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.

Unlocking Potential Through Love and Acceptance, with Patricia Sheridan

Children Need Adults Who Believe in Their Possibilities

Patricia Sheridan’s journey in transforming children’s services in Scotland is nothing short of remarkable. As founder of the Moore House Group, her story begins with a simple yet powerful observation: that children in residential care were not having their potential recognized or nurtured. This realization came when, as a social worker, she was tasked with evaluating residential services across Scotland. What she found was deeply troubling – establishments where staff had little belief in the children’s capabilities, with no drive to measure outcomes or create compensatory curricula for young people struggling with trauma and disadvantage.

Rather than simply filing her report, Patricia took up her director’s challenge to “do something about it” and founded Moore House School in 1988. Her vision was revolutionary for its time: to create an environment where children experienced love, acceptance, and a genuine belief in their potential. This language of care was so uncommon in Scotland at that time that Patricia describes feeling like “a lone voice in the wilderness.” She had to build a network of like-minded professionals who shared her values to support her through the initial challenges.

The growth of the Moore House Group over 38 years reflects Patricia’s commitment to meeting children’s needs in comprehensive ways. From the original residential school serving children with trauma histories and attachment challenges, the organization expanded to include a foster care service (recognizing that institutional care shouldn’t be the only option for children) and later the Jane Moore Trust Trust, a school dedicated to supporting neurodiverse children. Throughout this expansion, Patricia maintained a consistent philosophy: every child has potential that can be unlocked through the right relationships and environment.

What makes Patricia’s approach particularly noteworthy is her emphasis on organizational culture and shared learning. She describes how the entire Moore House “family” – from teachers to care staff to foster carers – receives the same training in attachment theory and trauma-informed approaches. This creates a common language and understanding across all parts of the organization. Patricia herself models lifelong learning, having pursued advanced degrees in education and forensic psychology while leading the organization, demonstrating to staff and children alike the value of continuous growth and development.

Patricia’s approach to neurodiverse children further illustrates her belief that while specific needs may vary, the foundational principles remain the same. Children with neurodiversity, like those with trauma histories, benefit from environments where they feel understood, valued, and supported. The trauma these children experience may come from different sources – educational establishments failing to recognize their needs rather than socioeconomic disadvantage – but the healing process still centers on relationships and belief in potential.

Perhaps most poignant is Patricia’s reflection on how Scotland’s approach to childcare has evolved over her career. The language she once felt isolated for using – speaking of love, relationships, and children’s potential – is now embraced across Scotland’s childcare landscape. The “Promise” initiative she mentions represents a national focus on children’s voices in decision-making and supporting families to nurture their children effectively. While challenges remain, particularly in shifting focus from damage control to prevention, Patricia expresses optimism about the direction of children’s services in Scotland.

The conversation concludes with a profound insight that applies across all educational and care settings: relationships are the vehicle for all healing. Despite the perception that children who have experienced trauma are defensive and difficult to connect with, Patricia emphasizes that establishing meaningful relationships with these children is both possible and essential. By helping children feel worthy, capable, and adequate just as they are, we create the conditions for them to flourish – transforming “impossible” into “I’m possible,” as Patricia so eloquently puts it.

You can listen here:

You can watch here:

About Patricia:

Mrs Sheridan established Moore House School in 1988. Her drive was to create a service with her personal mantras “Determined to Deliver Excellence” and “I’m Possible” for young people.

Mrs Sheridan leads the Board of Directors and continues to have a hands-on approach using a range of experiences and techniques to engage with young people to elicit their views on the service they are receiving. Her passion is for young people to be supported by adults who believe in their potential and adults who share the organisational values of respect, integrity and dignity for all.

Mrs Sheridan reminds us that we are responsible for creating trusting relationships and happy memories for our young people. She strives to ensure that our young people experience as many creative, happy, nurturing memories as possible.

Mrs Sheridan continues to strive for excellence and ensures that her passion for high quality services is cascaded throughout the organisation to encourage each and every team member to recognise the important part they play in the wellbeing and progress that our young people experience.

Related Podcast Interviews:

Dr Kiran Modi

Listen here:

Watch here:

Lighthouse Foundation:

Listen here:

Watch Here:

Transcript:

Colby: 0:00

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast.

Mrs Sheridan: 0:04

And I think for me it was important that I created something that I hadn’t found in Scotland, but I’m delighted to say it’s a language that we use now, a language of love and acceptance and belief in the potential of children, and that we don’t need to be embarrassed about using that language, which 30, 40 years ago, you were shunned for using that language.

Colby: 0:32

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast. I’m Colby Pearce, and joining me for this episode is a British Care Awards winner and inspirational leader and founder in the field of children’s services. Before I introduce my guest, I’d like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land that I’m meeting on, 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 guest this episode is Patricia Sheridan.

Colby: 1:20

Mrs Sheridan established Moore House in 1988.

Colby: 1:25

Her drive was to create a service with her personal mantras, determined to deliver excellence and I’m possible for young people.

Colby: 1:42

Mrs Sheridan leads the board of directors and continues to have a hands-on approach, using a range of experiences and techniques to engage with young people to elicit their views on the service they are receiving. Her passion is for young people to be supported by adults who believe in their potential and adults who share the organisational values of respect, integrity and dignity for all. Mrs Sheridan reminds us that we are responsible for creating trusting relationships and happy memories for our young people. She strives to ensure that our young people experience as many creative, happy, nurturing memories as possible In terms of her career journey, mrs Sheridan has gathered a range of qualifications she was a registered general and mental health nurse, a qualified social worker and, at a later date, completed an MA in Education and an MSc in Forensic Psychology. Mrs Sheridan continues to strive for excellence and ensures that her passion for high-quality services is cascaded throughout the organisation to encourage each and every team member to recognise the important part they play in the wellbeing and progress that our young people experience. Welcome, patricia.

Mrs Sheridan: 3:14

Good morning. It’s lovely to speak to you again, Colby.

Colby: 3:19

Thank you. So was there anything in that bio that you’d like to expand a little bit upon or add to?

Mrs Sheridan: 3:30

Not really. I think that when I hear it from someone else it sounds a bit pretentious and I can’t believe the journey that I’ve been on. It made sense while I was doing it, but I think it reflects that I’m a lady of age. So, no, I have to accept that’s my journey.

Colby: 3:53

Yeah, and it’s a common reflection when I ask people after I’ve read their bio, particularly when they’ve read it. They’ve been working in the field for such a long time and I think and I was discussing this with another podcast guest only last week reflecting on my own long journey of practice and thinking that perhaps, as we’re doing it, our mind and our focus is on what we’re doing, you know, right now, as it should be, and it’s only when we have these opportunities to pause and reflect that we have a chance to consider the journey in its entirety and how yeah, how long a journey, or how much we’ve achieved across that journey. Indeed. So, patricia, you started Moore House in 1988, Moore House School in 1988. And since then, your operations have expanded into the Moore House Group. I wonder if you don’t mind just to start off with telling us a little bit about each of the areas of endeavour that come under the umbrella of the Moore House Group.

Mrs Sheridan: 5:14

Yes, as you said, colby, my first venture was Moore House School and it was intended to be a small residential and day service for children who had experienced trauma and who were showing attachment challenges. But over the 38 years it has become a school for 32 young people with 14 houses attached to the hub, and it ranges from primary education through to college. So that was my first attempt at trying to show what I believed was the right approach in working with children. I then decided that, because I didn’t believe that children should necessarily be an institutional experience for all of their residential education, I decided to create a foster care service, and my foster care service has become known as permanency and short term, as permanency and short-term, and again, it was intended to work with children with trauma histories. But, like I’m sure you and other people will experience, it takes on a life of its own and it’s become quite a varied group of foster carers.

Mrs Sheridan: 7:05

We have up to 50 foster carers who work with babies up to a young gentleman who is 33, with very complex needs and a special group of conditions that we had never experienced before. So for me, establishing the foster care service seemed to make sense at the time. But it’s grown into a unique organisation on its own and I’m very proud that we in fact are the only organisation in Scotland who has the highest grades of the care inspectorate, and we’ve managed to hold that for two years. So I don’t often allow myself to be very proud, but in that instance I certainly am.

Mrs Sheridan: 8:02

The third organisation that I created was the Jane Moore Trust, and it’s a charity, and it came about because there was a school in Scotland that had closed and it was a school that was working with children with neurodiverse challenges, and so it’s my nature when I get a challenge to try and do something about it. So five years ago we decided that we would open the school again. So we now have a school that works with children who have experience of neurodiverse issues. It’s a small school and we have both primary and secondary children. It has taken quite a time to get established, but we’re beginning to show evidence of our reputation, beginning to expand the pupil numbers. We are registered with the National Association for Autism and again, that for me is a reflection of the quality of what the team’s doing. So, yes, three organisations that keep me busy, but organisations that I’m very proud of and organisations that seem to have made sense to me each time that we established and added on the next organisation. It’s been an interesting journey.

Colby: 9:39

Yeah, it certainly has. What set you on this path, would you say? How did you come to be involved in?

Mrs Sheridan: 9:48

Yeah, I started I was in social work and my director in the local authority asked me to do a report on the residential services that the local authority was using, and so I visited about 12 residential services in Scotland and then I did my report and what I found was really quite sad and disappointing, and I found that the pupils that were in these residential establishments clearly came from a socioeconomic group where families were struggling with poverty and difficulty was that the staff in some of these organisations did not have a belief in the potential of these children and there seemed to be an acceptance that these children couldn’t achieve and there was no drive to measure outcomes or to create a curriculum that would compensate for the difficulties that the young people were bringing into the education field.

Mrs Sheridan: 11:13

And so I had a conversation about the report with my director and, of course, knowing me, he said well, if that’s your findings, I challenge you to do something about it. So I took the challenge on, and my first organisation that I created was Moore House School, and I think for me it was important that I created something that I hadn’t found in Scotland and I wanted to start speaking a language that wasn’t used at that time in Scotland, but I’m delighted to see it’s a language that we use now, a language of love and acceptance and belief in the potential of children. So that was my starting point in working in the residential education sector.

Colby: 12:07

And he lost an employee as well. I’m thinking, pardon, I’m thinking that he lost an employee as well. Your supervisor at the time, who challenged him yes, was he anticipating that he would lose you from the organisation? Yes yes, he was yeah.

Mrs Sheridan: 12:28

Yes, he was a wonderful gentleman and he knew his team, so he knew me obviously.

Colby: 12:39

Yeah, yeah, yeah. So the Moore House School was a residential school. You brought together both a desire to house the young people in a more positive and encouraging way and also to deliver to them education opportunities that focused on unlocking their potential.

Mrs Sheridan: 13:15

Yes, very much so.

Colby: 13:17

And it reminds me very much of an earlier podcast that I had with John Whitwell and I’m not sure if you’ve heard it, but, um, he was talking about the uh, the cotswold community and, um, and he was talking at this point of the podcast particularly about donald winnicott, I think, and and winnicott seeing children as being like bulbs, the growth is within them. You just need to create an environment around them that unlocks that, that allows for that and facilitates that.

Mrs Sheridan: 13:57

Yeah, Very much so yes.

Colby: 14:00

And were there any particular challenges that you’d had along the way in terms of setting up the Moore House School?

Mrs Sheridan: 14:10

Yes, I think the first challenge that I struggled with was there wasn’t a landscape of talking about children in terms of trauma and attachment, and at that time the landscape was very much about control of children, and so I found it difficult a peer group of people, of like-minded people, and so it was a struggle but I thankfully managed to draw together consultants who had the respectability in the field in general, and it was about building a network of people that could share and did share my values and supported me when the going got tough, because sometimes when you’re a lone voice in the wilderness, it can be difficult. So I think the first thing was drawing a peer group together to give me sustenance. That was the first point. The second point, inevitably, was the challenge of being a new entity and not being known and having to establish a reputation. So that threw up financial challenges.

Mrs Sheridan: 15:47

I tell the story of when I first started. We didn’t have a lot of money and I had to go to the bank manager and ask to borrow money to buy a car, which I didn’t buy. The car I had to use the money to pay the wages. So there were early challenges, financial challenges but through time we became established and I think that I was very fortunate that as our reputation grew, so we got the confidence of local authorities and our numbers increased to a place where we became a viable organisation. So it was yes, I wouldn’t say it was a challenge, but it certainly.

Colby: 16:38

It took some courage and energy, but we got there yeah, it’s interesting because you’re not you’re not the first um founder that I’ve spoken to and that who has, um, almost uh, intimated that um, the first priority is to go in the direction that you you wish to go in terms of setting up a service, and you’ve almost got to.

Colby: 17:06

Well, you can hope and pray, I guess, but you’ve got to believe that, as long as you provide and deliver a professional service, a needed service, the money will take care of itself, or the money will follow, and yes, I’ve heard that experience from others, and certainly that’s the way I have practiced for a very long time in my independent practices, the focus being on just the delivery of a professional service and the money will, will, take care of itself. It doesn’t always, though, does it? Yeah, but in the end, perhaps inevitably, yeah, it does, and I really like what you were saying about needing a group of peers, bringing together a group of peers, and the logical implication of that being that even founders and directors of services need to have a reflective group to talk to, to reflect on the work that they do and offer feedback and be offered feedback and guidance.

Colby: 18:31

Yeah heads of organisations I think it’s been the consensus view of other people I’ve spoken to as well should be getting that kind of reflective mentoring, peer mentoring and, if not, full supervision. Yeah, definitely yes.

Mrs Sheridan: 18:53

I think that you can become isolated and I think it’s important that you have the humility to recognise that you may have a passion and you may have a belief, but you need to be open and available for positive criticism if we’re going to grow. If I needed to grow as an individual and the organisations to grow, so we had to have an open and transparent approach to our practice and a willingness to listen to people who had a lot more experience and that had a valuable contribution to make.

Colby: 19:41

And you mentioned that you gathered them from around the place. I’m wondering where did you find them and how do you think what were some of? I guess a bit of a question without notice, but what do you think were some of the more important things that they shared with you that informed your approach to the Moore House school?

Mrs Sheridan: 20:04

Yes, I think the very important relationship for me was that it may come with age, colby, but I was very much into the John Bobies, the John Ashcroft, all these theories of attachment that were not around and being spoken about and used in the early days, and I knew that I wanted my team to be trained and to have a real understanding of what I was trying to convey to them about how we should work with children. And I came across Dan Hughes in America and it sounds a bit pretentious, but I did go over to America to do his DDP attachment course and I just felt at home. For me it was the answer, it was the way that I wanted my staff to understand the work that I was trying to do. So I did the course with Dan in New York, actually came back to Scotland and then I met several of his team who worked both in England and Scotland, and the first person that I established contact with was Edwina Grant, who in fact was the Scottish director for Dan’s DDP organisation.

Mrs Sheridan: 21:49

And Edwina came into our organisation and started to help to introduce the DDP approach and she stayed with us for a number of years and has only recently retired, and so we became an organisation, with Edwina’s support, to start and roll out DDP in Scotland, and we still now offer DDP training to any of the organisations in Scotland that feel that that’s the theoretical approach that they want to use.

Mrs Sheridan: 22:29

So Edwina and Dan’s model theoretical model for me was a really helpful training module that I could use for the team to understand my approach. And so from working with Edwina it’s really been about me going out probably more often doing courses myself, and I came across a course in Ireland with Patrick Tomlinson, so I couldn’t miss that opportunity. So I did a course of which Patrick was a contributor, and then again I established links with Patrick and he now again works with the organisation, and so I’ve been really fortunate in that I’ve been able to be introduced to some really important, impressive, impressionable people impressive people, rather, that for me speak the same language and have the same values and the same passion for getting it right for children. So I’ve been really lucky, and our organisation’s been lucky in the people that have come alongside us and support us to make sure that we get it right for children.

Colby: 23:59

And I chuckled a little bit there, because Patrick is a mutual colleague and something of a silent partner for this podcast, in that he puts me together with some of our guests, including with you, patricia. One of the things that I think is really significant about what you were saying there is that you go and you yourself go and get trained. You attend the trainings, you, and then you. You have a strong desire for those trainings that you think speak to you and how you want your organisation to operate and run and the care and service delivery you want staff to deliver to children. You have them all trained in the same models and theories theories, um, but.

Colby: 25:08

But the interesting thing is that, by the sound of it, it’s from the top to I hate saying from the top to the bottom. It sounds terrible, doesn’t it really? Everyone in the organization is gets the same training so everyone can speak the same language and, importantly from the point of view of the children and young people that you deliver a service to, notwithstanding that everyone’s got their own unique traits and characteristics, there’s a foundation of commonality across your staff group, which I think is really important and can be. It doesn’t always exist, for example, in statutory child protection organisations, where you know large organisations but where you wouldn’t. We wouldn’t commonly see everyone, all the staff group, singing from the same hymn sheet, so to speak. But I agree, I think that’s a really valuable thing. And it’s not just I think. Another previous podcast guest, simon Benjamin, who ran the Lighthouse Foundation here in Victoria and also had worked in the Mulberry Bush School in the UK, spoke really authoritatively about the importance of everyone being on the same page. Yes, yeah, so that’s great.

Mrs Sheridan: 26:48

I think you’re right, colby.

Mrs Sheridan: 26:49

I think the importance is that everyone needs to be invested in, and everyone, if you’re saying we all have a part to play they have to understand what that part is and they have to feel valued and they have to have the confidence to contribute to the care of the children.

Mrs Sheridan: 27:13

And so for me, it’s important that we do all have the same training, and I think that was my drive. When I started, I realized that I did not have all of the skills and theoretical knowledge that I needed, and so that’s why I did my master’s in education and then went on to do my master’s in forensic psychology, for two reasons One I wanted the staff to recognise that we all need to be in a learning environment and that we don’t always have the answers, but to encourage staff to believe and to convey to children that lifelong learning is something that we should all aspire to and that it’s so valuable for both the children and for staff. And so for me, I thought, by showing an example, although it was hard sometimes finding the time, but it was about setting, you know, setting the scene and having staff understand that we’re all on this journey together, journey of learning together that you started from a place of I’m not quite sure if I know what I need to know and have the skills that I need to have.

Colby: 28:37

So you started from a reflective position.

Mrs Sheridan: 28:41

Yes.

Colby: 28:45

A reflective and self-awareness, self-evaluation, self-awareness and, I would imagine, as part of life, lifelong learning. Encouraging that, embodying that in ourselves, encouraging it in others, has as part of it an ongoing reflection of what about what? What do I know and what do I need to know? Next, and I think that that’s been again another theme of this podcast and something that I’ve said previously and stand by, is that we need to think about what we’re doing. In this area of work.

Colby: 29:25

Thinking about it can be hard I had Nicola O’Sullivan on and she was talking about how the work can be so confronting, so challenging in some ways, that it can impact our capacity to think but we need to be thinking about what we’re doing. If we stop thinking about it, we become procedural, yes, and when we become procedural, we apply a one-size-fits-all, regardless of who’s in front of us. And procedural practice can be hard, can lack heart, can, in fact, be heartless practice. Yes, yeah, and I just wanted to make the point, in case people missed it, that the Moore House School is a residential school. The children I’m not sure if you have day students as well.

Mrs Sheridan: 30:22

I think you do, don’t you?

Colby: 30:23

Yes, but you also have children who live in those homes that you mentioned, with staff, and I’m imagining that there is also the word I’m looking for. It’s getting late in the day for me, so the words don’t come as easy. Here it is, I’ve got it. We’re going to cut that bit out. So I imagine that there’s alignment between home and school, there’s concordance, there’s congruence between home and school.

Mrs Sheridan: 31:01

Yes, the team in the homes do go into the school and work alongside children, and I have a psychological service team and what they do is they work both with the house, families and the teaching team and together they work out what we call a children’s plan, and so there’s the multidisciplinary focus on the needs of the children and we also ensure teachers, care staff and our psychological services team do the same training.

Mrs Sheridan: 31:50

So there’s relationships that build up through these opportunities and there is good communication between the multidisciplinary aspects of our team. And I think the biggest challenge for the teams in the houses is that you assume that there’s confidence in terms of education for care staff, but some of our care staff struggle because they themselves had difficulties when they were in school, and so what we encourage is some of our care staff, if there’s a subject that they’re not confident in, that they will get alongside a child and the two of them will do the learning together, and it’s quite refreshing when you see the adult and the child trying to learn something that the care staff member may not necessarily be confident about. It’s nice to watch that experience.

Colby: 32:53

That’s wonderful. Yeah, as you were talking about that, I could just imagine the emotional congruence between the staff member and the child. You know the emotional connection from having that shared learning experience, which is really important for our children in need. And yeah, it sounds like just a wonderful therapeutic way of delivering aligned care across both the home and the school. And I’m wondering if your psychology service provide a therapeutic service to some of the children as well.

Mrs Sheridan: 33:41

Yes, Children can have one-to-one interventions, working with things like grief and attachment, and that’s usually alongside, when it’s appropriate, alongside the key care staff member. We attach a key staff member for each young person in a therapeutic pathway and it’s interesting to see how relationships are established and how passionate the key workers can become if a meeting’s cancelled or, you know, if there’s something important for the child. It’s interesting when you watch the two disciplines working together when there’s a need for the child that the other discipline doesn’t recognise. So yes, there’s a passion on both sides. It’s lovely.

Colby: 34:46

Yeah, it’s wonderful when you were talking at the beginning about the Moore House group, I was also thinking about the allied health team that you across the three organisations.

Mrs Sheridan: 35:18

And we normally use as much as possible community-based services in terms of health, and I think that’s important for the young people when they go back into their own community, that it builds up confidence to allow them to use community services. So we don’t cover all of the requirements in terms of health and we try to use any community-based services and it’s about the dentist, the doctor, the optician trying to help children to grow in confidence to use those services as and when they go back home.

Colby: 35:55

Right, fantastic and not being contented. Contented is probably not the right word, but moving, not finding the challenges of having a residential school enough. You then set up a foster care service. You said that you did that because you believe that children shouldn’t grow up in all of their years in a. You said the word institutional or residential care environment is what I understood you to be referring to. So were there any unique challenges, I guess, or different challenges involved in setting up a foster care service?

Mrs Sheridan: 36:43

I think it’s the same challenges as you find in terms of recruiting staff challenges as you find in terms of recruiting staff and it’s about finding foster carers who are resilient and who are open to training and are able to recognise that the challenge that they face could be quite complex.

Mrs Sheridan: 37:10

And so it was about working in partnership and we encouraged our foster carers to come to any training that’s available within any of the three organisations and we trained our foster carers in the attachment model. And it’s about, for me, stickability making sure that our foster carers have access to social work. Our social work team, our social work team carries small numbers of carers so that they can be available to carers more often than probably the local authority foster carers are able to get support. So it’s about consistency and it’s about encouraging carers to understand the very challenging role that they’re taking on. So in our organisation, we have had foster carers and still have foster carers that have been with us for over 25 years, so some of them have got stickability, but I think that the landscape in terms of the needs of children haven’t changed. I think the language has changed, but I still think the needs of children and the challenge that they bring, I think is the same as when I started nearly 40 years ago.

Colby: 38:47

So yeah, I’m very proud very proud, very proud yes, indeed you should be. And and so the fossil again, we, the, the organization as it’s grown, um continues to be aligned, uh, across all its component parts, that they have a shared values, their shared values, their shared knowledge. There’s a shared language, everyone can speak to each other and um and you, you’ve, you’ve deliberately gone about choosing um interested parties to become foster carers, who themselves are also, I guess, interested in being lifelong learners and continuing to unlock their own potential. That just reminds me again of the idea that what we do with our children we need to do across the organisation. So when we highlighted before in the bio, I first mentioned that what you wanted was an organisation that saw the potential in children and supported advancing that potential or creating the right growing conditions for that potential.

Colby: 40:15

It’s important that we do that for our staff, our volunteers, our foster carers. We do that for everything, everyone, because they get to feel it’s a bit like going to training and being inspired by training. If you’re the managing director and founder, you get inspired, and everyone else, you see the value in everyone else being inspired Very much so, yeah, so having your potential acknowledged and developed feels great and flows perhaps quite naturally into supporting the potential of the children as well, so that’s a very important and key value of your organisation.

Mrs Sheridan: 41:08

Yes.

Colby: 41:09

Yeah.

Mrs Sheridan: 41:09

And I think we’ve needed to use the language like families and again, throughout the years, we know when we speak to each other, I hear staff talking about the Moore House family, which I smile at, and the other kind of way that I describe foster carers is and care staff and teachers. I talk about them being professional, and so that implies a professional responsibility and implies the standards and values that we all need to share and the importance of each person within the family, because you just can’t attach someone onto the organisation. They have to be living and feel that they’re part of this living organisation, and so they have to grow as we grow, and so I think when I started, I really it’s over time that I’ve understood the importance of language, but it’s beginning to reap rewards so many years later.Colby: 42:28

Yeah, and I love the fact that I imagine that everyone feels like they’re on the same level across the family, and I think that’s also really important. And then, as if the challenges of running a residential school and a foster care agency were not enough, you’ve established the Jane Moore Trust and taken on the role of the school for children, neurodiverse children and young people, and I guess I mean I could ask you were the challenges or what are the influences there for the service that you’re providing for that part of the organisation?

Mrs Sheridan: 43:39

I think, to be honest, it was a steep learning curve for me. I hadn’t really had a lot of experience in working with children with neurodiverse challenges. I knew that I wanted to establish the same culture, and so I think that there were elements of our culture that were easily put into place in the new school easily put into place in the new school. One of the challenges that we faced was that the previous school had to close with very short notice, and so the first real challenge was to establish relationships with families and to build their confidence, and what I found was that we were actually dealing with trauma in the families that came back to us, and so there was a lot of work there in trying to establish that we were staying and that we would be reliable, and once we got that platform established, it was slow growth. I mean, we’ve been doing this for five years, and my first important step was to get accreditation and make sure that the team had all the knowledge and expertise that these children would need us to have, and, as I say, I did not have a lot of experience. I had to pull in experts.

Mrs Sheridan: 45:27

I was very fortunate in that two of the consultants from the school that had been there prior to us opening, stayed with us and again were very passionate and appeared to recognize where our drive was coming from, and so they stood alongside us and are still standing with us.

Mrs Sheridan: 45:52

And we tried to get accreditation through the National Association for Autism, and for me that was the kind of checklist of professional growth and expertise, and when we achieved that, it was the tick box. Yes, we’re doing it the way that we should and we’re still small numbers, but our reputation has become national rather than Scottish, and so we have referrals from England and Scotland, and most of our referrals are coming from word of mouth, from local authorities that are telling other local authorities the success that we’re having with with some of their children. But it’s still a learning curve for me. There’s still something different, um, different. I think children’s needs are the same, but I do think that, yes, they’re a unique, wonderful group of different behaviours that I’ve not come across prior to opening the school, but they challenge us in a different way. But it’s refreshing.

Colby: 47:10

Perhaps they come to the school in different circumstances. You might say Very much so. And there are, yeah, and that there are. They have their differences, but there’s a lot of. There’s still children and young people with needs, and there’s a lot of similarity as well as diversity. And the thought that was going through my mind, Patricia, was those consultants that stayed on the teaching staff that you have at the school. On what basis do they also stand in the Moore House family, so to speak?

Mrs Sheridan: 47:58

The training that we do is across the three organisations, so it offers the opportunity for establishing professional and personal relationships. So that’s the foundation of the relationship. The teaching team have some elements of training that inevitably are different, but we all train in terms of understanding trauma and attachment, because for me, trauma does not necessarily come from socio-economical challenges. It comes from experiences and for these children, their trauma came from their educational establishments not recognising their needs and not meeting their needs. So there are threads that go throughout our language and our training.

Mrs Sheridan: 48:58

Our consultants meet. One of our consultants meets in terms of therapeutic supervision and support once a week supervision and support once a week and our other consultant, her specialism is education and curriculum development. So both of our consultants work alongside developing the curriculum with the team. Because unfortunately, when we opened we needed to start almost from scratch with our teaching team and again, I think that was because the teaching team that had been in the previous school. They themselves had been traumatized by their experience and I felt that it was too big a challenge to support their healing whilst addressing the needs of children. So it felt as if we were having to start again with the teaching team. But five years later we have a cohesion and a language and a feeling that we are just an extension of the original organisation, although our approach is slightly different.

Colby: 50:16

And I guess you’ve confirmed what I was suspecting to be true and certainly suspect to be well think is true from my work is that it’s not that much different whether you’re dealing with children who have a history of relational trauma and socioeconomic disadvantage and you’re of diverse children. They’re all children. They all have needs. Relationships are important to them. So the language and the understanding that exists within trauma-informed theories and attachment-based knowledge is important across diverse endeavours, including, you know, as is represented in the Moore House group.

Mrs Sheridan: 51:16

Very much so.

Colby: 51:18

I was wondering if there is anything that you have learnt along the way that you really wished you knew when you were starting any of these endeavours.

Mrs Sheridan: 51:30

Yeah, yes, I wish that I had known at the beginning that, in terms of the development of trauma, and that services and local authorities would move away from the control of children, and I think if I had known that we would, as Scottish services, that we would get to a place where we would use language like love and understanding and relationships.

Mrs Sheridan: 52:23

I think if I had known back then that we would achieve this in terms of the Scottish approach and the Scottish landscape for children, it would have been a bit of a relief and I probably would not have struggled some of the times and cried some of the times that I did in the early days. But I think that within Scotland, childcare and education has come a long way and I’m relieved to know that my approach wasn’t wrong and that, yes, and that we are now there’s more of a camaraderie now in Scotland and an understanding about the needs of children, and for me I just I just find that exciting and a bit of a relief. So, yeah, I wish I’d known back there that we were going to be where we are today.

Colby: 53:27

Yeah, I do an activity when I’m delivering training Patricia, that I adapt for different scenarios, but from a parenting point of view, it’s an activity that’s based around this story, which is that I think of parenting as a bit like being a farmer a farmer who grows crops. Yeah, so, as the parent, you turn over the soil, you make sure you’ve got your paddocks fenced. Yeah, you turn over the soil, you add in extra nutrients that the soil may require, you choose the right time of the year to sow seeds, you plant your seeds and then you wait. You wait for the weather, you wait for you know whether you might have to manage any unwanted intrusions over those fences. But the most important thing is that we do is we wait, and we’re often in the dark about whether, yeah, whether all of those things that we’ve put into the growing environment, whether they’ll bear fruit. We have to wait for our crops to grow.

Colby: 55:00

Yeah, and it sounds very much like that in terms of your journey. You had the courage of your convictions to take service provision in a different direction in Scotland, service provision in a different direction in Scotland, and it turns out that you were right. Yeah, it turns out that you grew what you were hoping to grow. Yes, yeah, my last podcast guest was Richard Rowlandson of the Mulberry Bush School in the UK and his question was what are you feeling hopeful about in the work that you do? And the reason why I’m asking you now is I think you kind of was answering that already. Yeah, a moment ago.

Mrs Sheridan: 56:00

Yes, I’m very hopeful of the way forward In Scotland. We’re talking about the promise, which is a focus nationally, and it’s about recognising the need for children’s voice in decision-making, establishing support, genuine support for families to enable them to nurture and parent their children, so that we don’t end up with the damage and trauma that our children can end up having, and just a genuine awareness and honesty in that we didn’t get it right in the past, but that the future is brighter, there is hope for children. I still think there’s work to do for supporting families. I still think our focus is on the damage rather than preventative work being done, but I am very hopeful that, certainly in Scotland, that we are recognising and understanding the children’s behaviours and what the children are communicating by their behaviours in a way that we didn’t before. It was about control, Whereas now, and even the language.

Mrs Sheridan: 57:36

Now we’re talking about love, we’re talking about relationships and we’re taking risks in becoming attached and showing children that we can love them, that we do believe in them and that we don’t need to be embarrassed about using that language which 30, 40 years ago you were shunned for using that language. So I’m really optimistic and I’m optimistic that God gives me a lot more energy and a lot more years. We have a lot more to do.

Colby: 58:12

Yeah, well, I hope we both get that as well. Yes indeed so, Patricia. I always give my podcast guests an opportunity to ask me a question without notice. We’ve been going for about an hour now. We probably could talk for many more, but we should be thinking about winding this one up, but before we do, is there a question that you would like to ask me without notice?

Mrs Sheridan: 58:43

Yes, I’ve obviously looked into education in Australia and I’m aware of your national improvement framework and I was really wondering about you in terms of do you feel Australia’s education accepts, understands and is driven to meet the needs of the more vulnerable groups of young people? Are you optimistic about the way forward?

Colby: 59:18

That’s a really good question. I could speak primarily of my own jurisdiction, where there has been significant endeavour to roll out training across the jurisdiction to all the schools and personnel within schools in trauma-informed or trauma-responsive practice and what a trauma-sensitive school environment looks like. So there’s definitely been endeavour in that space here and in my neck of the woods In terms of what I think. What I would offer differently is a way of thinking about the work with the children that is tailored to the experience of each and every individual child who has experienced significant relational or other hardship. So capacity to think about and better understand what’s going on for each of those child and how they, how they each, each one of them expresses um that in their, in their outward behavior and and other aspects of their presentation, and I guess I would also a bit similar to what we were talking about before. I think it’s really important that when we deliver training about our most disadvantaged, we also acknowledge that they’re children like all the other children in the school and all the other children in the school are children just like our children who’ve experienced a lot of hardship, people that doesn’t discriminate in terms of the benefit that can flow from the way we approach the role. All that by way of. I encourage teachers and other staff within school that I have contact with to draw on conventional approaches to caregiving and relating that are helpful to all children, including those who’ve experienced significant hardship, because when we do that, that also communicates that all of the adults have within them the capacity to make a significant positive input into the lives the emotional, the relational, the psychological lives of the children. So I’m a little bit hopeful that schools and education are more interested in being trauma sensitive and responsive and indeed trauma informed.

Colby: 1:02:46

I think the difference between being trauma sensitive and trauma responsive and trauma informed, trauma-responsive and trauma-informed so trauma-aware, trauma-sensitive, trauma-responsive and trauma-informed, trauma-informed involves relationship. That’s, I think, the difference. So individual relationships. I really want to get to know you, to get to understand you. I really want to know what needs you have that I can assist with or respond to therapeutically to, in order to ensure that you feel loved, worthy, adequate, capable. I want to ensure those things and I think that, um, um, that that would be the difference from what I, what I understand to be what, what is being rolled out and what I would roll out is that I would encourage for teachers and other educational staff to have that capacity to think about, to reflect on, to understand the needs of each individual child and to deliver ways of of of relating to them and caring for them in school that help them to feel, yeah, worthy, capable, adequate, good enough.

Mrs Sheridan: 1:04:25

Yes, I think that’s why I use the term I’m possible for staff and children. Relationships are the vehicle to all healing, in my view.

Colby: 1:04:41

That’s right.

Mrs Sheridan: 1:04:44

So easy and yet so hard. I said so easy and yet so hard.

Colby: 1:04:51

Yeah, well, yes, I think, yeah, I think. Our children. The perception of many is that our children are defensive and difficult to establish and maintain relationships with. I mean our children who have been hurt and let down, and I’ve never found that.

Mrs Sheridan: 1:05:23

Yeah.

Colby: 1:05:23

I rarely have a child with whom I can’t develop a relationship and I don’t and I do it through helping them feel like they’re a person of worth, helping them feel like that they’re good enough, that they’re capable, they’re adequate. Yeah, just as they are.

Mrs Sheridan: 1:05:44

Yeah, wonderful little beings.

Colby: 1:05:48

They are. Yeah, they keep us on our toes a little as well. They keep us on our toes a little as well. So, finally, I did flag this with my Richard Rowlandson question, but I would just wonder if you have a question that you would like me to ask.

Mrs Sheridan: 1:06:13

My next, guest on this podcast. I was looking. It’s the lighthouse, isn’t?

Colby: 1:06:20

it, it is.

Mrs Sheridan: 1:06:21

I was looking at the work that they were doing and I think for me it’s about how do they create a culture in foster carers that replicates the values of Lighthouse and maintains the values of Lighthouse.

Colby: 1:06:47

Yeah, that’s a really good question. It’s an extraordinary organisation.

Mrs Sheridan: 1:06:51

I was so impressed when I read the background. It was wonderful and I’d like to pass my compliments on to them.

Colby: 1:07:02

I’ll definitely do that. Thank you, Patricia, for what’s been, I think, a really inspirational podcast chat between us. I’ve really appreciated you making the time to appear and I wish you all the best in your ongoing endeavours. Long may they continue to happen.

Mrs Sheridan: 1:07:31

Thank you. I’ve enjoyed this morning with you and I’d just like to say thank you for the opportunity, and it’s with links with people like yourself and Patrick that keep people like myself feeling strong and carrying on the work, so thank you for that too.

Colby: 1:07:52

Lovely. Thank you, you’re welcome.

Mrs Sheridan: 1:07:55

Thank you, you’re welcome, thank you.

Learning to Live with Yourself and Others: Insights from Therapeutic Residential Care, with Richard Rollinson

Sunflowers Don’t Bloom Overnight: A Therapeutic Journey

The profound wisdom shared by Richard Rowlandson in this episode offers a transformative perspective on therapeutic residential care that resonates far beyond institutional walls. With over five decades of experience at the Mulberry Bush School in Oxfordshire, Richard’s insights illuminate the essential elements of creating healing environments for our most vulnerable children.

At the heart of therapeutic communities lies a simple yet powerful concept: belonging. As Richard eloquently explains, the word “belonging” itself combines “be” (which the Oxford English Dictionary defines as a “defective word” requiring something else to make sense) with “longing” (a yearning for something unattainable). When fused together, they create something powerful – a sense of being part of something rather than apart from it. This fundamental human need drives much of the behaviour we see in traumatised children.

One of the most striking insights Richard shares is about children’s desperate need to be held in mind. He recounts a six-year-old girl who taught him that children who don’t feel held in the adult mind will produce behaviours to be “on their mind” instead – even when those behaviours lead to negative consequences. As Richard poignantly puts it: “If I can’t be in their mind, I better be on their mind, because if I’m not either of those places, I’m out of their mind and out of my mind.” This profound understanding explains why traditional behaviour management approaches often fail with traumatised children.

The Mulberry Bush School’s approach centres on creating an environment where children can “learn to live with yourself and other people.” This seemingly simple mission statement encompasses a sophisticated therapeutic practice that acknowledges how early trauma disrupts normal development. Richard uses the beautiful metaphor of “tempo rubato” from music – time that has been stolen. These children have had their childhood time stolen from them, and therapeutic communities work to give some of that time back, allowing for healthy emotional and social development.

Perhaps most relevant for mainstream education is Richard’s emphasis on the power of the word “we.” He laments that schools have a captive audience five days a week but rarely use that potential for building genuine community. By creating spaces where students can regularly reflect together on “how are we doing?” and “what’s going on?”, schools could transform their culture from one of compliance to one of belonging. This simple shift in approach doesn’t require turning every school into a therapeutic community, but rather introducing therapeutic elements that benefit all children.

The conversation also touches on the patience required in this work. Using a horticultural metaphor, Richard warns against forcing growth, which leads to weak roots. Instead, we must create the right conditions and wait, understanding that “the long-term hurt many of these children have suffered requires some long-term work.” This perspective challenges our results-driven educational culture and reminds us that healing happens on its own timeline.

Richard’s five decades of commitment to this work stand as testament to its value. The fact that former pupils still reach out years later, sometimes saying “you’re the only ones who didn’t give up on me,” speaks volumes about the lasting impact of being truly held in mind. For anyone working with vulnerable children, Richard’s wisdom offers both practical guidance and profound inspiration for creating environments where healing and growth can naturally occur.

You can listen here:

You can watch here:

About Richard:

Richard has a long association with Residential Therapeutic Communities, having worked at the Mulberry Bush School for well over 20 years and where, from 1991 to 2001, he was its Director. He was also Director, Children and Young People, at the Peper Harow Foundation, from 2001 to 2005.

Richard qualified as a Social Worker with an MSc from Oxford University in 1983, following the then Part 1 training in Child Psychotherapy at the Tavistock Centre. In 2005 he completed the Ashridge MA and training in Organisational Consulting. He has been Chairman of the Charterhouse Group of Therapeutic Communities and for many years the Chairman of the Care Leavers’ Foundation. In 2014 he became Chair of Trustees at the Mulberry Bush School, only recently stepping down from that position, while remaining a Trustee with a special brief for the links and development of the contacts with and participation of former pupils. He has published numerous articles and continues to lecture widely across the UK and Europe.

Related Podcast Interviews:

John Whitwell

Listen here:

Watch here:

John Turberville

Listen here:

Watch here:

Transcript:

Colby: 0:01

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast.

Richard: 0:04

And one of the most powerful words I believe in therapeutic residential care is the word we we. So if we encourage the sense of belonging and it’s very strong it provides an alternative to presenting disruptive behavior. Hence we always talk about you. Come to the Mooribish school to learn to live with yourself and other people that they’ve had time stolen from them, the time to be a child, to be well-grounded and rooted, and we’re there to help give them some of that time back.

Richard: 0:48

The long-term hurt many of these children, young people, have suffered require some long-term work. I don’t feel held in the adult mind and because I can’t feel I’m in their mind, I produce behaviors continually to be on their mind, even though I know it has negative consequences. It’s better for me Because if I can’t be in their mind, I better be on their mind, because if I’m not either of those places, I’m out of their mind and out of my mind. I better be on their mind because if I’m not either of those places, I’m out of their mind and out of my mind, and we have to wait and give the child the space and the opportunity to make amends for what they do.

Colby: 1:42

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast. I’m Colby Pearce, and joining me for this episode is a long-standing and highly respected figure in the world of therapeutic residential communities and practice in the UK and beyond. Before I introduce my guest, I’d just like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the lands. I come to this podcast from the Kaurna people of the Adelaide Plains and I’d like to acknowledge 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 guest this episode is Richard Rowlandson. Richard was, until 31 December 2019, the Director of the Planned Environment Therapy Trust and remains an independent consultant in the fields of therapeutic childcare, education and mental health across the voluntary, statutory and private sectors. Richard has a long association with residential therapeutic communities, having worked at the Mulberry Bush School for well over 20 years and where, from 1991 to 2001, he was its director. He was also director children and young people at the Pepper Harrow Foundation from 2001 to 2005. Amongst his activities in this field, richard worked for many years with the Department of Social Welfare in Portugal to support the development of specialist therapeutic residential communities across the country. He continues to work in a consultant role with several organisations in Ireland and Portugal.

Colby: 3:40

Richard qualified as a social worker with an MSc from Oxford University in 1983, following the then part one training in child psychotherapy at the Tavistock Centre In 2005, he completed the Ashridge MA and training in organisational consulting. He has been chairman of the Charterhouse Group of Therapeutic Communities and for many years, the chairman of the Care Leavers Foundation. In 2014, he became chair of trustees at the Mulberry Bush School only recently, stepping down from that position while remaining a trustee with a special brief for the links and development of the contacts with and participation of former pupils. He has published numerous articles and continues to lecture widely across the UK and Europe. Over 35 years he has undertaken numerous serious case reviews into the deaths of or serious harm sustained by children and adolescents, as well as service inquiries into organisations providing care and treatment for vulnerable populations. He was also involved in the Commission of Inquiry into Historical Child Abuse in Ireland and contributed a chapter to the final Ryan Commission report in 2009. Welcome, richard

.Richard: 5:10

Colby, thank you very much. I was just thinking I’d like to meet that guy sometime.

Colby: 5:14

It sounds quite interesting. Yes, Well, of course, our podcast guests will never know what a hash I made of some of those sentences. With the magic of recording and editing, I can make it sound perfectly seamless. And also I’ve just discovered that my editing software with AI involvement allows me to look as though my eyes are on the camera the whole way through as well. So that’s good as well. Yeah, Technology when it works it’s wonderful it is, it is. Was there anything else that you might wish to add to that bio?

Richard: 5:58

No, I think the bio is accurate and truthful is accurate and truthful. I think what it offers is a sense of structure that when going through it, living and working through it, sometimes didn’t feel that way. It sounds like everything was done and actually the experience is sometimes just getting on and getting on and other times the experience is sometimes just getting on and getting on and other times really just trying to survive and that sort of evens it out in a framework. So, while it’s true, the truth as anyone who’s involved in very close working with troubled populations and managing oneself in those can have a very different feel at times. So it is interesting to hear an introduction in that way and then have this sense of it was a very interesting journey, sometimes in the Chinese curse sense may your life be interesting look, as you were saying that I was just.

Colby: 7:04

I was also thinking to myself that about. You know, over a long career, we we becomes um immersed in what we’re doing in the here and now and we’re not necessarily uh spending a lot of time thinking about what’s gone before or what may come uh in the future. So my career hasn’t been as long as yours. I’m only in decade number four. We had a little catch up a few weeks ago before when we were talking about doing this podcast, and am I right in thinking that it’s been a 52 year long history of association with the cotswolds?

Richard: 7:49

not with the mulberry bush. Yes, I mean the cotswold, yeah, the mulberry bush. We always had good links with the cotswold community. And and of course, you’ve spoken to john whitwell already, someone who I greatly admire, and he was quite an important person to many of us in this sector.

Richard: 8:11

His capacity to contain anxiety really percolated through the community and went beyond the dispersal of Cotswolds people to other places. And of course the real link was Mrs Dr Drysdale, the founder of the Mulberry Bush was also the consultant for a number of years to Cotswold community too. So there are these links. But it’s right, yes, I arrived at the Mulberry Bush on the 8th of October 1974.

Colby: 8:50

51 years ago.

Richard: 8:51

Yeah, yeah, and I always remember that because it was a child who started that day as well.

Colby: 9:00

Yeah.

Richard: 9:00

And all these years later, we’re still in touch.

Colby: 9:03

Oh, really, that’s wow’re still in touch.

Richard: 9:08

Oh, really that’s wow yeah.

Colby: 9:08

Yeah so yes, it’s remarkable. Tell us a little bit about I mean, I’m sure many people who listen to this podcast will know something of the Mulberry Bush School because it’s had such an incredible history and long history, starting as it did by Mrs Drocker Drysdale and her husband. But perhaps if you could tell me a little bit about, or tell us a little bit about, the work at the Mulberry Bush School over these past decades that you’ve been associated with it, In many ways its emergence was out of a social and international experience of disorder and disarray and danger and risk, namely World War II.

Richard: 10:10

And at the start of World War II, very briefly, because it’s a long and interesting story Mrs Dr Drysdale, who was a housewife, opened up a nursery and playgroup for families in the locality in Oxfordshire urban centers. Because of the bombing, she found herself giving shelter to a good number of individuals and what emerged was the people who were organizing the evacuation, and Donald Winnicott was a consultant to that process, though she didn’t meet him, then consultant to that process, though she didn’t meet him. Then they discovered that Mrs D seemed to have a much greater ability to contain and maintain those children who found it impossible in many other places and had been moved on and moved on, and moved on, and even when they went home they weren’t able to remain there. The dislocation was so great and it really emerged from there. So that was during the war. But by 1948, she was left with 28 children, all of whom were not able to return home, either because there was no home to return to, or actually they just weren’t felt to be and didn’t feel to be a part of those home bases anymore, and so she found a place here in Oxfordshire where the Mulberry Bridge School is now, and so she found a place here in Oxfordshire where the Mulberry Bush School is now, and they moved sometime.

Richard: 12:25

A charity wasn’t even a charity then was from 1948. Though the story goes begins earlier than that, and the reason it’s a school is twofold, one of which is every child, wherever they are in the UK, has to be registered in a school. And so it was a school, even though it was a particular kind of school, and we’ll get to that, I’m sure. But the other thing was, instinctively and intuitively, mrs d knew that it would be of no help at all to children to become emotionally whole and wholesome, insightful, if they didn’t have the educational experiences and capacities that many of their contemporaries would have, and so she was very committed to that, but also committed to the particular nature of the school they needed. So that’s a bit of the history of how we got there.

Richard: 13:34

And right from the start, the educational experience was primarily emotionally led, with a population of children who had been so damaged by the presence of some treatments and the absence of others that they hadn’t been able to live with themselves or with other people. Hence we always talk about you. Come to the Moorooish school to learn to live with yourself and other people Living to learn learning to live. The words come easy, but it’s not glib. It’s a foundation to the reality of what children have needed and how they have to engage with themselves and being helped to do that and discover themselves as part of that process. So, as you can see, I can go on.

Colby: 14:32

Well.

Richard: 14:34

I was going to.

Colby: 14:35

I was going to look. I’m a history buff outside of psychology and I love hearing these, these stories about, and have done a little bit of reading actually about the history of the Mulberry Bush School and the work of. I’ve never heard her referred to as Mrs D before, but definitely as Mrs Docker Drysdale.

Richard: 14:58

Yes, yes.

Colby: 15:01

Rarely. I think I got corrected by referring to her as Barbara or gently corrected at one stage.

Richard: 15:08

Yes, yes, well, actually it’s interesting, cotswold, she was always Mrs Drysdale.

Colby: 15:14

Yeah.

Richard: 15:15

At the Mulberry Bush. She was Mrs D, but she was always the same person.

Colby: 15:21

Yes, yes, yeah. So you arrived in 1974, 1974, and over that time, that that span of involvement, which is, uh, 50 years, um how, how, what, how has it evolved as a school and as a mean? It’s really a therapeutic community with a worldwide reach these days.

Richard: 15:49

A colleague of mine and, frankly, one of the influences for me and on me of my work is Adrian Ward, and he was a colleague when I was teaching at university and for a brief interrenium in my time at the Mulberry Bush and we were reflecting upon what is the particular enduring nature of the Mulberry Bush and it really matched something that Mrs D and Winnicott were very keen on, this notion of always becoming. So the Mulberry Bush did not emerge you know who is it like? I’m trying to think of the God that sprang from Zeus’s brow, all fully armored and things, but it didn’t emerge fully formed, it was always becoming and it was opened to becoming and continues to this day to be open to becoming, which is not just keeping on keeping on, though that’s important it is seeing opportunities for further growth and development, not simply in service to itself, but in service to a commitment to a task to help other people who are troubled and at times troublesome, find a way through to a different way of being.

Richard: 17:23

And that’s the real continuity. And so it built up. Over times, and even during my tenure as director of the Mobley Bush, people would talk, sometimes in rather rarefied ways, ourselves included, about the therapeutic community and the therapeutic task.

Richard: 17:46

And that was important. But equally, there were times where I would acknowledge, look, if we were only to identify ourselves as a therapeutic community because things are going so well, I’d have to have a buzzer on my desk and press the buzzer sometimes to cease being that because we were in total chaos. That was part of the work. Part of the work was supporting functioning and development and managing breakdown, but in a way that made a difference, and so that’s really the task. And we would sometimes begin to go a bit off course and, in a culture and an environment where inquiry was at its heart, there was always, thankfully, someone to say hang on, I’m a bit concerned, what is it that we are doing? I’m a bit concerned, what is it that we are doing?

Richard: 18:45

And even the children sometimes would say to the grownups that’s not fair, we don’t do that. And we’d have to listen and we’d say yeah, okay, and we would think about what was going on. That was making us, you know, be a bit too controlling of things. So open communication and genuine discourse and dialogue was really, really important, and it could easily be quashed and squashed, not consciously, but with this anxious belief that everything had to be orderly. No, we don’t welcome breakdown and disorder the mulberry bush doesn’t do that even now but we accept it as part of the work that will help us regain an equilibrium where we are all together in our thinking and growing and learning, and not just the children in our thinking and growing and learning, and not just the children, I often say.

Colby: 19:50

People in my work. People talk about conflict as a bad thing and many of the children I work with they lose relationships where there’s conflict and conflict has been such a negative experience for them. But I’ve always held the view that conflict is really important, Disagreement is really important.

Richard: 20:14

And excuse me sorry. You can see I get enthusiastic. That’s all right.

Colby: 20:18

It’ll happen both ways, but how else will children learn that relationships will persist after conflict?

Richard: 20:30

Yes, exactly, and things can be mended with the commitment of all. And we’ve had a number of former pupils come back, sometimes years after, and and two themes, but really the same, one of which the communication is I don’t know how you ever put up with me. I was outrageous, I was this, that and the other. And you say well, actually you really weren’t as bad as you think you were. You gave us a run for the money. That’s fair enough, but there was always something about you that let us look after you and care for you, and you made good use of it. And the other one is and this is, you know, quite a sad observation a number come back and say I come back to you because you’re the only ones who didn’t give up on me yeah, that is a sad observation yeah yeah, it reminds me of a young person who said to me once Colby, do you know why I keep coming to see you?

Colby: 21:41

And I thought about it and I thought I said to them well, that would be because I guess you have the experience that I really understand you and I help you. Oh no, she said I keep coming to see you because you’re the only one who’s stuck around.

Richard: 22:05

Well, there is that, and really that’s such an important communication Stuck around.

Colby: 22:13

Absolutely.

Richard: 22:19

But not forcing ourselves on them, but them knowing they’re available. I still only live less than a quarter of a mile away from the Mulberry Bush, and that was my mistake.

Colby: 22:25

That was my mistake Earlier. For some reason I got Cotswolds stuck in my head instead of yeah, in Oxfordshire, there near the Mulberry Bush School. Yes, that’s what I was trying to say. You’ve been part of the community fabric as well as the community. Yeah, indeed, yes.

Richard: 22:46

Mind you, our son’s take on his childhood and youth was he was being held prisoner in a rural gulag because he was always a city boy, but actually he does. He did acknowledge that his childhood was okay. So it’s a lovely village and, if you like villages, and I grew up in new york city, so I’m quite happy having had my city time to be in a rural environment, so so how did you find yourself there, having grown up in New York City and people will notice the accent that has persisted.

Richard: 23:18

Indeed. Well, you’ll probably have to buy the first 14 volumes of my autobiography for the full story. But briefly, and this is relevant, ultimately, I spent four years in a seminary studying to be a priest. Thankfully, I was rescued by two Susans from a life of celibacy and I left the seminary and I was rather wandering while being a perpetual student. And I was rather wandering while being a perpetual student and I saw an advert for study abroad, in the UK at City University of New York.

Richard: 24:06

I thought well, long story short, suddenly, in the September 1970, I was over there in England and I liked it so much, I asked if I could stay and they said yes, there in England, and I liked it so much, I asked if I could stay and they said yes. And in fact, my girlfriend then, who’s now my wife? She had heard about the mulberry bush and in 1974, I drove her down for a visit. I was signed up as a PhD student and we visited it for a weekend and it was fascinating. It was much more interesting than social and economic history, and we both ended up staying 52 years ago 54 years ago.

Colby: 24:47

Say that again 52 or 54 years ago, 54. 52. No, it’s 74.

Richard: 24:53

Yeah, 74, yeah 74 74 sorry, yeah, yeah it was a long time this is not the maths podcast and, as they say, and the rest is history and hysteria but uh yeah, it was just so interesting and I hope this isn’t premature I always puzzled over what attracted me so much to the Mulberry School the day I walked in to it, and it is a very lively environment and it was very different from any other space I thought I’d encountered, from any other space I thought I’d encountered. Only after it’s really only been within the last 10 years, I realized what the connection was between being in a seminary and being at the Mulberry Bush, and it’s not a religious or belief-based thing, it’s the actual experience of living and working, not just in a group but as a group. That’s the link. And while the religious vocation wasn’t there, there was some kind of call.

Richard: 26:05

I felt to be a part of a culture and an environment where really living, to learn and learning to live as a group was important. And, as we know, learning can be sometimes painful, certainly for the children. But there are a number of cringe occasions in my own experience where I had to see myself as others saw me and it wasn’t quite the image I like to have of myself and I said, oh yeah, did I do that? Did I say that? Oh god, so it is really about learning and being open to it.

Colby: 26:48

Yeah, so and you you mentioned earlier when I, when I botched um the, the locations of, mentioned the cotswolds, but you did mention john whitwell as um, a colleague and and someone that you, um drew, had tremendous respect for, and and um yes drew inspiration from, and were there other along the way? You also mentioned another fellow who Adrian Ward. Adrian Ward, yeah. Have there been others as well?

Richard: 27:23

Yes, and in fact I mean the Cotswold community is quite significant and when I was still green behind the ears, or whatever the phrase is, I visited the Cotswold for the first time when Richard Balberny, its founder, was there and he was totally terrified and intimidated by the force of himself and his personality. And Mike Jenks was the deputy at the time and he took me under his wing, so to speak, on that occasion. We kept in close touch and he and several other people were quite instrumental in supporting my learning and understanding and my leadership. He was very key there. He passed away some years ago now and I was really really saddened by it because he was such a fine person. John, who had succeeded as the leader of Cotswold community, was there as well. So these were key people.

Richard: 28:29

But I was very well looked after in my early times at the Mulberry Bush by some of the staff there. John Armstrong, who was the head, was very clear you know real Scots clarity who was very honest with the children and very committed to them, and many of them still hold him in very high regard. But there was the deputy Roger and there was this occasion and I think it was about the first month that I was at the Mulberry Bush and breakfast was at 8.30, and at 8.29 and 30 seconds the group of children I was working with I think one had a sock on. The others were frankly, to use the clinical term, bare ass naked and bouncing around. And Roger came through and he said is this the way you’re treating Richard? You know he’s new. That’s no way to treat him. Come on, you guys. You know breakfast is downstairs. Now Get ready.

Richard: 29:36

I didn’t know whether to hug him or punch him in the nose for making me look bad you know, but it was those kinds of experiences of communication, naming something, and I thought I’m never going to be able to do that. How do they do that?

Colby: 29:50

And I thought I’m never going to be able to do that? How do?

Richard: 29:52

they do that. What I learned over time, thankfully, is the children need the grownups to be direct and honest with them, to name things, not blame. To name things and say this is not how we do it, and on they go. So it’s. You know, there is a period of survival, but while you’re surviving I think it’s a much more widespread experience than simply my own we’re learning to use ourselves, including those occasions where we do have to see ourselves as others see us for better or worse.

Colby: 30:29

So that’s the real culture of inquiry that is sometimes talked about yeah and in, and one of the things that I’ve been quite interested in on this podcast has been the conversations that I’ve had with leaders talking about the importance of having mentors whilst they’re leading organisations.

Richard: 30:54

And.

Colby: 30:55

I noted in there that you did mention that you had people who, even through those years that you were leading the Cotswold community, who were really important to you as mentors.

Richard: 31:11

Yes, well, I was leading the mulberry bush linked to the Cotswold community. But yes, they were there.

Colby: 31:18

Did I say the Cotswold community again you did yeah.

Richard: 31:22

But they were readily available and it felt collaborative. But there were times where I could honestly have my L plates on. You know, the learner driver, the learner leader, and it would be okay because they were recognizing that you know from their own experience the experience one goes through through. And you know, yeah, yes, I’m very grateful, which is why in more recent years, I’ve been very committed to supporting other people doing this work, you know, here in the UK, in Portugal and in Ireland, because I felt so well supported in doing the work and continuing to do the work. And you know what’s that word Bearing the unbearable, because it can be, as anyone in the work knows. It can be unbearable For us, just as for the children, the young people, the adults in any environment that seeks to be therapeutic. You don’t quash the feelings and squash them.

Colby: 32:38

You inquire, but it’s easier said than done and you need someone to hold space for you.

Richard: 32:44

Yes, yeah, hold space for you, just as as we hold space for the children well, it’s interesting you say that, because it is exactly the same thing and let’s see, I’ll use it. Kirstie, I’ll call her. If I use another name, ignore it.

Colby: 33:04

I can do some fancy editing.

Richard: 33:07

She taught me at the age of six a very important thing, which is I said to her social worker oh, I’d like to see her and speak to her to see if she wants to come to the Mulberry Bush. And the social worker was horrified why do you want to talk to her? We can’t get any sense out of her. That’s why we’re referring her to you. I said, well, okay, but the work has to start here and so I’ll do it. And she told me this very convoluted story, kirstie, and it involves snakes wrapped around ankles and things.

Richard: 33:46

But in the end, when I thought about it and reflected upon it, when I thought about it and reflected upon it, what she was saying was I don’t feel held in the adult mind and because I can’t feel I’m in their mind, I produce behaviors continually to be on their mind.

Richard: 34:13

And even though I know that has negative consequences for me, I mean I’m interpreting it. She was only six, but this was the message that she needed me to hear. Even though I know it has negative consequences, it’s better for me, because if I can’t be in their mind, I better be on their mind, because if I’m not either of those mind, I better be on their mind, because if I’m not either of those places, I’m out of their mind. And out of my mind, no mind, no minding. So it’s quite interesting that we have this role in the UK called childminders, and it’s just used as a term and it’s sometimes a very undervalued and always underpaid role. And yet childminding holding the child in mind, is the real important dimension of all the practical ways we have to go about making sure that children are well fed, well cared for, well looked after and all those things minding the child.

Colby: 35:22

Yeah.

Richard: 35:23

Yeah.

Colby: 35:24

As we were just speaking about beforehand.

Colby: 35:30

Being held in mind as a practitioner in this space is very important, and it reminds me of something a previous guest on the podcast, simon Benjamin, said.

Colby: 35:48

Now, you may or may not remember him, but Simon actually worked at the Mulberry Bush School for a period of time around 2010. And I think I might have mentioned this to you in our previous conversation, and he is an Englishman. He came and worked in Australia for a while, from memory, went back to the UK, worked at the Mulberry Bush School. While he was there, he met Adela Holmes and Susan Barton and they’re two people of high repute in the therapeutic communities sector in Victoria our adjoining state, communities sector in Victoria our adjoining state and he met them and showed them around and ultimately came back to Australia and worked for them separately, separately, at the two organisations they came from. Anyway, simon does works as an independent consultant these days, but he said something which I think um which I think captures at this little part of our conversation, and that is, he said, what we do, um for the children we need to be doing at all levels of the organization.

Richard: 37:05

Yes, Mm-hmm, mm-hmm. Yes, I look forward to meeting him sometime.

Colby: 37:15

You can watch his podcast at the very least.

Richard: 37:19

Yes, yes, I’m trying to think of you know, there are some. I think it was Goethe who called them eternal verities, mm-hmm Goethe who called them eternal verities. And you know, what Simon is saying is very, very true and it has been long recognized, even if not regularly or sufficiently honored. But I’m trying to think of the Latin phrase. I studied Latin for 11 years and it’s quis quis custodes custodiet, who looks after those who are looking after, and and that’s really so, you know, we’re talking about over a millennium or two millennia of human existence. It’s recognized and still sometimes ignored or honored in the breach.

Colby: 38:14

Yeah, that’s another goodness, richard, you’ll get me off on tangents as well. Another I was speaking to another person from just having conversation with him last night, from the UK, paul Van Heeswijk.

Richard: 38:31

Oh, yeah, I know Paul.

Colby: 38:33

Yeah, who also worked at the Cotswold community as a consultant after Mrs D, and yeah, anyway, I’ve lost it. It came and it went.

Richard: 38:46

Well, it was something about providing, making provision for the adults in the work in ways that supports them, so they are able to support, within that fashion, the children and young people or the prisoners in TCs, within prisons together. It is something about having the experience and the discipline. You know we’re talking about something about having the experience and the discipline. You know we’re talking about something about naming things and inquiring into them, as if this is such a wonderful thing. It’s the best thing to happen to be faced with a space inhabited by others, together with them, to look at what they’ve been doing. And you know, occasionally at the Mulberry Bush, you know, I would say to a child Do you see what you did? Did you realize that Ricky’s crying because you hit them and they give you that look, the look. What’s the look the look is? It encapsulates communication. Why are you bothering me talking about this? Yeah, I hit him. Where was anybody when I was being beaten to within an inch of my life? Where was anybody when I was being neglected? And now you’re picking me up because I smacked ricky, who probably deserved it. Forget about whether he deserved it or not. No, if we got what we deserved, god help us.

Richard: 40:34

However, you could understand these children saying it’s a completely alien culture. We’re inviting them to join because they need it, but we ain’t going to be thanked straight away. We’re certainly not going to be thanked. But we ain’t going to be thanked straight away. We’re certainly not going to be thanked. The amazing thing is how often we are 10, 15, 20, 30 years later which is good and still taken to task on occasions for things we did or didn’t do in a way. But it is that thing that we need to recognize how much we are asking while trying to give something that will be essential, and we need the space to name things, to reflect on things, and hopefully we have enough of capacity to do that.

Colby: 41:28

So I think that continuity and what you’re saying from simon is is really quite key yes and I and um, which led you into to the, the quote in uh latin, which led me to reflect upon um, uh conversation with paul van heswick, um, last night.

Colby: 41:49

But also it’s something that Patrick Tomlinson and I have talked about a number of times, which is, I guess, one of the themes that really underpins the reason for this podcast, which is the number of times, after a long career or at least you know, a longish career that we, we realize, we come to a realization that where we were, where we are now, others were at that same place at some point in time before us.

Colby: 42:28

Yeah, and so it’s. It’s kind of like the way that, uh, I put it in to words is we, we already knew that, or we always knew that. So you, yeah, and you were saying you know, back in 2000 years ago, people knew that about needing to look after those who look after, and I think, um, that that’s really part of why this podcast, you know, one of one of the main reasons for this podcast, in a way, is because I think, if we spend as I have on my first, I’m the first to put my hand up and say I’ve spent 30 years getting to this level of understanding that I am at now, yet only to find that, you know, there were a plethora of other people who reached that level of understanding before me and that’s in the end.

Richard: 43:21

It’s reassuring because one of the Mobley Bush trustees, early on when I was the director, he had been there for a while. Uh, ian blair his name was and he he gave me two phrases. One of them was people need reminding much more often than they need telling, and I I’ve never forgotten that because it’s something about recognizing that and how it opens communication If we are reminded. Let me remind you of something. I know, you know it, but let’s remember together and I think too often telling people can be experienced as telling off.

Richard: 44:17

And Mrs D was very, very keen. We never had a culture where we would impose acts of restitution on children, because she made very clear she said too often restitution imposed by adults is really retribution by adults and we have to wait and give the child the space and the opportunity to make amends for what they do. And I remember I’ll call her Lulu again if I say a different name but totally chaotic behavior, this, that and the other thing. And in the end I said okay, time to go back to the house and she said you’re not going to make me do anything.

Richard: 45:13

And I said no, no, I mean, the important thing was we interrupted what you were doing. That couldn’t happen, but you know it’s down to you to think about what you might want to do. And a couple of days later she said would anybody like a cup of tea? And you know there’s four or five people. Yeah, ok, she made a cup of tea. And you know there’s four or five people. Yeah, okay, she made this cup of tea.

Richard: 45:35

Meanwhile my heart is in my throat because she was a slight thing and she’s carrying this tray. But you know you have to tolerate anxiety and uncertainty sometimes. And she brought it out and really that was her way of making her own restitution for having undone some things. She now did something for others and you know it’s a small everyday thing but it’s hugely significant. That’s why living to learn, learning to live in and as a group, offers these opportunities through the ordinary unfolding of a day, a week, a month, australia with a profile. Their grasp of time and its passage is very often, for some time at best, tenuous, and the structure and routine of a day can be a a very, very therapeutically powerful feature that gives some sense of the structure of the day. It puts a boundary around things and defines space. It’s not a barrier, it’s a boundary that defines space. And I remember after I’d been there God, it was at least a year.

Richard: 47:11

Anthony comes up to me, one of the children. He says Richard, are you a grown-up here? I said yeah, anthony. He said oh sorry, I thought you were a student. Why are you here? Why don’t you just go get a job? I said Anthony, why should I go get a job? I mean, I’m here at the Mulberry Bush, we have great times together, playing, we have fantastic meals and everything. I’m not going to go out and get a job, I’m going to stay here with you guys. Oh, okay. So you know the nine-year-old child catching up something and said oh, that’s what we’re here for. It’s not work, mind, we are doing hard work, but uh, it’s.

Richard: 47:56

You know, it was good to know that he had this sense of people being together.

Colby: 48:00

That was a task you’ve talked about, um, so the outcomes, when I when I was going to ask you about a question about outcomes, but you’ve talked about the importance of learning to live with yourself and with others as an outcome, and do you think that that’s something that was regularly achieved?

Richard: 48:30

I think there are always differences in degree, always. And there was a very famous beer commercial years ago for Heineken, and it was Heineken reaches the parts other beers don’t reach. And I have to acknowledge, for some children they didn’t have the Mulberry Bush equivalent of the Heineken effect. I don’t think many children went away feeling entirely unhelped, but you know, quite a few children were able to do dare I borrow a phrase good enough, good enough for yeah. And it gave it gave them the capacity, two things to do more than just survive, having moved on, as I had to, eventually. But also it opened them up to an understanding that, you know, their life doesn’t have to be the reproduction of sameness. In other words, the traumatic experiences and events that they suffered in the past and that overwhelms them in the present does not necessarily have to be sorry, have to be the outcome of their future. It gives them a hopeful expectation, yeah, that things can be different and a bit better, and that they’ve had an experience of being able to use other people to assist them to learn, change and grow. So I think that’s really an important change. So, even for some of the ones that we didn’t quite do, good enough for, a number of them have been able to make future use, yes, of people and service.

Richard: 50:45

And and again it’s going back to that thing about mind. There is a healthy mind available if one can can find it, and sometimes not easy in our society. The dangerous mind of the street is much more prominent. I mean, over here in the UK. It’s hilarious. There’s regular things about, oh, these out-of-control youths and things. In the last 15 years over 80% of youth services has been closed down. I’m not making a particular political thing, it’s just the reality. It’s all closed down. And what’s available? What’s available, much more available, is the dangerous mind of the street to belong somewhere. And so those people who you know they’re not going to fall down and bow down and say, oh, richard, thank you so much for all that you did for me. I’m waiting for that to happen someday. It hasn’t yet, but there are ways of recognizing that they experienced something that gave them at least, as I said, a hopeful expectation that things for them can be different, yeah, yeah.

Colby: 52:04

So there’s a bit of belief and you do do, as I mentioned in the opening, you do do the follow-up contact you with, with former pupils and, yes, um, and you also have former pupils who initiate contact, uh, with the school and reconnection with the school.

Colby: 52:31

And one of the things I’ve noticed about my own work is that it’s not always the case that the outcomes are achieved. You know, in the time that the young people are engaged with the service, the young people are engaged with the service, but those, as you have rightly put it, it is introduced possibility to them and that can be realised years down the track. Yeah, and I think that’s. Do you think that, given that not all children who have experienced relational trauma, trauma in the home, can be in a therapeutic community like the Mulberry Bush School and are, in fact, still trying to find their way in mainstream education settings, and mainstream education settings are trying to respond to their needs as best they can, do you think that there’s anything particularly that was able to be delivered at the Mulberry Bush School that could be rolled out in mainstream education settings to support these children?

Richard: 53:44

Yes, and not only just support these children and I understand there’s a particular population but support all the children and young people in school. It is an enduring source of regret to me that schools state schools, private schools have a captive audience five days a week, for I mean, god, I don’t know how many weeks they’re in education, but you know what I mean 40 odd weeks, yeah.

Richard: 54:17

And they’ve got them there. And that potential capacity is rarely used. Too much is focused on the over concrete performance. And look, I’m a big fan of reading. I always struggled with maths but I knew it was important. My father was an accountant. I mean, he was happy with me. In a lot of ways he must have been disappointed with me about math. So all these educational dimensions we’ve already covered. We recognize them and it’s important.

Richard: 54:48

But, my gosh, surely you’ve got an environment where people can be together once or twice a day, three times a week, where you know the real focus is how are we doing, what’s going on? And one of the most powerful words I believe in therapeutic residential care is the word we, we, how are we Actually? What’s going on? We don’t usually do that. We don’t need to do that. When things are difficult we can do it a different way. That’s readily transferable to schools, not just for behavior management, but for that sense of being a part of something rather than a totally reluctant, you know, dragged in for what they have to do and create disruption there’s something about. Is this how we want to be here? It is so grossly underused in our culture of education, and I don’t mean turn every school into a therapeutic community. That would be perverse. But it is providing a space where people can be together and just think together about how we are.

Colby: 56:12

Yeah, and it’s, it’s a very powerful thing, readily transferable and it highlights the importance of the language that we use.

Richard: 56:21

Indeed yeah.

Colby: 56:23

And also to me. It sends chills down my spine when I think that often one of the more common ways of schools where I am and I’m presuminging in many jurisdictions, if not all around the world is is when children, when the school is having significant deal difficulty with managing a child, then they exclude the child from the. We yes and and, and they set them apart as a child, apart, and then, of course, if they don’t feel part of the community, then they won’t conform to the standards of the community.

Richard: 57:13

Yes, it’s this sense of belonging, yeah, belonging. And what’s the word um? Unconditional, but not necessarily uncritical. You know, we will name things, we will, you know, call some things out if we need to, but it is all in service to belonging, which is, you know, one of those interesting words of mine. My favorite book is the Oxford English Dictionary based on historical principles, and I have to have a real copy of it because it’s online now, but I have to have it. And the word be is a very interesting one. A defective word is the definition, the first definition of the word be in it, and because it needs something else, it’s incomplete. It needs something else to make sense, even to be or not to be.

Richard: 58:14

It is very explicitly present the presence of hamlet in that thing for me to be or not to be, and of course, longing, which is a yearning, usually after something or someone, that is unattainable. If not ameliorated, it will become. I’m trying to think of the right word now. I’m having a senior moment, but it makes it worse and worse till you just become depressed and disconnected. But if you put be a defective word and longing together, you create something, you forge something, and it’s about belonging, being a part of something and some others, rather than apart from. So, as we know, in atomic theory, fusion, putting things together creates a very powerful bond, and fission breaks the bond and creates terrible things. So if we encourage the sense of belonging and it’s very strong it provides an alternative to presenting disruptive behavior that reproduces the same thing. You’re out.

Richard: 59:38

Not for the first time in your life. Probably, and probably not for the first time in your life, probably and probably not for the last time. It continually happens because there’s never been enough space to hold the presence and make someone feel they belong and, as you will know from attachment and attachment disorders, it is sometimes you can get in too close as well as other times far away. So it’s about emotional and social distance regulation a good enough connection, as winnicott says look, I could speak to you for hours.

Colby: 1:00:17

We, we just had a a bit of a break at this end, uh, in transmission.

Richard: 1:00:23

Um, oh, that’s okay, um I thought you were looking at me with complete puzzlement because I was going off on one.

Colby: 1:00:32

No, um, actually the internet’s been pretty good for most of these podcasts, so, um, look, I could. So, look, I could sit here and talk to you for hours, but perhaps we don’t have hours, at least this time. There’s a couple of things that we’ve been trying with the podcast. I usually give my guests an opportunity to ask me a question without notice, and we’ve also just started to bring in the notion of the current guest asking a question of the next guest. So we’ve got three parts here We’ve got. Is there a question you’d like to ask me? I’ve got a question from my most recent past podcast guest and there’s an opportunity for you to pose a question that I can ask my next guest. And given that time might be a little bit against us now in in those, those seminal words of meatloaf, two out of three ain’t bad. I wonder if we go with two out of three of those, because I’m wondering if we just perhaps unless have you got a burning question you’d like to ask me, or shall we save that for another conversation?

Richard: 1:02:04

well, look, let’s save that for another. You know, there’s always things I can be curious about, but I think in the context I’m happy to save it. It’s not burning.

Colby: 1:02:12

Yeah, yeah, yeah the, the my most recent past podcast guest. Podcast guest was a fellow named Andrew Isaac, who I’ve known for more than a decade and he heads up BSN, social Care and the Children’s Services Development Group, and his question was is there a tipping point or is there something that you notice while working in a therapeutic school that really gives some sense of the capacity to reintegrate into a mainstream school or back into family successfully, or are they going to be um reliant on on a kind of a congregate environment for their care and schooling going forward?

Richard: 1:03:12

what kind of environment I missed congregate or a congregate or group group environment. Oh right, yeah, yeah, okay, yeah, um, oh right, yeah, yeah, yeah. Self and engaging with them about you know, here’s the now and what about the future, and they will find ways to let us know. So it it really is. The whole of the treatment experience is geared for not just being here but actually being elsewhere. But we’re here for now and I guess, from my experience, my counsel would be let’s not be too quick to jump to a decision either way, and it’s always well.

Richard: 1:04:22

It can often be a finely balanced decision and we have to be opened to what the child or young person is telling us in words and also in the way they behave. Yeah, I’m sorry, andrew, I can’t. There’s much more we can say and I just think the lived experience and the relationship we have with the children and young people will help us support the other thing Ultimately, the mulberry bush doesn’t decide, it advises, and often the advice is heeded and acted upon. Sometimes it isn’t, and sometimes it goes quite badly wrong. Other times it seems to have gone well enough. So we have to do the best we can, or, given all that we know, think we know and hope for this person and never send somebody to something that we know is going to be a total breakdown. But you know it’s we got to let go sometimes.

Colby: 1:05:39

I’m reminded of the conversation I had with John Whitwell, and I believe he was quoting Winnicott when he was talking about Winnicott seeing children as like bulbs. Okay, you know, the growth is within them.

Colby: 1:05:57

They just need the right environment to thrive. And I think and then linking that up with what we were touching on earlier, which is sometimes, we see, let me backpedal one little bit is that I think part of being a parent, part of any caregiving endeavour, is a bit like being a a farmer who raises crops, yes and uh. So as a farmer, you prepare the growing environment, you till the soil, you, you remove the weeds, you, you then seed the field and you pray for rain and you wait. And of course, part of the growing environment is you have fences and other things, but every now and then pests get in and other adverse influences get in that we would prefer didn’t.

Colby: 1:07:05

But the main thing is that parenting is a bit like that we put in what we put in and we wait, and sometimes in an ordinary family environment, we wait nearly two decades in many respects, to see the outcome of our endeavour. So I do think in this space, of course it’s fantastic if you can see and people always want to see, they want to see progress, they want to see outcomes achieved, they want to see results. It’s fantastic if you can see progress. I want to see outcomes achieved, I want to see results. It’s fantastic if you can see them. Yes, but you have to remember that children are like bulbs.

Colby: 1:07:47

Yeah, and you know, the growth is within them, in the right environments for them. And, yeah, and the growth can happen at any time, and that’s often enough our experience, is it not? When we hear from people that we’ve worked with in the past that things have clicked at some point? And, as I was saying to you earlier, I only had a lad ring me today. I crossed his mind and he thought I must ring colby. He thought I was retired. I might have been retired already, uh, but he rang and uh, he just rang to let me know how he was going. And when I first met him I won’t, yeah, when I first met him he was in a very bad way and, yeah, his life, he’s doing very well in his life now.

Richard: 1:08:46

Oh, that’s good, that’s fantastic. And I think what you talk about you know, that kind of horticultural, if you would. To broaden the thing perspective, it’s terribly important. The long-term hurt many of these children, young people, have suffered requires some long-term work and a lot of it is not forcing growth. So my eldest granddaughter, when she was three, nana went with her and they planted some sunflower seeds and for the whole of the rest of the weekend she would go out squatting over the pot waiting for it to grow. You know, a bit like Jack and the Beanstalk and you know how to be explained to her. It takes time and it will come up and you have to nurture it in the way you were talking about Colby. But it is also true If you force growth, you know the sunflower will shoot up but it won’t have a well-grounded rooting system and it’ll be too thin because it was forced and it will fall over. It was forced and it will fall over. So we have to do just as you say and create that horticultural mind.

Richard: 1:10:10

And you know, I like music. I’m not very good at it, I’ve never played a musical instrument but I I learned a bit from others about it. And there’s this phrase tempo robo in music, in a piece, in a conductor, and they’re not there to tell the score it’s to interpret and they do it. And sometimes, if they pace things up, what a good conductor recognizes is they’ve stolen some time. A good conductor recognizes is they’ve stolen some time and the piece has to be given it back so that it is a full, complete, healthy and helpful expression of the musical score. And it’s the same with these children, young people. Yeah, they’ve had time stolen from them, the time to be a child, to be well-grounded and rooted, and we’re there to help give them some of that time back. So we’re conducting something as well and again, to be good enough.

Richard: 1:11:14

It might not be the most beautiful sunflower in the world, but it’s well-grounded and it has the potential to come out with that beautiful sunflower head, and this is what we have to wait some time for.

Colby: 1:11:30

We do yeah, yeah, we wait. But what? While we wait, we hold, we hold space for that.

Richard: 1:11:37

Yes, yeah yes, yeah, I could say more, but I absolutely we’ll have to.

Colby: 1:11:45

We’ll have to do part two and part three at some point. I I’d be very um keen to have you back for another chat if, if you feel like, feel up to doing it, I’d be up for it.

Richard: 1:11:55

Yeah, you’ve been very kind and uh, warm and you know listening to me.

Colby: 1:12:01

Well, you know what I like talking to adults, because I talk to children all day. There you go, I do talk. I talk to their carers as well. So you know, the podcast has been a fantastic experience for me too.

Richard: 1:12:21

I have a wonderful quote from Václav Havel, who who spoke about hope, and you know the challenge and the opportunity of it. And I guess I’d be curious of her, about, you know, in the current circumstances globally UK and Scotland based. Where is she feeling hopeful? Yeah, as general as that, in terms of the world of work that we’re doing and the vulnerability and the potentials for young people.

Colby: 1:12:52

I think that’s a great question, yeah, yeah, well, thank you for that, richard, and thank you, yeah, thank you again for being on the podcast and uh, you mentioned me, uh providing a relaxed space for you, and, of course, you’ve tolerated some of my a couple of my own uh gaffes, uh, along the way, and uh, I’ll do, I’ll do my best with the editing that’s fine I I felt.

Richard: 1:13:23

I felt very, very, very positive throughout.

Colby: 1:13:27

Yeah, thank you and thank you to you too, and uh, yeah, good luck to you and, and maybe we’ll yeah, it would be fantastic to speak another time.

Richard: 1:13:36

Good, and all the best to everyone. Cheers, thank you.

Breaking the Cycle: How Investing in Children’s Services Changes Lives, with Andrew Isaac

Beyond 18: What Happens When the System Stops Caring?

In a powerful conversation on the Secure Start podcast, Andrew Isaac, Chair of BSN Social Care and the Children’s Services Development Group, unpacks the challenges and opportunities within the UK’s foster care system. With decades of experience in children’s social care, Andrew provides valuable insights into how we approach caring for our most vulnerable young people.

The foster care crisis in the UK has reached alarming proportions. Since 2010, there has been a 30% increase in children entering care in England alone – from approximately 60,000 to over 80,000 children. This dramatic rise has placed immense pressure on an already strained system. As Andrew explains, this substantial increase isn’t just a number; it represents thousands of individual children requiring comprehensive support systems, qualified foster carers, and appropriate therapeutic interventions to help them transition successfully into adulthood.

One of the most compelling points Andrew raises is the critical importance of early intervention. He laments the loss of approximately 30-40% of Sure Start centres during the financial crisis, which provided crucial early support to vulnerable families. This shortsightedness has contributed to the current influx of teenagers entering the care system. The mathematics is simple but often overlooked by policymakers: investing one pound in early intervention yields multiple pounds in savings down the line. As Andrew passionately states, “I would love a politician to say if we spend this now, these are the benefits of the country over 10, 15 years.”

The statistics Andrew shares are sobering. Approximately 23% of the UK prison population has been through the care system. Young people leaving care at 18 are seven times more likely to commit suicide than their peers. According to research by the National Economic Foundation, every pound invested in a looked-after child generates a sixteen-pound return throughout their life cycle. Reducing the number of care-experienced individuals in prison alone would release nearly a billion pounds from the justice system. These figures highlight not just the human cost but the significant economic implications of inadequate care provision.

Perhaps most concerning is what Andrew describes as “the cliff edge at 18.” At this arbitrary age, young people transition overnight from having a single agency responsible for their wellbeing to navigating up to ten different agencies independently. While legislation called “Staying Put” exists to allow young people to remain with foster carers beyond 18, the financial structure makes this unviable for many foster families who depend on the income to pay their mortgages. The result is devastating – young people “sofa hopping” with nowhere permanent to live, falling out of education, and losing contact with support services entirely.

Andrew also addresses the changing landscape of foster carer recruitment. In today’s society, particularly in metropolitan areas with sky-high property values, potential foster carers must weigh financial considerations carefully. Media coverage of allegations against carers, legitimate or otherwise, further complicates recruitment efforts. Despite these challenges, Andrew emphasizes the importance of honest conversations with potential carers – addressing their concerns upfront while also highlighting the profound difference they can make in a child’s life.

Throughout the conversation, Andrew repeatedly returns to a fundamental truth: “Foster care is by far the best setting for most children that need care outside their own families.” The goal isn’t complex – as another expert referenced in the podcast states, “the great aspiration of children in care is an ordinary life.” This seemingly modest ambition represents a profound shift in how we might measure success in the care system. Rather than focusing solely on educational attainment or other measurable outcomes, perhaps the true measure is enabling these young people to lead stable, content lives and break intergenerational cycles of trauma and care.

You can listen here:

You can watch here:

About Andrew

Andrew is a highly accomplished leader within heavily regulated healthcare, children’s services and special needs education environments.

Andrew is the Chair of BSN Social care, the parent company of six of the UK’s leading foster care agencies servicing much of England and Wales.

Andrew is also the Chair of the Children’s Services Development Group (CSDG), a coalition of leading independent providers of care and specialist education services, who work closely with policymakers, regulators and local authorities to develop policy solutions that will ensure the best possible outcomes for children and young people with complex needs.

Andrew was previously the marketing and communications manager for the National Fostering Agency, which is when we first interacted with each other.

Related Podcast Interviews:

John Whitwell

Listen here:

Watch here:

Richard Cross

Listen here:

Watch here:

Transcript:

Colby: 0:00

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast.

Andrew: 0:03

I would love a politician to say if we spend this now, these are the benefits of the country over 10, 15 years. If you reduce the number of looked after children or children who’ve been through the care system in prison, you would release almost a billion pounds worth of cost. The law at the moment in the UK at 18 is a cliff edge for young people. 18 plus are seven times more likely to commit suicide than their peers. So the balance of how you talk to foster carers or potential foster carers when they’re interested is really, really important. If I were talking to somebody that wanted to go into it, I would ask them what they were worried about first. There’s a sort of rule of thumb really. Most people react to something on the third prompt. Foster care is by far the best setting for most children that need care outside their own families. The best place for any child to survive is within mainstream education, but the mainstream education has got to have the right facilities to encourage that young person.

Colby: 1:19

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast. I’m Colby Pearce and joining me for this episode is one of the earliest supporters of my work in the UK to make themselves known to me. Before I introduce my guests, I’d just like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land that I come to, this meeting on 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 guest this episode is Andrew Isaac. My guest this episode is Andrew Isaac.

Colby: 2:10

Andrew is a highly accomplished leader within heavily regulated healthcare, children’s services and special needs education environments. Andrew is the chair of BSN Social Care, the parent company of six of the UK’s leading foster care agencies serving much of England and Wales. Andrew is also the chair of the Children’s Services Development Group, a coalition of leading independent providers of care and specialist education services who work closely with policy makers, regulators and local authorities to develop policy solutions that will ensure the best possible outcomes for children and young people with complex needs. Andrew was previously the Marketing and Communications Manager for the National Fostering Agency, which is when we first interacted with each other. I was under the impression that Andrew had since retired some time ago, but, as we’ll hear, that does not appear to be the case. Welcome, Andrew.

Andrew: 3:17

Thank you, Hi Colby.

Colby: 3:19

You sent me a bio and it was quite extensive and impressive and you asked me not to include all of that in my introduction. But was there anything that I missed there or any comment you want to make about the retirement scenario?

Andrew: 3:38

Well, I never really ended up retiring, so it was more about a point of what you know and, uh, you know the experience that you’ve had and you can benefit other people, so you just keep going, which I’m sure you will do so yourself yeah, well, uh, maybe, um, who knows, maybe I’ll be.

Colby: 4:01

I’ll still be doing podcasts, um, when I, when I give up uh, consulting, I I think you podcasts when I give up consulting.

]Andrew: 4:06

I think you will when you give up being active. I think you won’t, because you’ll still be doing it. I’ll almost wager a lunch on that with you. Aye, aye.

Colby: 4:18

Well, yeah, and a lunch, as we were just talking about before we came on, a lunch over in your neck of the woods in the UK would be a very attractive proposition for me, as long as it’s not above 30 degrees, as I’m hearing that you’ve been having lately there in the UK.

Andrew: 4:38

Well, it’s probably good Australian weather actually.

Colby: 4:41

Every time I’ve been to Australia.

Andrew: 4:43

It’s been in your summertime and it’s been wonderful. I’m thinking, oh, oh, I wish we could have that weather over here and uh, and so we have. My wish has come true. Well, it’s the case. We don’t cope with it as well as you do.

Colby: 4:55

I don’t think I don’t know if you’re set up for it like we are, although you do often have double glazed windows in your houses, which we don’t, which is quite uncommon in south in australia. So heat transfer from outside to inside is a is an issue, but we do have air conditioning by and large in our houses. Um and look, I’ll correct you on one thing there is a difference between the hot weather in the uk and the hot weather here, particularly where I am, I’m in the UK, and the hot weather here, particularly where I am. I’m in the middle south part of Australia, in the driest state on the driest continent on earth. The heat is dry and whereas in your neck of the woods it’s humid, and we do have parts of Australia where the heat is humid. But I just don’t like humidity at all, having always been here and in fact funny story whenever I used to go to Ireland for work, I used to take jackets with me and never wore them.

Colby: 5:56

And uh one one day I was with my son. We were out on uh at a lighthouse on Fannad Head in uh County, donegal, so right out on the Atlantic Ocean, out in the west, and it was 10 degrees Celsius at the time and I was feeling warm in a T-shirt and a local Irish lady came up and started seemingly berating me and I couldn’t understand a word she was saying because she was berating me in irish and uh, and then, I think, when I looked perplexed enough, she corrected to um english and uh, yeah, it was just basically so. How can you possibly be standing out here in this force 10 gale in in in a t-shirt? But you know the humidity that you have there is just horrible from from my perspective, growing up in a dry environment well, I suppose, and the differences as well.

Andrew: 6:53

When you walk around here, especially springtime, the, the green color of the trees and the grass is fabulous. I’ve never I’ve traveled all over the world and I’ve never seen it recreated in in the way you get it for those few weeks in the spring, although the autumn is different, because you go to various parts of the usa and you have lovely autumn colors, but the spring green is uh, it lifts your spirits hugely yeah, so I got you on because you have had a long career in management and something of a post-career, but the career has been ongoing in social care and related sectors and I firstly just wanted to ask you, andrew, how you got into management in the social care setting.

Andrew: 7:52

Well, ironically, I used to work for Marriott International and they merged, which is a family company company, and they merged with a company called Sodexo, which is also predominantly a family company, and for some reason I ended up in the healthcare division in the UK for Sodexo, dealing with healthcare provision in the NHS hospitals, which I had no experience at all. But with sales and marketing and communications experience, you suddenly learn what you’ve got to do. So I found it interesting for a number of years. And then my old CEO moved sectors. He moved into the National Fostering Agency in the UK as a new CEO in the UK, as a new CEO, and you know, he and I got on extremely well and effectively.

Andrew: 8:55

I moved with him thinking, ah, what have I done? Well, your skills are transferable and actually it’s probably the best thing I ever did, because when you look at the difference you can make, particularly in children’s social care, it doesn’t matter whether it’s fostering or special needs education, you can use your skills to. Let’s take fostering, for example. Um, there was a very quaint view of quaint, perhaps that’s that’s a little bit unkind an old-fashioned view of foster, foster carers and how they were recruited, and you know what they did.

Andrew: 9:33

Um, and when the market in the uk was deregulated in the late 90s, there was an opportunity for independent fostering agencies to be created yeah um, and as part of that, then people had a choice as to whether they went to work for local governments to foster carer or they went to work for an independent fostering agency, and basically there’s never enough foster carers. I’ve never come across any country in the world where there’s enough foster carers that are doing it in a in a professional manner, and I think this is where we need to drive it forward even more in. Foster carers need to be regarded as being professional. Yeah, so I realized that, uh, part of my job would be how can we recruit foster carers in a more professional way? It also meant using my market marketing experience to to make sure that we we we gained the interest of people wanted to know about it, but once they wanted to know about it, making sure they were fully informed before they made their decisions and then making sure that during there’s a very lengthy assessment process in the uk probably on average takes at least six months, and that’s going through all the appropriate background tracks, blah, blah, blah but also, during that process, making sure they’re trained to deal with all sorts of things. Now, that was 20 odd years ago and it worked extremely well and we we recruited lots of foster carers, and our organization at the time became the largest provider of independent fostering services in the uk, and I thought, gosh, I need to learn more and more and more. So, part of my communication skills, I began getting involved with children’s Services Development Group as a member, and, looking at the legislation that applies to social care is outmoded and outdated because it was written for a time that doesn’t exist anymore.

Andrew: 11:40

If you look, should we say over the last say since around about 2010, there’s been a 30% increase in children in care in England and that’s a phenomenal amount. It’s gone from 60-odd thousand to 80-odd thousand. If then you might say, oh well, yeah, that’s only 30,000 children, but sit and look at what’s behind it. Look at the number of foster carers, look at the number of residential settings and then into your world, look at the number of therapies and and social care support that’s needed to ensure those children that should be at the focus of everything that everybody does that they can transit into adulthood and and develop a life for themselves. That’s pretty level-headed and straightforward. Doesn’t matter about whether they’re yeah, how, whether they go to university or not, but it’s about their life skills and all sorts of things. So you suddenly take that and you suddenly got a huge, huge range of support organizations that need to be there to help a young person on their journey through life, and when you get that in huge numbers, that then starts putting a huge amount of pressure on the infrastructure that’s actually used to support them.

Andrew: 13:07

I’ll I’ll take you back, maybe to the the financial banking crisis. At that particular point, um, lots of funds were taken out to make economies and and all sorts of things and, uh, give you, give you time on sure stocks. I know you know the early years of you. Know I’m as passionate about the early years as as as you are, in the sense that if you can intervene at an early stage with a young family, um, or a child, you can make such a difference in those early years where they don’t need support later on in life.

Andrew: 13:44

Now, probably about 30 or 40 percent of short start centers were lost during that financial period. Now everybody said, oh, that’s, that’s fine. Now, 10, 12, 14 years on, there is an influx of young middle teens people coming into the care system. Now I’m sure with your experience, you know the difference between looking after a 14, 15 year old, six foot two young man than it is a four or five year old. So that doubles the workload that you need to do to help them go through the issues that they’ve got, and often issues that they’ve developed over a long period of time. So, on top of that, you’ve increased the volume of what’s going through. But also, going back to the short start areas at the beginning, you’ve also lost the intellectual property that was around at those times. That isn’t passed down to new people that are coming into the sector. Yeah, so you do have at the moment, people entering the sector for all right reasons and great qualifications, etc.

Andrew: 14:58

What you don’t have is a huge amount of um older people work, older, more mature people that have been in sector a long time to be able to pass their knowledge on, and that’s that’s an area that um I I’m probably disappointed in life in, really, because, um I’m not a social worker and I have met social workers who’ve had who are career social workers and their understanding of how to help a child or a young person is phenomenal.

Andrew: 15:29

It’s almost um an automatic insight that they have with all the different types of uh elements that present themselves with the young person. So I suppose um rattling on a bit here, uh, as I worked through um with, with national fostering agency, I could see, along with my other senior colleagues, the more work, more work that needed to be done, um. And when I left, uh, um, nfa, or my quasi-retirement, so to speak, switching, I was fortunate enough to maintain my children’s services development group role, and, you know, as chair there an independent chair, because my company I actually work for are not members, that is, you know, a small membership organization of larger companies yes um.

Andrew: 16:30

You know, 90 percent of their um, their settings, are all rated outstanding or good. So the quality thresholds are there. But importantly, we can’t all say, because we’re we’re all outstandingly, you won’t have issues. You know, you’ve worked with children long enough to know that one issue and all sorts of things can go wrong. But they have an infrastructure set up to deal with a problem if a problem occurs at a grassroots level. Part of that also in the UK. It’s a mixed economy. Part of that also in the UK. It’s a mixed economy.

Andrew: 17:05

Overall in children’s services maybe 40, 43% of services are delivered by the independent sector and the rest by the state. But in England alone we have 150 plus local authorities with their own character, their own style, their own political backgrounds etc. So things are always done slightly differently. But legally the local authority is the corporate parent of a child in care and that counts as statutory obligations. And when you see the rises that we’ve talked about in volumes, you can actually see what the problem could be when one the legislation doesn’t change for it but sadly, when the funding doesn’t keep pace, yeah, yeah. So what worries me in today’s society is, you know, we don’t want the child to become a transaction People that are looking after and have responsibility for that child to look and say what does that child need? What does that young person need? How best can we work with them to deliver the right things they need to transition into adulthood?Colby: 18:23

And those questions, andrew, that you pose. They’re predicated on people who work in the sector having the time to stop and think about the young person and think about their needs and think about what services would be of assistance to them and what the outcomes look like. As it is, I think, in probably a great many jurisdictions around the world, including my own jurisdiction here in South Australia the exponential increase in the number of children coming into care, coupled with not enough funding to keep pace with that, has meant that the work has become more procedural and less reflective is how I put it.

Andrew: 19:12

I totally agree with you. You then look, and it doesn’t really matter which country you’re in certainly Australia or the UK most of the original legislation was created in the late 90s. Now, in the late 90s, bringing up a child was in a certain, you know, type of environment and setting. Today, the society doesn’t relate at all to what it was in the 90s. You know pressures on individual children, I mean especially with all the things they’re exposed to on social media, and you know the use of the internet and the you know lack of development of, you know, interaction with, with people. There’s 101 different things that people far more qualified than I can can recognize my, my view from, from, from trying to persuade the government to look at it. What’s appropriate to children and young people today is different to what it was 25 years ago. Yeah, you know, and you need then to reflect the type of service that you give them. If you take residential care.

Andrew: 20:26

Um, with residential, there are some children that benefit from being in residential care, whether that’s, you know, physical or mental or sensory, whatever it might be, there will be a need for residential care to be provided. Now, over the years, the uk has ended up with the majority of residential settings being provided by the independent organizations you know. Probably two-thirds of of local authorities do not either have any residential facilities or very few, and that’s just the way the the market goes. But then you have to question what type of child do we put into a residential care? What type of young person, what’s best for them? And you go back to saying what is it that young person needs? I know, and you know, that young person needs to be in a family orientated setting. Yep, foster care is by far the best setting for most children that need care outside their own families and that will provide them with a balance straightforward. So actually putting children into residential one is far more expensive, but doesn’t then bring the best out of them.

Andrew: 21:40

And then you take the next bit what other support do they need going around their foster care? What sort of trauma have they been through in their lives? Because, let’s face it, originally they’re in situations which they did not create themselves. So they they’re. Whether it’s, whether the families they’re born into, the situations they’re born into, was no original fault of their own. So therefore, once you understand that and saying right, okay, quite a lot of them could go into fostering. When they’re in fostering. Well support do we need to give the foster carers in order to deal with it? And secondly, what emotional support can they give them to get them through to their adulthood?

Andrew: 22:24

And in a lot of instances it is more than just training the foster carers. You do need external professionals to come in and help, particularly on the mental health side, in in being able to allow these young people to understand why their behavior is like it is, and then that in turn impacts on education, so they may be fall out of school. They’re excluded from school. Um, their, their, their learning becomes more inward looking and and here it just doesn’t happen. So, he’s, all right, you need some special educational needs.

Andrew: 23:02

Um, yeah, the best place for any child to to survive is within mainstream education, but the mainstream education has got to have the right facilities to encourage that young person, because they need to integrate back into the mainstream run in order to develop the social skills they need. And again, in a lot of instances mainstream school may not be the right place because there are here one-to-ones that probably need. I know schools where you have individual pupils that are probably needed. I know schools where you have individual pupils that are residential that require two or three adults 24-7. In those instances you put the price tag on that. That’s phenomenal. It might cost a lot of money, but that’s where the service is built around the child. So I’d love to go back to a situation where the social workers that are dealing with the child at the front line they’re dealing with a family where the where the child has come from, and they’re looking and say the foster care is where the child is planned to go, that they look at the matching skills behind it and they’re the ones that say this is the best setting for that child.

Andrew: 24:15

Yeah, doesn’t happen anymore. As you know, it goes up to. Well, this is, this is a transactional thing and this person x y z child x y z. You know that’s going to cost us this. That’s one of the alternatives that cost. Um, I don’t think that’s right, but I understand why we’ve got to that. But that’s looking and currently in the UK legislation is being changed phenomenally. There’s a big new bill going through Parliament currently which will bring a lot of things up to date, but that will require a lot of implementation.

Colby: 24:55

So you might have an Act of Parliament that’s passed, but then you’ve got to implement it, and that means detailed changes to regulation, to guidelines, which will take some time and look, there’s so much in that, in what you were talking about, and I think you’ve really laid it out in terms of that exponential increase in young people ending up in care in the UK over the last couple of decades.

Colby: 25:25

I want to take you back to your role in the National Fostering Agency and you talked a little bit earlier about recruitment of foster carers and I guess one of the biggest challenges has been, with that increase of young people coming into care, that there’s been a need to really step up the recruitment and you’ve been competing, I guess as well, recruitment, and you’ve been competing, I guess as well, with other independent bodies that came into the marketplace, so to speak. I’m really interested to hear about and I’m sure our listeners will be about the recruitment of foster carers, your experience as when you’re in the National Fostering Agency, what you thought helped or hindered that process of securing enough quality foster carers.

Andrew: 26:26

Yeah, I think, if you go back to the basics of foster care recruitment, it’s you need to attract the right person for the right reasons in the first instance, um, and going back a number of years, there was a situation where you could assure them well, actually, you’re not doing it all for nothing.

Andrew: 26:45

You are being given fees in which to cover your costs and and the time that you spend, because there there is a statute tax benefit statute in the UK which we managed a couple of years ago to get doubled so that they can have these fees which won’t attract income tax, and that’s part of it in today’s cost of living crisis. But going back to your original question, there’s a sort of rule of thumb. Really. Most people react to something on the third prompt. So, if you get interest from somebody who may have watched a tv program where fostering has been involved, and many of the soap operas, um, certainly in the uk, which I’m sure are broadcast in australia as well um have had storylines based around fostering now, I know that because we advised on on a number of them and you’re watching that and you think, oh, you know, you know our kids are getting older or left home empty nesters, all that sort of thing maybe we could foster.

Andrew: 27:52

And they think about it, um, and and, as they’re going through their daily life, they might see an article in a magazine, they might see something online, they might look at one of your podcasts, um, or they, they, they might see huge recordings, I mean, whatever it might be, might then be a second prompt and then probably a year or months or whatever later, they will come across a situation that they recognize on the how, the call to action, how to do it, and this could have a period of a few months, or typically that is over a year or so. Whilst people think about it, you know, and they then they’re, they’re moving from oh, it’s in there to. Well, actually, we really need to look about this now that at that point, whoever is providing the service and whomsoever they contact need to be aware of community and location. It is no good somebody in the north of england talking to somebody on the south coast telling them what it’s like on the south coast. They would need to talk to somebody in their, their vicinity, part of their community, that say in our community we have this number of children that need looking after. These are the types of children they are, and this is where you could make a good difference in that dialogue explaining the child and then understanding from the potential foster carers where they feel their skills like, bearing in mind that none of them would necessarily, apart from bringing up their own children, would would have any knowledge, and that’s when you talk to them about. Well, if you’re interested in looking after teenagers, then the type of training we give you will help you deal with situations you will come across and you know where your own, your own experience with your own teenagers is hugely helpful, but these probably are not as typical as your own kids would be. So that’s the process, then. Is is talking to them and not pressurizing and understanding what they have to go through to get it. Now, that’s part of it, and once I think, ok, I’m going to put my toes in the water and I’m going to fill in this application form, which is hugely long, can make the difference in talking to people and explaining this is hard, but the results are worth it.

Andrew: 30:41

And and going through the assessment process is challenging. Uh, it does go, you know. It does dig into your innermost thoughts, your personal life. It’s, you know. It can expose an awful lot of things. It talks to your family, all sorts of stuff. Yeah, for all the right reasons, because safeguarding is paramount for the child.

Andrew: 31:01

Um, so going back again is how do you approach people now in today’s society? Can let’s come up to date. Now you’ve got metropolitan cities? Uh, you know, you’ve know, london, manchester, birmingham, melbourne, sydney, etc. Property prices through the roof. If you’re in london and you’ve got a couple of spare rooms and you want to, should we say, increase your money into the household, you could probably rent the room out to to somebody for a lot more than you would get fostering. So therefore the property value becomes an issue.

Andrew: 31:39

You then have a lot of exposure in the media about accusations and allegations from children and young people and that people will say do I really want to go through that?

Andrew: 31:53

Yeah, because if you look through, you know, and yes, you know, these things happen and sometimes they’re they’re not good. I can mention a couple of cases in the uk where immediately, you would be fully aware of what what it was about, but there are also allegations made that aren’t uh, you know, aren’t true, and that has a huge effect on potential foster carers in the first place. Yeah, so the balance of how you talk to foster carers or potential foster carers when they’re interested is really, really important understanding, understanding their motivation. If I were talking to somebody that wanted to go into it, I would ask them what they were worried about first, what worries you about becoming a foster care? Because that way you’re bringing it to the front and not leaving it in the background somewhere, so that halfway through their assessment they’ve had enough. When they go to the more difficult training, well, you know what to do with, with restraint and all that sort of stuff um, you know they’re more equipped for that.

Andrew: 33:08

So, apart from recruitment, there’s also retention of foster carers yeah yeah, particularly those maybe had a bad experience or who haven’t been able to manage a particular placement and there’s been a placement breakdown. You then got to look at how you deal with that. Um, I’m at a couple in london and, um, they’d been long-term foster carers. They have three young people. They were full-time, they didn’t have other jobs. One young person was disabled but they went on all the relevant training to deal with his disability Great. They had a couple of other young people in one who had special educational needs and one who was a great kid with the other two. That makes sense.

Andrew: 34:03

And when one of the children moved on, they then turned to preparing babies for adoption, which the adoption process can be interminably long, even for little babies, and often they would have those babies from, you know, a couple of days old or a few weeks old, through to two or three. During that period, in order that child develops, they have to attach. So the child itself is going through the normal procedure and this couple were phenomenal at this and and the problem happens then when an adoptive parent is found and they then go through a number of months when they’re working with the adoptive family to transfer across and, you know all the usual things about the day-to-day routine, and then the day comes when the baby is handed over or the young child is handed over. They maintain contact for questions, questions, that sort of thing. And then we found the.

Andrew: 35:11

It was almost like a bereavement process for the foster carers. How then do we counsel them to? You know, they know what they’ve done is for the best interest of the young person child, but how do they deal with the emotional side of then relinquishing those two or three years and relinquishing, uh, and then the, um, the, the husband, um, he used to go for about three days into his shed for the bottom of the gut and bang nails into bits of wood and scream and yell at himself to get out that, yeah, um. So we, we developed at that point, uh, quite a lot of, uh, little bits of counseling that will wrap around them, make sure that they went through the process and realized they weren’t on their own. But that is a a difficulty within fostering. If you’re doing that, I so admire those people because you know you’re you’re an attachment specialist. I mean, I, I would struggle with that.

Colby: 36:23

I don’t know if you would uh, to perform the role Absolutely, and certainly for the children as well. I mean, children will not be unaffected by this process as well, and one of the things that you’ve talked about in terms of the recruitment of foster carers is that balance of what you say to them, how you prepare them in the early stages of them expressing their interest and then through the assessment process. And what I heard you say is that it’s important to be realistic and it’s. It’s interesting because I um, I have in in an earlier part of my career, I was involved in inter-country adoption assessments, assessing couples who wanted to adopt children, uh, from overseas, and everything was upbeat about it. You know, these were people who were going to ensure that children grew up in a family environment as opposed to an institution in a third world country, and it was also very positive.

Colby: 37:36

And then there was a movie that was made about the two lads that were adopted by a. Well, two lads were adopted by a couple in New Zealand from India. It centred around one of those particular lads and I cannot remember the name of it, but it was a very good portrayal of how complicated it is raising children who have experienced relational traumas or attachment traumas, at the least. And if a child has grown up in a family until they’re three and then they go to another family, there are consequences associated with that. And I’m well and truly on the side of being as open and transparent as we can be about both, both the the blessings and the and the curses, so to speak, because I think people need to be, they need to be prepared, and then that feeds into retention, of course, because you you don’t want people who find six months in 12 months, in two years, into providing a placement or placements that this is not what they were told it was going to be, because then you’ve got potential um harm for them, the foster, the foster parents who have to relinquish children because it is not what they were expecting.

Colby: 39:18

Usually they’ve not felt supported enough or that the decisions that are taken by the child protection authorities are run counter to what they think should happen. And in my jurisdiction, and I’m sure in plenty of others, birth family connection and birth family contact is one of those vexed issues, those vexed issues. So it’s not only is it tremendously impactful for foster carers to come to the realisation that this is not what they signed up for and that it is harming them in some way. But then those children as well, those children that have been in their home, the impact for them of a foster placement that has to come to an end. A lot of what you’re saying is really resonating with me. If you can’t tell the story, warts and all then how can people be prepared for it?

Andrew: 40:22

Yes, and I think you have to be truthful and establish what their worries are. But then you must also outline the benefits. Just to give you another example, a couple I know have three young people with them a brother and sister and now a six or seven-year-old. And the two older children were in a bit of a state when they arrived and this couple have done some amazing work with them, to the extent that um the issues with with family contacts was were dealt with. Um, and the two older children are now in a position to choose and select, and they chose no further family contact. It was their choice and they had all the right support in doing it. But the older children now, when they get to 18, want to change their name to that of their foster carers. That’s an amazingly successful placement where the two older children have been there eight, nine years now and they feel as if they’re in a fully fledged family environment. But they are also working with their foster parents on a younger child that’s come in who has been through a very traumatic time, and the youngsters are helping and I just think that’s quite wonderful.

Andrew: 41:59

So I suppose what you’ve got to, you’ve got to look at, is we often hear. Well, we regularly hear when things go wrong. What you don’t hear about is when things go right, and you know there, there are so many wonderful stories out there where things go right. Um, and it’s getting that balance. My other hobby horse is what happens at 18 um, because the law tell me what you think the law at the moment in the uk at 18 is?

Andrew: 42:26

Tell me what you think the law at the moment in the UK. 18 is a cliff edge for young people Transition into adulthood, Up to 18, there is a corporate parent structure where there are statutory obligations and they’re dealing with one agency. Day after their 18th birthday they deal with eight, nine, ten different agencies. Now you tell me what young person at 18 that’s had a pretty traumatic upbringing being stabilized by by good foster carers? How on earth are they going to cope with that? You know it’s your own children. You don’t kick out at 18. The downside is, whilst there’s a lot of rhetoric going on about it, the foster carers who make their life as foster carers, so the fees they receive per their mortgage and their bills and things like that, have no option, option at 18.

Andrew: 43:28

But if they’ve got a spare room, move on to the next young person coming in. If the older child is to say, there is a facility called staying put in the uk but the finances of that don’t work for the foster carer. So you imagine you’ve got. You know we did some uh cstg quite a lot of research a few years ago in terms of what happens to kids post 18. 23 of the uk prison population has been through the care system or contact with the care system. Yeah, there are 18 plus are seven times more likely to commit suicide than their peers.

Andrew: 44:12

We worked with a couple of homeless charities and the number of young people that were sofa hopping because they had nowhere to live. Because they had nowhere to live it. How on earth do we expect them to move into and become self-sufficient when we don’t track them through? So my advocacy at the moment is we need to do something to take on. And yes, there is statutory legislation. You get the the uh, the rhetoric back that they should do this. We look after laughed until they’re 25. Yes, the law is there that highlights that at a senior level, but where is the practical input.

Andrew: 44:56

You look at the stats and how many kids have lost contact with their original corporate parent. Therefore, we haven’t tracked where they’ve gone. And in today’s society they they fall so much easy, easily into the wrong areas. They become more statistics. There was a study done by the national economic foundation a number of years ago now probably more years than I care to remember. I think it still brings true every pound that was invested in a looked after child will have a life cycle of 16 pounds. As you go through now you hear the numbers on that. It’s huge amounts of money. If you reduce the number of looked after children or children that’ve been through the care system in prison, you release almost a billion pounds worth of cost out of the justice system.

Colby: 45:51

Yeah, I don’t know if you’ve had a chance to hear it, but Graham Kerridge was a very interesting podcast guest of mine, one of the earlier podcasts. He’d worked at the beginning of his career in the Cotswold community and had thereafter gone into international health development, health management quite an illustrious career. But he got me thinking about well. He was very interested in human capital and that was what led him to get involved in social care at the beginning of his career. And when we create a better life for a young person, we’re also creating a better life for their long-term partner, their children and their grandchildren. Potentially that human capital created is intergenerational in effect, and also, as you say, the services that and this is tied up in the whole early intervention movement and the rationale behind its importance. But if we can keep our young people out of institutions like the justice institutions, there’s an untold capital almost.

Colby: 47:15

When you’re talking about well, another podcast guest of mine you’ve touched on it a couple of times, but her name is Adela Holmes. She had this. It sends a chill down your spine quote that the great aspiration of children in care, children who have grown up in care, is an ordinary life. And wouldn’t that be great if they could just have an ordinary life, have their own children successfully raise those children, have grandchildren, and the saving not just the saving but the benefit to society of that happening is You’re so right because there’s been some fiscal studies on early intervention that if you invest one pound up front you’ll double your returns very quickly.

Andrew: 48:16

Up front in the early years will just save you so much money going forward. And that’s perhaps trying to change the narrative of how chancellors of the Exchequer and treasury ministers look at spending. It’s all short-term budget now, because maybe in five years time or 10 years time they’re no longer going to be in power. They’re not worried about that. Yeah, I would love a politician to say if we spend this now, these are the benefits of the country over 10, 15 years and you drive through.

Andrew: 48:49

You talked about the human capital. Now you take that and I want an ordinary life. So my human capital is going to develop. I will get a job, I will pay my taxes, I will have a partner, I will have children. They will grow up in a more secure environment. They will grow up in a more secure environment. They will grow up normally. Of course they’re going to need health care and dental care and schooling and that sort of stuff, but hopefully then they will move into job. So you then start creating revenue for the country as well.

Andrew: 49:20

Incidentally, but the person that kicked it all off the child account wanted an ordinary life. But the person that kicked it all off the child account wanted an ordinary life gets their wish granted and they become happy, as contented as they could. But they could best they could possibly be as a human being, and it doesn’t matter if you, you know, rich as creases or as poor as a church mouse. It’s about are you content as a human being that you’ve done your very best in everything that you do? And if you could give those young people the skills to be as good as they could possibly be, then that investment early on pays huge dividends to society. Every time you open a newspaper or you look online at news, there’s some sort of disaster regarding young people or you know young families. There’s a major crisis going on and you think, if you went back, how could that have been avoided? For a kickoff not knocking the backside out of early start, you know, 15, 20 years ago. I wonder if you can come back to that yeah, yeah.

Andrew: 50:33

It is something, but I mean it is what it is and we are where we are, but now we need to make sure that the money invested is invested correctly. The best place for any child that needs non-family you know none non-birth family help is in a family environment. It’s the same the whole world over. But I think the focus on that but it’s the short term the short-termism by governments all over the world is probably a fault there.

Colby: 51:06

Yeah.

Andrew: 51:07

And the narrative, the whole narrative needs to change, but change in any first world country takes time. And it’s not, you know it’s not political gold. That’s the problem. You know, the problem is always going to be there and children’s services tend to be a Cinderella service across the world.

Colby: 51:30

What do you mean by that? Sorry?

Andrew: 51:33

What do you mean by that? A Cinderella service that it’s out of sight, out of mind? If it’s just plodding along, that’s fine. The minute it makes a headline, something done about it, yeah. But most of the time it doesn’t make the headlines, because the much more interesting things that you know that politicians say and do that people want to read about and I don’t think the societal change over the last couple of decades is is reflected in how we look after our children. These days we’re very much reliant on processes, procedures, and we’ve always done it this way. That’s right.

Colby: 52:18

Somebody needs to make a change. That’s a nice spot to pause and reflect on. I mean, we were talking about it early on and I said that whenever you’re in a or I would say that whenever your resources are stretched, you’re time poor and otherwise your resources are stretched in whatever role that you’re performing. We do have a. There seems to be a human inclination to become very procedural. This is how we’ve always done it Stop thinking, stop stopping and thinking, but just becoming very procedural and I’ve said it in a number of podcasts Our service delivery, in those circumstances where we’re not thinking about ourselves and not thinking about the person, the recipient of our services, when they’re received procedural, they can be quite heartless and that that’s, that’s not a good outcome. Andrew, thank you for agreeing to come on. I always there’s so much I could talk to you about. There was so much in there that I could follow up on, and maybe, if you came, we might set up another time down the track a little ways and explore it a little bit more.

Andrew: 53:44

I particularly would love to talk to you more about the Children’s Services development group, um, as well yeah, yeah, quietly in the background, they do a huge amount of work to try and let politicians understand what the real world of children’s services is about yeah, yeah now, andrew, yeah yeah, well, I’d love to as well.

Colby: 54:10

Now, I always always well these. I’ve started a trend of giving my my podcast guests an opportunity to ask me a question at the end of the podcast.

Andrew: 54:18

I wonder if there’s a question without notice you’d like to um launch onto me, so to speak well, I think one of one of the things that I’ve always uh you know, admired, enjoyed and agreed with is how can we teach ordinary folk, whether they be parents, foster carers or workers in our sector, how can we give them simple tools to help with making children more resilient to their circumstances? What would you say, the simple tools that foster carers, ordinary parents, can use when they’re helping children, so those children in today’s society become more resilient?

Colby: 55:10

Yeah, well, it’s a good question. I think I don’t know if I’m aligned with others or a little bit different from others, but I often think that complex problems are not easily solved with complex solutions. Yeah, and in actual fact, the solved with complex solutions? Yeah, and in actual fact, the problem with complex solutions, such that they depart from conventional caregiving, they’re hard to implement and they’re hard to sustain over time. And our children, particularly our children, who have experienced disruption, attachment disruption, loss and trauma in their life, if there’s one thing that that triggers them, that gets them going, is inconsistency.

Colby: 56:02

So the last thing you want to do, I think, is to advocate an approach to caregiving of our young people that is even difficult to implement in the first place, but certainly difficult to maintain over time, and particularly in the face of our young people. You know the ship doesn’t turn around quickly very often, and and and people can lose hope, you know, or lose faith in, in, in the worth of of strategies, and then they’ll revert back to some other previous approach. Now that’s the big problem is the reverting back. So our young people, just you know they’re left with thinking, oh, are you going to be like this or are you going to be like that? Are you going to be like that and how long is going to be like that? Are you going to be like that, and how long is that going to go on for before you end up coming back? So my view is that we need to have a look at conventional aspects of caregiving and relating that are very powerful and very important to the recovery, the reasonable recovery, that we can expect our young people to make. I say that because I think we’re all impacted by what happens during our childhood, and the best of us and everyone else as well, and so I think our children retain some enduring sensitivities, but we can put them on that path that you talk about of being resilient to challenges in life, of achieving that goal of an ordinary life where we um, where they get um, caregiving, that um is conventional, so it doesn’t stand out like a sore thumb, it’s not triggering. This is this is not what I’ve seen or experienced before necessarily um, and I say that because all kids who come into care have experienced some level of conventional care prior to removal. It’s just been inadequate, grossly inadequate often enough, but conventional approaches to caregiving and relating are still recognisable to the children. So all that by way of our children coming to care. Often enough, they’ve had a disrupted period of growth and development at the beginning of their life.

Colby: 58:40

So the things that we know that support happy, healthy babies and positive growth and development are things like a fairly consistent home environment with consistent carers, caregivers. Those caregivers are there for them, are accessible to them. They don’t spend a long time away from the infants. If they do move away, they check in on them frequently and in in doing that, the infant first learns you’re the people that look after me and later learns you’ll still be there to look after me even when I can’t see you hear, you smell, you touch, you taste you. In those circumstances they develop an appropriate understanding that that the people who look after them truly are there for them, are accessible to them.

Colby: 59:37

When their tummy is feeling uncomfortable after a feed, they get burped. When their nappy’s feeling a bit uncomfortable and wet and yucky, they get changed. When they’re needing comfort, they get held. When they’re tired, they get put to sleep. When they’re hungryucky, they get changed when they want to. When they’re needing comfort, they get held. When they’re tired, they get put to sleep. When they’re hungry, they get fed.

Colby: 59:56

So the infant’s experience is that that the people who look after them understand their experience, understand what’s going on for them, and they can trust you can trust this person because they understand me. And then they and and not only do they understand what’s going on for me, they respond to what I need, and when I’m happy, they’re happy. When I’m sad, they’re sad. When I’m screaming the house down, they’re looking like they’re about to have a meltdown, but then they get themselves under control and they come back and they calm down. And that’s so reassuring for me as a small child that I can trust this person to understand me in their thoughts, in their words, in their actions and in their expressed emotions. But they will then help me regulate back to a calm and contented place.

Colby: 1:00:50

So you did ask the question. This is a rather long answer, but what I’m really getting to is that those things that were really key during infancy and early childhood, that were often inadequate in our children in care, they’re the things that we need to enrich and put back in and make sure that our young people have a really good experience of it. It might look a bit different to how you do it with a baby, undoubtedly, unless you’ve got a baby in your care, it will look different. But what you want is a household that has some things that are consistent about it that the care that is delivered, including these other things I’m going to say, are delivered consistently. That you check in with the child or young person proactively. You just bob your head in, see how they’re going, so that they have the experience that you’re thinking of them, aware of them, and you’re there for them. That when you bob your head in, you notice what they’re doing In your words, rather than asking a question, you might say to them oh, you’re really getting into that game. I’ve seen you watching a lot of this program. You obviously love it. But they experience this as understanding them, just as the infant does when we change them when it needs changed or we feed them when they’re hungry, and that we, we anticipate some of their requests, their reasonable requests, that we would respond to and we delete. We respond to them without them having to ask their experiences. Wow, the I can trust this person. They understand my needs and respond to them without me having to push their buttons and pulling their strings.

Colby: 1:02:35

And play is every carer’s superpower. When you play, we fall into sync the adult and the child. You know we have a good time together, there’s good moments of emotional connection, and then the adult doesn’t let it go too far and they regulate back to calm and the kids come with us. They’re not, they’re not difficult. I mean a good example.

Colby: 1:03:00

Often our kids love all kids love hide and seek. But often our kids in out-of-home care really love hide and seek but they’re really bad at it because they can’t that when, when you get them to go and hide, they can’t hide without calling out I’m here, you’re getting close to the cup again, because they want to be found. That hide and seek such a great game because it it it helps children to tolerate temporary separations. But for our kids in care, it’s a great game because it helps them to experience that they will be found. So there you go.

Colby: 1:03:43

That was probably a 10-minute answer. You might have anticipated a five-minute one. But, yeah, being consistent, being consistent, accessible, responsive and emotionally connected to our kids, that’s the what I would. Um, yeah, thank you. Thank you again, andrew. Now, andrew, I’m gonna do something that, um, you’re the first person I’m going to do this, for it was a suggestion that was made by my colleague and somewhat of a silent partner for this podcast, Patrick Tomlinson. He has suggested it might be a good idea to get podcast guests to think of a question for the next guest. Now, I think that would be a little bit hard, a bit rough, unless you knew who the next guest was. So I’m going to tell you and I’m not going to tell anyone else, thank you.

Healing Through Relationship: A Lifetime in Therapeutic Care

An Ordinary Life Is the Great Aspiration

The journey of creating effective therapeutic interventions for traumatized children is filled with both challenges and profound rewards. This became abundantly clear during my conversation with Adela Holmes, whose remarkable 52-year career in child protection and therapeutic care has shaped Victoria’s approach to supporting its most vulnerable young people.

The evolution of therapeutic residential care in Victoria emerged from a crisis. During the 1990s, a well-intentioned but poorly executed deinstitutionalization process left residential care workers isolated and under-resourced. As Adela explained, the consequences were devastating: “Staff were encouraged to ring the police if a young person was out of control, which of course is the beginning of a long period of criminalisation.” This criminalization created a revolving door between the child protection and youth justice systems, with children entering through the family division of courts only to return repeatedly through the criminal division.

This crisis prompted judicial intervention and a pivotal report called “When Care Is Not Enough,” which recommended developing specialized mental health services for child protection clients and creating a therapeutic residential care model. These recommendations ultimately led to the creation of two groundbreaking programs: Take-Two Intensive Therapeutic Service and Hurstbridge Farm. Adela played an instrumental role in designing and implementing both programs, drawing on international therapeutic models while adapting them to the Australian context.

What made Hurstbridge Farm truly transformative wasn’t the rural setting, though many assume this was the key. As Adela emphasized, “People think that it’s the farm environment that is the key, but it’s not. It’s relationships.” The program’s success rested on fundamental principles: psychological containment, co-regulation, and consistent, caring relationships. The approach was remarkably simple yet profound – staff would never leave children alone, walking with them everywhere on the property, providing that continuous “calm presence” that traumatized children desperately need to feel safe.

The outcomes speak volumes about the model’s effectiveness. While a comparison group of similar young people either plateaued or deteriorated, 65-75% of the young people at Hurstbridge Farm showed clear improvements in their lives. As Adela puts it, her goal was simply “an ordinary life” for these children – a seemingly modest aspiration that represented a monumental achievement given their traumatic beginnings.

Adela’s experience offers crucial lessons for contemporary child welfare systems, which often seek cost-saving measures at the expense of therapeutic integrity. Her message to policy makers is unambiguous: “Don’t fiddle with what does work. Add to what does work. Take a deep breath. Spend the money now, because in 10 years’ time, 15 years’ time, is when the judgment will come.” She articulates what many practitioners know but systems often forget – that investing in relational capacity and psychological healing pays enormous dividends in reduced crime, improved wellbeing, and enhanced social capital.

The legacy of Hurstbridge Farm continues today, with the model still being implemented. As Adela discovered on a recent visit, “It has the same sense of order, the same sense of calm.” This continuity testifies to the model’s durability and effectiveness, challenging the common narrative that residential care is inherently problematic. Instead, her work demonstrates that well-designed therapeutic residential care can be transformative for our most vulnerable young people, offering them the healing, containment and relational experiences they need to thrive.

You can listen to Adela here:

You can watch at the link below:

About Adela

Adela has a career spanning 52-years, during which she has worked in the child protection, child & family welfare & out of home care fields for both the Victorian state government and the non-government sector.

Adela has a well-established track record in designing, developing and delivering complex trauma grounded therapeutic care services for the most complex and challenging children and adolescents, and an expertise for working successfully with and supporting others to work with these children and adolescents.

During her career Adela has designed and been involved in the ‘start up’ leadership and management of significant therapeutic service initiatives funded by the Victorian state government. These include the ‘Take Two” Intensive Therapeutic Service and the Victorian government’s successful pilot therapeutic residential care program, Hurstbridge Farm. 12 other pilot programs were developed using the same model and, in 2011, all 13 were evaluated as being highly effective in producing positive life outcomes.

Adela has been specialising as a trainer in the utilisation of complex trauma frameworks since 2000 and during this time has consolidated an extensive knowledge base and expertise in trauma & attachment informed therapeutic practice, both as a practitioner and a trainer of these skills.

Adela also specialises in the facilitation of Reflective Practice Groups and, in her consultancy work, Adela delivers to such groups as a visiting consultant on a regular basis.

In October 2024 Adela was awarded the inaugural Centre for Excellence in Child & Family Welfare Industry Lifetime Achievement Award for Services to Out of Home Care

Related Podcast Interviews

Dr Kiran Modi

Listen here:

Watch here:

Richard Cross

Listen here:

Watch here:

Transcript:

Colby: 0:00

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast.

Adela: 0:02

People used to say to me at the start well, you know, what are you aiming for with these kids? And I would say an ordinary life, because an ordinary life is the great aspiration for children who’ve experienced trauma Almost everywhere. I mean not everywhere, but almost everywhere I’ve been not everywhere, but almost everywhere there have been great compassionate mentors.

Adela: 0:31

But the day I knew that something had clicked for him was one of the other kids was having his birthday and we were having a barbecue on the deck and he had forgotten to bring the boys present that he’d made in the school. And he came up to me and he said will you walk with me up to the house? I want to get the present. Then the children’s court magistrates intervened and wrote a letter to the department saying what is happening in your residential care system? Because we’re seeing children come in through the family division and then they come back before us again and again and again in the criminal division. It’s compelling to try and save resources, but what do we do in terms of the judgment and the decision we make about the lives of people you’ve never met?

Colby: 1:39

Hi, I’m Colby Pearce, and joining me for this episode is a highly experienced expert practitioner here in Australia. Before I introduce my guest, I’d just like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land we’re meeting on the Kaurna people of the Adelaide Plains, for me, and the Wurundjeri people of the Melbourne area of Victoria, for my guest. I’d also like to acknowledge the continuing connection that all living Aboriginal people feel to land, waters, culture and community and pay my respects to their elders, past, present and emerging. My guest this episode is Adela Holmes. Adela has a career spanning 52 years, during which she has worked in the child protection, child and family welfare and out-of-home care fields for both the Victorian state government and the non-government sector.

Colby: 2:45

Adela has a well-established track record in designing, developing and delivering complex, trauma-grounded therapeutic care services for the most complex and challenging children and adolescents, and an expertise for working successfully with and supporting others to work with these children and adolescents. During her career, adela has designed and been involved in the start-up, leadership and management of significant therapeutic service initiatives funded by the Victorian State Government. These include the Take-Two Intensive Therapeutic Service and the Victorian Government’s successful pilot therapeutic residential care program, hurstbridge Farm. Twelve other pilot programs were developed using the same model and in 2011, all 13 were evaluated as being highly effective in producing positive life outcomes. Being highly effective in producing positive life outcomes, adela has been specializing as a trainer in the utilization of complex trauma frameworks since 2000 and during this time, has consolidated an extensive knowledge base and expertise in trauma and attachment-informed therapeutic practice, both as a practitioner and a trainer. Adela also specialises in the facilitation of reflective practice groups and in her consultancy work. Adela delivers to such groups as a visiting consultant on a regular basis.

Colby: 4:20

In October 2024, adela was awarded the inaugural Centre for Excellence in Child and Family Welfare Industry Lifetime Achievement Award for services to out-of-home care. Adela has no interest in retiring, as she loves what she does and still has much energy to provide input into the healing care of children impacted by complex trauma. Adela believes strongly in the capacity of well-designed and well-executed models of therapeutic residential care to bring about effective healing that is grounded in the growth of real relational capacity. In such settings, well-trained individuals can bring about the kind of real change required to heal from traumatic early beginnings and trust in the capacity of adults to provide safe, loving, respectful and kind care. Welcome, adela.

Adela: 5:22

Thank you, colby, good to be here.

Colby: 5:25

And Adela. I’m 30 years deep into a career, working in a very similar space to you in the adjoining state here in Australia, and I think your ongoing energy and passion is remarkable, which is not to say that I’m not still passionate about the work, but I do experience some dips in energy from time to time. How have you sustained your energy and passion for this work across 52 years?

Adela: 5:59

Well, it’s a really interesting question because 52 years ago when I started, I’d really fallen into the work. As I think I was saying to you a bit earlier, I started out my adult life as a folk singer. I was singing, I was born and raised in the UK, came to Australia in 1965, and it was at the height of coffee lounges and folk singers and I’d always sung. I was as a little girl. I was put up on tables and said oh really.

Adela: 6:45

Yeah, at family weddings or other dos, so I’d always sung. Got here, saw that there were a lot of coffee lounges, thought oh, this looks good, and so I kind of fell into this work. So I kind of fell into this work. But I always had an interest in the mind and psychology and things connected with that. So I read in a fairly eclectic manner from the age of about 16 with that sphere.

Adela: 7:24

In fact, the first book I read was by a guy called AS Neill N-E-I-L-L, a Scottish teacher who opened up a school in the UK for children with difficulties. It was a boarding school and the school was called Summerhill. The school was called Summer Hill. The book was called. Summer Hill then got interested in the work of RD Lang, the Scottish psychiatrist, and I think the people who I read back then had formed my thinking, because they had enormous passion and energy for the work.

Adela: 8:12

So there was no such thing as not being passionate about it and I think that mindset just has stuck with me because they were passionate and their writings showed that, demonstrated that passion really strongly. And I suppose the other thing, which is not a very scientific answer, but I’ve always, as an individual in my memory, only ever had on and off. There’s not a modulator in between. I’m either on or off. So when.

Adela: 8:56

I’m on. I’m on. I do have off times, but off time we’ll be reading or doing other fun things which some people might describe as on time. I don’t know. But I think also when you see what you do works, that kind of you know drives you with a bit of passion to keep going and do more of it.

Colby: 9:30

Yeah, yeah, I think you’re right. It’s reassuring, it’s reinforcing, I think was also the word I was looking for there. Yeah, it’s a vocation rather than a job, isn’t it?

Adela: 9:48

It is, it absolutely is. Yeah. And I know that. That’s why I have no intention to retire, because, you’re right, it is a vocation.

Colby: 10:03

Yeah, yeah, wonderful. Right, it is a vocation. Yeah, yeah, wonderful. So, um, you’ve part. I was going to ask you, uh, what led you to working in the area of designing and implementing therapeutic residential care programs, which is of great interest to me? Um, and one of the reasons why I started this podcast and chose certain people to interview but I’ve heard you speak already about those first two authors who designed therapeutic schools Reminds me a lot of the Dr Drysdale’s and the Mulberry Bush School. Yes.

Colby: 10:47

And of course Barbara Dr Drysdale was very important in the early days of the Cotswold community. Absolutely, and I’ve recently had John Whitwell on.

Adela: 11:00

Yeah, I saw that interview. I’ve met John when I was in the UK in 2008. And also, you know I do a fair bit of interface with Patrick Tomlinson. Yes.

Adela: 11:19

And I have said to him laughingly that I have what I call Cotswold envy because I was too young. Well, no, actually I’m older than him, but at the time that I was in the UK I couldn’t have worked in a setting like that because I was too young. And then I came to Australia and there was no such thing as a setting like that no, no. So I guess I never well, I did my own. But you know, we, I think, created something similar at Hirst.

Adela: 11:59

Not quite the same but very similar. But again that sort of sense of vocation, when you see something works. You know I’ve always also been what’s the word? Pretty outspoken, I suppose, but only in defence of something good you know, but a lot of times things that have worked haven’t necessarily been promulgated further because of systemic issues egos, which play a role in there, and resources, which play a role in there, and resources, and you know when you see that getting in the way of something that works to heal kids.

Adela: 12:54

I will never be quiet about that, never, ever.Colby: 12:57

Yeah, well, good on you. Yeah, it is frustrating that often extraneous factors are what gets in the way of the longevity of certain programs and, of course, the Cotswold I have a lot to do with Patrick as well, and the Cotswold community is no longer, and part of that, as my understanding, had to do with scandals that occurred in the residential care sector in the UK. But I’m hoping to speak to someone on a future podcast that can shed a bit of light on about, um that issue, the issue of quality of care and consistency of care, good quality care in in in residential care versus other forms of of out-of-home care. But so watch your space, people. Um, haven’t haven’t quite got there yet, but hoping to. And the other thing you wouldn’t have found here was therapeutic schools.

Adela: 14:09

No.Colby: 

14:10

No.Adela: 

14:11

No, and I know, having been brought up in the UK.

Adela: 14:15

there’s that long history of what was called Borschtel, which were residential, corrective residential schools, which have morphed into something different, but those residential schools that were therapeutic. I’ve read a lot about many of them and when I was putting together the Hurstbridge model, a big part of my research was a book that was put together. I think it was edited by Adrian Ward. A lot of people who had run services that I think grew from the Cotswold community had written chapters in the book that I read, and I actually met many of those people. When I was in the UK in 2008, alan Worthington and I went to the Mulberry Bush School. Yes, so all you know the places that had sort of grown out of the console community.

Adela: 15:27

I made it my business, wherever I could, to visit them and I must say that, adrian Ward, all I did was send him an email saying I’m going to be in the UK in November. I wonder if you could give me some numbers to contact people so I could go and see services? Yep, he developed me a whole one-week itinerary of visiting. Oh, wow. I was knocked out. And.

Adela: 15:57

I just, you know, got on the train and went from one place to another and was absolutely knocked out with what I saw. But it was great. I’d been doing Hurstbridge for a year at the time and I could see some of the practices that I based Hurstbridge on and I could see how well they worked and that gave me great fire and inspiration to keep going.

Colby: 16:29

Awesome, yeah, so we will talk more in a little bit about Hurst Bridge, and I know that people who are listening to this podcast and know anything about you will be very keen to hear you talk more about that. I’m just wondering you know you’ve come, you talked about, you’ve read some books about therapeutic work, therapeutic residential work, including in a school-based setting. How did you? But you’ve also talked about how it just didn’t exist here. How did you come to be at the forefront of developing these therapeutic residential care programs like Hearst Bridge? Who?

Colby: 17:13

you talk about. As I said, how did you get into that space to be able to bring it about?

Adela: 17:21

Yeah, it’s a good question when I reflect on it. So I mean my first job at the end of 1972, and it’s funny, I was in well funny, strange juxtaposition between doing this interview and events over the past two or three weeks here. I had a very formative, mentor-mentee relationship with a woman called Pat Simmons who had been the superintendent.

Adela: 17:58

we’re talking old times here of the very first place that I worked of the very first place that I worked, as I said, I fell into my study, discovered I could do it, discovered I had a real ability to do it. And then it was kind of onwards and upwards. But I was doing my final placement in doing welfare studies and it was at a place called Youth Welfare Division in what was then called the Social Welfare Department.

Adela: 18:37

It was a very new department in Melbourne, in Victoria, and so it was office-based and you would go out and do outreach visits to young people who were in the institutions. Because it was all institutionally based. At the time and it was coming to the end of the course, my only income capacity was back to the coffee lounges and earning $5 a night until I could find something in the sector. And I spoke to the person in charge then at that place and I said are there any jobs going here? He said, well, no, there aren’t. But there’s a very new initiative starting up in May next year. It’s a community-based diversionary program to keep young women out of the institution. And I thought, oh, that does sound interesting. So I did a couple of interviews with the people who were going to run it. But then I said to him well, that’s great, that’s good in May next year, but here we are in November now and I need to earn some money. Is there anything else?

Adela: 20:08

And he suggested that I work at the institution that they were building this diversionary program for, which was a place called Wynne-Leighton, so it had upwards of 100 girls who had been through the children’s court either for criminal offences or were considered to be what they called back then exposed to moral danger. Okay.

Adela: 20:41

In need of care, basically. So I said, all right, I had no real idea what I was walking into exactly, but it sounded like it was up my alley. So I said yes, went to work there. And by golly I mean there were some things I would never replicate. And by golly I mean there were some things I would never replicate, but there were many elements of the relational aspect of working with themselves that I retain to this day. And there was a woman there running the place called, as I say, pat Simmons. Pat very sadly suffered from dementia for the last eight to ten years, I think, and she died on Good Friday.

Adela: 21:34

So I went to her funeral last Friday and I was thinking a lot about exactly what you’ve asked me.

Adela: 21:41

And I suppose what I saw when I went into that role at Wynne-Leighton told me what you should do and what you shouldn’t do in deeply experiential terms, because it was like I walked in, I put my uniform on and there I was and I just had to do it and I saw from the very beginning, with Pat’s mentorship, that it was all about relational capacity, regulation and co-regulation. I didn’t use those words then, but that’s what it felt like and that’s later what I learned it was and the capacity to look past behaviour and understand what sat behind it. And you know, we were working two staff on a unit with 24 girls in it and you had to learn some very valuable things about the mood and the rhythm of what was happening in that large group of young women and also, therefore, how to intervene in a way that was a bit cleverer than just. You can’t do that, because that doesn’t work. It might work for 10 minutes or half an hour, but it doesn’t actually do anything, doesn’t change anything.

Colby: 23:25

Probably just stirs them up.Adela: 23:27

Yeah Well, actually, someone at the funeral talked about an event where a number of young women had climbed up on the roof of this place when they’d and I’m not quite sure what the reason was they weren’t either with Nathan. I’m not quite sure what the reason was, they weren’t either, but talked about the example of how Pat you know everybody was going to ring the fire brigade and the police and it was all going to escalate.

Adela: 23:56

But Pat said no, don’t want you to do any of that. I’m going to go up there and talk.

Colby: 24:05

I thought you were going to say that.

Adela: 24:08

And she did, and within half an hour and the shouting calmed down. Within half an hour they’d all taken off their clothes and they were standing up there in their underwear. Within half an hour they were all starting to feel cold. Why? Because they weren’t in a heightened state. Their heightened state was making them immune to the cold, but all of a sudden, when they started to come down and engage in the conversation with Pat, they started to feel cold. All put their clothes on, climbed down and came inside. So that’s the kind of person she was and that’s the kind of mentorship I received right from the word go. And that’s the kind of mentorship I received right from the word go. And it just fitted so well with what I’d read in Summerhill, what I’d read of Artie Lang’s work. Artie Lang lived in a household with people who were diagnosed with schizophrenia.

Adela: 25:15

He was no believer in schizophrenia. He resided in a house with them. I think there was a film made of it, called I think it was called Sanctuary. But a number of people worked with them and lived with them and you know, if you look at the film it’s probably unable to be accessed anymore, but I saw it. It’s just people talking to each other.

Colby: 25:45

That’s what I mean when you’re describing your role, that initial role in, I guess what we would think about more these days in terms of a youth training centre for girls out more these days in terms of a youth training centre for girls.

Colby: 26:03

um, I was, you were talking about the staff to to girls ratio which was, yeah, quite different to what you might observe these days, but and I, my mind was initially going to well, my mind was going to well it’s not how good a disciplinarian you are that will maintain calmness and order in that unit. It’s how well you’re able to develop a relationship with all the individuals, because the relationship is the most powerful regulating influence that you would have had at that time. And part of that is, as you said, is engaging with the young people with deep understanding of their experience, so not getting distracted with what they’re doing but focusing more on why they’re doing those things. And in those circumstances, the young people feel heard and understood and validated in their experience and they’ll regulate in consideration of their relationship.

Adela: 27:00

They’ll regulate without realising even why or how, because the person is interested in them. It never ceases to amaze me. I think a lot in metaphors, right, and I often use the metaphor of what works in physical health and what works in emotional, psychological health.

Adela: 27:27

Now, if you walked into the emergency room of a hospital and went up to the triage nurse and said, oh, you know, I’ve got a pain in my right side, and said, oh, you know, I’ve got a pain in my right side, does the triage nurse use a bit of compassion and empathy and get the details from you and help you feel better? Or do they yell at you from behind the glass? Stop that this minute. Yell at you from behind the glass, stop that this minute. But it’s the same thing with what’s going on emotionally. We come to triage kids every day of the week.

Adela: 28:12

You know I do either directly or indirectly with staff who need to work directly with them and where’s the compassion you know, where’s the understanding that we would automatically apply if it was something physical.

Colby: 28:34

I think it’s that question what’s really going on here? Yeah. It’s not what you present with, it’s the you know, yeah, the reason for that, that presentation, yeah.

Adela: 28:47

But it seems to the desire or the ability to do that seems to fly out of the window, when what we’re looking at is something to do with behaviour, right, and that’s something to do with the person on the other end as well. Mm-hmm.

Adela: 29:09

So I guess thinking about that induction into the work and working in the diversionary program that we did, that, I think, helps me to understand what set me on a pathway, and the pathway wasn’t straight. I you know. I did some things. I went back to singing for a little while, came back into the work, worked in child protection in the mid-’70s. I think my good fortune along the way has been that almost everywhere I’ve been not everywhere, but almost everywhere there have been great, compassionate mentors. Not to the same extent as Pat no one. I don’t think anyone will ever achieve the level of mentorship and influence that she had on my later career and thinking that she had on my later career and thinking but they’re in pockets, that approach, there’s enough people out there to be able to go.

Adela: 30:30

Yeah, okay, so we’re not going to do this, we’re going to approach this in this way and use the brains that we have in our heads to think about this intelligently and seeing that in those early days and seeing the results of my you’d have to say rudimentary attempts to work relationally with kids. But I learned from what didn’t work and what did work. But seeing that, I think has provided me with the fuel for the passion to keep going in it and, of course, because I had that fuel for the passion, I stayed on that track. So my passion, really, I do other things and I’m as passionate about those other things, but my first passion was for therapeutically working in a residential setting, because you have the entire day, the entire life of the young person rolling out before you and that affords us so many opportunities.

Colby: 31:51

So your passion led you ultimately to Hurstbridge and the development of the Hurstbridge residential farm and community. I think people who are listening would really love to hear a little bit about how Hurstbridge came about and your role in that and the model of care that you were responsible for there.

Adela: 32:14

Yeah, okay. So there’s a little bit of systemic explanation I have to do to explain how both Take Two and Hurstbridge Farm came about. Yep.

Adela: 32:27

So in the early 90s in Victoria there was a Premier called Geoffrey Kennett. I think he’s quite well known because he was a it was a liberal Victorian government and he was a person who understood the value of a funding cut let’s put it that way and was looking at things in a different way. Now, through the late 80s, there had been many discussions about the need to deinstitutionalise services in the state Great discussions. But by the time he came into power, those discussions had taken a slightly different twist, because they obviously also afforded the opportunity to cut money and redeploy resources, which he made full use of, might I say.

Colby: 33:40

I remember.

Adela: 33:43

So, in actuality, the deinstitutionalisation process was to some extent, and it probably varied across the state and the service system, but it was to some extent put into the probably varied across the state and the service system, but it was to some extent put into the service of funding cuts and refocusing of funding.

Adela: 34:10

Having said that, what that resulted in was a deinstitutionalisation process for young people that was probably quite stripped of resources in a way. It was never intended to be. I can’t say that for sure, but that’s my guess. So what that meant was that the way it was done was quite squished. So the staff who had worked in the institutions some of them were offered the option of redundancy packages and some of them were redeployed to work with kids in houses in the community. But of course there is a very big difference between working with children in an institutional setting, with all the things that surround you, and working in a house in a suburb with access to no one and nothing. You’re on your own, you know. And over the course of about two or three years the workforce was heading towards being quite industrialised about that.

Adela: 35:29

People were getting assaulted, of course, children and young people who really struggle with internal regulation for all the reasons we know in terms of complex trauma and early life experiences, are going to punch a hole in the wall when they’re frustrated because they can’t talk about how they feel. Now, in the institution there were solutions for that, but in the community there weren’t any. So the staff were encouraged to ring the police if a young person was out of control, which of course is the beginning of a long period of criminalisation of these young people, and I have nothing to base this on but my own experience. But I would not mind hazarding a guess that up to 80% or 90% of adult people now in prison were those children, because they became criminalised not all of them, but a fair percentage. So you know we were on a hiding to nothing in the system and during that period of time I was working in child protection very closely seeing the impacts of these decisions, and I was a case planner.

Adela: 37:10

So these decisions were having a major impact on the quality of care that we were able to provide children on the quality of care that we were able to provide children and in the mid or the industrialisation was noted, and what the response to that was was the outsourcing to the community service sector. It was a great solution.

Colby: 37:38

I think it’s someone else’s problem.

Adela: 37:39

Yeah, and the same thing happened. What we ended up with in the mid-’90s was a highly criminalised group of children in the residential care system, which could have been something wonderful, but ended up something not wonderful. Then the Children’s Court magistrates intervened and wrote a letter to the department, whatever it was called. Then it changes names every so often it does a bit.

Adela: 38:15

yeah, Wrote a letter saying what is happening in your residential care system Because we’re seeing children come in through the family division and then they come back before us again and again and again in the criminal division. And good on them because they called it out. Yeah.

Adela: 38:36

And that led to the commissioning of an investigation and a report. The investigation was undertaken by a fabulous woman called Robin Clark and two associates looking at those children who were coming back before the criminal division of the courts. Again and again and again I case-planned some of them, so I was quite involved in that process. And to cut a very long story short, the report, which is called when Care Is Not Enough, which I highly recommend to anybody. It was published in 1999, but it’s as relevant now as it was then because it’s based on the same truth. And in that their two main recommendations were number one the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service System does not suit child protection clients. They won’t go, they won’t front up and so develop a service designed specifically for those kids that became TAG2. And develop a therapeutic residential care model. That became Hearst Bridge Farm. So they were the two recommendations of that report. That review and report the government changed to a labour persuasion.

Colby: 40:12

More sympathetic perhaps.

Adela: 40:14

And there were quite a number of people who were very committed to doing this, and so from about 2000 to 2002, there was a lot of activity in the head office of the department and they came up with the realizationisation that what probably would make sense was to go first with the outreach service and put some energy into that. At that time I was working for Berry Street. It’s a large service provider in Victoria that is non-religious but funded by the government. Yeah, and I made the mistake. We were all in a meeting. I was in a senior management role. I was relatively new to Mary.

Adela: 41:13

And we were in a meeting discussing the consortium that we were going to put together to put our hands up for that outreach mental health service, I put my hand up like that and said look whoever does it, not thinking that I would you know. I’m fairly junior on the tree. I said whoever does it, I’d really like to help them because I’m very interested in those sorts of services and the ceo.

Adela: 41:46

At the time, a woman called sandy de wolf said no, you can do it oh god, be careful what you ask for yeah, um, I said, oh, oh, really, yeah, this is a 5.5 million dollar program annually, recurrent for three years, with you know, and then, of course, dependent on outcomes.

Adela: 42:12

um, so you know, if we get it, career move, if we don’t get it bad career move, but I said, oh okay, and we had six weeks to write it. I wrote it. I designed the model with the assistance of a couple of people who were in the other parts of the consortium, but we put together what we thought would work and it was all grounded in what was, for us, an emerging understanding about complex trauma and how to approach it. And we got it. It was a good career.

Colby: 43:06

Then you had to do it.

Adela: 43:08

So we got that in. I think we were advised in mid-2000 or, yeah, mid-ish 2003, and mid-ish 2003. And then we got going with it and I got so connected with it I couldn’t really let it go. You know what it’s like? It’s like this is my baby.

Adela: 43:32

So I applied for a position in it and was one of the founding area managers of it. We were led by a fabulous guy psychologist called Rick Pawsey who had worked with the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service who were part of the consortium. He was a fabulous leader and, again, great mentor. So we had the support from the head office of the department. It was all systems go. We recruited something like 43 people in a month and I remember doing the interviews. It was like oh right, okay, and we were fully staffed by October 2003. And then we started accepting clients in the beginning of 2004. So I was with that endeavour, which was going really well from the start, and in about 2005 the department started to then think about the second recommendation, which was the pilot, and I was at that stage in a role where I was the pilot and I was at that stage in a role where I was the statewide services development manager in TAC2.

Colby: 45:07

TAC2, yeah.

Adela: 45:10

And so really it came to that role to write, pilot and research it, which was extremely exciting because this was my passion. So I’d kind of got myself without a career plan of any sort, but being led by the passion where I was right there.

Colby: 45:38

At the right time. At the right time.

Adela: 45:40

At the right time. It was a very fortunate juxtaposition. So I think I spent about six months reading, researching, mainly drew from the work of Bruce Perry, bessel, van der Kolk, dan Hughes, others, some others as well Sandra Bloom, certainly in terms of how they made sense of what you needed to actually do in working with kids. Put that together with my own experience reading, et cetera, and wrote a proposal for a model. And then we sent it to the two regions who were going to fund it and operate it. And you know that’s nerve-wracking, because he spent all this time reading, putting together writing and it was a massive thing to write. It was really a important and B had to be very precise and grounded in evidence. And that was when I read the book and used the writing from the Cotswold community people and beyond and they came back to us having read it and said we love it, it’s what we want, it is exactly what we want.

Adela: 47:20

So this was my second baby. I already had a daughter, wonderful. So this was like my third baby, really, um, and again I couldn’t not do it really. It was like really, no, come on, you know.

Adela: 47:41

So then I went into the role of being the founding manager of hearstbridge farm yeah, yeah, it’s interesting, colby, because people you know, because we called it hearstbridge Farm because, it was 33 acres with animals on it. People think that it’s the farm environment that is the key, but it’s not.

Colby: 48:07

It’s relationships.

Adela: 48:09

Relationships and the freedom to trial what seems to work in other settings if it works in this setting. We also had fabulous backing to do it at head office level, and I will mention names because I think they deserve to be mentioned. Sure.

Adela: 48:36

The minister at the time was a guy called Gavin Jennings who was a social worker and totally understood what the model was and what we were trying to do, so he was really, really fantastic to have in that role. And the bureaucrat who sat above this and sanctioned all of it is a guy called David Clements who repeatedly said oh, I don’t really understand all this. I mean, he’s a social worker and he does understand it. But he said, oh, I just, you know, I have my faith and trust in the people who are doing it, and I repeatedly over time have said to him yeah, but you know, there you go, Dave, you also understood what we were doing. Yeah, yeah.

Adela: 49:36

I still think he’s a bit too modest. That’s why I named him, because he should take a vow. He made it happen and he had a. You know, if you think of that first cohort of kids who ate, kids who came through the farm, he had a direct impact on their lives, whether he acknowledges it or not.

Colby: 49:57

And their children.

Adela: 49:58

Because he supported it.

Colby: 50:00

Yeah, and their children and their grandchildren.

Adela: 50:04

Yes, absolutely right, absolutely right down through the generations, and a fairly high percentage in the region of 65% to 75% of those young people showed clear improvements in their lives, like an upward trajectory, when a comparison group of kids over the same period either plateaued and stayed troubled or got worse, or got worse yeah. So there’s a fabulous diagram in that report which is called the Verso Evaluation of Therapeutic Residential Care Violence. It’s just there. It’s a very simple graph that they’ve done, but it’s like yeah, so it just changed the trajectory, didn’t it?

Colby: 51:02

Yeah, figuratively and actually.

Adela: 51:06

Yeah, absolutely yeah. So, and we’re still we. I say the. You know, the original staff are still in contact with many of those kids and people used to say to me at the start well, you know, what are you aiming for with these kids? And I would say an ordinary life, because an ordinary life is the great aspiration for children who’ve experienced trauma. What they do with it after that, that’s up to them. They have the wherewithal by that stage. But an ordinary life is good enough for me. And I used to say well, just an ordinary life. And many of them, most of them in fact, have an ordinary life. If it’s not totally ordinary, it’s closer to than any other trajectory they might have been on.

Colby: 52:07

Yeah, that’s fantastic and probably not dissimilar to the stories that come out of the Cotswold community that you were so envious of and I’m tremendously interested in as well. You had the opportunity to go back there quite recently, back to Hurstbridge Farm. What were some key observations or take-homes that you took from that visit?

Adela: 52:35

Well, one of the key observations that um it came about because you know the award ceremony that I was at, where I got that lifetime achievement thing um, the woman who is has managed it for about the last 10 years I think a woman called lena lamandola and a small amount of her team were actually there doing the presentation for that day and she came up to me in one of the breaks and she said hi, and we had a hug and she said I just want you to know that I use your model and I will not let anybody make us change it.

Adela: 53:20

And I said thank you, you know, and of course it’s true, and I saw that when I went up there because it has the same sense of order, the same sense of calm. I mean, it’s a beautiful environment and you can’t take that out of it because it is an element of it. But the more important part of the environment is the people, and there are really good people up there. They’re calm, they know, they’re focused, they understand what they’re doing, they don’t diverge from it. One of the elements of the model that I think is really critical is the recognition that kids who have had these experiences feel uncontained, and the important, and I know Barbara Dogger-Drysdale talks a lot and Winnicott talk a lot about the importance of psychological containment. Yeah.

Adela: 54:35

And, of course, psychological containment comes from physiological containment, because that’s got to come first and that’s what I observed, because that’s something we created up there when we were starting off the pilot.

Colby: 54:53

Contained adults.

Adela: 54:56

Contained adults and initially the kids would say no, you’re going to stop me doing this, you know all that. But we started off really simple by not letting them be alone. Other than you know they’re having a shower, they go to the toilet, all of that, but in the rest of their waking hours we are positively with them and we took that down to walking everywhere with them on the property.

Adela: 55:33

So if a child was in the school and needed something from the house, someone would come and walk up with them to get it and on the way we would have, we didn’t talk about anything. What was? You know? A bird in the tree or whatever, it doesn’t matter, because the containing element is from the presence, the calm presence. And I knew with one boy who had lived his life on the street right. He was 13 and a half when he came in the first cohort and he resisted everything and we developed a series of ways of helping him come into the program. But the day I knew that something had clicked for him was one of the other kids was having his birthday and we were having a barbecue on the deck and he had forgotten to bring the boys present that he’d made in the school. And he came up to me and he said will you walk with me up to the house? I want to get the present. I said inside, I’m going. On the outside I’m going. Of course I will. You know it’s such a massive.

Colby: 57:00

it’s such a massive achievement, I mean for people who are are not like us, who don’t, you know, have the level of familiarity that we do have with these children, they would just think yeah so yeah what, but it’s such such a huge thing, yeah yeah, the the same boy.

Adela: 57:19

I mean I bore you with stories but the same boy was telling me about two months after or three months after that how he thought he was doing really well in the program and was checking that out with me. And I said, yeah, you are, and how he had been impacted by a newer boy who’d come in and who was still quite a lot less regulated and who made him feel unsafe, which was music to my ears because it meant he was feeling safe. And you know, we worked out some things that I was going to do to try and help him feel safer. And I reflected that story to the steering group, which was a group formed of people from the regions of the department, some bureaucrats from head office and some me and some other practitioners in child protection, and I told that story as an example of change and growth.

Adela: 58:29

And the bureaucrat made this comment. He said, oh, it just sounds like a lot of bullshit to me. And I said, well, you know when somebody says something and you think of the right answer two hours later and you go. Well, I actually thought of the right answer in that moment. I was very confused.

Adela: 58:53

It doesn’t happen often. I said, well, but even if you’re right, it’s really high-quality bullshit. Yes, but even if you’re right, it’s really high-quality bullshit. Ha, yes, and it was like, ooh, where do you go with that?

Colby: 59:13

Well, on that, Adela. I mean, I could talk to you for hours. I’m a little bit weird that we’re both at the beginning of our working days. I just Maybe we need to do a part two, if you’re up for it.

Adela: 59:26

I’m always up for it, but.

Colby: 59:28

I think maybe on that’s a nice little segue into what advice would you if you had the opportunity to speak before heads of departments, ministers, again what would you say to them about therapeutic residential care?

Adela: 59:54

I would say well, there’s a bit of a push at the moment in Victoria to, in my opinion, water it down a bit. It’s being badged as enhanced because it is giving therapeutic funding to a greater number of places, which is, of course, an enhancement of sorts. But it’s really only an enhancement if you do it forward rather than take some things away and put some things forward, and at the moment it’s a bit like that. So I’m hoping that that will be different, because the sector is having a lot of input. To that I would say don’t fiddle with what does work. Add to what does work. Add to what does work. Take a deep breath. Spend the money now, because in 10 years’ time, 15 years’ time, is when the judgment will come and when you will see what is the impact of what you didn’t do.

Adela: 1:01:04

And when you will see what is the impact of what you didn’t do. And I said I don’t know. I would say I don’t know what will exactly be the impact, but I can tell you in broad terms what the impact is likely to be. But it’s compelling to try and save resources. But what do we do in terms of the judgment and the decision we make about the lives of people you’ve never met and are not likely to meet? Because that’s what it’s all about. It’s about the quality of life. You know social capital.

Adela: 1:01:48

Yeah, if people are worried, I don’t know what it’s like in South Australia, but in Victoria and other states there’s great consternation about the level of crime and you know juvenile crime and I share that consternation because it’s not good for anybody, including the perpetrators of it. But if people are believing that there is no way that that can be impacted, they’re wrong and that’s what I would say to them. I would say to them you are wrong. There is a way. It may cost you a little bit more in money in the short term, but it will bring you such amazing dividends in the longer term in social capital and the quality of life of people.

Colby: 1:02:46

And I think yeah, just to repeat, probably an earlier point, that any investment in relational capacity impacts behaviours down the line.

Colby: 1:02:57

Absolutely, if you are concerned about behaviours in society. About behaviours in society, the focus needs to be in significant part, developing relational capacity and things that kind of spin off from that, including, you know, felt sense, self-worth. I had a very interesting conversation with Lisaisa etherson in my last interview. Um can facilitate relationships, um facilitate the containment of pervasive shame, uh, these. It’s a lack of um secure relational capacity, that is, and a lack of secure sense of one’s own worth. That really underlies a lot of the social ills. That, yeah, that you can almost, as you say. You can’t predict it with certainty, but you can almost guarantee that there’s a consequence down the line.

Adela: 1:04:00

Yeah, I think a lot in metaphors. Colby and I was having a conversation with someone just the other day about a family and I had this metaphor spring to mind you know, when you’re at a fun fair and you’re in the Dodgem cars, some people know how to drive the Dodgems really well. They’ve had a lot of Dodgem experience. Some people haven’t. I’m one of those, are you? Oh well, good, I’m not. Some people don’t. Now you’ll always notice that the person who’s operating the Dodgem cars will hop on the back of the cars where the people are not driving too well to minimise the impact or the number of impacts and help them steer. But they actually do it. I often think they would make wonderful workers with kids because they do it in a way that doesn’t shame.

Adela: 1:05:08

So, it’s like if I dodge a car then we need more of those dodge-em-car operators because they hop on the back and they get it going in the right direction and if you look at them, they’re laughing and chatting with the people who are hopeless. They’re steering the car. But they’re not laughing at them, they’re with them.

Colby: 1:05:36

That’s a great metaphor. And they’re not on your back, they’re guiding you. They’re guiding you. They’re guiding you. Yeah, I think that’s a great metaphor. Now I’m not sure about your time and commitments today. I usually, at the very end of the podcast, I say well, I’ve asked you a load of questions. Have you got a question you’d like to ask me before we wrap up?

Adela: 1:06:05

Yeah, well, I do, because I’d like to know where you got the idea to do the podcast, because I think it’s such a fabulous idea. What did it emerge from?

Colby: 1:06:19

Probably yeah, there’s probably a number of contributing factors. Probably yeah, there’s probably a number of contributing factors. I have dabbled in making YouTube videos. I’ve done a lot of training myself and face-to-face and online. I think what really motivates this format for me is making connections and having conversations. That matter, I think so. As I said, I’ve tried a few different things, but what I probably like best and what best suits me, I think, in terms of as a as a person practitioner, my personal style is to is to have conversations with people, and that’s, you know, probably largely because the great bulk of the work that I’ve done across the last 30 years has been psychotherapy. Um, in terms of, you know the people that I’m inviting on, there is a little bit of an agenda between Patrick and I, because I think that there is a need, because residential care has often, in the child and youth sector, has a bad reputation.

Colby: 1:07:41

Yes, it does it certainly has a terrible reputation here in South Australia amongst practitioners, I would add and I think decision-makers have even tried to go so far as eliminating residential care, and the reality is that that will never happen. We will always need residential care. So we have to turn our mind to how do we make it better, how do we address the concerns that people have, how do we address even the myths that exist around therapeutic residential care. So the agenda is a bit. There is a bit of an agenda to have people on the podcast who can contribute to a different narrative around therapeutic residential care. Right.

Colby: 1:08:36

And then, lastly, I think I really want to provide a space where people who have really significant knowledge and expertise and I think the expertise that you get on the work, in the work, shouldn’t be denigrated in any way. It should be elevated. It should be elevated those who’ve worked in the sector for years, decades. I don’t know anyone who’s worked in the sector longer than you, adela.

Adela: 1:09:10

No, I think I’m a record breaker.

Colby: 1:09:18

Yeah, and I’m the longest-serving clinical psychologist in the sector here in South Australia, just working in the sector. Yeah, yeah, and I’m only at 30 years, so I’m I’m 22 years behind you, um, but I think I do think that, um, I have a great interest in speaking to people who have tremendous experience and knowledge to share, who don’t necessarily, who don’t necessarily get the same attention from those who you know, who cherry pick to elevate, I guess. So I’m trying to elevate a much broader cross-section of people.

Adela: 1:09:54

Yeah, well, that’s great. That’s really good, Because, as you say, it’s a poorly understood modality of care. I think I came into contact with a particular concept recently. It’s called the Dunning-Kruger principle or the Dunning-Kruger effect one of them and basically it’s a cognitive bias whereby you don’t know what you don’t know.

Adela: 1:10:37

And if you don’t know what you don’t know, how can you make good decisions about it? Hmm, I really like the Dunning-Kruger effect. Well, I don’t like it, but you know, I like the conceptualisation of it. I’ve got no idea where it comes from. I’ll have to research it a bit, but it is true. If you don’t know what you don’t know, you’re going to make decisions that don’t necessarily prosper anyone. Well, that’s right, and I think that is the case often in relation to bureaucratic systems. Yes, not putting bureaucrats down. They have a value, but they don’t know what they don’t know.

Colby: 1:11:26

No, and they need to hear from people who do know. Yeah. Yeah, exactly so. Thank you very much, adela, for being so gracious as to appear on this fledgling podcast. I’ve enjoyed it.

Colby: 1:11:41

There’s so much more. I would like to ask you, like just just to flag a few, I I’d love to speak to you more about that transition from like a um, a training center, but it was called something different back in the 70s where train, that training, that transition from what had gone on before though the girls who had been young offenders or had lacked moral something or other, They’d been in moral danger.

Colby: 1:12:10

Yeah, in moral danger into something therapeutic, which, of course, is what happened with the Cotswold community and likely many others. The Cotswold community had started out as a reformatory and then Richard Balburnie had turned it into a therapeutic community. So I’d love to yeah, I would have loved to have asked you a bit more about that, and also your model and how that’s been applied in other.

Colby: 1:12:40

I think you said 11 other programs. Yeah, 12 others. So look until another time. Thank you very much from me and from our listeners, and look forward to speaking to you again another time.

Adela: 1:12:54

Great pleasure. Thank you very much, Colby.

Therapeutic Culture: Building Healing Environments for Traumatized Youth, with John Whitwell

Creating Therapeutic Environments for Traumatized Children: Lessons from the Cotswold Community and Beyond

The journey towards healing for children who have experienced significant trauma requires more than just care – it demands thoughtfully designed therapeutic environments that understand the unique needs of emotionally unintegrated young people. In a revealing conversation on the Secure Start podcast, former Cotswold Community principal and therapeutic foster care pioneer John Whitwell shares invaluable insights from his decades of experience creating such environments.

The transformation of the Cotswold Community from a punitive approved school (similar to a juvenile detention facility) to a pioneering therapeutic community offers powerful lessons for today’s residential care and foster care providers. This radical shift in the 1960s, led by Richard Balburnie with consultation from child psychotherapist Barbara Docker-Drysdale, required dismantling entrenched systems of control and punishment while building a new culture focused on understanding rather than managing behaviour. As Whitwell explains, “It probably took about three or four years before a therapeutic culture was really established.” This timeframe provides a realistic perspective for contemporary organisations undertaking similar transformative journeys – meaningful cultural change requires sustained commitment and doesn’t happen overnight.

Central to the success of the Cotswold Community was the establishment of a clear primary task: helping emotionally unintegrated children. These children, though physically older, functioned emotionally like much younger children with little capacity to manage their behaviour and profound difficulties communicating their needs appropriately. The primary task provided a touchstone against which all decisions could be measured, from maintenance responses to property damage to how drivers interacted with children during transitions. This clarity of purpose ensured everyone in the organisation, regardless of role, understood their part in the therapeutic process.

Perhaps most striking in Whitwell’s reflections is his emphasis on understanding behaviour as communication. When children acted out, Barbara Docker-Drysdale encouraged staff to look beyond the behaviour to find the communication breakdown that preceded it. This approach, revolutionary at the time, has now become central to trauma-informed practice in out-of-home care. Equally important was Docker-Drysdale’s gift for symbolic communication through play, helping staff connect with children’s inner worlds before acting out behaviours emerged. This dual focus on communication – both understanding what behaviour communicates and developing alternative communication channels – remains fundamental to therapeutic work with traumatized children.

The integration of consultants into the daily functioning of the Cotswold Community underscores another crucial element of successful therapeutic environments. External consultants from various disciplines (child psychotherapy, organisational development, education, psychiatry) provided regular, frequent consultation to staff teams. This consistent outside perspective helped staff maintain a therapeutic stance when facing challenging behaviours that might otherwise have overwhelmed them. The consultancy model created spaces for reflection rather than reaction – a principle Whitwell later brought to therapeutic foster care at the Integrated Services Program (ISP).

Whitwell’s gardening metaphor beautifully captures his philosophy of therapeutic care: “Part of what we’re doing is emotional gardeners. We’re trying to create conditions to enable these plants, these children, to grow.” This perspective recognizes that the potential for growth exists within each child; the adult’s role is to create the conditions that allow that growth to emerge naturally. This stands in contrast to approaches that focus primarily on outcomes, which Whitwell likens to “showing a packet of seeds with pretty flowers a picture of what they need to become” rather than attending to the soil, light, and water they need to flourish.

For those working in out-of-home care today, Whitwell’s experiences across both residential and foster care settings offer timeless wisdom about creating therapeutic environments. The elements remain the same: clarity of purpose, understanding behaviour as communication, integration of consultancy and reflection, ongoing training and development, and an unwavering belief in each child’s inherent capacity for growth. By attending to these foundations, we create the conditions where healing becomes possible, regardless of the specific setting where care is provided.

You can listen:

You can watch here:

About John

John was formerly a UKCP registered Psychotherapist and a full member of the British Psychotherapy Foundation (BPF). John was also the Chair of Trustees of the Gloucestershire Counselling Service and Trustee of the Planned Environment Therapy Trust and the Mulberry Bush Organisation. Between 1985 and 1999 John was the Principal of the Cotswold Community, a pioneering therapeutic community for emotionally unintegrated boys. Thereafter, between 1999 and 2014 John was the Managing Director of Integrated Services Programme (ISP), the first therapeutic foster care programme in the UK.

Related Podcast Interviews:

Patricia Sheridan

Listen here:

Watch here:

Richard Rollinson

Listen here:

Watch here:

Transcript

Colby 00:01

Welcome to Episode 2 of the Secure Start Podcast.

John 00:06

And I think it probably took about three or four years before a therapeutic culture was really established. Their unintegrated personalities meant they needed a very integrated environment to hold them, contain them, to manage them. I often use gardening as an example that part of what we’re doing is emotional gardeners, that we’re trying to create conditions to enable these plants to grow, these children to grow. The conditions that we create are vitally important. Once we’ve got those conditions right, growth will occur. Winnicott actually described that the growth inside a bulb. I mean the growth is there within the bulb. You’re creating conditions for that growth to occur and I feel that’s very crucial in creating therapeutic organizations that we have to realize that the growth potential is there within the person and our job is to create the conditions for that.

Colby 01:07

Welcome everyone to the Secure Start podcast. I’m Colby Pearce, and joining me for this episode is a highly respected former leader in residential and therapeutic foster care in the UK. I say former because he is now retired and has been for the past 10 years. Nevertheless, I could not pass up this opportunity to talk with him and anticipate that listeners will enjoy our conversation too. Before I introduce my guest, I’d like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land that I’m meeting on, the Kaurna people, and the continuing connection that they and other Aboriginal people feel to land, waters, culture and community, but also like to pay my respects to their elders, past, present and emerging.

My guest this episode is John Whitwell. Now, john was formerly a UKCP registered psychotherapist and a full member of the British Psychotherapy Foundation. John was also the chair of trustees of the Gloucestershire Counselling Service and trustee of the Planned Environment Therapy Trust and the Mulberry Bush Organisations. Between 1985 and 1999, john was the principal of the Cotswold community, a pioneering therapeutic community for emotionally unintegrated boys Integrated Boys. Thereafter, between 1999 and 2014, john was the Managing Director of Integrated Services Program, the first therapeutic foster care program in the UK. I’m very much interested to hear John’s views from working across these different types of out-of-home care. I hope you will enjoy our conversation too, so welcome John.

John 03:08

Pleased to be here and having a chance to talk with you.

Colby 03:12

And just because you are from the UK and we’ll hopefully have people listening from other parts of the world, that little intro that I gave about the Kaurna people and the local Aboriginal people is something that is more and more characteristically being done in Australia at the beginning of meetings. It’s a sign of respect and acknowledgement for the long history of Aboriginal peoples’ ownership of Australia prior to white settlement. So, john, I really enjoyed catching up with you a couple of weeks ago and getting a bit of a sense of what our conversation would look like. I really want to start, because our audience, of course, didn’t have the benefit of being part of that conversation.

John 04:13

Can we just start with the Cotswold community and perhaps if you could give me a brief description of the community and your role there over time, Sure Well, the Cotswold community was an unusual place by UK standards in the fact that it was based on a 350-acre farm and the reason it was there was that it was an approved school from 1942 till 1967. And approved schools were basically like junior borstels or young offenders institutions. The boys were sent to the approved school by the courts for offenses that they’d committed and they actually had a had a term of um, I think it was probably up to two years, and they could earn their way out earlier, very similar to the prison system, but for good behaviour. But the approved school system in the UK was coming into disrepute and more and more research was showing that, far from rehabilitating young offenders, they were actually leaving approved schools and having a higher rate of reconviction than they were before going. And then there were various scandals which hit approved schools as well, which hit the headlines of abuse in approved schools. So the writing was on the wall for their future.

And it was at that time that the organisation that was running the approved school it was a charity called the Rain Foundation decided, when the headship became vacant, to really go for a very radical change, a very brave change really and a pioneering change, and they were supported by the government the British government in doing that, because the British government were already working on abolishing the approved school system and creating something else. So they were interested in this change taking place at the Cotswold school to see, to give them some ideas about how things could change nationally. The crucial thing in that process was appointing Richard Balburnie as the principal, because he was very, very clear what he wanted to create and he needed to be sure that the Rain Foundation was going to back him 100% in that, and also the government as well. And it was needed because I think everybody knows that if you change an institution radically, you’re going to have a tough time. And he didn’t have the luxury of closing the place down and reopening with new staff and new children. I mean, basically he had to bring about change on the hoof with whoever was there, and that’s a really hard thing to do. And it was very graphically described in the book by David Wills called Spare the Child, which came out in the early 1970s a Penguin paperback. So it was actually very available in just about every bookshop in the country and and very readable too.

Um, I think, I think that’s one of the crucial things I’d say about um, therapeutic communities and therapeutic organizations is that they need to have good leadership with a good understanding of the task. And, sadly, one of the things that I’m going off on a bit of a tangent here, but one of the things that I saw happen in the 80s and 90s in the UK that organizations were worried about the kind of financial situation so they started to appoint more business people in leadership roles and that often proved to be fatal because, with all the best women in the world, those people didn’t fully appreciate the fine balance that there is in running a therapeutic organization and how quickly it can go wrong. So, coming back to the Cotswold school, so Richard Bell Burney, um, overnight abolished all the things that had been keeping the thing ticking over previously, like corporal punishment just stopped. And these things don’t seem like big deals now because we don’t have them, but at the time it was a very big deal and the staff were not in favour. In favour, the staff were afraid that if someone abolished all the kind of punishments in the place which was, in their view, keeping things kind of steady, it was going to be chaos. And actually it was chaos for a while because the staff weren’t behind the changes and most of the young people, the boys who were here then took it as weakness and spent an awful lot of time running around and on roofs and so on.

So it required a lot of support from the organisations involved, particularly the charity and the government, not to pull the plug on this when they saw things going a bit awry and realised that this was something you had to go through, and I suppose it. I’d rather likened it to what happened really with the uh collapse of the sort of berlin wall and the collapse of sort of communist regimes in europe, that everybody initially thought this was fantastic and then chaos ensued and then people started to want to go back to the way things were before, because at least it was the devil. They knew. Yeah, and that was one of the processes and one of the difficulties in the change that took place at the Cotswold School. But Richard Balboni was was very clear in the direction he wanted to take things and I think it probably took about three or four years before the therapeutic culture was really established.

It involved bringing people in. He had to sort of sift out through the staff that were there, those that were going to be positive about the change he wanted to make. It was also crucial for him to bring in Barbara Docker Drysdale as the consultant child psychotherapist, and she was already well established and well known in the uk through her work in starting and running with us and the mulberry bush school, which, I’m pleased to say, is still going very strongly and uh and and he’s doing great things one of the very few places that probably almost the only one, that survived from the sort of 1940s and 50s and has continued and managed to adapt and change and and still keep its its primary task. Incredible it is. It’s quite, really very remarkable.

Um, but barbara, dr drysdale and richard balboni had worked together before and and so he knew that she was going to be very much on board with what he was wanting to do. And, of course, her understanding, through her own work as a child psychotherapist and a cooperation with Donald Winnicott, meant that she was able to bring in the philosophy and the practice and the understanding of of working with emotionally unintegrated children. And these are children who are, have got no very little capacity to manage their own behaviour, are very chaotic Inside. They’re really very small children indeed, even though they might be 11, 12, 13 years of age and very, very difficult to look after in group care because they are very disruptive. Naturally their need for attention often comes in out in such negative ways, which is difficult for staff to cope with, because it tends to bring about sort of quite quite a negative reaction rather than an understanding reaction as to where they’re coming from.

Yes, so building that culture took quite a time and it did mean having to use the term it sounds a bit kind of brutal but weed out those staff that weren’t really weren’t really aligned with that um, but that was done and with, as I say, with the support of the uh managing organizations behind the cutsaw community. So the farm uh was quite important. I mean, in the approved school days it was used very much to send boys out to work on the farm, but really that changed dramatically for the Cotswold community as a therapeutic community it provided a very positive environment. I mean, when you’re surrounded by the sort of chaos of children, to actually look out the window and see somebody doing an ordinary job, doing ordinary things like plowing a field or or bringing in some cattle. It’s kind of just kind of brings you down back to earth, literally back to earth and, and some of the boys also enjoyed helping out on the farm. They weren’t made to do it, they wanted to go and help feed the cattle or be involved in the lambing season or helping to stack bales at after harvest and things like that. I mean they. It was something that was an additional part to the life which made life interesting. And of course most of the boys who came to the cotswold community came from city, inner city areas, and so for them it was a big change and initially they possibly found being in the quietness of the countryside quite difficult, but that didn’t tend to last long because they made sure it wasn’t very quiet for very long anyway. So the Cotswold community was a completely kind of integrated environment.

The boys lived in four separate households small groups by those times I mean in groups of up to 10. Nowadays 10 is regarded as quite a large group. It was interesting then we were actually bringing groups down from the size of 20 during the approved school times to under 10. And the households that they lived in were quite self-sufficient. They had their own staff teams, they cooked their own food, they did everything together. They also, I mean, had their own garden and territory which was theirs, which they looked after and their space. There was a school there as well.

So the boys went to school within the Cotswold community. It was completely separate from the households. They walked to school. They had their own school groups. The teachers who worked with them in school also came and helped out in the households, some for some time in the week and again. Crucial, the crucial part of all that was really good communication between all parts of the organization, and that’s what a lot of the boys, their unintegrated personalities, meant. They needed a very integrated environment to hold them, contain them, to manage them. So if there was something went wrong in the school, it was vitally important that that that information came back to the household straight away and vice versa so the people working together.

There wasn’t. It wasn’t. It was trying to reduce the possibility of splitting between different parts of the organization. And again I get, I see in in the UK today. I mean, it’s very easy for a child to have a problem in school and for the parents not to know for weeks, and vice versa as well. The school doesn’t know that this child is coming into their school every day and is having to deal with huge problems at home. The Cotswold community had to avoid that and it did so very well. There was a lot of time spent in discussions and meetings between all the different staff and that’s something that Richard Balbirdi knew was very vitally important and encouraged.

One thing I haven’t really focused on and mentioned is the importance of the organisation having a clear primary task. Yeah, that was something that Richard Balburnie brought to the Cotswold community and the clear primary task was helping emotionally unintegrated children. The reason that was important was because there were many other groups of people working in the community. There were obviously administrators. We had a maintenance team who looked after the place and helped fix broken windows and stuff like that. We had the farming staff. We had people who helped to come in and cook and clean and so on. All those people also had to take on board the primary task and realize so. The maintenance team, for example I use this as an example could feel very fed up that they just repaired a window and the following day had to come back and repair it again and understandably they could feel frustrated by that. But they also had to and were helped to understand that this was the nature of the work and it was nothing personal. No one was attacking them, but they needed to get behind all the work that was going on and when there’s damage it’s really physical damage. It’s really quite important that it’s fixed quickly because if you just leave it it just builds up and you get more and more, as we know, as we see in society generally and interestingly, if I can switch to ISP very briefly, one of the things that the lack of the primary task in some groups there was very clearly shown to me early on by the drivers at ISP.

Isp, because it had to, unlike the Cotswold community, obviously wasn’t on one side and it had to help ferry children around to get to school or get to different sort of parts of the care that they needed, had cars and drivers who would help take children somewhere. When I went there, their reason to be was keeping the cars clean and they would get furious if and they banned children taking drinks or food into the cars because they just didn’t want this. I had to, didn’t want this, I had to.

One of the things I had to do is kind of say to them look, your task isn’t to keep cars clean, your task is to help these children, who are finding transitions incredibly difficult to get from a to b and get to be in a reasonable emotional state. And it might be to have a contact meeting with their birth family or something really important like that. And it might be to have a contact meeting with their birth family or something really important like that. And they might be quite worried about it and what’s going to happen. So it might be really important that they can take some food in the car during the journey, because we know that emotional, integrated children often find that a great comforter. But that’s just another. I mean it. It’s kind of, in a way, a small example, but how important the primary task is because it gives you something to measure things by and refer things to. So if you’re having a problem with a staff member who isn’t really getting it. You can remind them and say clearly why it’s important we do what we’re doing.

Colby 19:46

Yeah, it’s interesting hearing you talk about the primary task and I’ve always thought about the primary task as being that that one thing that all the rest of your endeavour is is kind of supported by or rests upon, and I’m hoping we’re aligned in that, in, I guess that definition and I think you’re Right, the point that you make, and there’s so many points, there’s so many things I could pick up on from your description of the community, but I think the alignment of the staff to a common purpose. It’s still very much important to ensure that in any endeavour that is being undertaken in this space, in the out-of-home care space, that there is alignment of the major players. In doing that it doesn’t take much to trigger or otherwise bring about a return to chaos. I think of the primary task in the work I do, john, as being connection, our connection, our relationships, our reparative relationships with the young people.

But it’s followed very closely by consistency, because what we know about our client group, about the young people, is that their first learning environment, or even environments, their history of inadequate care, of difficult care, of early adversity, was characterized by inconsistency, inconsistent parental responsiveness, because, generally speaking in this space, parents, it’s not the case that the children were never cared for, but it was. The care provided by parents was inconsistent, often due to the other factors at play in their lives, the things that were getting in the way of them being the best version of themselves as a parent. So I think alignment is crucial. Any misalignment, as you described, with ISP, with the drivers, that can just be that one thing that the young people might have the thought you know, I knew it, I’ve had all these people being nice to me or responding to me with understanding, but yeah, but this one experience can then become generalised to I knew it, you’re all the same. You know my beliefs, my understanding of how relationships work, have been confirmed just by this one experience with the driver.

John 22:51

Yeah, yeah, and I agree very much so with what you’re saying when you said about the primary task and where it originated from. I mean, I don’t know that these people actually did it, but one of the other consultancies that was vitally important for the Cotswold community was from the Tavistock Institute and that started with Ken Rice, ak Rice, who was very well known and well, very well known, and he wrote the first working note of the Cotswold community with, with a kind of organizational structure, because in order for the Cotswold community to work as a therapeutic community, it had to change the whole way the organization was structured, because, because as an approved school it had been very top down, with the headmaster being all powerful over everything. Richard Bell Burney turned that on its head because he really wanted the people who were doing the direct work with the children to have the confidence and the ability to be able to make decisions, to be able to be good role models of being kind of caring, responsible adults in the children’s lives, and the approved school system was the exact opposite of that, because the people who were at the coalface were seen as the kind of least important people in the organisation, whereas they became the most important people in the organisation really for the therapeutic approach to work. And Ken Rice started that. Unfortunately he died two years after doing that, so his consultancy ceased.

And then that was taken over by Isabel Menzies-Lykes again who is a very well-known organizational consultant. Who’s a very well-known organisational consultant. She’d done a very well-known study on nursing in hospital and how anxiety was managed by nurses in that organisation. It’s still a classic work and she worked with the Cotswold community for about I suppose it must have been about seven or eight years and then that was from the Tavistock was taken over by Dr Eric Miller. That line of consultancy was vital because it wouldn’t have worked, I don’t think, had it been just Barbara Dr Drysdale on her own working away at the day-to-day interaction with children. That was vitally important, crucial. But if the management structure had not been around to support that work it would have just come undone very quickly. So the two threads of consultancy, the two aspects, were so crucially important to the success of the Cotswold community.

I can’t stress that enough and I personally learned a huge amount from both consultancies really, and Isabel Menzies-Lyne for example.

I’ll give you an example of some of the things that she focused on. She was a great believer in the value of scarcity, um, which now may seem a bit of a contradiction in terms of what we’re talking about, but she believed that, as in families who have to work together when they haven’t got infinite resources or infinite money, so as a therapeutic community we’re in the same boat and we sometimes had to face the fact we couldn’t do everything we wanted to. We couldn’t have as many staff as we wanted to, we couldn’t have huge amounts of money for having banquets every night, I mean, and how we worked at that scarcity was really really important for the children that they they were a part of figuring things out like, okay, we would like to do this, but actually we can’t, so what can we do with with the resources that we’ve got? And it was a really important kind of learning experience for well for us all, really, not just the children, I mean.

As adults, we were kind of learning all the time through through that um so I I really valued uh isabel menzies lives work on on the importance of scarcity and how you manage it you.

Colby 27:13

I mean again, there’s so much I can pick up on. Um, it’d be interesting, I think it’d be interesting for our listeners to hear how much contact staff were having with these external consultants and so you know, at what frequency and regularity was that contact happening? And I think also I want to put this into the same question, although they might be best treated separately. I’ll leave it to you. But what was the prime? You’ve referenced the therapeutic approach. What was the primary therapeutic approach that they were supporting?

John 28:01

Okay, we’ll take Barbara Do docker, drysdale first, because she was the probably the main consultant for the community. Um, bearing in mind we had four households. She, she came, she did. She didn’t do a long day Probably. She came for about five or six hours three days a week and saw each of the staff teams once a week.

But she also had time to see individuals, some individuals, I mean, not everybody. You basically had to queue up to see her, so to speak, individually, but you might get a chance every two or three weeks to see her for an individual consultation. And the consultations were quite brief. I mean there were no longer than probably half an hour for individuals and for a group no longer than an hour, which you know is quite, is quite brief. But she had also her that that suited her style, because she was, she was probably quite a directive consultant, which maybe you sound a bit unusual for a, for a child psychotherapist, who, who might be characterized as somebody who who sits in silence most of the time. But she wasn’t like that and that was probably quite important in the early days. If you were going back to when she started with Richard Bell Burney, she really had to be quite definite about what was needed to be done, and that meant probably saying and talking more than probably most consultants would normally do. But this was about establishing initially the culture.

Colby 29:47

Yeah, so three days a week for five hours or so she was there. By today’s standards, that’s a lot of contact and involvement with the organisation.

John 30:03

And she also met with the education school staff as well. So many groups had a chance to meet with her and it was all part of everybody getting on board with the primary task. There were other consultants who came in less frequently. I mentioned the Tavistock Institute. They would probably come and spend a day with us once a month, okay, um, we, we also had a, an educational psychologist, who worked with the education staff team, and that was probably also once a month, um, and we also had somebody with a difficult role, a person called Dr Faye Spicer, who was a psychiatrist, who came in and it was an unusual kind of role for her to take because it was a kind of on that sort of medical, psychiatric boundary, bearing in mind that there would be times when we as an organization would be quite worried about the, the risk we were taking with a particular child who was perhaps exhibiting some very extreme behaviors, and we needed we needed to work on this and discuss this with a psychiatrist who could help us look at what, how to manage that risk, what was the, what was the reasonable risk to take?

Colby 31:30

um, and and and that again was probably once a month really, um, sometimes a bit less it’s a well-supported um team with, with different functions, from care staff to teachers at the school, everyone in alignment.

And I’ve often said and this is part of the reason why I’ve developed programs for professionals, for carers and for schools is well, it’s the actual reason why I’ve done all that is because I think the best outcomes are achieved by getting alignment in all the major domains of a child’s life, or at least as many major domains of the child’s life as you can get that alignment.

You mentioned that it took about four years, though, to and that would be a struggle that a lot of contemporary residential care providers would identify with which is getting all the staff in a program, I guess singing from the same hymn sheet. So I think there are probably factors there, with it having previously been, I guess what, in my parlance, would be a reformatory and staff that had a different role and then having to take on a more therapeutic role. That may well have elongated the process. But I think that challenge of getting everyone, as I said, singing from the same hymn sheet is still a contemporary challenge. And I wonder, do you think that the frequency of involvement with Barbara and with other consultants, what role do you think that had, in terms of facilitating alignment, aligned focus on the primary task.

John 33:42

Yeah, I think it was, uh, exceedingly important. I mean to give you another example um, the frustration sometimes that a group living household staff team could feel when they were dealing with, um, some sort of very, very challenging behavior, with the best will in the world could lead that team to believe that they just need to get rid of this child to make everything all right, because this, this one child is, is is absolutely taking everything apart. So the staff team would go to mrs drysdale, barbara drysdale’s consultancy, in a, you know, in a frame of mind that wasn’t very therapeutic, in all honesty, was probably thinking to survive, we’ve got to get rid of this child. Can you support us do this? I mean, they wouldn’t come out as clear and sharply as that question, but everything they would be presenting and what they got back from Mrs Drysdale invariably was no, we’re not going down that road.

What we are going to look at is actually how things develop like this, because one of her key principles was that the acting out of children was down to a breakdown in communication and that invariably meant that it put pressure on the adults to help the child to communicate, not to complain about their acting out, but to come back to the origins of it, and usually there were things which we as adults had missed, um, and it could be something fairly obvious, like some contact with a birth parent that had really upset the child and bottled it up and then exploded exploded over something quite trivial.

It might have been just an ordinary frustration which, instead of just being, you know, exhibiting frustration, had become a huge explosion. Frustration had become a huge explosion and then when you actually got to talk with the child about that, they would probably relate it back to something that had happened a few days before, which which people had missed at the time and hadn’t realized. Now it’s that sort of thing unpicking, unpicking things to and, of course, it’s tremendously good for learning as well. I mean, it does bring people together, and I’m going to say the role of consultants go back to your question, I think is very important in helping people to understand that and keep on task. Really.

Colby 36:12

So it’s interesting to hear that because, just as an example, what I’m referencing is Barbara Dockerdryer-Stiles’ reference to communication. What I’m referencing is Barbara Dockerdrysdale’s reference to communication Because I think, 30, what are we now? 30, 40, 50 years later, people are again, or maybe still, talking about behaviour as communication, and whether that’s exactly the same as what Barbara was talking about or a little bit different. But there is very much in the therapeutic community, in out-of-home care these days, there’s very much a focus on understanding what the child is telling us through their behavior, telling us about their experience through the behavior. So less of a focus on the behavior itself and more of a therapeutic response to the reasons for the behavior.

John 37:20

Yeah, the other aspect of communication I haven’t mentioned, which Barbara Dockers Drysdale, in her writing, demonstrated that she was very, very gifted at communicating with children symbolically through their play, and that’s something that she helped to develop in the community so that she would encourage different play materials to be available and so that when the focal carer to a particular child had individual time with him, they would often be playing it might be in sand with various toys, um, and helping to sort of see the world that the child was creating and and kind of respond in in a sort of sympathetic way, you know, in a, in a way which isn’t taking over from the child very much, not that but can get alongside um, and it’s quite quite a skill that, and I think, well, I’d say it’s a gift almost, because I’d be the first to hold up my hands that I’m not great at symbolic communication, um, whereas someone like barbara drisdale was just brilliant at it, and when I saw her with children, I mean, you know, it was like she was kind of entering at another level in terms of communication.

So that was an example, I suppose, of being able to not wait for acting out for the communication but to sort of get in and understand the inner world of the child through play.

Colby 38:58

Yeah, absolutely, john. I feel like we could talk for hours about the Cotswold community. I’m aware that I also want to talk to you a little bit about your other major role of your career Before we move on to a brief discussion about ISP overall. How would you describe your time at the Cotswold community?

John 39:24

Initially it was very, very hard and I nearly didn’t survive it, I have to say, um, because it was I. I went to the cotswold community thinking I was quite experienced because I’d had three years working in a probation hostel, only to be completely flattened by the fact that I knew next to nothing about a more psychodynamic approach. I was having to start again, and the other difficulty for me was being assigned to a household that hadn’t achieved a therapeutic culture and we were struggling to. We were struggling in all honesty. So my first year there was a tough one. It did me some good, I have to say, looking back, because it helped me appreciate how easy it was to slip back from a therapeutic culture into something that wasn’t. You know, groups are fantastic when they’re very positive and they bring everybody forward and take everybody along. But there’s also a very negative side to groups as well, and if a group is in a downward spiral, everybody gets infected by that. So that was a really crucial lesson for me to learn very early on, and I spent a lot of time making sure we never went down that road again. Um, I mean, I suppose everything I did subsequent to the Cotswold community was based on what I learned there really. So, having the privilege to work with the consultants we had, I can’t think of another environment in the UK that I would have had that experience. So yeah, it was very hard but very, very positive and enabled and gave me a real sense of direction in terms of what I wanted to do and which certainly helped me when I moved across to ISP.

And perhaps I should just say briefly the reason I decided to move partly from the fact I’d reached the age of 50. I thought if I’m going to do anything else in my life, I have to go now, otherwise I’m really past my sell by date. But also I began to feel there were lots of pressures on coming which I thought were going to make residential therapeutic work harder in the UK. I mean, staff were increasingly working shift systems. There was a lot of anxiety about risk taking Understandable, because there’d been some pretty awful things happened in residential institutions in the UK over the years. But it’s it just felt that the reaction to those awful things were just going to make it more and more difficult to, in my view, to do the work.

And I’d go as far as to say that had the Cotswold community been thought about in the 1990s. I don’t think it would have happened in the UK. In all honesty. The UK, in all honesty, um, certainly I think Richard Bell Burney and Mrs Drysdale because they were so kind of determined about what they were doing, I think might have struggled to get the backing of the organizations that they were able to get the backing of at the time when they started. I may be wrong about that, that’s just my personal view, but anyway it led me to think about moving and I saw an opportunity with the integrated services program which had been started by foster carers in 1987. So I went there in 99, so it had been going for a good few years already, and they were looking for someone to take on the overall management of the organisation who had experience, because they tried the Twice.

In my working life I’d taken over from the charismatic founder directors. My role in life was not to be one of those people but to be the next generation, um, and so it was interesting. I didn’t I didn’t actually at the time consciously do this, but when I look back I think, well, that can’t, that can’t have been accidental that I ended up in two organizations as as the next leader from the founder director and ISP had had two goes at recruiting somebody to take on from the founder director and both had failed. So they were looking for someone who had more of a track record in therapeutic care and that’s why I got the job track record in therapeutic care and that’s why I got the job. It was a difficult job to take on because it was a very different organisation to a therapeutic community.

Naturally, for carers it’s more fragmented. I mean the carers, the care is going on in everybody’s individual homes and and so whereas we had the benefit at the Cotswold community of everybody being together on one site, and so you I described earlier, you could aim for good communication between all parts of the organisation almost instantly, that wasn’t the case with ISP. So we had to work at that was one of the things we really had to work hard at improving communication.

And one of the syndromes of deprivation that Barbara Docker Drysdale identified was the archipelago child, and these are children who’ve got pockets of functioning amongst a sea of chaos, and the therapeutic task with these children is to help to grow the pockets of functioning so they start to gradually join up and the sea of chaos diminishes. That all sounds very sort of graphic and and a bit, a bit poetic but it is. But it is basically what we’re trying to do and it can take a few years with a child to achieve that anyway. But I saw isp was like that. Isp was like an archipelago child. There were picket, there were pockets of good practice going on, but there was also a lot of stuff that needed sorting out.

Colby 45:41

Yeah, and I found my task was really how can I help build on the good things that are, that are that are there, and it took a few years, uh, to achieve one of the reasons why I was so keen to speak to you was what lessons you or or what understandings did you garner or attain while you were at the Cotswold community that were of a benefit to a therapeutic foster care service?

John 46:18

I think there were a whole variety of things. Really, one of the first things I think one of the first things that ISP had a difficulty with me when I first arrived was that I wasn’t prepared to give instant answers to things. They had a culture of expecting, whenever there was a problem, that the founder director would give them an answer straight away. Sort it out didn’t have to be the right founder director would give them an answer straight away, sort it out didn’t have to be the right answer, they would just get an answer.

Yeah, when I came in, people would be banging on my door or phoning me up and saying what do we do? So I actually I don’t know. Let’s think about it. And that was a complete culture shock for them. I mean, I think initially they saw me as a complete idiot who didn’t know anything. But fortunately again I had the support of the board of directors and the chairman of the board said you know, he said I, I just I just gave three cheers when you, when I heard the word, the words, I don’t know. It’s the first time that I’d sort of heard it. That was kind of one thing, that capacity to stop and think and reflect, not react instantaneously.

Colby 47:37

So mindful practice, the opportunity, stopping and thinking about what you’re doing and why you’re doing it.

John 47:43

Yeah, and this was trying to get that through to foster parent carers as well, because, um, I mean, there was much in the practice of foster carers which was, which was very good and and and you would certainly probably put it in the bracket of being therapeutic. They wouldn’t necessarily know that they were doing that. Um, and that was one of the things I wanted to sort of build up in the organisation was the whole training programme for foster carers whereby they could appreciate what they were doing and also understand some of the behaviours they were dealing with, because they also suffered the same things that we did at the Cotswold community, where a child would, instead of lapping up all the great care, would throw it back in the carer’s face. Instead of lapping up all the great care would throw it back in the carer’s face and, and that lack of gratitude for being looked after is something that I think a therapist has to learn that you’re going to have to weather those sort of storms without expecting to be thanked for it. So, linked to that was also the importance of consultancy.

Now, isp, when I arrived, there had quite a number of therapists working there already, but their role was entirely to see individual children for individual therapy when it was needed. The change I started to bring about was using those therapists in a different way as well. Where they could, they could be involved with the staff team discussions. They could also because there are many children who might people might say, well, they really need to have individual therapy, but the child is nowhere near wanting it or ready to use it. But the carers would benefit greatly from having a regular time with a therapist to help understand what was going on, as indeed the residential workers at the Cotswold community did, and so that was. That was a really important change I made. It did mean we had to expand the therapy time in the organization to allow for that, because there were still children having individual therapy as well, but a much more.

It was the development of the network around the child, of all the different people working. I mean obviously crucial to that were the foster carers, but there’d be the social workers in the organisation, the therapists. We also had and developed what we called advisory carers. These were people who’d been experienced foster carers who were able to take on a role supporting newer foster carers based on the on hard-won experience, because one of the things that foster carers really got very fed up about was being talked down to by social workers, as they saw it, who’d never once in their life had a child, never once looked after a child, and felt that they were being kind of seen as second-class citizens professionally, um, whereas we were making them, they. These were absolutely vital, crucial to the child developing, and the network around the child was also a network around the foster carers to support them in that crucial role. And these are the advisory. Foster carers knew that. I mean because they’d done it and that was.

Colby 51:03

That was both as a culture of continuous growth through education and support from significant others.

John 51:18

Yes, yeah, the training program in both the Cotswold community and ISP was was really vital.

I mean because we would take I mean at the Cotswold community we were taking in quite young staff who’d not necessarily been very experienced and we had to select them very carefully to have the potential to learn and they had to come into an environment which was going to support them, because they weren’t at that time.

I mean, I know things have changed since, but at that time there weren’t qualifications which meant someone could walk straight in and do the work. We had to provide that training environment there and, in a way, the same for the foster carers we had to provide enable them to develop the tools that they were going to need and the understanding they’re going to need. So we had a, we had a three-year training program for foster carers, um, and we had a whole range of of of trainings that we would expect them to go through and to embrace and um, and that was. That was something that really took a while to develop, but gradually, as people saw the benefits of that and they saw the way children were growing and developing themselves, I mean they got a lot of positive feedback.

Colby 52:36

It reminds me of something that you talked about in our previous, just initial meet when you talked about our mutual connection, patrick Tomlinson, who introduced us, and you telling me about how he kind of organised training for staff at the Cotswolds community, and if we had more time, if we had another time, it would be really good to have a bit of a chat about that from your end.

Of course I can also speak to Patrick about it. Hope to have him on the podcast as well. So much to talk about, john. I feel like I could sit here for hours, but unfortunately I don’t have those hours and we’ll need to kind of make some final comments. But before we do, you did refer earlier to the advice that you would give to leaders in residential and foster care endeavours these days, but I wonder if you might just quickly say again what advice from your long career working in both aspects of out-of-home care that you think is probably a bit like the primary task, the most important thing, piece of advice that you could give them. Sorry, that’s probably a bit of a question without notice.

John 54:13

It’s quite a difficult one, I think the thing that really comes to mind and I can remember actually, you mentioned Patrick, I remember talking this over with Patrick quite recently and that is we know that outcomes for children are really important. So what I’m going to say is not in any way denying that, but my worry in the last few years in the UK has been the focus on outcomes to such an extent that I think there’s been a misunderstanding, because all that I learned at the Cotswold community and subsequently at ISP is about if you get everything in place, if you successfully create this therapeutic culture, the outcomes will come.

Colby 54:59

The outcomes will develop.

John 55:00

Yeah, and I think the focus on outcomes. My worry is it’s a. It’s a silly example, but it’s a bit like I often use gardening as an example that part of what we’re doing is is emotional gardeners that we’re trying to create conditions to to enable our these plants to grow, these children to grow. The conditions that we create are vitally important. Once we’ve got those conditions right, growth will occur, and it’s a bit like a gardener picking up a packet of seeds with pretty flowers on and showing it to the seeds. This is what you need to do, this is what you need to be like and expect this to, whereas I mean you know it isn’t going to be like and expect this to, whereas I mean you know it isn’t going to be like that.

Winnicott actually described that. You know, you could, that the growth inside a bulb, I mean, is the growth is there within the bulb. It’s not. You’re creating conditions for the for that growth to occur and it’s a bit and I feel that’s very crucial in creating therapeutic organizations that we have to realize that the growth potential is there within the person and our job is to create the conditions for that. And it’s not easy and there’ll be many things to test you along the way, and you need to also have the support of other organizations around you to do that. That is kind of, I think, one of the most important things I’ve learned, would say I love it yeah, bruno betelheim, if I can just very quickly say just something’s come to mind.

Bruno betelheim was asked by somebody what is a cure and he said, well, it’s. It’s doing the best you can every day, and then it might add up to something and you might then at the end of the process say that’s a cure. But at the time you don’t know, you’re just doing the best you can every day for as long as it takes. And I thought that’s I like, that. I thought it was pretty good.

Colby 57:02

It’s a great metaphor and reminder Just before you leave us. John, if you could give your younger self, just starting out your professional journey, some advice, share some knowledge with them that you wish you could have had advice you could have had or knowledge you wish you could have had as well, what do you think it would be?

John 57:32

Well, again, that’s difficult Because I sometimes say to myself, if I knew everything I knew now, would I go back and do the same thing again? Because sometimes ignorance is bliss. And when I kind of stumbled into doing therapeutic work, I didn’t fully, in all honesty, I didn’t fully appreciate what I was getting into and some of the things that I, some of the knocks I had to take and the tough times I had to put through my own family. You know, I think would I do that again? I hope and think I would.

But you know, sometimes you take a leap of faith and for me, when I was working at the probation hostel, I came across this book by David Wells that I’d mentioned before, called Spare the Child, which was about the change coming at the Cotswold, that was taking place at the Cotswold community, and I just had a wow moment, thinking this is all the things that I’m aware of in our hostel that we’re not doing. We’re just we’re not getting below the surface, and I really wanted to do that. Little did I know that getting below the surface was going to be really tough and would really impact on me, and there were times when I really felt like giving up, but it really was worth it. I guess when I look back and I’m pleased I did it. Sorry, it’s not really the right answer to your question, but it’s what comes to mind.

Colby 59:00

Yeah, it’s an answer. So look, john, that was a very enjoyable conversation and very enjoyable to hear more from you. I will include, when I distribute or advertise this podcast, the link to your website, which has lots of valuable information for people working in the sector to access and look. On behalf of our listeners and also myself, thank you very much for agreeing to do this podcast, for being on, and hopefully you might agree to doing it again sometime in the future.

John 59:48

No, I’m very, very pleased to, and thank you for inviting me. It’s been a pleasure and I hope I’ve said something that’s been quite useful for some people.