicator and if you aren’t naturally passionate about the role that you have. It’s not going to work. So sometimes it’s helping people pivot and, you know, move out of leadership roles into maybe a more specialist practitioner role. But it’s so important that we’re in the right roles for us because happiness of work is essential yeah you, there’s so much in that there, lynn.

Colby: 37:39

Um, the first thing I want to pick up is, um, the real importance of what you said about you know coming people being aware of, of the work that they can do that is consistent with their, their own values, and because values burn out or values fatigue it goes by different names now but it is the experience of working in a, in an endeavor that runs counter to or is not consistent with your values.

Colby: 38:17

And child protection is a really obvious area for that clash to occur, because most people who get involved in child protection get involved because they want to help families, they want to help children, they want to help families. But particularly here in the jurisdiction I live in, child safety is the paramount consideration, and so, rather than necessarily being a place to support and help families, our child protection authorities intervene to ensure the safety of our children. And look, there’s arguments both sides of the ledger on whether it should be safety or best interests is a paramount consideration, but, in any event, what we end up with is if we have too many people in our workforce who are there to help families that’s what’s consistent with their values then child protection is really not necessarily, or at least as it is in this jurisdiction, is not really going to be their best place to work, I think.

Lynne: 39:35

And that’s particularly the case when older children are in very high risk circumstances and I think sometimes we have to ask if we remove them from home, what have we got for them that is actually any safer or better? And often that answer is very nebulous well, I think I don’t know that.

Colby: 39:59

The question is often asked very much. So the, the, the the role of the agency is to intervene to ensure safety. What comes after that is a secondary consideration, but I guess what you’re referring to is that a child’s journey through care can be quite a vexed one, and it is something that we need to keep, I think, in the forefront of our thinking at all times, because I often say the most healing relationship for our children is the repair of the one with their birth family, birth parents in particular. That’s the most healing relationship.

Lynne: 40:47

I think that is so true and that’s why one of the things I work on constantly is empowerment is empowerment, because if we empower staff to be more confident in their practice, they’re willing to do more to empower families to get better at their parenting or, you know, or their family relationships. So empowerment really, really is the key, and I think that all starts with leadership. So you have your toolkit in your books, my toolkit. I haven’t written the book yet, to my shame. I should have had it written long ago. But on my website just lynnpaytoncom there is a thing called the Leadership Library, which is absolutely packed with toolkits for leaders on anything that is likely to come up. And people will say to me years later, I still do that perceptual positions exercise, or I’m still using the seven steps to change, or oh, do you remember the day you told me about the single issue meeting? Well, that changed my entire practice. So there’s lots and lots of stuff on there that will help, because for leadership, we need a toolkit as well.

Lynne: 42:11

I’ll briefly tell you about the single issue meeting. How many times have you been in a supervision session? And as the supervisor? There’s this one thing that you need to raise, and what happens when you do all your case management reviews and you get to the end and you think I’ll bring that up next time and what happens is that the elephant in the room just gets carried forward. Elephant in the room just gets carried forward. So I say you never deal with those things in supervision. You have a single issue meeting. You have it in a territory that is private but that you control, so you can leave when you’re done saying, as the supervisor or the leader, what you need to say, and you make it really, really short and you, you practice it because how you communicate, it is very important. Gabe Karp talks about doing it in your shopping list voice, so that there’s no emotion attached to it, and then you give the person a minute or two to respond or you can just say to them so have a think about that and we can talk about it again. But you do the thing that needs to be said. You set it up to say it will. You control the environment as the supervisor and it’s short. The meeting is short but sweet, and then you can pick it up again later. But you plant the seeds. You say what needs to be said, you don’t leave it to supervision.

Lynne: 43:39

And then I think the other thing is perceptual positions. It’s a beautiful exercise where you rant for a minute as you and then you completely shake it, shake it all off and you become the other person. So you, I always say, stand like they would stand, and they might say, well, they would sit. Okay, well, then sit and breathe like they would breathe and now rant as that other person.

Lynne: 44:06

The insights that come out when people truly accept that the other person has, you know, a completely different view on the world. Sometimes that’s enough. Sometimes you need a higher authority. So I’ll say who’s the wisest person you know? And they might say their granny, or for some people it might be God, and I say, ok, so could they look down at these two people and please tell me what’s going on here? And then from that position, it’s amazing what comes out sometimes that has healed fractured relationships. It has helped people to stay in organizations that they didn’t think they would stay in, because, remember, most people leave because of the relationship with their immediate boss, when that relationship isn’t safe, when that relationship is fractured. I mean, I had somebody whose boss didn’t speak to them for six months. How do you supervise somebody that you’re not even speaking to. So perceptual positions can unlock a lot. So those kinds of tools are all on the website, and if anybody wants to know more, they can reach out to me by email as well.

Colby: 45:18

Well, that’s very generous of you too, lynne, and you said something about five minutes ago that gave me chills, and that was you said you were talking about. If a worker is empowered, then they have an improved capacity to empower their client. Yeah, we’re now, you know, in child protection, we’re wanting to be empowering, empowering and encouraging parents to, to really take the bull by the horn, so to speak. Yeah, and what was going through my mind is the disempowered worker. And how does the disempowered worker work with the disempowered?

Lynne: 46:08

Well, we know the answer to that, don’t we? Sadly?

Colby: 46:13

You’ve mentioned a number of times about leadership, mentoring, leadership, supervision. I mean, what would you say to senior leaders and managers about the importance of supervision?

Lynne: 46:27

Supervision is absolutely mandated in social work practice and it is a governance responsibility at all levels to ensure not just that it takes place but that good quality supervision takes place. So that does require I mean, everybody has a supervision policy, everybody audits supervision. But does anything change? I mean it just is such a necessary requirement. It has to be quality from the point of view of case management and generally that’s the area that it’s strongest in. But supervision is also about personal development plans. It’s about staff growth and hugely it’s important, about staff well-being.

Lynne: 47:20

You know only too well the vicarious trauma that’s experienced by staff in these fields. It’s got to include well-being. It’s got to include whether there is accumulated harm over time and over incidents and working with a particular family and it’s got to check in about just general well-being. Thankfully, most organisations are putting well-being on the agenda, but it’s our job as a supervisor to check in. Are you sleeping? You know you seem to be eating a lot of junk food. You know what is going on. You know how are the kids we’re all carrying? We’re all carrying multi-responsibilities. You might have a parent who’s elderly that you you’re looking after. You’ve got kids, um, and so many children nowadays in the families of the workers with with particular issues that need maybe some special attention. We have to. We have to treat and care for and look after the well-being of all of our staff and, as leaders, we’ve got to lead by example. I can’t ask somebody else if they’re eating properly, sleeping well, drinking water, if I’m not doing it myself.

Colby: 48:44

Yeah.

Lynne: 48:44

We have to model the behavior that we want to see, and it’s so critical in our world that people take care of themselves and we take care of others as leaders. But not just that, because you said about bottom up approaches earlier on Everybody on the team needs to take care of everybody else on the team. You need accountability bodies, you need all, and you need people to speak up, like if I think you’re looking a bit ragged, I need to be able to say, colby, what’s going on, you just look tired or whatever. And it’s our responsibility to take care of each other.

Colby: 49:22

And if we do, then people, we are providing a safe containing space for people to feel, allow themselves to be a little bit vulnerable and share that the work and life do have an impact on us and share that the work and life do have an impact on us and in doing so, being open to support or open to time away, whatever, we need to ensure that when we are at work and servicing the needs of our children and families, that we’re optimal, as you said earlier, that we’re at our best.

Lynne: 50:00

How do you find in group supervision, can you create that space there?

Colby: 50:05

People respond best. People are. In my experience, people are more likely to trust, are more likely to trust to participate, to open up, to reflect in circumstances where they feel like their experience is honoured, is known, is understood and is honoured.

Lynne: 50:31

Absolutely. I think that is so true. And when I do team building I actually did a bit recently in Australia at an academic institution and I always have the same model I ask people to introduce themselves and I ask them what gifts do they bring to the team? And inevitably, when people do that, they get feedback on it. But I ask them to stand up, tell me what their role is not their job description, but their role and why they’re in the work. What gifts do they bring the team? And then I ask them what do you need from your colleagues? And it’s amazing what comes out in that simple exercise. Again, it has to be well facilitated.

Lynne: 51:19

I find when people try to do it themselves, they get stuck in their own head about what they think should be going on, whereas as the facilitator, you and I have no investment other than to make this a great experience and for them all to get to know each other better. And I ask everybody in the room what did they learn about the person? Not what they heard. What did they learn? And that lets them to say they’ve got amazing energy or you could tell that they’re really committed. So all that other stuff. Now people just glow when their colleagues give them all that amazing feedback. It’s not rocket science, but team building needs to be managed by someone who’s good at team building. Group supervision needs to be managed by somebody who’s talented in providing that group supervision.

Colby: 52:19

Yeah, for me, I think it’s.

Colby: 52:21

I talk to people every day.

Colby: 52:23

You know I’m primarily a psychotherapist working with children and I think one of the things that you alluded to there is the benefit of looking beyond the behaviour and looking at what’s really going on and acknowledging what’s really going on for a person.

Colby: 52:49

I think the question is not so much what you observe about a person but what you’ve learnt about a person, which means you have to take an open and reflective stance, and one of my mantras, I think, in supervision is about it being an opportunity to stop and think about what you’re doing, think about the work that you’re doing, think about your clients, and it’s one of those core aspects of trauma-informed work and trauma-informed organizations that there is a focus on looking beyond the behavior and trying to decipher the meaning of that behavior.

Colby: 53:34

And something else that you said that resonates with me and is also very much aligned with an interview I did earlier with a gentleman by the name of Simon Benjamin and his podcast may come out before or after yours, but they’ll be adjacent to each other and he talked about leadership supervision uh, being important because it models it, but also because if it’s good quality supervision to leadership, then leadership will see the value in supervision and if they see the value in it, then they’re more likely to promulgate it and support it right down through the organization, which I thought was. Yeah, it was also very, very similar to what you were saying and I think, I think, um, we all need coaches.

Lynne: 54:30

So I still have three coaches and sometimes I pick up coaches. So, um, I had challenges, I had an organization with challenges, um, that needed mediation. So I actually got a wee bit of coaching on mediation just to refresh my skills, and I think that’s important. I would not dive into something that I thought, gosh, it’s a while since I’ve done that. I need to brush up.

Lynne: 55:01

But I have my Tony Robbins coach from it’s now going on 23 years. I have quarterly sessions with her. She’s a very dear friend. And I have another very dear friend who I met through Success Resources America, and she and I have an arrangement where we coach each other for an hour each month. Now it flows, but we do our updates and we identify our challenges in advance. That’s the other thing with all my coaching. It’s all. You must prepare for it. We have to agree the actions. You have to keep going or I won’t continue to coach you. So I do accountability coaching, but with her it’s amazing. For about seven years now we’ve had this monthly session.

Lynne: 55:49

Now, again, these are two people I could.

Lynne: 55:53

My life could depend on them.

Lynne: 55:54

I could, if I needed anything, would reach out and one of the things I found out recently Colby, just because I’ve been probing it a wee bit more not everybody has somebody like that in their corner and I think it’s critical that we do so.

Lynne: 56:11

Again, it would be an exhortation to everybody listening have you got somebody who, regardless of what it is, you can talk to them, you can be yourself, you can be vulnerable and they will? They will listen and not necessarily advise, but ask you the questions that allow you to work through it yourself and sometimes become shift from a coach to a mentor, where maybe their advice is the right thing to do. So I would encourage everybody to ensure that they have somebody in their corner and and I think the other thing is, I have a business coach, which is a very different approach to the approach from this, but I love I think everybody should run their organisation like a business, and I have other businesses outside of. This is my passion, this has been my life’s work, but I love business as well. So I’ve got a business coach and that’s entirely different kind of relationship than the relationship with my growth and leadership coaches, than the relationship with my growth and leadership coaches.

Colby: 57:21

There’s so much I could pick up on and talk more with you about. Lynn, thank you very much for your generosity and grace in accepting the invitation to appear on this fledgling podcast of mine. What I usually? You’ve kind of asked me a question already, but I’ll give you another go.

Colby: 57:45

I always because when I’m working with children, if I find myself having, for whatever reason, asked them a series of questions, I’ll always say to them well, that was a lot of questions For me, wasn’t it? How about you ask me a question? So it’s kind of like a return serve for them. And the most common question they ask me is how old I am, and I was answering in months I was. Then someone worked that out, so then I was answering in dog and cat years.

Colby: 58:17

I mean before that I always used to say what my grandmother said, which is I’m as old as my tongue and a little bit older than my teeth. That served me for about 20 years. But then it was months, then it was dog and cat years. But I heard a really good one yesterday which was from a client, and she told me how old she is in adult years. So adult years start when you’ve left your teenage years. So I don’t know if I’ll see how that goes. I’m not sure it’s. It’s very flattering, of course, because it’s uh, if I say how old I am in adult years, it’s much lower than my actual age, but anyway.

Lynne: 58:59

Age is literally just a thought. You know, I mean, you’re literally, I like the bit. You’re literally only as old as you feel. I was 72 last week and I feel about 50 and I have loads more to do, and a numerical age is not going to stop me. I did a zip line my first ever zip line when I was in Perth a couple of weeks ago, and I’ve got a new daughter in law now. So I said to her you need to think of an adventure for us to go on. And so here’s my question for you. You’ve done a number of these podcasts. Now what has been the biggest learning, colby, from the people that you’ve interviewed so far From the podcast process?

Colby: 59:50

From the process, I think the important. I would say that you can be in an area of endeavour where you are highly experienced and you always wish you know more than you know. And the longer you stay in an area of endeavour, you probably are more appreciative of what you don’t know. Um, but I think what, what, what has stood out for me is I’ve talked to people in a in in the related endeavor that I’m in, and I have learned and been stimulated in so many ways by each of the different perspectives when I’ve done that. So I think not only should we be speaking with our mentors, our supervisors and so on, but I think we should speak to a diverse range and number of people in our era of endeavour. And the other thing that I’ve learnt is that all the people that I’ve spoken to have been really keen to have a chat with me. So you know, people are to to speak and share ideas and um. So there is a, so don’t.

Colby: 1:01:25

I would encourage people to not be backwards in coming forwards and reaching out to people and um, and and making connections and communicating. I think and that’s and, of course, for me, the conversation is, you know, the foundation of all the work that I do and, a bit like what you were saying before, I’ve absolutely loved doing podcasts because of the conversation, because of the interaction. It’s really floated my boat, um, and you, yeah, you feel so, you feel so energized about in doing that. So there you go, there’s a. There’s a range of a range of things. I thought you were asking me initially what who said the most profound thing? And I didn’t. I think it’s a bit early for me to choose favourites just yet.

Lynne: 1:02:19

Oh, no, no, no. I just think we learn something. As you said, it’s so stimulating. We learn something from everybody and I think what it’s done for me, in addition to all the things you’ve said with which I concur it just gives you hope, even more hope. You know we’re hopeful people anyway, but you just realise there’s so many amazing people in the world doing amazing things and, as you say, who are generous with time and spirit and willing to share, and every single person I speak to I learn something profound from them, whether it’s their take on a particular thing or just their attitude to life or something that a challenge that they’ve overcome. It is such a privilege to both host a podcast and to be a guest on a podcast.

Colby: 1:03:10

Well, thank you for being a guest and perhaps this might, if you’re willing, will, the the first of perhaps a number, maybe backwards and forwards, because I have appeared on your podcast as well you have.

Lynne: 1:03:24

You were amazing. It got very good reviews and I continue to be a huge fan, colby, so keep up the good work thank you.