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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

You can listen to the podcast here:

You can watch here:

About Ben:

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

Related Podcast Episodes:

Professor Julie Taylor:

Listen here:

Watch here:

Transcript:

Colby: 0:01

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast.

Ben: 0:04

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

Ben: 0:34

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

Colby: 1:33

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

Colby: 2:28

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

Colby: 3:47

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

Ben: 4:22

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

Colby: 4:34

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

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

Colby: 5:23

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

Ben: 5:34

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

Ben: 6:15

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

Ben: 7:29

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

Ben: 8:12

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

Colby: 9:13

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

Ben: 9:28

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

Colby: 9:50

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

Ben: 10:23

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

Ben: 11:08

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

Ben: 11:52

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

Colby: 12:35

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

Colby: 13:40

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

Ben: 14:24

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

Ben: 15:32

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

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

Ben: 15:58

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

Colby: 17:12

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

Ben: 17:27

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

Ben: 19:21

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

Ben: 20:22

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

Ben: 21:01

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

Colby: 22:09

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

Ben: 22:39

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

Ben: 25:11

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

Ben: 25:29

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

Colby: 26:28

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

Ben: 27:01

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

Colby: 28:02

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

Ben: 29:14

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

Ben: 30:03

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

Colby: 31:18

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

Colby: 33:07

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

Colby: 33:58

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

Ben: 34:39

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

Ben: 35:28

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

Colby: 36:48

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

Ben: 38:06

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

Ben: 38:29

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

Ben: 38:49

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

Colby: 40:08

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

Colby: 41:33

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

Ben: 42:07

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

Colby: 42:18

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

Ben: 42:34

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

Ben: 45:06

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

Ben: 46:56

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

Ben: 47:23

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

Colby: 48:21

Awesome. Where can you get a copy most easily?

Ben: 48:26

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

Colby: 49:07

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

Ben: 49:20

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

Colby: 49:51

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

Ben: 50:03

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

Colby: 50:18

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

Colby: 53:32

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

Ben: 54:31

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

Ben: 54:49

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

Colby: 55:41

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

Colby: 56:49

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

Colby: 57:02

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

Ben: 58:27

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

Colby: 58:43

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

Ben: 58:49

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

From Winnicott’s Piano to Adolescent Minds: Peter Wilson’s Journey

Uncertainty as Strength: Why Not Knowing Matters

Peter Wilson’s journey into the world of child and adolescent psychotherapy is a testament to the power of serendipity and openness to unexpected opportunities. From his initial degree in industrial economics to becoming a founder of Young Minds and working with some of the most influential figures in psychoanalysis, Peter’s career trajectory defies conventional planning and instead follows a path of meaningful coincidences.

What stands out most prominently in Peter’s narrative is his formative experience training at the Anna Freud Centre in London during the 1960s. This period represented something of a golden age for psychoanalytic thinking, with Anna Freud herself still actively involved in the training program. The immersive four-year experience provided Peter with a thorough grounding in psychoanalytic theory, requiring him to deeply engage with Freud’s concepts and apply them in clinical practice with children and adolescents. This foundation shaped his entire professional identity, giving him a lens through which to understand the complexity of human experience and emotional development.

Peter’s reflections on his time at the Pepper Harrow therapeutic community offer a fascinating glimpse into an approach to working with deeply troubled young people that would be nearly impossible to replicate in today’s safeguarding-conscious environment. The therapeutic community model, with its emphasis on communal living, shared responsibility, and psychological understanding, provided a holding environment for young people whose emotional lives were profoundly disrupted. The fact that staff would physically prevent young people from running away—something unthinkable in today’s practice—speaks to how dramatically the landscape of child welfare has shifted over the decades.

Perhaps most thought-provoking is Peter’s upcoming book with its intriguing title, “The Adolescent and the Psychotherapist: Why I Don’t Know Matters.” His celebration of uncertainty represents a powerful counterpoint to the current evidence-based practice paradigm that dominates mental health services. Peter argues persuasively that the adolescent’s “I don’t know” response in therapy is not merely resistance but a genuine reflection of uncertainty that deserves respect rather than frustration. Similarly, he challenges the certainty with which cognitive behavioral therapy is promoted as the treatment of choice, suggesting that such confidence is not justified by the evidence and may in fact represent a dishonesty about the limitations of our knowledge.

Peter’s critique of current mental health service delivery models cuts to the heart of contemporary debates about efficiency, evidence, and effectiveness. His concerns about the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) program and the Health and Social Care Act of 2012 reflect a broader disquiet about how market-based thinking has fragmented services and created competition rather than collaboration between different professional disciplines. Most poignantly, he suggests that young people themselves don’t respond well to CBT, preferring the relational, play-oriented approaches that take longer but may address their needs more effectively.

As Peter reflects on his career, his wish that he had been more assertive and authoritative as a younger man reveals a fascinating tension. While he values the humility of “not knowing” as a therapeutic stance, he also recognizes that sometimes more forceful advocacy is needed to challenge dominant narratives and protect valuable approaches to understanding human distress. This balancing act between openness to uncertainty and confidence in one’s perspective represents a profound challenge for all who work in the helping professions.

You can listen to the podcast here:

You can watch here:

About Peter:

Peter Wilson is a Consultant Child and Adolescent Psychotherapist. He qualified in 1971, having completed his training with Anna Freud in her Centre. Since then, he has worked in a variety of organisations, holding senior positions in all of them. These included three Child Guidance Clinics ( now known as CAMHS), two walk- in Centres for young people, a therapeutic community ( the Peper Harow Community) and the Institute of Psychiatry. Peter founded a national charity, called YoungMinds, the purpose of which was to raise public awareness of children’s mental health and to improve multi- discipline services. Peter later became Clinical Adviser at ThePlace2Be, a national organisation providing counselling services in schools. Peter has maintained a small private child and adolescent psychotherapy practice, and now teaches and provides supervision. He is publishing a book in the autumn, entitled ‘ The Adolescent and the Psychotherapist: why ‘ I don’t’ know’ matters’.

Related Podcast Episodes:

Coming soon.

Transcript:

Colby: 0:00

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast.

Peter: 0:04

Life is really a bunch of serendipities. It really is. And I went where I was wanted and I spent three extraordinary years working as an unattached youth worker walking around the streets of the city that I was in, getting to know young people At that time. Psychoanalysis was kosher. Psychoanalysis was the way you thought Winnicott and I was doing a social work training at the London School of Economics, but he was just mesmerizing. So we come back to England and I then do the four-year course at the Anna Freud Center in London, which was, if you like, like the kind of turning point of my life, because it was a thorough psychoanalytic training and a Freud was still alive and it was in a kind of heyday, really, by saying I don’t know. That opens up our dialogue. People don’t believe in psychoanalysis by and large they don’t. They believe in what’s obvious, what’s said on top. We’re always looking underneath what’s really going on, and I play piano and I played his piano, but I was good, I played Willie Goldspierre.

Colby: 1:28

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast. I’m Colby Pearce, and joining me for this episode is a founder and trailblazer in children’s mental health. 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 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 Peter Wilson.

Colby: 2:07

Peter is a consultant child and adolescent psychotherapist. He qualified in 1971, having completed his training with Anna Freud in her centre. Since then, he has worked in a variety of organisations, holding senior positions in all of them. These include three child guidance clinics, now known as CAMHS, two walk-in centres for young people, a therapeutic community, the Pepper Harrow Community, and the Institute of Psychiatry. Peter founded a national charity called Young Minds, the purpose of which was to raise public awareness of children’s mental health and to improve multidiscipline services. Peter later became clinical advisor at the Place to Be, a national organisation providing counselling services in schools. Peter has maintained a small, private child and adolescent psychotherapy practice and now teaches and provides supervision. He is publishing a book in the autumn for him, spring for Me, entitled the Adolescent and the Psychotherapist, why I Don’t Know Matters, welcome Peter.

Peter: 3:33

Hello, thank you very much.

Colby: 3:38

And I should just say at the outset that you’re being a very good sport, not only being on the podcast, but continuing the podcast today, me having made the cardinal error of not sending you the questions beforehand, or at least beforehand long enough for you to consider them. Anyway, hopefully it won’t be too harrowing an experience for you. And I usually just ask my guests is there anything else? Is there anything that you would like to add to that short bio that I’ve just read?

Peter: 4:19

well, I think it covers pretty well much of my life. I think I think it covers pretty well much of my life. I think We’ll have to see. Perhaps at the end I’ll find there’s something I want to say which I haven’t said I have no idea what’s going to happen. So let’s see what happens.

Colby: 4:35

Well, yeah, let’s see Excellent. So, peter, you’ve had a long and very varied career in young people’s mental health and also with the Pepper Harrow community, with therapeutic communities. So I guess my first question to you is how did you get into this line of work? That has been your life’s work.

Peter: 5:06

Oh, completely by accident, I mean pure, pure accident. I mean I knew nothing about psychoanalysis until I was about, I suppose, 20, 21. Um, and I had no aspirations in this direction at all. I mean, I really was quite ignorant. Um, and I had no aspirations in this direction at all. I mean, I really was quite ignorant.

Peter: 5:28

And I went to university and I had my degree in industrial economics, you’ll be pleased to know, of which I knew very little and of which I know very little now. But I did it because I had some kind of ambition to be rich and to be in industry and to be a very grown-up sort of person, as it were. In fact, my life at university was not supremely glorious academically. I spent a lot of time in the drama society. I acted in about 10 different plays, so I was goofing around and very fortunate because in my day only about 5% of the population, general population, went to university. So I was very, very privileged to be there at all. And this was in the when was I that? 1957 to 1960, so you know it’s a long, long time ago. And I, the facilities were extraordinarily, uh, abundant really for me as a young person. So you know, I danced about I, I had fun, I enjoyed myself and all the rest of it and um, and met my future wife. Can you believe, such a young and delicate age that I was so there? I was a minute.

Peter: 6:50

I came out of university and I applied for jobs in industry and can you believe it? I got nowhere at all. Nobody wanted me at all, and my wife suggested I apply for a job as an unattached youth worker in the youth service. I applied for that and can you believe I was unanimously accepted. So there was a complete change of direction and I went where I was wanted and I spent three extraordinary years working as an unattached youth worker, walking around the streets of the city that I was in, getting to know young people and all the rest of it, and I made use of my enjoyment and skill, I think in the theatre. So I formed a group amongst all these kids who were not. The point of the whole enterprise was why aren’t more young people going to youth clubs? And, of course, more interesting young people didn’t go to youth clubs or the delinquent ones, and so I formed a group where I got to know this bunch of kids by just lolling around, and then we formed a youth group and it was very successful and we, we won prizes and and I was enjoying myself carrying on being in the theater and so on.

Peter: 8:11

So there I am, 21 ish, no, 24, something with my twenties and still not a clue. And then I did. Then again, I’m very much influenced by wife in those days. I mean, my wife told me, advised me to go for this job, and I never would have done otherwise. And then she went off to do a postgraduate diploma in the london school of economics and I followed suit and did a comparable course of study of diploma and applied social studies, I think it was. And there, can you believe, I encountered Winnicott. Winnicott was one of the teachers and a lovely man called oh goodness name, name’s gone now. Anyway, there were psychoanalytic, esteemed people on this course which complete will absolute news to me, finish that.

Peter: 9:08

And then we have two next, and the true story it’s not probably the formal story is that I needed to find Holly Golighty. In other words, I needed to find Audrey Hepburn, who was in Breakfast in Tiflis with all those yellow cabs and all that beautiful. And I had a thing Having been brought up on American movies, I had to go to America to find Holly Golightly. She was a total fantasy. My wife has a different story, but that’s my story.

Peter: 9:46

And so we went to New York and my brother-in-law happened to live in New York for one reason or another, so we stayed with him and then I just looked up the Yellow Pages, basically to find jobs. Looked up the Yellow Pages and looked at all of these various jobs and the usual sort of hustle and this and the other, but managed to get a job with the jewish board of guardians, which is a big, major kind of social service facility in new york, you know, and they ran a residential treatment center, yeah, upstate New York, for crazy kids, and they just had a strike and so they’d lost quite a few of their staff. And so there I was, merrily coming along and they took me on. They took me on, so it was pure pure luck, and that was an amazing job because it was working with very disturbed kids. They had about 200 of these kids on a big campus in different cottages up there in in upstate new york. And it was at that time. Psychoanalysis was kosher.

Peter: 10:58

Psychoanalysis was the way you thought this was before its demise. This, this would be what in the 1963 to 64, I think something like that. And so they were great people and I and they had training in their central office in Manhattan and I learned psychoanalysis. I was introduced to this whole new thing. Here I am, whatever I am, in the middle of my twenties, discovering psychoanalysis. I was introduced to this whole new thing. Here I am, whatever I am, in the middle of my 20s, discovering psychoanalysis really.

Peter: 11:29

And then there was a man there, a man called Fred Evans. He was a psychiatrist and he said why don’t you apply to Anna Freud for her training? And I said well, that sounds a good idea. Turns out Anna Freud’s training was in London, not in New York, and I got interviewed. And I got interviewed by two eminent child psychotherapists, augusta Alpert and Mariana Chris, in New York. I was interviewed in New York and they thought I was married at my time and our first child was there. We went back to London. My wife wanted to get back to England because of the culture. The American culture was very different. So we came back with one child and I got married when I was 21. He, he, long, long time time. I’m 21. Can you believe that? I didn’t know what on earth I was doing, but she was beautiful, so there we go I wasn’t much older, peter there we go and I’m still married to the same woman.

Peter: 12:39

can you believe that? Yeah, 64 years 64 years Congratulations.

Peter: 12:45

Yeah, married in 1960. And went on to university. So we come back to England and I then do the four-year course at the Anna Freud Center in London, which was, if you like, the kind of turning point of my life, because it was a thorough psychoanalytic training. Anna Freud was still alive and it was in a kind of heyday really, and there were about eight of us who were in that year and I’ve most of them were American. So then then, so here I am now a psycho and I’m a child and adolescent psychoanalyst, and I qualified in 1971, as you put, and then I waded off into the world. So that’s how I came to be what I am. Actually. I mean, it’s a total hit and miss story, but they’re the best stories really.

Peter: 13:42

I mean, some people the age of five say I’m going to be an accountant or I’m going to be a lawyer I had no idea what I was going to be, but that’s what I became and have became and have become ever since yes, yes over 50 years in this business.

Colby: 13:58

Wow, that’s there you go yeah that’s an extraordinary story and in fact, uh fact, peter, not uncommon amongst my guests on this podcast. So they will say something very similar about accidents, getting into it by accidents and economics as well, extraordinary. I think there’s been at least a couple of people who’ve talked about who’ve come in from a more an economics background into this space. One of my guests was a fellow by the name of Graham Kerridge and he was interested in he’d also studied economics, was interested in human capital and got a job at the Cotswold community. Yeah, and he’s an Australian. He has moved backwards and forwards. In fact he’s eventually ended up in health management and has worked all across the world in that area. But, yeah, up in health management and has worked all across the world in that area. But, but, yeah, but economics. I’m trying to think if john whitwell, who also was from the cotwell cotswold community, might have mentioned economics yeah, yeah yeah, so there you go.

Colby: 15:16

It’s all these maths. People get into psychotherapy yeah, it’s extraordinary.

Peter: 15:22

Yeah good, never have been any good at economics, but there we go.

Colby: 15:28

Yeah, and Richard Rowlandson from the Mulberry Bush. He also talked about, well, his father. He talked about maths. We had some interesting little backwards and forwards about maths on his conversation. But anyway, you’re in the group of. You are good company in both having something of a maths background and also describing how you got into the work as if by accident.

Peter: 15:58

Yeah, I would add that I was a child, adolescent, in the 50s, the 1950s, and actually people have all kinds of views about that period. But in fact in England following the war there were major changes and the establishment of an education system and health service and so on was phenomenal age and I benefited wildly from it. I mean I happened to do well at school. My own, my background is pretty modest. My father was a tailor and I was pretty modest, you know, but I did well, for some reason or other, with my A levels and then got, but only five percent of us got into university. I mean, if we I was just lucky, frankly, the politics of the time, if I were to set out now I’d probably get lost very, very early. But in those days, I mean, I did prosper very much from a very ordinary background. I mean there was nothing privileged about my life at all. I feel very grateful for all of that and I sometimes think, oh my God, you know I mean everybody’s so critical of the past, but that was a good period.

Peter: 17:14

A lovely man called a politician, called can’t remember his name Anyway, he wrote a book called the Age of Hope, the Age of Hope. Anyway, he wrote a book called the Age of Hope, the Age of Hope, and I don’t think we could say the age that we’re living in is of hope at all.

Colby: 17:34

Yeah, quite the opposite, quite the opposite. Unfortunately, you’ve mentioned a couple of names too. So Donald Winnicott is, you know, obviously still quite influential in our thinking, in child protection circles, and you met him. He was a teacher while you were doing your second part of your education. And, of course, anna Freud is a giant of the psychotherapy world.

Peter: 18:05

Winnicott and I was doing a social work training at the London School of Economics but he was just mesmerizing. I mean I was totally ignorant and this man comes on and doesn’t talk in a particularly eloquent way, but he drew a diagram of two circles and called one a bad breast and another one a good breast and he talked about these circles on the board and I really didn’t know what he was on about. But also the little bit I like to say that he and his wife Claire invited our students to his home in the Rottlosh part part of London and I played piano and I played his piano. I thought I was good. I played Willy Holtz’s piano.

Peter: 18:54

I wasn’t very good in those days but he thought he was very nice about it anyway. So you know I didn’t quite know him and I well he’s been such a presence in my life in all kinds of ways and you know he writes so well, although at times you haven’t got a clue what he’s on about, but at times I was right very well, and those phrases like the good enough mother and the transitional space and um, psychotherapy is two people playing with each other, I mean all those kind of ideas just resonate. It was a remarkable man, frankly, and we lack anybody of that significance these days, I’m afraid yeah, his ideas have definitely stood the test of time.

Colby: 19:44

I just thought of a title for your next book, peter.

Peter: 19:48

Yes.

Colby: 19:50

Winnicott’s Piano.

Peter: 19:52

Yeah, that would be nice, wouldn’t it? Yeah?

Colby: 19:59

I had these moments of inspiration, and then, yeah, and then you spent four years at Anna Freud Centre and she was still alive at that time.

Peter: 20:07

Tell us a little bit about that experience okay, well, I need to say that I was green, young and very beautiful in those days and she was where. She was not a pompous woman, she was not a Melanie Klein. Frankly, she was very different from a client, rather modest woman, but I looked upon her with in awe really and uh, uh and well, I, I, just I. It was such a thorough training in psychoanalysis. I mean, we, we were required to read Freud and it was a theory, the theory group, and it was all looking at Freud in some detail and which I still benefit from, actually the stuff I learned when you’re reading forward. We all, we all took concepts. I took the concept of resistance, I took the concepts of identification and you read Freud all through on those concepts. That was terrific.

Peter: 21:10

Anna Freud’s meta psychological profile, meaning a profile of a diagnostic profile which looks at all the various aspects of a child’s personality. That was part of the breathing. It was called the diagnostic group and we would do, I mean, looking at the complexity of a child’s growth. That was what she was on about and she’s written it in the book called Normality and Pathology in Childhood and it’s there if you want to find out about it. And then I actually became a consultant, which is a rather absurd term, but I was called the consultant of the nursery school because in the center there was a nursery school as part of the center and it was financed for socioeconomically deprived backgrounds. So there was a nursery school and Anna Freud loved the nursery school. She just loved children. She just was a very modest person really and I was somehow the consultant and I used to go down there and be part of the scene.

Peter: 22:21

Every Thursday afternoon two o’clock there was a beer meeting to discuss the children and that was very, that was very, just, very, because we all knew the children and they were. Some were very problematic and some who were very flourishing at such a young age, and Americans who had come to these meetings and the americans love to come and sit at the feet of anna freud and there’s some funny stories about that, but I won’t go into those anyway. So so, and then we had three cases. Five times a week I saw, uh, an adolescent and a latency child, the under five. I didn’t really hit it off with and I don’t think the child or the mother understood what on earth I was doing. That didn’t work out very well. I’m not very good at that, but the other two children and we would write weekly reports of what had happened and that would be reviewed and discussed and so on.

Peter: 23:26

So it was a phenomenal training. It was not the most perfect training. It was not, you know, I could. There were. There were things that didn’t not happen, but by and large it was a psychoanalytic training and it was my turning point. Really it just sort of shaped me. I was now a child and adolescent psychotherapist for the an analyst, but psychotherapy and that’s what I was, and.

Peter: 23:56

I sailed off into the world being one and have been one. Can you believe all my life? Yeah, yeah, yeah it’s very.

Colby: 24:04

It’s definitely a vocation, I think, being one myself. Yeah, if I heard you correctly, you said five times a week you were seeing the young people yeah yeah, five times yeah, that would make you over what sort of period, peter like, how long would you see them at that frequency?

Peter: 24:23

Three years two to three years.

Colby: 24:25

Yeah, and how were endings managed when you’ve had such a significant amount of involvement in a young person’s life?

Peter: 24:39

Yeah, that’s a naughty question because I don’t think endings are ever properly discussed really. I mean there is what you’re supposed to do is to acknowledge what has been done, acknowledge achievements and knowledge limits have happened, and understand the hurt and the anger of something important being terminated. I mean you ought to all do all of that. Truth is probably didn’t do it as well as I should have done really. I mean I was being, I mean all these cases of being supervised and they were very. There was an extraordinary woman called bianca gordon who wasn’t terribly popular but she was a very um particular, looked at detail, was very thorough, and so I did do reasonably well, I think, with the child, the adolescent. I was supervised by a lovely bloke called max goldblatt and I don’t think that was probably handled as strongly as it should have been really. I think I mean, given that I mean I’m not sure, really well, I don’t think. I just know, actually you can’t expect children these days to come five times a week.

Peter: 26:06

It’s just not part of the rush of our society. I think the Anna Freud was still deep in its own history really. It certainly couldn’t be applied now. The psychoanalytic trainings that exist now have three times a week, but very rarely anything more than that.

Peter: 26:26

I think the Institute of Psychoanalysis sees adults maybe four times a week, but anyway but and I think actually, I think, looking back, I think maybe maybe I could have made more of that, we could have made more of that. Maybe it was almost too much, maybe there wasn’t enough analytic scrutiny of what was going on. You get into a kind of lull, you know if it’s every time all the time. So I look back with some kind of reservations about it and I mean I know that Peter Fonagy and his I forgot her name, I forgot it anyway he and his co-worker looked in detail at the work that we had done, all the cases, all the weekly reports, and I think he could see that there were limitations.

Peter: 27:31

I think we did well with the neurotic children, but with the more borderline and the more delinquent I’m not sure we did as well as we might and I think it left Carnegie with a certain sort of questioning about that kind of training, that kind of and of course he has gone ahead now and and spearheaded uh, training which is virtually non-athletic, as I can see anyway, we won’t go into that. But um yeah, but for me it was an extraordinary experience, it really was apologies for the question.

Colby: 28:10

I. I think endings. Endings come into my work quite a lot as well and, um, you can probably tell from oh no, it’s that way from the book title just next to my shoulder. I mean, I’m very interested in bolby’s attachment theory and work very much in consideration of that.

Colby: 28:32

I don’t see children more than once a week but I have seen some children weekly, probably more ordinarily fortnightly, working in a context with young people who come from relational trauma backgrounds and relational disadvantage, and working with them for a long time and I think we become significant parts of their life growing up. And so the question of endings, and therapeutic endings is is quite a vexed one well.

Peter: 29:12

Do you know of any relationship that ends well?

Colby: 29:17

that’s a. That’s actually a very, yeah, a very important point, I think I often think that. So, for example, I observe couples. I don’t work with couples who divorce, but I’ve observed people in my circle who have divorced and observed that they considered that their life would be better away from their partner. Their life would be better away from their, their partner, who and even in circumstances where they they were, they disliked their, their spouse quite a lot. I’ve observed their life. They go through it, definitely go through a period of struggle, and things do go downhill after that because, even if you don’t like someone, there’s still been a significant part of your life, a significant connection. So, yeah, I think you’re right ending well, isn’t it really?

Peter: 30:12

yeah good ending people talk about and I wonder where it is yeah, maybe that’s a another book I don’t mind writing books either.

Colby: 30:23

Actually, I haven’t written one for a while. I I’ve been thinking of.

Peter: 30:26

How many have you written? I mean, that’s really quite something.

Colby: 30:30

I’ve only written these two, but the attachment book. I refer to that as two books because it’s two editions and when I came to update the first edition I liked it so little that I attempted to rewrite it completely and it is very different from the first edition. But my publisher asked me to put respectfully put stuff back in from the first book. So, yeah, so that’s what happened, and I haven’t written anything now for a decade. I should write something again. I’ve got lots of ideas and little time.

Peter: 31:11

yeah it’s not easy writing it’s not easy is it.

Peter: 31:15

Well, I don’t find it easy at all. The only consolation is that people think that I’m easy to read, that I’m you know and that that pleases me. But trying to get it to be like I mean I can only write stuff that I’m you know and that pleases me. But trying to get it to be like I mean I can only write stuff that I understand myself, you know. A lot of stuff I read I don’t understand. I don’t know what they’re talking about. I’m not sure they know what they’re talking about.

Colby: 31:39

I went through a Nietzsche stage reading Nietzsche’s books.

Colby: 31:43

You did I did and you know, and I took a nugget out of, oh, I took a few nuggets out of them, each of them, and and yeah, when you’re reading Nietzsche from my well, when I was reading Nietzsche, I I think, yeah, I probably understood about five percent, particularly as it went on, I think, the last of his books that he well, very close to the end he wrote, thus spake zarathustra, and I loved that book, but he was actually quite unwell when he wrote that book and uh, yeah, so it was quite, it’s quite a challenging book, but so is dostoevsky as well, and notes from the underground. You know, very short book, only about 70 or so pages, but, goodness gracious, is that hard to read. Yeah, what was that?

Peter: 32:29

what was that?

Colby: 32:31

it’s just the field or dossier’s book. Uh, notes from the underground, yeah, yeah, I similarly have a reputation for being easy to read and, um, I just say to people well, I’m just a simple man with a simple message. I don’t like over and, like you, if I don’t understand it, I won’t write it.

Peter: 32:55

No, exactly, exactly Same as me, absolutely.

Colby: 32:58

Yeah.

Peter: 32:59

I mean, I’ve read quite a lot of Freud and he’s not at all easy to read sometimes he isn’t yeah. So yeah, I tried to read.

Colby: 33:09

Interpreting Dreams a few years ago, did you really? And I gave up. Much to my chagrin, I confess, I gave up. I’ll have another go, another time.

Peter: 33:21

It’s 600 pages. That’s an awful lot.

Colby: 33:30

Peter, yeah, like I said there’s this earlier, there’s loads I could speak to you about. I you founded the, the um you founded young minds in in the uk there, um, I I knew about young minds, I think because I I had come across it at a time when there had been some reviews of probably the first edition of my attachment book that was associated in some ways with the young minds, with young minds activities. But tell us a little bit about young minds and how you came to found found it and what. What was its work?

Peter: 34:04

well, it happened in the middle of my life. I think I was in my very early 50s when I got involved with it. Well, you know, it was quite a leading light, and what can I say about it? I mean, I had been practising in the health service and very aware of, uh, poor resources and and people didn’t really understand what it was all about. And um, and there was a. There was a. It was called the interclinic conferences. Um, in england at that time, where are we now? We’re in my 40s. I can’t remember where I’d be now.

Peter: 34:51

There was a lot of concern about child guidance clinics and them being properly managed and who was managing them. Was it the psychiatrists? Who were the managers, or was it other people? But the bottom line was that there was really very inadequate resources and very limited knowledge of what they did, and so a group of us thought you know, something needs to be done, we need to make more of an effort. And at that time I belonged to a funny little group called the Child Guidance Trust and it was spearheaded by a lovely lady called Robina Addis, who was a rather posh lady, who, in the 20s, with her friends I think they were called the Mayflower ladies, and they went over to America and Adler Alfred Adler, who was one of Freud’s early departures had set up child guidance clinics over there and they learned that and they brought it back and so they started the child guidance movement in the 20s and 30s. Then the war came, but then in the 50s and the 60s they really blossomed and I think there was something like 300 or so child guidance clinics in the country and so and that was the body that was coming, that kept coming together and saying we need to have more influence than we do.

Peter: 36:13

So a long, long, long story. A couple of us did it. We started to approach the department of health and, um, and then it’s, it’s just, and then it’s just. Life is really a bunch of serendipities, it really is, for some extraordinary reason.

Peter: 36:37

I got to know the man in the Department of Health whose responsibility was to oversee expenditure or something like that, and he turned out to be an interesting man. Um, who, who, who, was in analysis himself I mean, can you believe, civil servant in analysis and he, he lived in the suburbs and he came into every time he came to London. He was looking at all these young people and an awful lot of them looked pretty hopeless and miserable and disheveled and unhappy and he said what is the department doing about these people? There are a lot of people looking after people with dyslexia, but what about these people, these emotionally? So he became well, he and I got on for some extraordinary reason, and the extraordinary, extraordinary reason was he liked horse racing, as indeed I did at that time it wasn’t the economics connection that was pretty bad economics.

Peter: 37:40

I can do that, but anyway, he he was. So we got on very well and, uh, he managed to be. It’s a long, long story, but he managed to. At that time I was running the Brandon Center, which was a walk-in center for adolescents and so on, and he managed to find some money that was not being properly spent and gave us a grant which was like magic. It was like pure magic, and so we got on with that.

Peter: 38:07

And then he was in the Department of Health and he was used to going to very impressive people. So he wanted to get in touch with a man called Louis Blom Cooper who was a barrister of high repute and sat on various child abuse inquiries. He was a rather dignified man and he got in touch. He tried to get in touch with Louis Blanc-Cooper, but Louis Blanc-Cooper was in the bath. But his wife answered the phone and I happen to know his wife rather well and she said you don’t want to talk to Louis, you want to talk to Peter Wilson.

Peter: 38:50

And that’s how this chap and I got on with each other and that was that pure piece of utter serendipity. It’s just ridiculous. And then on the back he said well, it’s all very well, you’re running this center in the middle of London, but what about all these young people? What are we going to do with that? So with his support his support he managed to get some money together to actually fund the beginning of Young Minds Enough money to pay for my salary, an information officer and a PA for me £150000 pounds or something. And because of that that’s how Young Minds happened and I became the director and it was a really important course. Two things raise awareness of children’s mental health and improve multidisciplinary services for them throughout the lab. They were the two main things, because at that time if you talked about children’s mental health, people thought what are you saying? They’re all crazy, they’re all schizophrenic. What the hell are you talking about? So we had to define what we meant by mental health and then so I built the organization up and I was there for I don’t know, 10 or 11 years or something like that in my 50s and we built it up and we had a budget of about 2 million, I think by the end of

Peter: 40:20

it and we we organized a consultancy service that went across different parts of the country and looked at the way different departments are organizing comprehensive services. Children’s mental health was not just the business of psychiatry or psychotherapists. It was the business of everybody in the voluntary sector and there were some very good reports. It was a good period. This was in the 90s, in the early part of this century, so that’s how that happened and it was going very well indeed. But then there was this whatever it was a bank crisis or something. Suddenly everything was in crisis because of all these dodgy loans in America or whatever. It was a bank crisis or something. Suddenly everything was in crisis because of all these dodgy loans in america, or whatever it was. Yeah, and everything tightened up. Everything tightened up and, as a result of that, things have not gone very well since. I can talk about that later on.

Peter: 41:21

But that’s what young minds was and it was very alive and I had about 30 staff and it was. It was terrific, actually it was very, but it took a hell of a lot out of me, I must say. You know, I worked long hours. I worried about money all the time. Get to christmas and the financial year is march and you can see an almost deficit where you’re going to get the money from. I mean, it was, and I went all over the country talking and this and the other.

Peter: 41:48

I did work terribly hard, um, and it was, it was good and actually, and we ran a parent information service and people, parents, ringing up about their kids, and that was very well in. It was. It was going very well. I was very with it. But then I got to 65, 65 or coming up to it, and I really I thought I’d done enough and I was pretty exhausted, pretty exhausted, and I was ready to retire, you know, carpet slippers in front of the fire, dozing off forever and ever. But then an extraordinary woman called Benita Refsson, who ran an organization called the Place to Be that puts counselling into schools nationally, came and said would I be a clinical advisor to her organization? And I couldn’t resist it really, and so I did that for several years afterwards. But everything is all by chance really. It really is one chance. Yeah, I feel very proud of it. I’m rather sad that I think all of his efforts have pretty well come to nothing as a result of recent political events in this country.

Colby: 43:04

But we’ll come to that later on, if so be yeah, and you were a consultant, I think, at pepper harrow too, or you were you’re involved in paper harrow.

Peter: 43:15

Yes, there was one frenetic period in my life and I’m not entirely sure I’m proud of it. I was working in six different places during the course of every week omnipotence madness, but that’s. I was working in six different places during the course of every week, omnipotence madness. That’s what I was doing. And Pepper Harrow was another extraordinary thing. It’s a therapeutic community in a big house in the country with, about when I first it was 50 kids first of all, now it’s 30 kids and a staff of about 30 or something of that kind, and that was an amazing experience. I mean, really, really disturbed crazy kids, very delinquent, some borderline and uh, and it was a therapeutic community. So you know, every morning there would be a community meeting, everybody, all the staff, all the kids, come together in informed community and and so the staff operated both as teachers and as as therapists.

Peter: 44:35

It was a whole kind of integrated idea yeah and it was amazing place and the man who ran it had a certain kind of extraordinary charisma as a little guy but very, very determined and and he led it with a kind of passion very strong.

Peter: 44:53

And the dining room was was designed so that all the tables were breast like in shape and the children had a delicious, every lovely field that they wanted. I mean it was an amazing place. It closed because and I was the consultant my basic job was being a consultant to the staff to help deal with the pressure at all, but of course I was in the community and I was known and so on.

Peter: 45:22

So that was incredible and I was known and so on. So that was uh incredible that was Pepa Haro. Yeah, that was Pepa Haro. It was amazing and I’m not sure I was. I mean we’re trying to. I mean I loved them.

Peter: 45:34

I always remember he was determined to try and understand the, the psychopathology of these kids and what was in them and he had, and I think he hoped that I really would be able to get there and tell him, and I don’t think I did. I think I was reasonably useful to staff, but to understand the extremity of their misery and their acting out was was just wild. But it was a wonderful place and it couldn’t exist. It couldn’t exist now because you know, for example, for example, if a kid ran away, staff would run after them and bring them back. Can you imagine? And physically bring them back, physically touching them, safeguarding, and what do you mean? Kids have a right to their right to go off.

Peter: 46:21

We had a scandal in this country where men have been exploiting young girls who’ve been run away from their children’s homes, sexually exploiting them. These kids have been allowed to run out and nobody’s come and found them. They do that because you know to find them, them to bring them back physically, is safeguarding, and so it was a great place and it had passion and commitment and care.

Peter: 46:56

it wasn’t just a child minding place, it was a therapeutic place and some of the kids did remarkably well and some of the kids did remarkably hopeless. I mean, it got nowhere, yeah. So there we go. So I’ve been incredibly lucky, frankly, in having that experience, and that’s simply because I happen to know the founder of the place, a play called Melvin Mose, and for some reason he thought I was very good, so I took the job and it was well paid, so I did it.

Colby: 47:25

So I took the job and it was well paid, so I did it. Peter, I want to pick up on something that you said there as a bit of a segue into your soon-to-be-released book, because you were saying how the chap that was running the place really hoped you could answer the questions that he had about what was going on for the young people, and you’ve got this book coming out with a rather intriguing title to it the Adolescent and the Psychotherapist. Why, I Don’t Know Matters, and I wondered if there was just anything that you could, you felt able to share with us about the book and maybe even a little bit about that title yeah, well, it’s going to be published, apparently in December or over the next year.

Peter: 48:17

It’s going to be published being through all the business contract, more than I say. And well, I wanted to call it, I wanted to call it, I don’t know. That’s what, that’s all I wanted to be, I don’t know. But their editors routledge, um, they said I’m not already happy about that, would they put the book what? What section of the bookshop or the library? And I can see their point of view. Um, but I had a thing about, I don’t know anyway, one.

Peter: 48:48

I went, we went barmy, trying to think of a title. The adolescent, the psychotherapist is not a bad title, but in the end I kept it in. Why, I don’t know matters. And the book basically is a collection of papers that I’ve written in the past. I’ve written about 40 or 50 papers or chapters that have been here and there and I’ve got 10 in there and I think that they’re quite pleased with what they’re giving off, I think, and I think it meets the title of the therapist and the adolescent.

Peter: 49:26

But I don’t know how I had a thing about, and there’s two main reasons. The first is clinical. You tell me anybody who sat down done psychotherapy with adolescents and they are confronted with I don’t know, I don’t know. What do you feel, what do you feel? What do you feel? I don’t know, I don’t know. And I think as therapists we’ve become rather cross. I’m here to know and you’re saying you don’t know. That’s resistance, resistance, whereas in fact it’s much more than that. It’s much more uncertainty about what they feel.

Peter: 50:00

Anyway, they’re not sure whether they should say or not say are they being disloyal to their parents? To talk about this? I mean, there are all kinds of reasons. Be it, I don’t know. And so I think it matters that we respect I don’t know. Also, the other thing is political. There’s far too much certainty that having an influence on policy and it’s my crack and the scientists.

Peter: 50:29

Now, I’m not anti-science or all the rest, wonderful things, but the science of psychotherapy not so good, not so good, not so conclusive as they make it out to be, so that they think cbt is the treatment of choice. This is what evidence suggests. The evidence is not good. It’s not good, it’s a lie. They’re lying about it, in my view, and so they are not saying I don’t know If they said I don’t know, but so far this looks as if CBT can be helpful with certain patients, for a certain type of plan maybe, but they don’t it’s either. They know, and they’ve set up a whole kind of service delivery now which is based on we know, and we will do it this way.

Peter: 51:22

So do it this way, so I, I don’t know matters, and I. A great virtue If I, if you and I. I mean the paradox is I’m telling you what I think I know, but you know if, if we leave it and I say I know everything, then you haven’t got a question to answer because I’ve known it all by saying I don’t know. That opens up our dialogue for for something, and so I think there’s a, there is a, there is a virtue, virtue not knowing. And through not knowing we discover. If you say no, you’re not opening your mind. That’s right. So that’s what that book’s all about.

Colby: 52:12

I was hoping that you would say something along those lines. I remember John Whitwell talking about using I don’t know as a way of opening up reflective thinking about things, and I was also thinking with teenagers that I don’t know. Is there a way sometimes of setting some boundaries around themselves? And if that is possibly what they’re doing, then that’s something we should respect rather than get frustrated with yeah, yeah, no, that’s wonderful.

Peter: 52:58

Talking about Australia, I did a series of seminars organised by Peter Blake, who you presumably know no, I don’t, you don’t, no, really. Organised by Peter Blake, who you presumably know no, I don’t, you don’t, no, really. He’s in Sydney and he’s written an enormous book on child psychotherapy, peter Blake. Anyway, at these seminars, people will present me with these impossible cases and I will say I don’t know and I’m worried that actually that wasn’t the right approach. People want you to have omnipotent answers and I just don’t see it.

Peter: 53:34

I think we have to live with the uncertainty in order to find out a bit more.

Colby: 53:42

So there we are is there any advice that you would give your younger self as a, as a early career psychotherapist, um, from from the position that you’re, you’re in now, or that you would give, indeed, to other, uh, early career um psychotherapists? Child and adolescent psychotherapists?

Peter: 54:05

very. It’s a very, very good question and therefore a very difficult question. Yes, I have been thinking about that. I’m going to give an answer, thinking about myself and maybe particularly psychotherapies. The advice I would give young Peter Wilson is to do something to enable him to be more assertive and confident in what he, uh was doing, and you could say my analysis should have done that, but it didn’t. I mean to speak with more authority, to to be more, um, to be less inclined to let things pass, to basically recognize the wrongness of what other people are talking about and to express my disagreement.

Peter: 55:10

I think, I’m not putting this very well, but I wish I’d had more authority to some deeper sense of authority within myself that I think I have now, which I’ve gleaned from my my life’s experience. But as a young person I don’t think, and I think it’s something about psychoanalytic training, um, that it makes you reflective and thoughtful and all the rest of it, but doesn’t really engineer you to to speak up. I had a farcical experience a long, long time ago, uh, with a man called wallace hamilton and we were involved in um trying to establish a salary structure in the national health service for child psychotherapists, which in fact, we did an amazing piece of work. But as part of that, we were involved with a trade union I forget what it was called now the trade union and they organized some training sessions in how to negotiate.

Peter: 56:24

And we had an ex coal miner I think it was a unionist coma and he was a rough truss sort of bloke and we were videoed in in negotiating relationships. We were pathetic we were. We were leaning back, saying, oh, yes, yes, yes, yes, and just leaning further back, almost a disappearance, whereas we should have been much more assertive, confrontational, authoritative and so on, and I really I would. And I say I mean I don’t have too much to do now with young child psychotherapy, but I encounter them every day and they’re very nice young men but they’ve got no balls, if I can put it that way. They need a bit of punch and they’re also understanding.

Peter: 57:15

It’s that balance between understanding and assertion. And so and I think we do ourselves it’s that balance between understanding and assertion and I think we do ourselves a great disservice as a child psychotherapy profession. The psychiatrists have sort of bred with it. They are the people who know about mental health, they know about mental illness and the psychologists are very, very pushy and very uptight and so on, but the psychotherapists, I think, are a pushover. Frankly, I wish I’d had greater authority as a young man, even at Young Minds, when I was pushing for child mental health. I found my psychoanalytic background. Psychoanalytic understanding was too understanding. People don’t believe in psychoanalysis background.

Peter: 57:59

Psychoanalytic understanding was to understanding people don’t believe in psychoanalysis by and large they don’t. They believe in what’s obvious, what’s said on top. We all looking underneath what’s what’s what’s really going on, but they don’t get there. You need to operate at that kind of level, yeah it is, I is hard it’s the worst of my life. I think I wished I would like that would be something. I mean it’s a good answer, I think, to a good question really, because it’s an honest one, and I do feel I rue that I didn’t have more of that in my life.

Colby: 58:34

But there’s also a wisdom in humility in a sense. I know that sounds a wisdom in humility. I know humility. I know that sounds a bit corny, but it’s as we were talking about in relation to, I don’t know, maintaining a stance of curiosity, yeah. Yeah, not jumping in with the answer straight away. Yeah, maintaining an open space of inquiry, which I think is very much. I don’t describe myself as a psychoanalyst in the same way that you do, but I think that’s really a cornerstone of psychoanalytic work is that it creates space for inquiry and exploration.

Peter: 59:31

Some people just assume that they are to be heard and I don’t think I’ve had that assumption. I mean not that I’ve been effective. I mean you’ve highlighted a conundrum. Frankly, you know that I do believe in not knowing and humility and so on. At the same time, I wish I had been something other than what I’ve been. Not that I’ve been lacking in any assertion, but I could have made more of a difference. I could have made more of a noise.

Peter: 1:00:03

People make an awful lot of noise and people sort of keel over under the weight of the noise.

Colby: 1:00:10

There’s a proverb, isn’t it the rusty? What is it? The rusty gate gets the oil, or something like that. Though, what would you say, peter, if you were sitting in front of the health secretary, and what would you say to them now about child and adolescent mental health and what needs to happen?

Peter: 1:00:34

Well, it’s a bit in my head at the moment because there’s a very good article in the latest edition of the Journal of child psychotherapy and this chap’s written what the state of affairs is in the for a child psychotherapist and basically what he’s actually saying is that two major developments have occurred in the running of mental health services in this country. The one was a the introduction of something called IAPT introduce introduce improving access to psychological therapies.

Colby: 1:01:12

Yeah.

Peter: 1:01:13

And the other one was the children health and social care act of 2012. And he highlights these two things and the two strains which are so important. In the first, in IAPT, it’s all about improving access and apparently improving treatment. Uh, improving access and apparently improving treatment, but it bases the, the, the therapy, on what is called nice, the national institute of clinical excellence. Look at very thoroughly at the end and the evidence from that suggests probably more powerfully, points to cognitive behavioral therapy and that that is the therapy that should be offered for all in all in all, child and adolescent mental health services should be CBT, which is the predominant offer, and that is reinforced by this power of evidence that it works. They’re interested in outcomes. And there’s a whole history about IAPT. It was basically introduced by the Minister of Economics, funnily enough.

Colby: 1:02:35

Again.

Peter: 1:02:39

Again, he was very concerned that so many men were not going to work because they were depressed. So let’s bring in a treatment which apparently works with depression. Get these poor buggers to work. That was the raison d’etre. And it happened to be he had a close relationship with a cbt specialist in the mausoleum hospital and so cbt was presented and now it put it pervades everything.

Peter: 1:03:07

So as a child psychotherapist working in a health service, by and large in the camps, you won’t be if you won’t see a referral out there. As it comes in cbt, be offered it Maybe three or four attempts before it’s given to a child psychotherapist, and that’s absolutely wrong. And the thing about all this evidence is that it doesn’t really take into account the complexity of people’s problems and it’s just it purports to deal with mild to moderate problems. Anybody can do that. Really, you know, to deal with the kind of real problems that we have in in our society you need much more. So IAPT has entered into the realm. The the other thing is this Health and Social Care Act, which actually is coming from a political view that people, we should be in businesses, we should be in competition with each other, we should be efficient, do outcomes and we should compete with each other.

Peter: 1:04:20

We should, and I’m putting that broad as a broad political view, um, but now being applied to that simply means everything is division, everything’s divided. Yeah, people are fragmented. I have a kid. I’m working with a kid and somebody says, well, this kid’s got a neurodevelopmental problem or something. So therefore the kids should go to that service, not be part of the service I’m doing and anyway.

Peter: 1:04:52

So it’s a long, long story and I’m full of it at the moment because it really pretty well renders irrelevant to all the work I do at Young Marts. I mean, they, they they’re very impressed that everybody has more awareness of child mental health, possibly, but I’m not sure that people understand what mental health is. And, um, as far as my whole attempt to bring together the disciplines to provide a comprehensive service, that every discipline is in competition with each other, yeah, being more competitive, and it just is. And we hear people demoralized and their skills devalued. And so what would I say to the health secretary? Abolish the lot. Yes, a weakness is, cbt is attractive because it’s quick, short term and ding, ding, ding, whereas our psychotherapy is longer, it has to take longer, it has to. And the overwhelming thing is the resources for CAMHS for children’s mental health has been reduced. I mean, posts are not being re-advertised. It’s just an appalling situation.

Peter: 1:06:16

Now I feel for the Secretary, the Health Secretary, a man called Wes, something or other, montgomery. I feel for him because the National Health Service is really in a terribly difficult state and I don’t think child mental health is going to be high up on its priorities. And what would I propose instead? Because it is a factor that there’s an enormous need, an enormous demand, and what can people do effectively to deal with it? I understand all that, but the bottom line is people are getting disillusioned. All the CBT doesn’t work for most of these people and everybody becomes disillusioned and I think it does a major disservice in the long run. But what I would advise I’m moaning more than what I would advise but I would advise not to be so reliant on these two policies, to think about other ways of meeting a need. It’s a very, really serious problem really, and families anyway.

Colby: 1:07:23

So I was just going to say you know as much. If it’s worth anything, what 30 years of delivering psychotherapy to children and young people has taught me is that they don’t like CBT.

Peter: 1:07:37

No, they don’t.

Colby: 1:07:39

They much prefer relational, play-oriented psychotherapy.

Peter: 1:07:46

Yeah, absolutely, they much prefer it, yeah.

Colby: 1:07:49

And I remember when I was training. I remember there was and that’s over 30 years ago now, but I remember a relatively recently retired clinical psychologist here in my home state. I remember her addressing our class and saying that all the CBT practitioners in our professions you know there’s all these people that advocate for CBT and say that CBT is the answer, but when they themselves need a therapeutic service, they find someone who is much more person-centred. Analytical Absolutely yeah, I’ve never forgotten that. Analytical, yeah, absolutely yeah, I’ve never forgotten that. Anyway, yeah absolutely.

Colby: 1:08:45

Peter, yeah, we’ve had a wonderful chat and there’s so much more. I’ve really enjoyed it and there’s so much more I can speak to you about. I wondered if there was any question that you’d like to ask me before we wrap up. I’ve asked you a lot of questions.

Peter: 1:09:01

Yeah, you got me there. On the last one. What would you like me to ask? I think maybe. What do I mean by psychoanalysis, Because I always go on about it and I, yeah, yeah, I think that’s what am I talking about. I think I’m a psychoanalyst you’re asking me well, it’s a question you should ask me, but you can ask yourself.

Peter: 1:09:35

It’s a question you could ask me and I would have liked that would have been a difficult question for me, because there’s two question what you could ask me and I would have liked that would have been a difficult question for me, because there’s a. There are two ways of thinking about that. The Institute of psychoanalysis is basically the, the interpretation of the transference of the unconscious, and it’s on the couch, and you hold your position. For me, I psychoanalysis is much more on a live business, looking at the sheer conflict and struggle and yearning and desires and frustrations and what it does to you and how it affects your mood, and it’s everywhere. It’s everywhere, it’s not just on a couch, and that’s what I mean by psychoanalysis yeah, it’s almost like a science in and of itself.

Colby: 1:10:22

It’s the science of the human condition, the scientific inquiry or you don’t even have to use the word scientific, but it’s the inquiry into the human condition really, and it’s not boundaried in the ways that other approaches or conceptualisations are, it’s not limited. It’s because, you know, probably going right back to free association, it’s about an unboundaried exploration of each human life that you come into contact with.

Peter: 1:11:01

Absolutely absolutely.

Colby: 1:11:03

Peter.

Peter: 1:11:05

Was your question. Do I have a question of you?

Colby: 1:11:10

Yeah, well, I often I say to all the I don’t ask a lot of questions in the way I do therapy with children and young people, but if I do find myself asking them a lot, I’ll say to them well, I’ve asked you a lot of questions in the way I do therapy with children and young people. But if I, if I do find myself asking them a lot, I’ll say to them well, I’ve asked you a lot of questions. Is there a question you’d like to ask me?

Colby: 1:11:27

hey, that’s right yeah, and, and usually I can almost predict. I don’t want to say this with any certainty, but I can almost predict what they’ll ask. The first things they ask is how old I am, and they’re not satisfied with as old as my tongue and a little bit older than my teeth, which is what my grandmother used to always say. For a long time I got away with telling them how old I was in months, and then a couple of kids started to work that out, so now I just do it in doggies. I am in doggies good question.

Peter: 1:12:06

My question would be what are you, what are you learning from these interesting podcasts? What are you going to distill from it? Maybe it’s too soon, but that would be. It’s such an interesting project you’ve got going here Aye, aye. What are you going to learn from it? You don’t have to answer my question.

Colby: 1:12:26

I will say one thing. I’ll say a couple of things. One of those things is that I am learning a lot about a whole range of aspects of practice in um, the in. I call the podcast really a podcast about child protection out of home care and related endeavors. So I’m I’m learning things about you know, for, like you know how to run a good child protection organisation, I’m picking up ideas because I’m speaking to people who’ve run them.

Colby: 1:13:08

But the thing that I would really, that is really coming through for me is is the person reflecting on the person in the role? Because I think for a lot of my career I’ve been really trying to understand the person in front of me and what. And I think and I think part of this is because psychoanalysis is less popular in Australia than it is in the UK and Europe. It still has standing there and I’ve interviewed a lot of people from the UK and some from Europe but what I’m getting out of it that I probably knew but didn’t consider enough, was the person in the role, if I can put it that way.

Peter: 1:14:13

Very good. Yeah, I like that yeah.

Colby: 1:14:18

Well, we’ll finish on that point. As I said, Peter, thank you very much for agreeing to come on and also for being a good sport about my faux pas of not giving you more prior notice about what questions I might ask. But yeah, thank you again and good luck with the book, and I really hope that there might be an opportunity for us to speak again.

Peter: 1:14:45

I hope so. It’s been very good meeting you. Thank you for this podcast.

Colby: 1:14:51

Thank you you.

Relentless Kindness: The Foundation of Therapeutic Care, with Adela Holmes

Trauma-Informed Care: The Power of Relentless Kindness in Therapeutic Residential Settings

In the challenging landscape of therapeutic residential care for traumatised children, a profound approach has been quietly transforming lives for nearly two decades at Hurstbridge Farm in Victoria, Australia. This revolutionary model, developed by Adela Holmes, has consistently demonstrated that relationship-based care grounded in neurobiology can heal even the most severely traumatised children.

What makes this approach stand out from other care models is what Holmes describes as “relentless kindness.” This isn’t just being nice—it’s a deliberate, consistent therapeutic stance that prioritises relationship over traditional behavioural management techniques. The model recognises that traumatised children operate from lower brain functions and cannot access higher cognitive abilities until they feel safe and valued.

Traditional approaches to managing challenging behaviour in out-of-home care settings often rely heavily on cognitive behavioural models—star charts, points systems, and rewards for good behaviour. However, Adela’s experience at Hurstbridge Farm demonstrates why these approaches frequently fail with severely traumatised children. These children typically haven’t developed the capacity to regulate their emotions or delay gratification. They don’t expect adults to follow through on promises, leading them to either demand immediate rewards or sabotage the process entirely.

Adela shares a powerful story about a young boy who requested a star chart upon arrival at Hurstbridge Farm. Rather than implementing the chart, she simply gave him the CD he wanted, explaining: “I want you to have the enjoyment of listening to that person singing on the CD and I want you to feel good about having it.” This approach demonstrated worthiness and deservedness—core experiences these children often lack.

The Hurstbridge model was built on solid foundations, drawing from decades of successful therapeutic residential care approaches. Adela studied established models like the Mulberry Bush School in the UK, Villa Santa Maria in New Mexico, and Chaddock near Chicago. All shared a common thread: relationships as the primary vehicle for healing.

One striking feature of the Hurstbridge approach was the constant presence of caring adults. Children were never left alone except for personal privacy. This consistent presence created a containing environment that allowed for co-regulation—adults helping children manage their emotions until they could develop this capacity themselves. One young boy who initially resisted this approach was later found frantically seeking an adult when he woke up alone, demonstrating how quickly children can adapt to and need this consistent care.

The neurobiology of trauma informs every aspect of this approach. As Bruce Perry, a leading authority on childhood trauma, explains: “Traumatized children tend to have overactive stress responses… Before they can make any lasting change at all in their behaviour, they need to feel safe and loved.” The Hurstbridge model follows Perry’s principle of “going to the lowest part of the brain implicated” to create change, providing countless repetitions of corrective experiences.

Despite its success, implementing this model isn’t easy. Adela describes the doubt she often felt and the criticism she received from colleagues who believed the approach lacked sufficient boundaries. However, the long-term outcomes speak for themselves—many of the children who experienced the Hurstbridge model have gone on to lead stable, fulfilling lives, with many maintaining connections with staff members years later.

In a field often dominated by quick-fix solutions and compliance-based approaches, the Hurstbridge Farm model stands as a testament to the power of relationships, neuroscience, and what Adela beautifully describes as “relentless kindness.” For anyone working with traumatised children, the message is clear: start with relationship, understand the brain, and never underestimate the healing power of consistent, compassionate care.

You can listen to the podcast here:

You can watch here:

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:

Jenna Bollinger

Listen here:

Watch here:

Richard Cross

Listen here:

Watch here:

Transcript:

Colby: 0:00

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast.

Adela: 0:04

But don’t give up and don’t change, because it’s kind of in the hardness that gets success and that requires really strong leadership and what I call relentless kindness towards children. He talks quite clearly about the importance of children learning how to like themselves. One of the experiences that I’ve found quite important in moving into developing a model was the experience that I’d had of observing a model that very clearly did not work. If you’re going to develop a model of care for any group of children, it’s actually got to fit the children for whom you’re providing it. We relentlessly were nice and good and we didn’t try to achieve things with him that he couldn’t possibly achieve being able to use relationships to build safety and trust. Here’s something else that I wonder if you know, but that if you do run off, we run away with you.

Colby: 1:31

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast. I’m Colby Pearce, and returning for this episode is a highly respected figure in residential childcare here in Australia. Child care here in Australia, adela Holmes. Before we begin our conversation, I’d just like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the lands that we come to you from. For Adela, it is the Wurundjeri people of the Kulin nation and for me, it is the Kaurna people of the Adelaide Plains and I’d like to acknowledge the continuing connection the living Kaurna and Wurundjeri people feel to land, waters, culture and community and pay our respects to their elders past, present and emerging Now. I saw Adela out for a return to the podcast after reading a social media post of hers about trauma-informed, relationship-oriented and neurobiology-informed practices and was keen to talk to her further about this. Welcome, adela.

Adela: 2:39

Thank you. Lovely to be here, Colby.

Colby: 2:42

So, as we just were talking about, and I mentioned in the little intro, what captured my attention was a post on LinkedIn in which you presented some reflections really about trauma-informed practice and relationship-oriented practice in the out-of-home care space and where neurobiology, and I guess in particular, the neurobiology of trauma, sits, with current trends. So that’s what I love to pick your brains about and and I’m sure that people who listen to this podcast will also be very interested to hear your thoughts.

Adela: 3:28

So, in terms of sort of preparing my mind for talking about that today, if I can just reflect what drove me to write that post, on LinkedIn, I’d seen a few posts that worried me in terms of perhaps a growing tendency to shrink from some of the practices that we have been quite successfully using in working with the young people in residential out-of-home care. Because it is fair to acknowledge and I think I’m going to acknowledge that quite a bit during what I’ve got to say today but doing this work in that way, in what I would call the correct way for the client group, is hard work and I would not be surprised by people feeling tired or somewhat daunted by it.

Adela: 4:35

But the role, I think, of people like myself and yourself and others who lead the way in therapeutic residential childcare is to actually keep the motivation up and to encourage and support those who feel like faltering by the wayside by actually acknowledging yes, it is hard, it is really hard, actually acknowledging, yes, it is hard, it is really hard, but don’t give up and don’t change, because it’s kind of in the hardness that gets success and that requires really strong leadership and what I call relentless kindness towards the children and the word relentless tends to have often a negative edge to it, but I’m not talking about any negative edges. I’m talking about an absolutely relentless knowledge of how important it is that we maintain our internal state and our external state as a consequence. So one of the things I thought I’d talk about today is the lead-up and the preparation that I did when I was writing the proposal which later, you know, then morphed into the model for Hurstbridge Farm Therapeutic Residential Care Pilot, which was requested by the Victorian government.

Colby: 6:18

Yep.

Adela: 6:19

And I was already working at Take Two, the intensive therapeutic service that had been secured by Berry Street. I was working with Berry Street in Take Two when they wanted to move to the second recommendation of a report that they had commissioned in the late 90s, which was to initiate a therapeutic residential care pilot where an approach could be trialled to see how successful it would be. And of course that came to me in the role I was in at Take Two to write at the time, and so I thought I’d talk a little bit about that and where my relentlessness came from, and then sort of see where that takes us, if that’s okay with you, Colby.

Colby: 7:18

That sounds awesome. Interestingly, when you talk about that relentlessness, a number of my guests have talked about the importance of stickability. Yeah, I don’t know if they as such and perhaps in the foster care context more so. But stickability, yes, and the other thing that just a question I have, and the other thing, that just a question I have, and perhaps you’ll cover it, but if not, I’d be interested to hear what you think are some of the reasons why it is so hard the work.

Adela: 7:56

Yeah, look, it’ll probably become apparent as I’m talking, but if you don’t think I’ve articulated it clearly enough, ask away. Yeah, sure, but when I was first approached at Tag2 to write this proposal for the pilot, I was very mindful of prior experiences, because I guess my natural inclination had always been somewhat similar in terms of the use of relationship, because that’s something that I learnt when, I think, I talked about starting out in the institutions when I did my last podcast. That was something that I learnt in those settings that, even if you were very limited in what you could achieve because of the environment, you could still demonstrate to those young women what it meant to be there for them, present in the true sense of the word, and to demonstrate that you liked them.

Adela: 9:21

And I had not read Bruce Perry yet, right but, I’m going to read a short paragraph from Bruce Perry during this, because he talks quite clearly about the importance of children learning how to like themselves, and that was something that I did develop when I was working, you know, right at the beginning of my career in the institutions.

Adela: 9:48

But what I also understood was that it wasn’t enough. Right, it was important and it was great, but it wasn’t enough to actually achieve the change that was required, and I don’t know that I understood that completely fully until I’d done all the reading that I’ll talk about in a sec. In terms of putting together the model for Take Two Sorry for Hurstbridge when I was at Take Two, for Take Two sorry for Hurstbridge when I was at Take Two, one of the experiences that I found quite important in moving into developing a model was the experience that I’d had of observing a model that very clearly did not work for young people. Observing a model that very clearly did not work for young people. This was something that the department I think had tried to initiate in I’m just trying to think of the year. It was around 2003, 2004, I think and they wanted to develop a house that they had in the community to work with four young people.

Adela: 11:13

Now I’m not going to use any names but, the person who developed that model selected a very cognitive approach which involved points and things you could gain and lose, and you know it was quite complicated and it didn’t work. And it very clearly didn’t work because there was quite a level of interest in understanding why it didn’t work and that fell to me to explore in my role at take two, in the role that I was in at the time, because that was what I was focusing on, and one of the things that became very, very clear in terms of why that model hadn’t worked was because it was exceptionally cognitive and so for me that was quite important to hold in my mind. And then the more reading that I did, and certainly the more reading of Bruce Perry that I did, I completely understood why that model had not actually worked. And I suppose my starting point then that I developed was if you’re going to develop a model of care for any group of children, it’s actually got to fit the children for whom you’re providing it. Yes, it’s got to fit with their needs.

Adela: 12:50

And of course, the problem with that one was it didn’t fit with their needs, because we were talking about the child protection client group of children who really don’t like themselves and their starting point is lower down in their brains, if you like, and reading the work of Bruce Perry and others really helped to cement that in my mind, so I knew where I had to start. Looking was not in the range of cognitive models that exist out there. Now I’m not saying that cognitive models don’t work at all. I’m just saying that they’re not a good fit for the client group that I was mainly looking at writing a model and developing a model for.

Colby: 13:42

Yes, and if I can just jump in for a moment and just for our listeners as well, when you’re talking about a cognitive model in my parlance, I’m wondering whether you’re talking about a cognitive behavioural model, because you referred to points, and so I’m imagining that the model would require the young people to reflect on themselves and their approach to life in the home particularly, and regulate themselves in consideration of a set of expectations that could achieve them points towards a positive outcome.

Adela: 14:30

And for rewards right. Yes so there’s an implicit belief within that that A they can regulate themselves which you know we’ll talk about a bit more but that they can regulate themselves and that they can do that in a thinking reflective way to achieve a certain outcome, neither of which is actually possible for very traumatised, possible for very traumatised young people who are really not operating from that part of their brains effectively.

Colby: 15:13

No, and nor do they expect adults to follow through on promises. You know, on agreement, I often say where such an approach is tried, the young person I’ve found observed, the young person will go. Well, if you were going to give me that, you can give it to me now.

Adela: 15:34

Yeah.

Colby: 15:34

And if you don’t give it to me now, you are never going to give it to me Exactly, or they’ll sabotage. Yes, yes, because they don’t like uncertainty, so they hate uncertainty, in fact, and so they’ll go. Well, I’m never going to achieve it. You are never going to give it to me, so I might as well just blow it up.

Adela: 15:56

Well, it’s interesting. You make me think about a child who first, once we had the Hurstbridge Farm going. In the very first weeks of coming to the farm, this young man, who was about 13 and a half, said to me in his, I think, first or second week. He said to me can I have a points chart, a star chart? And I said oh, have you had one of those before? He said yes. I said why is it that you want one? He said because I want a CD of CD, and he mentioned some artist. I want a CD at the end of the week and that’s how I’ll get it.

Adela: 16:52

And I said have you always been able to get, you know, the thing you want at the end of the week with a star chart? And he said oh, oh, not always. And I said how many times do you think you might have been successful? He couldn’t really remember. Anyway, I said to him look, we don’t actually do star charts here. But I said let me say right now you can have your CD at the end of the week, no star chart. And let me tell you why I don’t want you to have a star chart. I don’t want you to have a star chart, because I want you to have the CD, because I want you to have the enjoyment of listening to that person singing on the CD and I want you to feel good about having it and listening to it. I said I don’t like setting people up to fail and I don’t know whether you can do it or not, but I really don’t want to start you being here with that experience.

Adela: 18:10

So you can have the CD and we’ll organise for you to go and buy it. You don’t have to wait till the end of the week. You can have it now. Now, what was I demonstrating to him?

Colby: 18:24

His worthiness, his deservedness, All of those things and that he would. He was with people for whom his interests were important.

Adela: 18:37

Yeah, and that I wanted him to feel good and I wanted him to have something that was enjoyable to him, which I would say is probably a thirst, and I wanted him to have something that was enjoyable to him, which I would say is probably a thirst. But that’s no, I’m not saying that he miraculously changed overnight, because of course he didn’t.

Colby: 18:56

That would have been quite inconsistent with his model of relationships and he’s likely to have, yeah, tried to sabotage that approach.

Adela: 19:02

Absolutely, and he did many times. But we relentlessly were nice and good and we didn’t try to achieve things with him that he couldn’t possibly achieve. And, interestingly, he is quite a challenging young person to work with all through the about two and a half years that he was in the program. But, strangely, changes were happening. That became evident when he moved on to the placement that he went to next, evident when he moved on to the placement that he went to next, which was a sort of lead tenant model, because he was by that stage, you know, I think, just over 16 and he could move into that and he’d been in that new program for about six weeks. We got a phone call from the people who ran it and they said, goodness, you know, I don’t know what you did with him out there, but you know we had his whole history and we read his history and he’s just been fantastic here and I was going phew, because I honestly had not thought that we had achieved what I’d hoped we could, but we did.

Colby: 20:32

That’s an important thing. I think that’s a very important experience to have in this area of work. It’s part of the reason why I think it’s really important that we reflect on young people’s journey through our involvement with them, because the changes are often small and gradual.

Adela: 20:54

Indeed.

Colby: 20:55

But I’ve always found that they undoubtedly occur. They just take a while. And also the other thing is that sometimes we’re just not even around to see the full realisation.

Colby: 21:11

And then I also reflect on and this was something that came from an earlier podcast with Graham Kerridge which I might have mentioned to you. In the previous time we chatted about the human capital element and and also the intergeneration you know, like impacts of of turning a life in a in a slightly or largely different direction, and and the impact that has on partners, children, grandchildren yeah well, um yeah.

Adela: 21:41

Well, this young man that I just referred to has just recently got married, and one of the lovely elements of the work that we all did at Hurstbridge Farm is that in almost every case, every case, the various young people have maintained a connection with one or other of the people who worked there throughout the years. So, you know, I only became aware that he’d got married recently because I think he had sent something from Facebook to one of the workers who he had really worked well with, because obviously he wanted us to know that he’d got married and that he was happy. And indeed we were happy that he was happy, and I think I said, you know, at the start of our first podcast, what was I aiming for? People used to ask what was I aiming for?

Colby: 22:55

A great aspiration, an ordinary life? Yeah, you’re reading my mind, adela. I was just about to remind you of that.

Adela: 23:02

Yeah, and he’s got an ordinary life. He’s just got married, you know, his adult life is beginning in another direction and for me that’s enough. That’s actually more than enough, really to see a product and an outcome, which I think is, you know, really it’s really important to be able to say, well, I achieved, or we achieved, that outcome, and that outcome has a tangibility in the real world. And it doesn’t have to be flat. It can be very, very mundane, because ordinary life is pretty mundane, but to be able to be comfortable and happy in it is really important. Yeah, yeah. So you know, it was a nice outcome to hear of.

Adela: 23:57

And I’ve, over the years, heard, you know, some people have struggled more than others, of course, you know some people have struggled more than others, of course, but in terms of their struggle, they have struggled with less dramatic issues than they otherwise, I say, would have. Some people might say might have. I say would have, because we all know, you know, what outcomes can be if interventions don’t succeed. So when I was, you know, asked to write this proposal for a model, where did I go? I went to look at models that worked, yes, look at models that worked, yes. So I think sometimes we in Australia can get a bit sort of startled and stargazy by models from overseas because they’re from overseas.

Colby: 24:57

Mm-hmm.

Adela: 24:58

But because they’re from overseas doesn’t mean anything actually.

Colby: 25:03

That happens overseas as well, when I work overseas as well, does it?

Adela: 25:06

That’s interesting.

Colby: 25:07

Yeah, I’ve never been more highly regarded in my work than in other countries.

Adela: 25:13

There you are. Yeah, I don’t know what that’s about exactly, but it must be something to do with some kind of self-talk that makes us regard people whose work perhaps we don’t know as well more highly or differently, but it is actually something that I think can really get in the way of good work and developing models that work for our culture, in our environment and in a society with our ways of seeing the world, and Australian values are quite different to values in other parts of the world. But our kids, you know that’s the circumstances in which they’re reared. So at the time of course we’re talking about 2005 was when I was asked to put together this proposal and we were all leaning towards, very strongly towards the work of Dr Bruce Perry, bessel, van der Kolk, dan Hughes, the people who really strongly espoused understandings of complex trauma, and lucky that we were, because this was the client group that we were actually designing a model for. We were designing something that had to work for children and young people who had experienced complex trauma, because they don’t cross all the thresholds to come into any sort of out-of-home care. Unless that is the case, they have to cross all the legislative thresholds, all of which imply quite significant harm. So again, you know that’s what I had in my head that we had to actually match the model with the actual needs of the children for whom I was trying to design it.

Adela: 27:35

Now I want to read a paragraph. I often read this paragraph when I’m doing training. You’ll be familiar with it. Anyone who’s familiar with Bruce Perry will be familiar with it. It’s very short.

Colby: 27:46

Go ahead. I’m not monetized, so I don’t think you two can demonetize this.

Adela: 27:54

This is out of the boy who was raised as a dog.

Colby: 27:58

Yeah.

Adela: 27:59

Traumatized children tend to have overactive stress responses and, as we’ve seen, these can make them aggressive, impulsive and needy. These children are difficult. They are easy to upset and hard to calm. They may overreact to the slightest novelty or change and they often don’t know how to think before they act. Hence why star charts don’t work.

Adela: 28:28

Before they can make any kind of lasting change at all in their behaviour, they need to feel safe and loved. Unfortunately, however, many of the treatment programs and other interventions aimed at them get it backwards. So that was a very clear message to me don’t get it backwards. They take a punitive approach and they hope to lure children into good behaviour by restoring love and safety only if the children first start acting better. While such an approach may temporarily threaten children into doing what adults want, they can’t provide the long-term internal motivation that will ultimately help them control themselves better and become more loving towards others. So now I’m just going to share a little bit about what it was like developing a model that had that as its foundational thinking, because it was alien to many people to operate in that way. More services than not hoped to, as Bruce Perry says, lure children into good behaviour. Hence the star chart comment from the book.

Colby: 29:51

Yeah, with rewards as the lure.

Adela: 29:55

And there were times when we had started Hurstbridge Farm, when I used to drive home it was an hour’s drive from Hurstbridge to where I lived at the time and I would sit in my car driving and you know, mulling over the day and what we’d done and I’d be thinking do I know what I’m talking about? Am I bonkers? You know? Am I leading things in the right direction? What are we achieving?

Adela: 30:34

And I had to be brutally honest, I lost good collegiate friendships during that time because people would say really hurtful things to me about how misguided I was and how we were not setting enough limits for the children, and many, many things that demonstrated that people did not understand. And sometimes I’d get home and I’d run in the door and read that paragraph to myself because I wanted to remind myself of what I was doing and what we were doing as a group of carers together in that therapeutic milieu and remind myself that it was okay and we were on the right track. But there were comments made to me that were really hurtful and from colleagues who I’d really valued in the past, and so I suppose that’s part of what I was talking about at the start, about the hardness of doing this work.

Colby: 31:43

Yes and doubt is common. Self-doubt is common as mud.

Adela: 31:55

And the actual, sometimes quite hurtful responses that people would say as if I had no idea what I was doing. But thankfully, I’m a Cancerian, and one of the qualities of a Cancerian is tenacity, and I do possess quite a bit of that, and one of the qualities of a Cancerian is tenacity, and I do possess quite a bit of that. So I kept reminding myself, and I also kept reminding myself of the other work that I’d done and the reading that I’d done in putting the model together, because I didn’t only draw from the work of Bruce Perry, vandenhek and Hughes. I also drew from this amazing book, which was based on the work that had been done in the UK for decades.

Colby: 32:42

Yes.

Adela: 32:43

You know, people like Adrian Ward, who was one of the editors of that book and who I later met, people who ran the Mulberry Bush School, people who had been operating in a similar way to what we were doing at Hurstbridge and what we proposed to do, because that was source documentation that I was drawing from for sometimes 70 or 80 years, yes, grounded in the work of people like Winnicott and….

Colby: 33:19

Dr Drysdale.

Adela: 33:20

Dr Drysdale, all of those really good thinkers who put together longstanding and reliable months of books. So they’re the two main source documents. When I was putting it together I drew from Plus a couple of places that were very strongly grounded in trauma and attachment understandings in America. One was a place called Villa Santa Maria, which was in New Mexico, and another place called Chaddock, which was near Chicago, and again there were lots of their approaches that were brought together and sort of dovetailed in with Bruce Perry’s work.

Adela: 34:10

So when we talk about Hurstbridge Farm, I wanted to mention those, because I think sometimes people say oh, you know, adela just wrote that sort of off the top of her head. Well, I didn’t, no, I didn’t because I wouldn’t, because you can’t do that. If you’re going to produce something and devise something that is really going to have some gravitas, it’s got to have been based on something else that has had longevity and been tried and tested, because what kind of an idiot would I be, you know, to just dream something up and put it into action. So very important, I think, for anybody who’s drawing together and writing a model of new, a new model of care, to actually base it on the work that has gone before. Yeah, because otherwise that’s a fairly egotistical approach which you know doesn’t fit and doesn’t fit the needs of kids.

Colby: 35:27

I think we live in times where every agency wants to develop their own model. You’re right, yeah, and we also live in a time where evidence-based practice is reified. Yes, and that does get me thinking sometimes that when people kind of go it alone and look on, a lot of the question, a lot of the evidence is ethnographic in this. It’s so hard to do research in this area. You talked about the kind of people who do their own thing, but most you talk about Hughes, you talk about Perry Van der Kolk. You talk about Hughes, you talk about Perry Van der Kolk. I mean, they worked in this space for a very long time.

Adela: 36:14

A long time.

Colby: 36:21

And they operationalised their thoughts into an approach, and likely also in some ways, based on those who’d gone before them. So you, know Dan. Hughes, I would imagine, was heavily influenced by the work of Bowlby, for example.

Adela: 36:32

Oh, absolutely yes.

Colby: 36:35

My concern is there is such a plethora of agencies wanting to present their own model, and part of that, I think, is because we have competitive tendering environments.

Adela: 36:48

Yes, I agree.

Colby: 36:50

So agencies are trying to present a point of difference to their competitive tenderers. So, rather than, as you would say, drawing on everyone, drawing on the work that is tried and tested which I think they probably do to a certain extent, but they’re also wanting to bring something different. I think is what you’re saying and, if I understand you correctly, that concerns you from the point of view of departing from established knowledge and approaches that work.

Adela: 37:35

Yes, well, I can’t see other than what you’ve just referred to. I can’t see a good reason to not apply principles and tactics that have worked for 80 years in some settings again.

Colby: 37:57

And the Mulberry Bush School. Mulberry Bush would be probably one of the best examples of that.

Adela: 38:03

One of the best. And I must say, when I was in the UK I did go and see a few places and when I saw those places I could see coming to life why they worked. And people may or may not be familiar with a documentary that was made about the Mulberry Bush School in well, it was released in 2007,. I think it was called Hold Me Tight, let Me Go, and I presume it’s available still or perhaps you can see it on YouTube. But basically they had a documentary crew come and spend substantial amounts of time at the school and obviously take film of a lot of interactions and situations that they were dealing with and then presumably sit down and edit that into a watchable format. The documentary itself goes for, I think, almost two hours. It’s quite a lengthy piece of work. But when I had first started Hurstbridge, it was shown at the Melbourne International Film Festival here, was shown at the Melbourne International Film Festival here, and my daughter, who was actually working on the film festival, said oh, you have to come and see this documentary about a place in England because it’s what you’re doing. It’s what you’re doing at the Hurst Bridge. So I went to see it and I thought, well, thank you to my daughter because it felt so you could see its effectiveness. It was just fantastic to watch.

Adela: 39:59

And then I went there when I was in the UK a year later a bit more than a year and actually saw some of the children I’d seen on the documentary and how they had prospered and how far they’d come along as a result of the interventions. And I remember I was kind of constrained because they said you just have to sit quietly, can’t say anything or be involved in anything, just sit in the corner and be an observer. And I watched one of the children who in the documentary had been very troubled and he was leading the discussion about how they were going to do the end of the year nativity play and he was so calm and grounded and centered. It was palpably different to the way that he had been. And I remember I had just had tears running down my face because of the change in that time.

Adela: 41:04

And you know they were doing that again and again and again, reliably doing it. So people could send. You know people don’t send children to the Mulberry Book School for no reason. They send them there because they reliably have a model that works. And now I sit back and I think about those early days at Hurstbridge and how well terrifying which is probably the best how terrifying it was to know that I had actually taken that step and gathered together a group of people with an intent to undo harm and help children to heal. And I can now sit back and think, yeah, well, we did it, and they’re still doing it, because Hurstbridge Farm is still operating 18 years later.

Adela: 42:11

Well, we did it and they’re still doing it because Hurstbridge Farm is still operating 18 years later and it’s been reviewed twice with no changes substantial changes made to the model of care and it’s still working to produce those outcomes. So that’s quite exciting. It’s the possibly the only thing that actually makes me feel okay about the trauma of those drives, those long drives home, having had to process people’s criticisms and running in and reading that paragraph which, to be honest, I could probably almost recite.

Colby: 42:53

Yeah as a mantra.

Adela: 42:57

But again I think it goes to the importance of being able to use relationships to build safety and trust and do it in a very thoughtful and predictable way and have some confidence that it is actually going to produce the results that we wanted. I mean, one of the things that I drew from the model at Chaddock in the place near Chicago was that they had an approach which was very strongly attachment-focused and they were working a lot with Dan Hughes, working a lot with Dan Hughes. The way that they promoted attachment was that the children did not spend time on their own. They were actively engaged with during their waking hours.

Adela: 44:06

The only time they spent time alone was when, you know, they were having a shower or in the toilet, even when they were going off to sleep at night, until we felt that they could get themselves off to sleep. We followed what Chaddock talked about, which was to be with the child in a positive way, which was to be with the child in a positive way and I actually have a story to tell about that with a boy who radically altered in a very short space of time under that kind of administration of relationship relationship. He was in our second intake of kids at the beginning of 2008. And we used to meet the children hierarchically. So we wanted to very strongly deliver the message message as per all of the other models that I’d read that the adults were actually in charge and that we would take care of them.

Adela: 45:18

But I didn’t want them to meet the other children first. I wanted them to meet all the adults and feel confident and comfortable in those adult relationships. So I used to meet them first and then I would have my assistant manager go and meet them and then we’d go down through the hierarchy of the staff. So I went to meet this young man who was 10 years old, with significant attitude, and he was, you know, quite small.

Colby: 45:53

We smile because we know what you know. Other people would be like, well, he’s got an attitude problem. But you know, I mean our kids, I mean who doesn’t?

Adela: 46:04

Who doesn’t, why would they not? And why would they not? Why would they not? So he came out with his arms folded and he said this was, I think, quite a good use of a sort of pace-like response. He said first words to me were is it true, you don’t let kids out on their own up there? And so I thought now change the transaction. We don’t need to respond in like fashion.

Adela: 46:41

I said well done. I said you’ve been doing some research on us. It’s a great thing to do some research on a place you’re coming to. I’m sorry that you don’t like that bit of your research. But, yes, it is true. But do you know why we do that? No, I said well, the reason we do that is because we want you to be safe, and we want you to be safe no matter where you are and what you do. And I said I bet sometimes, when you’ve been out on your own, you’ve had a real whale of a time and, you know, done exciting things. But I bet also there are times when you’ve been in a bit of danger and a bit of trouble, and I bet those times you didn’t know what to do. Well, we don’t want you to have those experiences. So, yes, we do stay with you to make sure you’re okay.

Adela: 47:45

So he wasn’t convinced. He said, well, you won’t stop me. And I said well, we will do whatever we can to keep you safe. And I said here’s something else that I wonder if you know, but that if you do run off you’re, we run away with you. And he looked at me and he said what do you mean? I said, well, because we want you to be safe, our staff stick with you no matter what, and if you feel you’ve got to go, well, they’ll stick with you to make sure you’re safe.

Adela: 48:34

And he wasn’t in like that at all, so he sort of went oomph and walked off. And then he came back and said to me are you going back there now? And I said yes, that’s where I’m going now. He said, well, I hope you have a car accident on the way there and die. And I said, well, I hope I don’t, but I think you’re telling me that you’re a bit angry about what you’ve heard. That’s okay, we’ll work our way through that, that’s fine. And then I explained to him who was coming to meet him next and how it would all go on. Obviously, it wasn’t magic. It didn’t transfix things in that short a space of time, but it just, I think, gave him a taste that we weren’t going to be competitive.

Adela: 49:32

So that was February, beginning of February 2008. He never ran away, I might add. He only once walked up the driveway and the staff member who was working with him that day, doing you know good activities, said oh hang on a minute, mate, I’m just tying my shoelace, I’ll be with you in a tick. And he’d just turn around and walk back again. But fast forward to June. The end of June in that same year, 2008, I was driving into work one morning. It was about I don’t know half past nine, and as I got to the bottom of the driveway he was running around in his pyjamas. I mean, it was cold, you know it was June. Outside the house, adela, adela, waving his arms. So I wound down my window. I said what’s the matter? He said there’s no adult with me.

Colby: 50:43

So what did he do? He sought one out.

Adela: 50:46

So I said oh, how’s that? How come, have you just woken up? Yes, I’ve just woken up and there’s no adult with me. So we went and found out what had happened was he was fast asleep and the worker in the house had gone up to get some milk for his breakfast. So he happened to wake up at exactly that minute. Happened to wake up at exactly that minute. However, the message is clear He’d actually got to quite like having an adult who cared about him with him, and so, you know, we saw enormous changes in him, and in some ways, we hadn’t seen the extent of the change until that morning, when there wasn’t anyone with him, and we realised that he had learnt to accept being cared for.

Colby: 51:47

While I sit here and listen to you, Adela, and thinking about why I wanted you to come back onto the podcast. You’ve talked about the importance of relationships and relationship-based practice. You’ve also mentioned the importance of neurobiology and the neurobiology of trauma, thinking principally of Bruce Perry, and I think what I’m hearing you say is that it’s about the order and sequence. It’s about sequencing our work?

Colby: 52:29

Yes, it is, and that’s what the neurobiology of trauma brings. It’s about. This is actually where you start and this is where you go next, and this is where you go next, and the relationship is the containing environment yes, and you can’t substitute anything for that it you’ve actually got to go through those levels of connection.

Adela: 52:57

Now you can tag team a little bit because you know in a therapeutic milieu I can tell you how many times in a day I used to have staff come and say, oh, I need some space because it is intense. But that’s when you tag team. But if you do the building of relationships correctly you can do that, because kids are not developing only one relationship to rely on, which is what I discovered in the institution that one relationship might be great but it’s only going to work when you’re there. So what we used to really focus on at Hurstridge was developing those relationships across the board.

Adela: 53:49

That was what Chaddock talked about in their writing and also the Villa Santa Maria. Those relationships were transferable to a certain extent. I mean, obviously people are people and they have their certain quirks and you know personality, styles and they’ll actually bring the relationship to life in a slightly different way. But the underpinning of that relationship, which is the certainty of being cared for, the reliability of adults as protectors, the reliability of adults as people to like you, value, you, have fun with you, that can be shared and that can be an overarching experience.

Colby: 54:46

Yeah, a Prince William experience.

Adela: 54:48

With another boy. I won’t go into the entirety of his story but, again, very little capacity to trust adults. The day that I knew we’d actually got there with him was he’d been with us for about three and a half, four months. We used to walk everywhere with the kids. They didn’t walk anywhere on their own on the property it was 33 acres but anytime they went from one place to another they had someone walking with them, doing nice things, talking about you know what they were, but a presence, an adult, co-regulating, calming, valuing presence.

Adela: 55:37

And this particular day we were having a birthday celebration for one of the other kids and we were all on the balcony and had the barbecue fired up and this particular boy had said, had made a present for the other boy whose birthday it was. And he came up to me and he said will you walk with me up to the house because I’ve forgotten, you know the boy’s present and I want to go and get it. And when he asked me if I would walk with him, I knew that he had accepted being in the presence of a calming, co-regulating adult. Otherwise he would have just gone and I would have said hang on a minute, I’ll come with you or somebody would have. But no, he came to me and asked me to do it and I thought, hmm, okay, that’s good.

Colby: 56:39

So we hear a lot about trauma-informed practice, the importance of it, and I’d probably be well, I am one of the people who’s probably contributed to the narrative that trauma-informed practice is relationship, is the distinguishing feature of it, and developing relationship, and it is. But I think what you’re suggesting is that it’s more than that. It’s more than just the, it’s how you utilise that relationship, how you structure your work.

Colby: 57:15

Yes, and while I listen to you, I think what you’re talking about has real implications for staffing in community residential care. It also has real implications in foster care and kinship care and the ratio of adults to children.

Colby: 57:35

I’ve always had a saying, adela, when that, when I’ve been speaking to people who are starting out on their journey of having their own children, I’ll say to them never have more children than there are adults to attend to them. And then I’ll say but if you do happen to have more children than there are adults, have lots more children than you have adults so that the children have always got company, got someone to be with.

Adela: 58:06

But it’s really interesting, isn’t it you? What you say is so true, because it’s not just about what the adult says or does, but it is about the ratio as well. But it is also about the way in which you can generalize elements of those relationships so that you can tag team. And there will be times when children who have experienced such massive harm, particularly in the realms of attachment capacity, when they cannot let you go right, when they really really need you to be in the space with them to co-regulate, and sometimes, if it happens that you’re perhaps at the end of your capacity, that’s really quite hard. So that’s why a group milieu works effectively.

Colby: 59:11

Yes, I was having that very same thought. Across the podcast we’ve been talking about, there’s a couple of things One is just like.

Colby: 59:20

not every family is the same, neither is every endeavour in residential care and the residential care that works therapeutic residential care that works, therapeutic residential care that works. There’s a number of important things, components to that the opportunity for continuous relational connection through having not only other young people around, but having adults. It’s got to be staffed well, though for that. Adults it’s got to be staffed well though for that, and that’s that’s a message that that policy makers and funders really need to take on board strongly.

Colby: 59:58

Yeah, the. But the other thing I was thinking about as you were talking, was about the need for staff to have their own support in this space because, as you say, say some of the children, you’re not going to be afforded gratitude. I always think seeking gratitude is a fool’s quest from young people. Some adults will say we’re not praising you for doing well at school because that’s what we expect you to do. You know like it’s not noteworthy if you have a good day at school, if you flip it around. That’s not dissimilar to saying you know the argument against feeling like we should be validated all the time for the job we’re doing with, with our kids. No, that’s your job. Yes, that’s just actually your job to do a good job with the kids, but it’s as you said earlier, it’s hard work, it’s very hard and I think and and other other guests uh have well have also talked about.

Colby: 1:01:09

It is really important for staff to have the opportunity to feel, to reflect, to think about what they’re doing, to reflect, to reflect on their own reaction to the work and be supported in relation to that.

Adela: 1:01:25

I agree, and that is really, I think that’s incredibly hard to achieve. Some people say, or have said over the years, that Hurst Bridge Farm worked because of the farm environment. But actually I mean, yes, sure, that’s part of it, but that is not why it worked. That’s part of it, but that is not why it worked, because the work was in the relationships and how we used the relationships as vehicles for our knowledge of what needed to happen. So we know that kids, when they first came to Hurst Bridge, they could not regulate their presentation, they could not think effectively, they were not in a calm place inside their minds and they didn’t like themselves very much and we did all sorts of things. And I think one of the key elements is to not lower expectations but alter expectations. So when I used to say this many, many times in a day to the staff there times in a day to the staff there it’s not actually that I’m asking you to validate when a child is unpleasant towards you. What I’m suggesting is that if you can neutralise it neutralise it you’re better off in terms of your own response and what the child gets out of it. And that related directly to all the things that I read particularly Bruce Perry’s work about kids needing to like themselves first.

Adela: 1:03:30

I can remember an interaction that ended up with one of these erstwhile colleagues of mine ringing me because a child had been quite difficult with their visiting child protection worker and the staff, as always, had taken a decision internally not to humiliate them or shame them in the presence of that worker. So, yes, we would deal with it, but we would deal with it when they had gone and then I’d get a call from that person’s manager saying what are you doing up there? You know that he was really rude to whoever the worker’s name was and your staff member did nothing. And I said that’s right, they did nothing and let me explain why they did nothing. Went through what I, you know, just talked about and said can I tell you that right now that kid is out in a car with that worker unpacking why they got so upset when the child protection worker was there and that worker will try and go through it with them and help them unpack that until they have actually got somewhere. Even if they don’t manage to do the whole thing, they will keep going until they’ve got somewhere.

Adela: 1:05:07

And the reason they’re doing it in a car is because when you had little kids, what did you do if they wouldn’t go to sleep? You’d put them in the car seat and drive around the block a few times. We are helping that young person to regulate and to soothe. So please don’t tell me we’re doing nothing. We’re not doing nothing, but you can’t see it. And we had gone out of our way to help, you know, to visit and explain how we did what we did. But of course, until you saw it, it was impossible to know I like.

Colby: 1:05:47

I like the example of the car. I think it’s a very good example of the sequence. Yeah, I always in my own work, I always say you know, what do we do for babies? You know, we spend a lot of time thinking about their experience, responding to their experience, without them having to explain it to us Exactly. You know, thinking what’s going on for baby all the time. And then, yeah, and we didn’t expect them to regulate, we helped them regulate, and all of these kind of ideas. Some people will say, well, you’re just babying the children.

Adela: 1:06:30

But you know, I yes, I think we might have talked last time, but I’ve certainly.

Colby: 1:06:35

I can easily dispel that notion. When you think about um, what we do, a person’s needs are the same whether they’re one or 101 what they their relational care needs and their needs more generally. It just looks different in how you operationalise it. So we’re not babying the kids. What we’re doing is we’re filling in the gaps.

Adela: 1:07:00

Well, we are, and one of the things that I think that we if I said it once, you know, we must have all thought it and said it hundreds of times at Hurstbridge, which was Bruce Perry says you have to go to the lowest part of the brain implicated to create neurobiological change, and he talks really volubly about the amount of repetitions of corrective input that you have to provide. So if you think about that, that’s all we were doing that day. We were going to the lowest part of the brain implicated and we were going over it again and again and again, in a calm, non-punitive way, until even one little notch of awareness was achieved.

Colby: 1:07:56

Yeah, yeah, and we do this for years, you know, with our babies and young children and, like you were reflecting on a little bit earlier, I’ve had my doubters and the doubts rubbed off a bit.

Adela: 1:08:13

It’s always that, yeah.

Colby: 1:08:16

And it’s always been a challenge to advocate for therapeutic care for our children and young people. I think part of that has to do with other species in the animal kingdom. Don’t have experts telling them how to raise their young.

Adela: 1:08:37

We’re the only ones that have Exactly. But our young are dependent for so much longer than anyone else in the animal kingdom.

Colby: 1:08:44

And they’re capable of so much, and they’re also equally capable of a life that’s unproductive from a broader point of view. So there is complexity there that we need to acknowledge and tailor our approach to caregiving. We do that in the home anyway. Our kids aren’t all the same.

Adela: 1:09:09

Well, we do, and one of the things that I think is a really important skill for people who work in this field, with these kids who have been really impacted by complex trauma, is the skill to be able to let things wash over you. So you know when kids I don’t know how you go with expletives on your podcast do you commit them or do you blake them out?

Colby: 1:09:38

Go ahead, say what you need to say.

Adela: 1:09:41

Well, when kids say things you know to me, like oh, get fucked, or this or that or the other, if we buy into that we say goodnight really, because those are defences. We have to recognise them as defences and I have never been a person to buy into any of those kinds of expressions. And in fact I’ve got a million stories I could bore you to tears, you’d probably fall asleep. But one story I think really sticks with me we had, you know, in our first intake of young people that we had at Hurstbridge, we had probably eight of the young people who no one could work with.

Colby: 1:10:36

Yeah, they would have recorded them and sent you the most complex, troubled population of kids.

Adela: 1:10:43

We had, you know, children who’d had sometimes 42 placement breakdowns before coming to us, sometimes 42 placement breakdowns before coming to us. I said to the staff for that first year, when we were in about September, october, I said I would like let each of the kids know that I would like a Christmas list from them. I’d like a list of what I like for Christmas. And they said, yeah, right, that’s going to be easy. And I said, no, it won’t be easy because they won’t believe it. They won’t believe that we care, they won’t believe any of it. But we’ve just got to stay right and true and calm and see how we go. I still have the first list I got from the first child because it reminds me of the importance of relentless kindness, right? So, anyway, we got one or two and, to cut a very long story short, there was one in particular who’d had, you know, some pretty horrific childhood experiences, who just didn’t, wouldn’t do it, wouldn’t you know? No, I’m not going to do it.

Adela: 1:12:08

So I think about the beginning of December, I was walking out of the office building and she was leaning up against the wall and she said something like well, so when are we going to go and get this fucking Christmas present, then Now some people might have said, when you speak to me nicely, well, what would that have done, you know? So I just said now, yes, I went and got my bag and my car keys. And we got in the car and went to get it and on the way there I won’t tell the whole story because it’s very personal information, but on the way there a whole story came out about why this young person didn’t like presents and Christmas and it was an actual experience that she had. So very important not to get caught up in the. You know the niceties of nice behaviour At some point you can, but not at that point.

Colby: 1:13:35

Yeah, the importance is to avoid debate, to get involved in the behaviour and respond more meaningfully to the reasons why you’re seeing it. Adela, I could talk to you again. We could talk for hours, I’m sure maybe, maybe the next conversation we have can could be about how you I’m just thinking about this last little story how you explain to people, um, to that we it’s important to defer social niceties to another time.

Adela: 1:14:15

Yes, I think that’s actually a very good point.

Colby: 1:14:18

The reality is we don’t berate our babies for throwing up on us pooing on us weeing on us in the middle of the night when we’re trying. We don’t berate them for throwing whatever at us for spitting their food out. There’s a time to provide a corrective response, but there’s a whole lot of stuff that has to come before that.

Adela: 1:14:45

Has to come before that and it’s got its solid grounding in neurobiology because it’s go to the lowest part of the brain implicated. And I used to say that again and again and again to staff, because if you don’t go there you can’t go anywhere. You must go to that place because you’re building up from that place and you’re building up from that place with what the young person didn’t get in the first place, which is love and kindness and care. So you kind of have to say, okay, this is like a large baby walking around.

Colby: 1:15:34

People also take exception to that.

Adela: 1:15:37

Well, yes.

Colby: 1:15:38

Yeah.

Adela: 1:15:39

But this is what it is and sometimes you know, at a certain point you always, like you, can sense the point in the relationship where you can start to introduce that young person to some of the metaphor. So that same young person rang me up once, ages after leaving in a not very good state and, as we all know, anger is a couple of stages up from despair. So I did something which I thought might make them angry, but even if it did, it was probably better than despair. So I sent this young person a photograph of my hand, like that, my palm up, and the response was WTF. And then I texted back and I said can you not see it? And I knew it was provocative, but I knew the young person well enough to be able to do that.

Adela: 1:17:02

And the response was see what? And then I rang and said your hope, it’s in the palm of my hand. I’m looking after it. Until you can get it back, I’ll give it back to you. I’ll give it back to you now if you want it, if you’re ready for it, but if you’re not ready for it, I’ll look after it now, forever after. That has been a means of communication between us, so it’s kind of somewhere around Anne Hughes and Pace and metaphor as well. But in difficult situations in past times probably not so much in recent times but in times where you know things were a little bit tough I could just go and she knew exactly what that meant.

Colby: 1:17:57

Yeah, Well, Adela, again it’s been wonderful speaking to you, and if you’re going, we’ll probably have another conversation.

Adela: 1:18:07

Oh, I’m going yeah.

Colby: 1:18:09

About what I was just mentioning earlier, but thanks again.

Adela: 1:18:12

No problem, good to do it. See you, colby.

Colby: 1:18:16

Bye for now. Thank you.

The Hidden Strengths of Residential Care: Challenging the Status Quo with Dr Jenna Bollinger

Relationships: The Cornerstone of Stability in Out-of-Home Care

Dr. Jenna Bollinger’s groundbreaking research on stability in residential care challenges conventional thinking about what makes children and young people feel secure. Traditional measurements of stability in out-of-home care focus primarily on counting placements over time, suggesting that fewer moves equals greater stability. However, Jenna’s research reveals a more nuanced reality that practitioners, policymakers, and carers need to understand to create truly stable environments for vulnerable children.

The current system often defines stability as remaining in a single placement for a defined period. Yet Jenna’s research uncovers that children can remain in a placement for extended periods and still not feel stable. As she eloquently puts it, “If I was just told I have to leave my house today, I’m just told I have to get out for no reason and I don’t know where I’m going, I could be in my next house for 12 months, but I don’t know how secure I would feel.” This powerful insight reveals that stability is about much more than physical placement—it’s fundamentally about relationships.

Through extensive interviews with young people who had experienced residential care, Jenna discovered that those who formed strong connections with staff members felt a profound sense of stability, regardless of other factors. One particularly moving moment came when a young man corrected her interpretation of his experience. When she suggested that staff caring about him made a difference, he firmly stated, “No, I felt loved.” This correction highlights the depth of connection these young people need and can experience in residential care settings when relationships are prioritized.

This research challenges the commonly held belief that residential care is always inferior to other placement options. While Australia has one of the lowest rates of residential care use in the world (around 5-6% compared to Israel’s 95%), the outcomes may not necessarily be worse when considering the different starting points of children placed in various settings. Jenna points out that research rarely differentiates between care leavers from different placement types, making it difficult to accurately compare outcomes.

Another significant insight from Jenna’s work is the concept of “traumatized organizations.” When agencies responsible for caring for traumatized children become traumatized themselves, they struggle to provide effective support. Reflective practice, especially when implemented at leadership levels, can help organizations remain healthy and stable. As Jenna notes, “For an organization to work effectively, we need to start at the top and make sure that everything going on at the top is stable and healthy.”

Jenna’s “Secure House” model provides a practical framework for creating stability in residential care. The foundation is safety, the walls represent connectedness to consistent staff, the ceiling represents genuine care, and the roof encompasses training, supervision, and trauma-informed approaches. Additional elements include good matching, planned transitions, appropriate use of casual staff, and ongoing relationships with former staff members. This holistic approach recognizes that while change is inevitable, it can be managed in ways that preserve relationships and stability.

The research also highlights the importance of capturing diverse voices in understanding the out-of-home care experience. While we often hear from successful care leavers who have the language and connections to share their stories, we rarely hear from those who end up in the justice system or who didn’t even recognize they were in “residential care.” Understanding these varied experiences is crucial for developing truly effective systems of care.

You can listen to the podcast here:

You can watch here:

About Jenna:

Jenna has a Masters Degree in Forensic Psychology from the University of New South Wales, and a PhD from Monash University, where she investigated the experience of, and capacity for stability in, residential out of home care.

Jenna has worked in out of home care in different capacities since 2012 and is currently the Director of Psychology and Clinical Services for Knightlamp, which consults on assessment and implementation of therapeutic programs in out of home care across Australia.

Jenna also conducts a variety of assessments, including therapeutic assessments for out of home care, forensic assessments and parenting capacity assessments in the context of the child protection system.

Related Podcast Episodes:

Laura Steckley

Listen here:

Watch here:

Bruce Henderson

Listen here:

Watch here:

Transcript:

Colby: 0:00

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast.

Jenna: 0:04

If I was just told I have to leave my house today, I’m just told I have to get out for no reason and I don’t know where I’m going. I could be in my next house for 12 months, but I don’t know how secure I would feel. And so my research was trying to unpack what constitutes stability. Relationships are what makes stability. Those people spoke really highly of their time in residential care. They felt that they belonged to someone, that there was someone who cared for them, someone who loved them, someone who would protect them, someone who liked them. And I just don’t think the research bears out that residential care is as bad as what everyone makes it out to be. While the outcomes may be somewhat worse, maybe, not are, but may be somewhat worse for residential care, comparatively they may not actually be worse at all because they’re not on an even playing field at the starting point. Organisations become traumatised in and of themselves and so for an organisation to work effectively we need to start at the top and make sure that everything going on at the top is stable and healthy and therapeutic care is astonishingly difficult we need to have good staff who are trained who have really good supervision who have time together to build a connection as a team because fundamentally this all lives and dies with the staff.

Colby: 1:33

Welcome to the secure start podcast. I’m Colby Pearce, and joining me for this episode is a local, to me, expert in the design and delivery of therapeutic programs in out-of-home care here in Australia. Before I introduce my guest, I’d like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the lands that we meet on. For me, it’s the Kaurna people of the Adelaide Plains. For my guest, it’s the Darug people. And I’d like to acknowledge the continuing connection the living Kaurna and Dharug 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 Dr. Jenna Bollinger. Jenna has a master’s degree in forensic psychology from the University of New South Wales. and a Doctorate of Philosophy from Monash University where she investigated the experience of and capacity for stability in residential out-of-home care. Jenna has worked in out-of-home care in different capacities since 2012 and is currently the Director of Psychology and Clinical Services for Nightland. which consults on assessment and implementation of therapeutic programs in out-of-home care across Australia. Jenna also conducts a variety of assessments, including therapeutic assessments for out-of-home care, forensic assessments, and parenting capacity assessments in the context of the child protection system. Welcome, Jenna.

Jenna: 3:24

Thanks for having me.

Colby: 3:26

Well, yeah, and thank you for coming on. And I’m really excited about doing this podcast because I think we both have done, well, you do, and I have done similar things in our work, particularly insofar as developing and implementing therapeutic approaches to care. Jenna, I’ve I just wanted to start off by asking you how you got into working in this space.

Jenna: 4:00

Yeah, look, it was by accident, actually. I was doing my master’s and I was working in hospitality and hated it. And so I applied for a bunch of jobs and I got a call back from a residential care agency and I did not know what residential care was. But I went. and went to an info session and did a bit of an interview, I think. And I got hired as a casual residential care worker. And that was where it started, really. So I worked on the floor. for about 18 months. And then I finished my master’s degree. And at that point, they happened to, you know, the stars aligned and one of the psychologists went off on maternity leave. So there was a one-year maternity leave cover as a specialist psychologist. And for whatever reason, I got it, which was amazing. And I think it was actually really fortuitous that I, it was only for one year because it didn’t actually end up that way she resigned and I got a permanent position but I felt really compelled to do as much as I could because I only had a year you know I didn’t have time to settle in and find my way and work out what to do you know it was sort of boots on the ground, full steam ahead. I only had a year to learn as much as I could. And because I’d worked on the floor, I had some sense of what happened and what didn’t work and what did work. And then I pretty much just stayed in varying capacities ever since.

Colby: 5:55

And you said… Interestingly, you talked about, you tried to learn as much as you could in that first year. I wonder who were the, what were the bodies of work or who were the people that you drew the most knowledge and or inspiration from? Look,

Jenna: 6:16

Bruce Perry was right up there for me. He was quite a remarkable inspiration for me. And I would, is… I would still say that his book, The Boy Who Was Raised as a Dog, is the most compelling and easily read and digested book about trauma that has ever been written. And I recommend it to anyone, really. I’ve got three copies of it myself. And I just think it’s a brilliant book. And I have read everything that he’s written. I’ve seen him in person regularly. And I think that the way he explains things is so readily understood and readily read. You know, you could read it like a novel. And so his work on brain development and trauma therapy were really influential for me. And since then, I have sort of expanded my reach, looking at Bessel van der Kolk. I’m a huge fan of Martin Teicher at Harvard. I don’t know if you’ve heard of him, but he is extraordinary.

Colby: 7:28

Tell me what’s extraordinary about him.

Jenna: 7:31

Well, if you ever have the opportunity to hear him speak, You’ll need to take some Ritalin first because he just speaks so fast that you’re basically, you know, you need something to help you keep up. He’s brilliant. And the work he has done on identifying the impact, you know, Bruce Perry talks a lot about type and timing of trauma, which we know, but Martin Teicher has worked on that. on being more precise. You know, in girls aged six to eight in the corpus callosum, this is some of the effects if you have this type of abuse. Like it’s extraordinary work and it’s really complicated and difficult to digest. So it’s not a beginner material, but his work is just extraordinary. So there’s been a lot of researchers that have influenced women me and the way I do things. Oh, I also really like Dave Ziegler. I think he’s fantastic too. I’ve seen him present. I’ve got a couple of his books. So, you know, it’s sort of all over the place.

Colby: 8:40

What does Dave Ziegler, what does he bring to the work?

Jenna: 8:45

Well, so he runs a facility in America called Jasper Mountain. And he has written a number of books and a number of papers as well that are also really accessible. You can read them. You can understand the impact of trauma on children. But because he runs sort of a residential facility for even young children, because it’s different over in America, I suppose. And so he’s got lots of approaches that are a bit novel. I think there’s this amazing facility and I haven’t been, I haven’t been, I wanted to go, but I think it’s in Oregon. So it’s a bit, it’s not really on the track holiday, but you know, and there’s, there’s horses and chickens and there’s, you know, a school on site, you know, it’s just, it looks like a really amazing sort of place to do really good work. And his writings are really accessible.

Colby: 9:44

Yeah. I’m getting the sense that the neurobiology, what comes really under the heading of the neurobiology of trauma is really influential in your work and your approach to the work. Are there any other kind of theory traditions or theoretical traditions that you find also of benefit toJ

enna: 10:07

you? Look, I’ve written a lot about attachment theory. I’ve read a lot about attachment theory, which is every psych student’s trauma memory. You talk to anyone who studied psychology and say attachment, they go, oh, God, no, Baldy. But I think when you look at it through the lens of trauma and development, attachment can really help as an important theory and an important way of looking at it. And I’ve had the opportunity to talk to a lot of people about about attachment and attachment theory and You know, they happily say, oh, I get it now. I get it now. I see it’s not just a strange situation. It actually applies to real life.

Colby: 11:01

I’ve written a little bit about attachment too. And it wasn’t ever a trauma memory because there may be different epochs, time epochs, but they never taught attachment theory when I was at university um i had to i got it yes people asked me when i appear on podcasts and i think how i really first started to become interested in it was part of a an assignment in my masters where we were all split up to do developmental domains researched them brought a paper on them and i got social emotional so um that’s where There were some precursors to it, but attachment theory became important then. And I agree with you. I think attachment theory also provides a very strong explanatory basis for things that… for when parental care goes seriously awry.

Jenna: 12:01

Absolutely. Couldn’t agree

Colby: 12:05

more. Yeah. And you… I mentioned when I talked about your bio a little bit earlier, you researched residential care as part of your Doctor of Philosophy project. Can you tell me, tell the people who watch and listen to this podcast all about your research and what you found?

Jenna: 12:30

Yes.

Colby: 12:31

Yeah.

Jenna: 12:31

So my PhD was looking at stability in residential care. I was just looking at it in New South Wales, but I don’t imagine that findings would be massively different around Australia, but I haven’t done that. So I was interested in looking at stability because… Well, because decisions get made about where to place children in residential care. And, you know, I believe firmly that everyone does the best that they can do with the information that they have. But from my experience, there was very little frameworks guiding how decisions are made. It’s rather just a matching template that someone’s put together and you kind of hope for the best.

Colby: 13:18

Yeah.

Jenna: 13:19

And so I thought, well, what do we do with that? What do we do with that information? And so I wanted to explore stability, this sort of broad concept. And when I started looking at the literature, I found that not only is there not much research that looks at stability, there’s virtually none… There’s very little that looks at instability. There is virtually none that looks at stability itself. But I think I found two. I think I found two papers that actually looked at stability, not instability. And they found that there was virtually no effect of stability. Instability is bad. Stability, null. And I thought, well, that doesn’t make sense. It doesn’t make sense. So what do we do with that? So then I dug a little deeper and the conclusion I came to when I was looking at this sort of broad brush of stability and instability research is that they were measuring stability in basically a placements over time form. So X number of placements in X amount of time is stable. Y amount of placements in X amount of time is unstable. Pick a timeframe, 12 months, 18 months. If you have zero or one moves in that time, you’ve got stability. If you have more than that, you have instability. Let’s look at the outcomes. And I thought, well, if I was just told I have to leave my house today, I’m just told I have to get out for no reason and I don’t know where I’m going next. I could be in my next house for 12 months, but I don’t know how secure I would feel because, well, now I know I can just get kicked out. So is not moving placements for a period of time sufficient to be considered stability? Shock? The answer is no. And so my research was trying to unpack what constitutes stability. And look, to be honest with you, it’s really basic. It’s really simple. And I genuinely worried that the PhD wouldn’t pass because it’s so straightforward. But actually, it was really, really well regarded, really well regarded. And I think that’s because while nothing I found is jaw-droppingly remarkable, it puts an academic basis to what We all essentially know to be true, even if we haven’t thought about it that way before. And so essentially the findings were that relationships are what makes stability. For the young people that have strong, profound relationships with the staff members that they live with, they feel stable. They have good outcomes. And for those that don’t, they don’t feel stable and the outcomes are potentially if you’re depending on where they may find that stability from. So obviously remaining in a placement for a prolonged period of time is a fundamental part of stability. You can’t build relationships. You can’t have anything else, but it’s just not enough. It’s not the core features, not the defining feature of stability. Does that make sense?

Colby: 17:08

Yeah, yeah. There’s two things that I wonder about listening to you speak about. The first of it is, why were you interested in stability as a topic of research interest? The second bit I was going to say was probably more an observation, but of the last little bit, which was talking about relationships and connection. I wondered whether you considered belonging, a sense of belonging in that.

Jenna: 17:39

Yes, that was actually one of the findings, yes, quite literally. So, I mean, look, my thesis is massively long. You’re welcome to read it. But absolutely belonging is, was a key thing that was part of it. You know, it’s going to take me forever if I rattle through the thesis to try and find it. But that sense of having a home, that sense of belonging to someone. So one of my favourite quotes in the whole thesis is, All of my research was I talked to a young man who had had some really solid relationships with some staff he’d worked with for a long time. And he was telling me about the relationship he had with them. And he said that he felt loved. And I said, oh, wow. So it made a difference to you that you felt like they really cared about you. And he said, no, I felt loved. And he corrected me. I had undersold it. I underplayed what he was saying to me for whatever reason. And he said, no, I felt loved. And those staff, I mean, at the time it was a good couple of years ago that I interviewed him, but at that time he said that those staff knew his children, that he still called them if he needed a hand. And I would imagine that that was still going on now. And, you know, another thing, Actually, a few of them told me that the staff knew their children after they had left and they were still in touch with them. A number of staff had referred them to me for my research, so they had strong enough relationships that they could do that. And those people spoke really highly of their time in residential care. They felt that they belonged to someone, that there was someone who cared for them, someone who loved them, someone who would protect them, someone who liked them.

Colby: 19:40

Yeah, it’s interesting, isn’t it? When you contrast that with other roles in the sector, so for example, the therapeutic role, the role of the therapist, and especially long-term therapy with young people in out-of-home care, that’s something that has been, I guess, the mainstay of my practice over the last 30 years. And As a psychologist, we have different boundaries around our work, but it is the case, though. I have had the same phone number since about 2001. So the young people still contact me that I knew. Not all of them, obviously, but quite a number of them do. And I think that that’s, yes, it stems from feeling like they mattered. Yeah. To me. And we hung around. Yeah. Yes. You know, hanging around for them. And I wonder, the other part of my question was just about what piqued your interest in stability versus what did you think was the case in relation to instability before you did your interviews? I

Jenna: 20:55

don’t know. Look, as I said, I don’t think anything came out of it that I was like, what? Oh, my goodness. That’s amazing. There were a number of moments of, wow, that’s so cool, but very little was shocking. You know, no one said, oh, actually it’s having eggs for breakfast on a Saturday, where you go, wow, okay, fair enough. You know, it all made sense. It was about feeling cared about. It was about feeling safe. It was about… the staff showed up. What was maybe a little bit surprising and unexpected was that no one really talked about co-resident stability. That was less of an issue. I don’t know that anyone really raised it. If I asked about it, they’d all kind of, not all actually, a number of them would say yes. Yeah, that matters. But that didn’t really come up. And even then it sort of felt like it was a bit more of if it’s good, that’s great. If it’s bad, it’s bad. But if it’s okay, that’s fine. That doesn’t really matter. And I thought that would have been more of a feature.

Colby: 22:24

Absolutely. I do too. I think in foster care, where you’ve got multiple young people fostered in the same home environment and one of the children moves out, then I’ve always thought and observed that that can be quite destabilising for the children who remain in that placement. Residential care. one of the things, ways in which I’ve always thought about it is that it does provide an opportunity for stability of care, for stability of relational connection that is superior to foster care. And that’s one of those things that people would be like, Don’t say that. You can’t say that. No, no, no. Residential care, bad. Option of last resort. Option of last resort. Why would you want to send any child to residential care? You only send those who cannot be placed elsewhere to residential care. But there are… And it is one of the things that I like to pursue on this podcast. There are clear… aspects of residential care where there are opportunities and superiority, where it’s superior in some respects, and there are opportunities afforded to us with residential care that are much less vexed than with foster care. For example, family contact and family reconnection, I think much easier with residential care.

Jenna: 24:03

There’s lots that’s easier in residential care, I think. And I just don’t think the research bears out that residential care is as bad as what everyone makes it out to be. In Australia, we actually have one of the lowest levels of residential care use in the world. I think we’re at about 5%, 5% to 6%, whereas over in Israel, it’s at 95% residential care. Oh, look, I’ve done a little thumbs up.

Colby: 24:32

What

Jenna: 24:33

was that? It’s the way of doing things. out of high care, right? And all in between, UK and USA, about 13%, give or take. And so, but the research also shows that in countries with lower levels of use, those in foster care and those in residential care, they’re actually not the same at baseline. So while the outcomes may be somewhat worse, maybe, not are, but maybe somewhat worse for residential care. Comparatively, they may not actually be worse at all because they’re not on an even playing field at the starting point. But the research doesn’t necessarily suggest that residential care outcomes are worse because the leaving care research very, very rarely differentiates the groups of care leavers. So you can very rarely find outcome measures that striated for residential care, for foster care, for kinship care. So it’s very, very hard to actually identify whether the outcomes are any worse at any rate.

Colby: 25:42

Yeah, there is a serious dearth of good quality research into care leavers and I think your point about where they start is really interesting. And effectively, you would be needing to look at effect sizes, treating foster care and residential care as interventions and then looking at effect sizes to see. So you work with organisations who are delivering care. I was just wondering, Really keen to hear a little bit about your experiences of doing that. And in particular, what sort of work are you doing with those organisations?

Jenna: 26:28

So we do work with various organisations doing various things. Doesn’t that sound… suspicious. It just really depends on what they need. So, you know, sometimes we will advise on therapeutic care plans for foster kids, for whole agencies. Sometimes we deliver reflective practice to the management teams. Sometimes we work directly in the houses, you know, giving advice as to what the staff might need. And other times we do assessments of what’s happening and if it’s appropriate or whatever. So whatever is needed is kind of what we do. My boss delivers training. And so, you know, we do whatever is needed and with the various organizations who need things from us.

Colby: 27:29

Okay. You mentioned in there something piques my interest was the reflective groups with leadership.

Jenna: 27:36

Yes.

Colby: 27:36

Yeah. Tell us a little bit more about implementing reflective practice with leadership.

Jenna: 27:44

Reflective practice is a bit like attachment theory, really, and it tends to get a reaction from people until they do it. And once you do it, you tend to be relatively sold on it. It’s quite an extraordinary opportunity to reflect, but also to sort of recenter a lot of the work, you know, because we know that trauma is traumatic and working with trauma is traumatic, that organizations become traumatized in and of themselves. And so for an organization to work effectively, we need to start at the top and make sure that everything going on at the top is stable and healthy and untraumatized. And so starting at the top by doing the reflective practice, we can get everyone back on the same page. They can communicate with each other. They can reflect on what’s going well. They can reflect on what’s going not so well. They can help each other. There’s not so much of an agenda as there often is when you have those big team meetings where every minute is structured of people telling you all the things that they’re doing well. And so people have the opportunity to really talk about things. And by the end of it, you know, it feels a bit magical almost that people feel happier at the end of it. They feel more connected to each other and more positive about the work that they do.Colby: 29:18

It’s therapeutic.

Jenna: 29:20

Yeah. So we found all the hard parts.

Colby: 29:23

Well, I think, yeah, I think there’s a couple of things I would say is that, yeah, When people are able to be collectively in a leadership team a little bit vulnerable with each other to talk about the challenges, their own challenges in delivering the work. the response is often an empathic one and connection deepens. And I’ve spoken to, in various other podcasts previously, this issue of reflective supervision has been quite a significant one in terms of it being a very common theme of saying, one, it’s really good. Two, it really helps with the work. And also three, that there’s something in it for retention

Jenna: 30:22

as

Colby: 30:22

well, which relates a little bit back to what you were saying about stability and your thesis. And, you know, those relationships that those young people had in residential care, one of the factors that would impact that is the stability of the workforce. So that’s a very interesting thing. part of the work. Yeah. And traumatised organisations. I mean, every time I hear it put like that, which is not very often, I think of big organisations like our statutory child protection agencies, who are subject to a high level of scrutiny from time to time. And in some senses, they’re very large and probably unwieldy. And I often think about and turn my mind to how difficult it is working in those organisations from the top to the bottom. and how good it would be to… I think how much benefit there would be to the children to roll out reflective supervision from the top. I hate saying to the bottom, but let’s just say from the top and keep going. Yeah. Everyone has an opportunity to do it. And I have a little saying, which is… There is the old, there’s the meme saying that you see, which I’m ambivalent about, which is that the hurt people hurt people, which is kind of true, but a lot of hurt people don’t hurt people. But what I think is probably more true is that hurt people hear people. Yeah. heard people, hear people. And so when you’re in a reflective group where you feel heard and acknowledged in your experience, you are then better able to consider the experience of others.

Jenna: 32:41

Yes. I couldn’t agree more. And that was one of the things that did come out of my research was this sort of need for staff to be supported. to do their work. And exactly as you were talking about feeling heard, I think that one of the greatest challenges of the organisations is to communicate. And I think, you know, when I was talking to, you know, I talked to floor staff and they say, you know, we talk to management, we tell them we’re at capacity, we can’t take any more, we can’t handle this, this match is going to be bad. This is a bad idea. And the management say, cool, thanks for letting me know. And then they go ahead and do whatever they need to do anyway. But when you talk to the management team, it’s not that that’s not an accurate representation, but there’s so much more behind it where, you know, the funding bodies set up targets and if you don’t meet those targets you don’t get funded so if you’ve got one bed available and they’ve got a child that needs a placement fundamentally it doesn’t matter if it’s a good match necessarily you could you could push back i suppose but there’s a limit to how much pushback you can have and still get funded and so i mean i think uh some more of that backwards and forwards communication would really ease some of those relationships where the staff are feeling heard You’ve told us that you can’t handle this. And I hear you. Unfortunately, the funding rules mean that there’s nothing I can do about this. But as soon as we can do something about it, we will. What support can we give you to help you manage this, given the limits of what we can do? And I think those conversations don’t happen. And so the staff feel unheard and they feel put upon and their workloads increase because as soon as you put a new person in, it is harder. As soon as you change things, it is harder. And if the match is bad, it is harder again, right? And so they’re overwhelmed, they’re pressured. So they take leave. So then you put in casual stuff or agency stuff and then it explodes again. And we don’t have anyone feeling heard. We don’t have anyone feeling supported. When in the first instance, everyone was right. Everyone did the right thing. Everyone did the best that they could. And so some reflective practice with with everyone, with, you know, line managers and with floor staff and with whole management teams and with whole floor teams and everything in between, I think we can get somewhere a little bit more productive because, I mean, everyone has, I’m sure everyone can understand all of those limitations. You know, they’re all intelligent, competent people that I speak to and I’ve worked with and they would understand everything. those limits and we could work together better.

Colby: 35:56

If we understood each other’s experience

Jenna: 35:59

more. Yeah.

Colby: 36:00

Yeah. And I think, you know, when you were talking, I was thinking about, yeah, the floor staff and management as well. Management feel put upon by the funding bodies. Exactly. Yeah, the bodies that engage them to do it. And just all round, it is a difficult process. job and it’s a bit i think of it a little bit like this is that um across a long career talking to lots of children predominantly children recovering from a tough start to life i haven’t found that there’s many who like school

Jenna: 36:39

yeah

Colby: 36:40

but um but they have to go to school it’s the law and i think so there are always problems that cannot be solved cannot be solved But at least they can be heard about. And that’s almost as good, if not just as good, in many instances.

Jenna: 37:05

Yes.

Colby: 37:05

We can’t solve or change the situation, but feeling heard and understood and acknowledged about it is very powerful.Jenna: 37:15

Absolutely.

Colby: 37:16

Yeah. Apart from those challenges of staff and management, What else do you see as the challenges that exist in terms of delivering good residential care to children and young people? I

Jenna: 37:34

think probably one of the biggest challenges is that all organisations these days purport to being therapeutic. Trauma-informed. Trauma-informed care. We all do therapeutic care. No one says that they don’t. But therapeutic care is astonishingly difficult and it is not something that is necessarily happening all the time. And I think that helping people, helping organisations to understand what it means to be trauma-informed and what it means to have those really… considered, planned conversations with young people for everything to be considered. Every interaction is understood. Every interaction is thought through. That is astonishingly difficult for the relationship to be front and center is astonishingly difficult when we’re talking about attachment disordered young people who are not going to see your care and say, oh, gosh, thank you so much. That’s what I was after. Thank you. No.

Colby: 38:59

No.

Jenna: 38:59

They don’t. If they did, it wouldn’t be hard. But, you know, attachment trauma, I mean, sometimes manifests that way, I suppose. We probably don’t get called in to talk about those kids. But so much of the time it doesn’t. It manifests with testing and pushing and rejecting and damaging, not necessarily physically but emotionally and emotionally. To consistently show up and understand and feel hurt and cope with that is astonishingly difficult. Yeah. And I think that is the challenge for us for now, forever. I can’t really see that changing, which is why we need organisations to be less traumatised so that we can support staff better.

Colby: 39:54

And reflective… Circa vision is important in that key, really. I’m wondering if there’s anything else that you have come across that helps to detraumatize organizations. It’s a bit like a cure for tantrums in kids. If you can come up with that,

Jenna: 40:19

you

Colby: 40:20

are set. You’re like the family that invented the little umbrellas that go into the alcoholic drinks.

Jenna: 40:30

Yes. No, I mean, I don’t know. I don’t know the answer to that. I really don’t know the answer to that. I think, you know, when I did my research, I put together a model. of what I call a secure house, a stable house. And if I can find it really quickly, I’ll talk you through it. But it was, you know, this sort of this house that I designed, you know. In the end, I got it drawn up by a graphic designer because my version was done on, you know, paint, you know, with a square and a triangle on top and some, you know, handwritten and then on my iPad, you know, just writing in various things. And so, you know, sort of based on the analysis that I put together, I sort of put together this model of a home that is sort of has the key features in the, you know, the floor and the roof and the walls. And these are the key things that you need. But then, you know, you’ve got to have your roof and your windows and your front door. You know, you can’t have a house without four walls and a floor. But you don’t really have a house if there’s not a door and some windows either. So there might be slightly less room. necessary but but really necessary you know and so my house sort of takes that sort of form and so in the four main you know the floor is safety on the main walls we’ve got connectedness to staff and consistent staff on the ceiling we’ve got genuine care that’s that love that we talked about but then on the roof we’ve got training and supervision we’ve got trauma-informed care In the windows, we’ve got good matching and peer relationships. Coming out of the chimney, we’ve got pushback so that we’ve got the higher-ups pushing back against the agencies when they can and saying, this is not good, we can’t be doing this. And then you’ve got, you know, in the front door, we’ve got planned and communicated changes because change is inevitable. Staff will leave. Staff will retire. Staff will get moved to different houses. Young people will have to move for various reasons. And so that is part of life. Change is part of life. That’s why I put it on the door because it comes and goes. I thought that was quite clever.

Colby: 43:03

That is clever.

Jenna: 43:04

And then I’ve got a plant on the outside where we’ve got casual staff and ongoing staff contact, which were some of the other features. You know, casual staff are also an inevitability, but there are ways of doing it better, you know, ways of having pools of casual staff that work with various houses, that know the kids and know the staff. And so while they may not be permanent staff, they’re not randoms either. They’re known. They’re familiar. And that idea of ongoing staff contact. In this house, it doesn’t solve all the world’s problems, but I think if we put it all together, we’d probably be a little bit closer to solving those issues that are plaguing residential care. Because the staff are cared for. They’re supervised properly. They’ve got good training. We’ve got good casual. So if the staff need to take time off, it doesn’t destabilize the house for the other staff that’s left on shift or when everyone comes back from leave. You know, if we do it right, it’s just less hard for everyone all the time.

Colby: 44:15

So you’re in a meeting with the heads of the commissioning body, the funders, the policy makers. Invariably in this space, it’s the local statutory child protection agency. What are you going to tell them? What are you going to say? This is what you need to do to improve the quality of education therapeutic residential care or residential care for children and young people across our jurisdiction? What are you going to say to them?

Jenna: 44:53

Well, you need to fund it, which I think they do. I think the funding’s probably there. We need to have good staff who are trained, who have really good supervision, who have time together to build a connection as a team because fundamentally, This all lives and dies with the staff. You know, the young people, they are who they are and it is not their responsibility to make this work. You know, you can’t ask them to be anything other than who they are and to be loved as they are. So it lives and dies on the staff. So how do we get them to be as good as they can be doing this impossibly hard job? and that is that we need to support them. And, you know, the funding rules are what they are, so we can’t change that, really. We just have to support them and we need to listen, as you say, be heard.

Colby: 45:49

It’s interesting. That’s probably a piece of advice that can go all the way through their own organisation as well, looking after the staff. Yeah. Looked after staff, yeah. are more effective in their role.

Jenna: 46:09

Yeah.

Colby: 46:10

Yeah. Now, I had a question from my previous podcast guest, who was Ben Pryke and Susan Barton from the Lighthouse Foundation. I give my guest, and I’ll give the same to you, I give my guest an opportunity to ask a question for the next guest. Now, I actually, as we’ve been talking, I’ve been thinking this is probably been at least partially answered by you. I’ll read the question just so our listeners or watchers know what the question is. So the question was, how can we meaningfully integrate the voices and insights of people with lived experience into the development, delivery and evaluation of therapeutic residential care models or services, I guess?

Jenna: 47:02

Yeah. I reckon I’m going to answer this differently to how you think I’m going to.

Colby: 47:06

Well, okay. Let me tell you what I thought. Okay. Why I think there’s been a little bit of overlap is that in a way your thesis went some way along towards that. Is that how you thought I was going to answer it?

Jenna: 47:22

Yeah, probably.

Colby: 47:22

Okay. Well, you go ahead.

Jenna: 47:25

Okay.

Colby: 47:26

You go ahead.

Jenna: 47:26

All right. Okay. I don’t know. is my answer. And the reason I don’t know is because, all right, so this is a bit of a long story. So give me a minute. Let me give a bit of backstory. Through the course of other work that I do, I do a lot of forensic assessments and I interview people for upcoming court appearances. Through the course of that, I interviewed a number of people who were in residential care who didn’t know that they were in residential care. Now, you ask, I say, they hadn’t heard the term residential care. So some careful questioning, they could tell me that they’d been in a group home or a boy’s home, or they, you know, could tell me that there were staff and other kids, it wasn’t a family, but they’d never heard the term residential care. And so when we think about lived experience voices, they are crucial, but they’re The lived experience voices we usually hear are of remarkable young men and women who have done really well, who have the words, who have the language to talk about their experience, who have the connections to people who can say, hey, Jill, tell us about your experiences. Someone who wants to go to create and be a youth ambassador. Someone who wants to go into social work and psychology and do research. There’s a lot of PhD students with lived experience and they are remarkable. And those are the voices that we hear. You know whose voices we don’t hear? The young people in prison. The ones who are on the street, the ones who don’t have any connections to anyone, and the ones that didn’t even know they were in residential care, even if they saw my flyer on the side of the road saying, hey, were you in residential care? I want to talk to you. Even if they felt compelled to ring me, they didn’t know that that applied to them. So my thinking is we actually need to work out how to engage people not everyone necessarily, but a broader community of lived experience, young people, not just the ones who are doing well enough to stay connected and who can use their words. What about the ones with intellectual disabilities, the ones who have gone on into NDIS-funded accommodations? How do we hear everyone’s voices? Because I’m not sure that the voices that we hear are representative, even though they’re remarkable. And I want to hear what they have to say. I’m just not sure we’re covering everything that we need to with regards to lived experience. I’m hoping, I’m trying, I’m trying with a group of researchers at Monash to forward some research in this area. We are looking to pay attention to people whose voices have not been heard. We are looking to research. There’s been a lot of research about the pathways from out-of-home care into youth justice. There’s been remarkably little research into the pathway from out-of-home care to adult justice and the adult prison system. And there’s been a number of people that I have interviewed who have bypassed the juvenile justice system entirely. And they go straight from out-of-home care into the world and then randomly into the adult justice system. And we want to know what those pathways are. And those are voices we don’t get to hear too often. You know, what happened? What is that pathway? Is it more like the out-of-home care to juvenile justice pathway? Or is it more like… a different pathway. You know, if I ended up in prison, what is that pathway? Is it more like that? I don’t know. But there’s voices that we need to hear in order to inform our ongoing development. So Lighthouse Foundation, if you want to do some research with me, give me a call or if anyone else wants to.

Colby: 51:51

Yes, Lighthouse. Well, absolutely. And Lighthouse Foundation, I think probably themselves have captured a little bit of the picture here. I couldn’t agree with you more in what you’ve said. I think in order to capture the broader spectrum of care leavers, we need to follow them up. And the research with them is highly lacking. No one’s following them up. Our statutory child protection agencies, at least to date, there hasn’t been significant endeavour that I know of in the jurisdictions that I’m across, including my own, to really make sure we keep tabs on or have a relationship with our young people such that we can keep tabs some level of involvement with them. An organisation like Lighthouse is in a better position to track these young people transitioning to adulthood because they are a service provider and they provide services beyond 18. Another group that you mentioned, when you were mentioning the groups that we need to consider, are the care leavers who have their own children removed, which is quite, you know, which is, I’m not sure, I can’t say with any authority what proportion of care leavers that is the case, but that would represent a really significant challenge for our statutory child protection agencies that the children you raised had such poor parenting models that they were considered unsafe to raise their own children. Their parenting models, often their most dominant parenting model was the state as a parent.

Jenna: 53:57

Yes. Look, there’s a couple of brilliant researchers at Monash who have looked at early parenting in care leavers. And they might be interesting people for you to have a chat to, because I think from my conversations with them, that there’s also a whole lot of you know, oversight and intervention. And often I think they’re not even given much of an opportunity to parent. before having state intervention. So I’m happy to pass on some details to you if you’d like to have

Colby: 54:26

it. Yeah, I’d love to. I’m always open to hearing about other people I could have on the pod. And I was writing down David Ziegler’s name. I hope I spelled it correctly earlier. And listen, it’s been great to have you on. Before we finish, I tend to give my guests an opportunity to ask ask me a question without notice before we finish up. I’ve asked you a lot of questions. Is there anything you’d like me to respond to before we finish up?

Jenna: 55:05

What would you say is the biggest challenge facing residential care?

Colby: 55:14

I think that it probably is staff. Not that the staff are the problem, but in terms of how we look after the staff. And I do think that funding needs to take into account opportunities for ongoing reflective practice. See, the big challenge, I guess, in the work that we do is that We are the only species that has psychologists that tell people how to raise children. Yeah. So a lot of people are like, well… we know how to raise children. We remember being raised. We learnt as much from what our parents did well as what they did poorly. And we obviously have an instinct, just like every other species, the parents, the young has. I think part of it, part of the problem is amongst residential staff as well as kinship and foster carers is seeing the value in in being trained in therapeutic care so but also but also um i think ensuring that they’re looked after that they hang around they’ve got that stickability that that kinship carriers for example excel with you know because if they’re kin they do stick more um and that they think about what what they’re delivering. They spend more time being mindful and holding the young people in mind that they’re working with. I think those are challenges. I do think that there needs to be more money into residential care in order to support more reflective practice. I think reflective practice, my view is you need to have at least some guide a model that guides and becomes a framework for reflection, for supporting reflection and developing understandings. Which probably I could talk for a very long time about. But yeah, I think I agree with you. I think the staff is where we… should primarily be putting our focus to. And look, I would also say, as I’ve said before, I don’t intend to criticise stuff. It’s not my intention to make staff feel criticised for the job that they’re already doing. They’re doing the best they can, in my observation, the best they can with the structures and support and… funding that they have. And it’s unfair to put all residential care, residential childcare together because there’s great variability in what organisations like the Lighthouse, you know, for example, the difference between what the Lighthouse can provide, what is provided at Hurstbridge Farm and what’s provided in other residential childcare organisations. concerns. So I think getting consistency of residential care. So, you know, when we talk about research, see, this is what I mean, I could keep going. When we talk about research and we want to look at outcomes for residential care, we have to consider that not all residential care is the

Jenna: 59:16

same. For sure.

Colby: 59:16

And is that a problem? We need to perhaps be looking at um remedying that um yeah just like not all families are the same and you know foster care outcomes well how far down that rabbit hole do you want to go in terms

Jenna: 59:32

of tough research it’s really it’s why no one does it

Colby: 59:35

yeah yeah you’re undoubtedly uh onto something there

Jenna: 59:40

But

Colby: 59:41

look, as I said, thank you again for coming on and perhaps our paths will cross another time and maybe I’ll have you back again for another conversation if I

Jenna: 59:53

haven’t

Colby: 59:54

scared you off.

Jenna: 59:57

Thank you.

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.

From Orphanage to Therapeutic Community: Portugal’s Residential Care Revolution

Every Girl Deserves a Chance to Flourish Beyond Trauma

A remarkable journey through two centuries of child protection unfolds as Colby Pearce speaks with the core technical team from Livramento, a residential care home in Porto, Portugal with a transformative approach to supporting vulnerable girls.

From its origins protecting abandoned children during the Napoleonic invasions to its current therapeutic model, Livramento’s story challenges common perceptions about residential care. The team – Yvonne, Maria, Bruna, Carla, and Liliana – share how their graduated approach to independence creates pathways for young women to thrive despite early trauma and family breakdown.

What makes Livramento exceptional is their unwavering focus on education as the key to breaking cycles of disadvantage. Through scholarships and supportive environments, they’ve achieved a nearly perfect academic success rate, with many residents continuing to university. Their innovative pre-autonomous program within the facility followed by semi-independent living in nearby apartments provides a gentle transition to adulthood while maintaining crucial supportive relationships.

The conversation explores how Livramento transformed from a closed institution to a therapeutic community through collaborative work with consultant Patrick Tomlinson. Their approach encompasses family intervention, regular supervision for all staff, and continuous evaluation of outcomes. Most striking is how they’ve created a family-like environment where younger girls aspire to follow the path of successful older residents.

For anyone interested in child welfare, therapeutic residential care, or trauma-informed practice, this conversation offers profound insights into what’s possible when we truly commit to transforming young lives. Subscribe to the Secure Start podcast for more discussions challenging outdated narratives about residential care and showcasing innovative approaches to supporting vulnerable children.

Listen here:

Watch here:

About Livramento:

The Fundação Lar Nossa Senhora do Livramento (FLNSL) is a non-profit Private Social Solidarity Institution (IPSS) that receives female children and young people aged between 6 and 25 years old into its residential care programme.

The history of Livramento is intertwined with the history of the city of Porto, dating back to the Napoleonic invasions. At that time, a group of citizens organised themselves to protect children and their mothers from abandonment and mistreatment, creating the first shelter in 1810.

Livramento accommodates female children and young people aged 6 and over who are in a situation of danger or neglect, and whose reception is requested by the competent entities – Family and Juvenile Court or Commission for the Protection of Children and Young People at Risk. The objective of this social response is the protection and rehabilitation of children and young people, aiming at the following possible life projects: family reunification, foster care, adoption or autonomy.

Livramento operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, ensuring accommodation, food and personal care as well as monitoring and promoting their integral development.

In recent years, the residential shelter has undergone a very significant transformation process, which I am hoping to discuss further in this episode of the podcast.

My Guests are Ivone (Psychologist), Maria (Social Worker), Carla (Psychologist), Liliana (Special Education Technician), and Bruna (Psychology Intern).

Related Podcasts:

Dr Kiran Modi

Listen here:

Watch here:

The Lighthouse Foundation

Listen here:

Watch here:

Transcript:

Colby: 0:00

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast.

Maria: 0:04

In this way, I think we are not giving all the answers. We are just giving a way of thinking about the work and a way of reflecting about the work and the needs of the girls.

Liliana: 0:14

In all the different projects or perspectives that we have here working in our that we are more responsible for the project, but we are very connected and of course we have to be that way.

Ivone: 0:29

Most of the times in other organizations. There are the apartments, autonomous apartments. Then we have here a level in the middle that is the pre-autonomous and what we evaluate. This is a good practice because it is an autonomy, but inside the house.

Bruna: 0:46

When we started working with the families, we changed a little bit and we would like to promote health relationships with them.

Carla: 1:00

I really do believe that residential care homes may be the best them. I really do believe that residential care homes may be the best opportunity to life change of some girls in some situations.

Colby: 1:11

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast. I’m Colby Pearce and this episode will be a little different. Joining me will be the core technical team of a residential child care home in Portugal, which has provided a home and support for girls and young women for more than wait for it 200 years. Before I introduce my guests, I’d just like to begin by acknowledging the traditional custodians of the land. I’m coming to you from the Kaurna people of the Adelaide Plains and I’d like to acknowledge the continuing connection that the living Kaurna people, as with all Aboriginal people, feel to land, waters, culture and community. I’d also like to pay my respects to their elders, past, present and emerging my guests for this episode and you heard it right, I say guests because there are five of them. They are Yvonne, maria, bruna, carla and Liliana from La Nossa Senhora do Livramento, and I hope I pronounced that correctly. La Nossa Senhora do Livramento is a non-profit, private social solidarity institution that receives female children and young people aged between 6 and 25 years into its residential care program.

Colby: 2:50

The history of Liverminto is intertwined with the history of the city of Porto, dating back to the Napoleonic invasions. At that time, a group of citizens organised themselves to protect children and their mothers from abandonment and mistreatment, creating the first shelter in 1810. Livermento accommodates female children and young people aged six and over who are in a situation of danger or neglect and whose reception is requested by the competent entities, family and Juvenile Court or the Commission for the Protection of Children and Young People at Risk. The objective of this social response is the protection and rehabilitation of children and young people, aiming at the following possible life projects Family reunification, foster care, adoption or autonomy.

Colby: 3:52

Live Remento operates 24 hours a day, seven days a week, ensuring accommodation, food and personal care, as well as monitoring and promoting the integral development of its service recipients. In recent years, the residential shelter has undergone a very significant transformation process, which I’m hoping to discuss further in this episode of the podcast. Welcome Yvonne, maria, carla, liliana and Bruna. So I think we’ll get started. I wonder if, just to begin with, if you might introduce yourselves to me and to our listeners to me and to our listeners and what I guess, what your role is at Livramento and also how you came to this role.

Carla: 4:57

Who’d like to start, yvonne?

Ivone: 4:59

Yvonne.

Carla: 4:59

Yes, yes. So hi, I’m Yvonne. I’m here about 20 years. This year is about 20 years. I’m a psychologist and I was invited to substitute a colleague a psychologist the first one in Livramento because she was pregnant. So that was the starting point of our team. From then it became to grow. Three years later I was invited to become director, replacing the main director. That was a nun, and that’s so. We later, some sometime later later, Maria came. So I started in 2005, no, 2005, working here, and now I work as a director.

Colby: 5:52

Hi, well, and thank you and welcome to this podcast and, yeah, I’m really glad that you’ve continued to communicate with me through some difficulties with my email, it seems, and we’re all here now, yeah, so who would?

Maria: 6:08

like to go next well, I can go next. My name is maria. I am a social worker. I have been working in livermento for a bit also, like yvonneonne, my role first of all. Thank you very much, colby.

Maria: 6:27

I’m sorry because, I think I’m a very eager consumer of podcasts, and when I heard that your podcast existed, it was very exciting to me to understand that someone was giving voice to such a specific area and field of work. At least, I don’t know a lot of podcasts like this one, and to be invited to participate seemed to us all like a really big issue. So thank you very much for giving us this opportunity too. Giving us this opportunity too. That being said so I have been working in Livramento for more or less the same time, yvonne.

Maria: 7:13

I entered a few years later and my role is, as I said, quite I’m a social worker, but I am what we call a reference technician, so technical director and technical references, as we are like a multidisciplinary team. And, yes, so we have this role of managing several issues that regard the safety, promoting the rights of children and young people in Porto, which is the second city of Portugal and very glad to be here. We’ll have the opportunity to talk a lot about this, so thanks, Thank you and I’m glad to have you all.

Colby: 8:02

And yes, the podcast is very much well at least quite a significant part of it is going to be dedicated, and has been dedicated, to looking at changing narratives that exist about residential care that are less positive than many instances would show it can be.

Maria: 8:35

Yeah, great.

Ivone: 8:37

I’m Carla Carla and I have the same functions as Maria João. It’s more easy for me my presentation because I will make Maria João words mine. And I’m a psychologist and I am in the technical team Since Liliana, 15 years, 16 years more or less.

Liliana: 9:00

I think you are since 2010,. I think I think you are since 2010,.

Carla: 9:07

I think Since 2011.

Colby: 9:11

Welcome, carla. You might as well go next, then, liliana.

Liliana: 9:17

Yes, we are introducing ourselves by the time that we are here in Liberamento. So I’m Liliana, I’m really glad to be here with you, so I’m really thankful, as Maria said, and I’m a reference technician. Also, I’m a social educator. I’ve been working. I was thinking, listening to Yvonne, I’m in Liberamento about 12 years now, I think, and more or less in the child protection, more like 15 or 16 years old, more or less like this. And our role in Liberamento is similar between the three of us, the four of us me, maria, carla and Bruna and the difference is I’m more related to the old, young people that we have here. The are related to the promote the skills of autonomy, but we have the opportunity to explain that in more detail.

Bruna: 10:26

so I’m Bruna and new head of the team. I’ve started here on doing an internship three years ago and last year I was integrated the technical team and I have the same roles as Maria Carla and Liliana.

Colby: 10:50

Welcome to you too, bruna. Now, I nearly forgot to say it, but it’s just popped into my head that I wanted to confess that I visit your country weekly. Through the wonders of modern technology, that is. So. Not only do I produce videos and post them on YouTube, I spend a bit of time on YouTube as well, so I tend to watch a lot of YouTube channels of people from other parts of Europe and the UK who come to live in Portugal, both in northern and central, and set up an off-grid homesteading lifestyle, which is what I do here in Australia. When I’m not working, I spend my weekends at my own off-grid homestead as well, so, yeah, so a number of the channels that I watch on YouTube are people who are in Portugal. Mainly, is it Casabranco? Yeah, casabranco around that central Portugal? Have I pronounced it poorly?

Ivone: 12:04

Castelo Branco. Yeah, castelo Branco, castelo.

Liliana: 12:05

Branco, castelo Branco, castelo Branco.

Colby: 12:10

I just abbreviated it a little bit.

Bruna: 12:12

It’s.

Ivone: 12:12

Castle, Like Castle. It’s Like Castle.

Colby: 12:16

Yes, yes, sorry, okay, so I think look the obvious first question is if you can tell one or more of you can tell me and our listeners about Livermento and the services that the. Well, a little bit about the history of Livermento and the services that it provides today, because it is a very interesting history.

Carla: 12:44

Yes, yes, it is yes yes, so maybe I can start and I think, if you can complete what I’m going to say. So our story starts with Napoleonic invasions and the girls who were born from soldiers’ relationship with girls were put out of their homes because of that type of relations, and that means some good people from Porto City decided to protect those child and ladies. So we are talking about more than 200 years back and since then Livramento take care of young girls, protecting them from the risk situations, different kind of risk situations. So some years later, in the 70s, men start to work in Livramento, like Almeida y Sousa, and we can say that in that period of time started a big change in our history because the house became open to outsiders. It was not so closed like before the orphanage Orphanage, I think so, and he had this vision already about education and about the graduation of children and so on, and he invited a group of nuns, also with a strong charisma of education, to run the house for 40 years, during 40 years. So, and in that period of time you can say the pillars of what Livramento is today were started, the foundations of Livramento concerning the focus on education, the focus on knowing the world, the focus on having good results for the girls and so on. So this is till the dance.

Carla: 14:55

What happened? They already divided the house in small units in order not to have a huge group of roles to manage. Each of them was responsible for a small unit, just the same way, we have technicians and reference educators to run. So the NNNs stopped their work in 2014 because of the age, because of the challenge of the girls that we were accepting at home, so it was a very challenging management for them. And then it’s the first time since 2014 that the house became to be managed and run for someone who is not nun, not religious, but with the worry of having some scientific evidence to having another kind of knowledge. And that was the starting point for our qualification.

Carla: 16:14

And we can say that some years later, 2016, and now I give the word to Maria, because we always as a team, is a characteristic of this team we wanted to challenge us, to do it more and better, to get better results concerning mental health, concerning education, concerning and so on, and we were not satisfied with what was happening. We wanted more with what was happening. We wanted more, and it happens in this Concerning, this idea of knowing more and knowing better. Maria met Patrick, and now I give the word to Maria.

Maria: 17:05

So from then she can give us a little bit of Liberamento’s story. I’m just going to add on to your sharing, yvonne, two details that I think are very relevant in the storytelling of Liberamento, one of them being that when I when I don’t know if this happened to all of us, but when I was going for my interview, for my job interview in Liberamento and I was younger, I went to the interview and Ingeniero Almeida de Souza, who was the president Yvonne was referencing he did the interview and when we, when he was talking with me and he was a historian lover and a very enthusiastic person about life in general he put in my lap a book full of signatures of relevant people that had visited throughout 200 years of time, and the first page was signed by the last king of Portugal, dom Manuel II, and I was. I was even like trying to clean my hands in my hand, like I really have a relic in my hand, and I realized that the signature of the last king of Portugal was done in a day where Livramento existed for already a hundred years. So imagine that when the last King of Portugal was in our organization, the organization was already 200 years old, 100 years old, and another relevant detail I think about our history is that when this man, who was very transformative, as Yvon was saying, entered the Livramento and got this mission, portugal was living a dictatorship that only failed in 1974.

Maria: 19:04

And so it’s interesting that this visionary man who had traveled the world, who had like two courses university studies, with a strong vision about the protectiveness of education, opened up an organization who was very closed, also in a very closed environment, societal environment, and in that context that was also very innovative.

Maria: 19:36

And then he grabbed the most avant-garde religion or congregation that he found, a group of nuns that were spread throughout the world and whose main vocation was also education, and they didn’t even ever work in an organization like ours. They worked majorly in schools. And so I think this set the ground for a kind of culture that still remains, which is a culture of seeking transformation instead of preventing that transformation to happen. And so he, as Yvonne said, put girls studying outside instead of inside. He incentivized girls to go to superior studies, breaking through family cycles of low investment in education. Of those first girls that went to the university still today are very moving because he was really operating also in a ground of a strong attachment and and relationship that was built with these girls, with the staff that he brought and with himself. He even traveled to the islands of portugal to visit one of the girls that was on her first job back then.

Carla: 21:09

That goes now with grandma. Yeah.

Maria: 21:12

And so, yeah, so the nuns were innovative. Then we got in Livramento, we realized a lot of good practice was being held, although not very clear the therapeutic intention behind it. So we maintained a lot of good practice that was happening there, and then the residential care setting in Portugal started to change as it changed everywhere in the world. So the challenges got bigger. The nuns were getting older also, and that’s just the reality of it, and so we were also concerned of how this transformational process was going to happen, were also concerned of how this transformational process was going to happen and public policies were also being set. You know, like, in general as I believe it must have happened in every country, there were a lot of residential care units there still are in Portugal and so there was a need to transform these organizations, because the consciousness of working with children and young people in Portugal was also very, it was also transforming very much, and so. But we also realized that in the general picture, organizations were struggling to implement these policies because they came with good practices, but they also came with structural changes that were kind of imposed, created impacts that some organization didn’t anticipate and some organizations I’m not telling that this was all negative and not all of our organizations closed, but we observed that some organizations disintegrated and children had to be distributed by other organizations, et cetera, and so we were very interested about these good practices and good policies, but a bit apprehensive on what impacts they could generate. So I think this was the first step of absorbing processes that were being set publicly to the organizations organizations and after this, we started implementing these policies without embracing, like formally this, public policies.

Maria: 23:53

And then afterward we did, but we were already prepared. We set the grounds for it to be implemented in a protective way, and then in 2014, this training that was happening in Alentejo happened, and Patrick Tomlinson was the lead person that was invited to to train the people that were, and so I went there. I was the only person from the north mainly there were people from Alentejo and I think this was a very important few days because I understood that people were building models and people were building therapeutic models, and what I found most exciting was that Patrick was building models grounded in the culture and the context of the organizations, and I was thrilled. I talked to my colleagues. I said we have to work, or try to work, with this person.

Maria: 25:07

I was in contact with Patrick. He still has that group in LinkedIn, which is an interesting place to share thoughts and relevant information. And then, a few years later like to 2019, we had the opportunity to make to cap funds to work with Patrick, and this was European funding with a specific purpose of enhancing the quality of organizations through consulting and mentoring of professionals. And so we applied for that funding and we started to work with Patrick, developing our model firstly, then implementing our model afterwards, and we kept managing to still work with patrick and he still is our main supervisor and consultant in the liverment and I think that was really profoundly changing for the organization and life changingchanging for me specifically personally.

Carla: 26:25

Thank you and, if I, may say just something and I will ask my other colleagues to help me. Some years back we spoke about the focus on education and mental health of the girls. So some years back we also made one application with the focus on education in order to support children to have scholarships and to become differentiated on their on their academic projects, academic way. So and we made that application and we still today benefit of scholarship till the regular, how you say, Maria, the 12 years of school.

Carla: 27:21

Yes, what is obliged. So, and that is a strong basis for their resilience and as a protective factor, because they can skill themselves, they can start to have another view of the future. Something else concerning emotions and these needs to respond to the specific needs of these children with very adverse experiences in all ways. So then became this application. Maria spoke and we still today are working on that, and we still today are working on that. Each of us have the responsibility of lead different areas. Like Liliana said, she’s with the eldest girls of the house, working on autonomous skills and promoting autonomy of the girls, and she has. I’ll invite you, maybe, so you better explain, because we are divided in different projects. We run different projects concerning the model and, after building the model, we work on instruments, on the work, on a methodology. Inside we reorganized ourselves. We review policies as well.

Ivone: 28:53

So, and maybe I let you, marie and Carla and Bruno, also speak a little bit about these different projects you lead Well, I will add something that that is not so much the history of Livramento, it’s more about sorry, it’s more about what we are doing now but just had an appointment, because what you share about the scholarship is a big part of our history and is very important. A little appointment is that our house is implemented in society, in the community, is a community with very risk factors, so the public school has very high risk factors. That was what invited us and moved us to search for other answers, other schools, and these are private schools. So our girls, most of our girls, and if it makes sense for them, for our necessities, they are in private schools because of that scholarship that is financed by a Spanish organization.

Liliana: 30:04

Spanish organization.

Maria: 30:06

It’s sponsored by Naturgi, which is an energy company a Spanish energy company.

Ivone: 30:23

Well, our history is made about many applications trying to have funds to promote to achieve our goals and our vision that we want to yes, that’s because the vision to become innovative, to never stop, always unsatisfied.

Carla: 30:39

So this is our charisma.

Maria: 30:41

Let’s say so since the beginning so of I was going to help explain what you just asked, yvonne. So we, for a whole year, the team worked together with Patrick on building the model, designing it and writing it down, and that was a very strong reflective process. We had meetings every week, we had material to read, we would write a section of the model regarding a certain issue. We would discuss it together, we would rearrange it and make changes, changes so we would get to a consensus within the team and that section will be closed and it would be also translated to English, obviously. So Patrick would also contribute, and so we did this process throughout the year and we ended up with in, by the end of the year, a document of 200 more or less pages, written in Portuguese and English.

Maria: 31:58

And that was what we designed. That’s what Livramento does, how it does it, for whom it works, and things to implement, things to change, things to work on in the future. And then came the implementation part. So in this implementation part, who, which was like two years, three years more during the implementation we divided ourselves in four different fronts and each of us would lead one of these projects. Bruna was not in the team yet, but now she also leads one branch of the implementation.

Maria: 32:52

And so the four branches were Sorry. She’s recovering the implementation, and so the four branches were Sorry.

Carla: 32:56

She’s recovering the time. You just can go a little bit back, maria, and speak about the participation process of children and staff, on the diagnosis phase of the model and on the construction of the model.

Maria: 33:12

Mm-hmm. So this process was also a result of an application that the, and the purpose of this application was not only to design the model although this was the main reason why we applied and we also designed a system of an evaluation impact system. We also designed a value model, a growth and development program for Livramento and a marketing and communication program. So it was a quite overwhelming year. But, that being said, we had different consultants concerning different areas of the whole application and this also has a stream of meetings and checkpoints what is being done. And those meetings and checkpoints also had the representation of different layers of the organization. You know, the children were there, educators were there, the board was there and this was very relevant because, um, it gave a sense of commitment of every, everyone, uh with uh, of everyone within the project, and all the consultants of this application were present, and that’s the stakeholders that Yvonne is referring. So it was a participated process and children participated also in important and relevant parts of building the model and they would have the opportunity to interact. Patrick would visit Livramento, I think, four or five times that year. He would participate in processes of the house, he would have contact with the children. So I think a lot of things were very positive during that process. Then COVID happens.

Maria: 35:18

We were in the first year of implementing the model and so it was a bit impacted, as you imagine, and so, but we didn’t stop the process of implementing it, of implementing it.

Maria: 35:33

So I was leading the building, designing and implementing the training program.

Maria: 35:40

My colleague Carla is, I was and I am leading because it didn’t end, and Carla is leading the process of the policies and procedures, revision and adaptation, so everything is coherent and congruent with the model.

Maria: 36:01

It’s a huge project with a lot of hard work that has been done. Liliana was responsible for developing the assessments for the children and young people, and this is an assessment that ends up in an intervention plan, individual and family plan. And from the training and the intention of supporting the development of all professionals in all layers of the organization, we felt in the end of three years of supporting people, that we might benefit on developing a specific instrument and process to support specific needs throughout. Also an assessment of professionals, because the training is a more collective approach and we felt that, as, as we do with the girls, we might support the development of adults in a similar language, and this process was started by me because I was responsible by the training, but now Bruna has been leading that process also and adapting instruments, and we are still testing out how this is helpful to us and to all the team.

Carla: 37:33

And we keep the same methodology of the beginning of building the model, Like they are responsible for a project, but then the project comes to the team. The team discussed, proposed some corrections and then come again till we have a consensus. But something it was also very interesting we work on it was the impact evaluation, and that is done over the years. So that is also something innovative in organizations social organizations to evaluate the impact of our intervention, and we do it with different targets Children, staff, professionals, families is a higher challenge to get information from families and with stakeholders also. So every year since 2020, we do it. So every year since 2020, we do it.

Carla: 38:38

And now we are just reviewing our theory of change because we understand lots of things changed in the last five years the rules, the laws, the profile of the girls.

Carla: 38:51

I don’t know if profile is the right word, but the characteristics of the young girls come into organizations is different comparing with 10 years back or with five years back, because they are more disruptive, they have more severe mental health problems and that means that challenge organizations and the way we are going to work. So something funny when Maria said we still are in the process, it means this is a never-ending process and this is a challenge. This is good but is also a struggle point somehow, because we never hand and we do it on our daily routine of work. So so, just coming to some challenges, the other one is the human resources to have someone with the entire time dedicated to this process of creation. But maybe Liliane could explain the process with the autonomous group, because it’s something very different and we have these apartments and so on, and you could explain a little bit better. You are the best one to explain it.

Liliana: 40:11

I was thinking about what you are saying, ivanonne, right now and I think it is exactly as you said. It’s like a ongoing process, as patrick said, that a lot of time. It is really a ongoing process and I think we all feel that in all the different projects or perspectives that we have here, working in our more, that we are more responsible for the project, but we are very connected and of course, we have to be that way and um about exactly my, my, the old girls, the older girls. So the difference between my groups are related to the groups of Carla, maria and Bruna is that I have girls from 16 years old to up and then they transition. They are in their groups. When they are admitted in our house they go for the Maria or Carla or Bruna groups and then they are evaluated, their life projects are being analyzed and worked out related to them and their families and the girls, and it is a process and, of course, in the basis we have this tool that we use, the basis we have is this tool that we use, for instance, the assessment, the development assessment, that it is a really help for us to be more connected to the needs of that girl, the needs and for her development and sometimes it makes sense for this specific girl in a period of the year to transition, to have this transition.

Liliana: 42:03

For my group, the pre-autonomous group, is a little different because it is more intentionally directed for their working, for their training, their skills on daily routines by themselves. They have all of us groups have a technician reference, that is, me or Maria, carla or Bruna, and a reference educator and a support educator. It is like a micro team concerning to each group, and the pre-autonomous is not an exception on that. So I have my reference educator, my support educator that are there present for the girls to work out with the girls of what they need in a daily basis, but not on a daily basis also of what they need in a daily basis, but not on a daily basis also. And then it is like if you work like a small house in a big house the government is really, really big and and it is like a small house they have.

Liliana: 43:08

They do their, their, their meals every day. They have like a leader, monthly leader, young girl Manager, manager, leader yes, that is responsible for everything that happens on that group, not only related to the. They go on supermarket, they do the menu, they do the supermarket list, they go the supermarket list, they go there by by autonomous, they go on group, they discuss on assemblies that they have weekly um the problems of the group. Of course, educator is always there to mediate something. Sometimes I’m there also and but it is more a training, more intentionally for their social skills. I can say that like soft skills and social skills to um to help them to be more, to facilitate their integration or adaptation in society.

Liliana: 44:08

So they have different roles there that sometimes they are not very they they are very oh this is so responsibility, a lot of things to do, we have to think in so many things and of course this is a ongoing exercise for their lives and it’s very, it’s very important and they know that.

Liliana: 44:29

They feel that of course it’s more demanding. But their age are different also, they are in a different phase of their life. They are in secondary, like high school, or in the university also, and so and after that, after a period of time there in Pre-Autonomous, we are ongoing process on evaluation, on participation of the girl in meetings to see if their needs on priority areas are more answerless and the needs are different. And then, if we are in a good planning system and achieved some aims that we feel the needs that that young girl should aim for their life. They transition for the, the apartment, and now we have two apartments, uh, really close to livermento, like not in a mile, I think, it’s not even a mile, it’s really close, uh, but it’s outside and the, the opportunity of that being outside, is very, very important for them, very important. Of course I’m I, me and my reference educator and my support educator are still like on behind and always present but not in presence. I don’t know if I was clear enough we are not in presence every day in.

Liliana: 45:55

Exactly, yeah, we are still working with them.

Liliana: 45:59

Um, we have, of course, we have related to the policies and the procedure that carla is responsible for.

Liliana: 46:06

We have we created a lot of a lot, some news procedures that will fill the needs that are important and one example of that is like the transition plan system for autonomy.

Liliana: 46:21

We feel the needs of have documents that have this agree, like agree between the criteria or the conditions to the young girl B on the pre-autonomous group or to the young girl B on the apartments, and which are the functional areas that we feel that are really important, that we understand and conclude that are really important for them to develop.

Liliana: 46:50

And some of these functional areas, it is possible and understanding to work it out with the girls individually and some of them are working out on group assemblies and so on, and some of that also functional areas like in alarm, red lights are really important to work it out on workshops and there are themes like our transversal for each one of them and it’s some some of that opportunities. Other girls from other groups that are like 15, 16 in the we all talk and discuss related to that and we feel the need for them also to be and integrate on these workshops, like in a prepare, a preparation of transition, also for the pre-autonomous group. Like two weeks ago we have like um two or three, so in the last month we’ll work it out like two workshops related to the politicians literacy, because we have elections really like two weeks from now and if we feel the need for the tried to be the most, I don’t know how to say it neutral.

Maria: 48:28

So they could ask questions know, where to check out the programs discuss their ideas and the financial literacy also.Liliana: 

48:41

that is a really important area also and they have like a workshop, like a month ago also. But we do that. This is related also with that. This is related also with some project that Carla had like he’s like the responsible for the training for the young people also.

Ivone: 49:01

yes, so I can go on for two hours, but now I will. Let Liliana, I would like to say one thing that is something that is particular for our house, that is, the experience of having a pre-autonomous group is something different and it gives us know-how. That is a good practice. Not having groups with very protected. They are small groups. The adult is always there then most of the times. In other organizations there are the apartments, autonomous apartments.

Ivone: 49:47

Then we have here a level in the middle that is the pre-autonomous and what we evaluate is a good practice because it is an autonomy, but inside the house, you know, and it’s like levels that they are going to go through, and I think it is something that differentiates us from other organizations this pre-autonomous group before the autonomous level and we also Right Because the girls see the pre-autonomous group as an inspiration, a dream.

Maria: 50:26

They are an example. It’s like having older sisters and brothers, you know, that are in a different level where I want to get you know. They really are examples for the other girls.

Carla: 50:42

And now we aim for a long time back to have apartments in the community and we just got it about one year and a half. And now another level is to go to outside home. So with less support, because they are more regulated and they have more self-regulation and self control on that, they are more skilled, that the transition will be smoother. But Liliana, you just didn’t hear that about the Adult Transition Plan were built. The girls participated on it. They also gave their. It was a co-participated process. Because they read it. They said here we did, we like to be like this, we can head this. This is not so important, so can you just explain that process of participation.

Liliana: 51:44

Yes, I think it is like a practice that we all in our house do in all methods and related to the pre-autonomous, of course, because, even because, even because of that, because there are old girls, so they have more critical, they are more connected, and we involve them, of course, in all the practice and all the things that we think that matter for their lives, cuts for their lives and the transitional plan for autonomous, but also the, all the documents, the, the, the rules not the rules like the internal regulations of the department, also before that, the role, the internal regulations of pre-autonomous also, and so they are always.

Liliana: 52:36

We always want them to participate, because only on that way it makes sense, and we do like meetings with them after dinner, in assemblies also, and so we discuss, we distribute the document, we take the document and so we ask them to read, to give them time to think about that, sometimes some days, and after that we go again and we want to, we want their feedback about what they think, the conditions, what could be different, what they feel the need that is not there, what they would do different and why, and some of their ideas make a lot of sense, and so we integrate that and we adapt that, and this is like a reflect of the participation that we want for the girls to have and, of course, if we do that also, we are also contributing for them to be part of something and for them to be like active in our society also. So they are always training their role on society. So I think it is very relevant and for all of us, it is the only way that makes sense.

Colby: 53:53

And to begin at 16, when do they graduate from the program, so to speak? About what age would they transition out of your program From?

Liliana: 54:04

the abutment.

Colby: 54:07

Out of the apartment or out into their own homes.

Liliana: 54:15

I think I tried to answer. If I didn’t understand very well, can you correct me please? Okay, so I think that is related to our law system, also the Portuguese law system. Our laws say that until for the age of 25, the girls or the boys can be on the social system right, our social system care, yes, but they have to be studying, like it is a condition.

Liliana: 54:43

the condition is that they have to be studying.

Liliana: 54:46

But I have my, all of my girls are studying.

Liliana: 54:49

So here in Portugal, if you want to go to the universities, like three years and more, two years for the master’s degree, and so easily they catch the 24, 25 years old.

Liliana: 55:03

So our work is to support them on that process. Of course, some of that girls begin to work sorry to study and then work on part-time, and so they are supportive on that also because we think that it’s good for them in all matters to have this balanced system and it’s good for their responsibility, it’s good for their budget management, it’s good for their responsibility, it’s good for their budget management, it’s good for their training, also for the financial, and it is like a step-by-step situation that we are giving support to them and working out on individual meetings, group meetings and so on, and we have this experience that they catch this opportunity, because a lot of these girls that I have right now, at this moment in the pre-autonomous, in the apartments, are girls that were financed by naturgy. You know this program that we are talking about like social, the scholarships that we talked like about 20 minutes ago or half an hour ago.

Colby: 56:17

I’m going to try and summarise all this and ask some other questions.

Ivone: 56:20

I’ll be doing well.

Liliana: 56:26

Yes, a lot of these girls were being supported. But a lot of these girls were being supported like in the whole school system, the Portuguese school system, like 12 years old, and after that, university for the ones that want to, and we motivate them a lot to be on the university and it’s like a nice group impression also because they see the other girls on the university, they want to go to the university. They have like this protective participation on school until the end of the high school and so I think it is really the impact of this programme, of Natalgy programme is outstanding.

Liliana: 57:14

It’s like life-changing.

Maria: 57:17

I would like to add to the answer one thing that these are the girls that continue in Livramento. And Portuguese government gives a huge help here too, because if you are in a residential care facility and you want to go to the university, public universities tend to have greater and difficult criteria to match, and so for a lot of young people in Portugal they go to private schools whose criteria are a bit achievable more achievable and, in the case of our girls, they apply to a scholarship, a public scholarship, and the majority of them have access to it because they are in residential care.

Maria: 58:16

and also, and answering to your question, some of the girls leave the program earlier if there is potential change in the families or whatever. Was that motivated them to be separated from their families? And me, carla and Bruna have experiences in managing processes where girls integrate, reintegrate their families before getting to Liliana’s group when they came to my group.

Liliana: 58:48

There are only autonomous work it out because there are no prevent. This is not the aim of return to the family. They want to be with Libermento, they want to be studying, they want to be there, and so we give them this opportunity and the courts agree with us saying that, okay, the girl wants to invest on themselves, they want to be on Livramento, they want to study, and we all the community support them on this process. So all the girls that I have are on an autonomy project.

Maria: 59:25

Can I just Same?

Liliana: 59:26

thing of Maria Carla and Bruna.

\Ivone: 59:29

I was just saying one thing, More than the age, of course the age is a criteria, but also in transition from different groups or transition to home, to society, is the evaluation of the competence. So age is important, the change, the transition from our three groups to Liliana’s group, the pre-autonomous of course, age is important 17, 18, but the competence is the most important and the regular emotional regulation Carla also and the regular emotional regulation Carla also competence social, emotional and so on, and functional, all the competence.

Liliana: 1:00:18

This is the criteria the competence.

Ivone: 1:00:20

We work and we intervene in the basis of the competence this was a topic you just point out, liliana, about Armory.

Carla: 1:00:31

I don’t know about families. Our whole intervention with families and of course, since the first moment they came into Livramento, family is an important target, considering we see family as a potential partner, but never forgetting the vulnerability of the families and never forget that if families were okay, girls were not here. So we work in this basis of trying to empower families, to integrate families in the work we do. It is a very difficult process sometimes, but because of that we made another application. So we are leaving application through application and another application to have some funds to do the work we want to do, because it is expensive. This is another challenge the sustainability of this process. So, bruna, lead this. Maybe you can develop a little bit this project. We had to work with families in a different model of those projects happening in Portugal, because we have another idea about how can work better this work with families towards the unification, towards going back in a good and safe conditions to family. Bruna, maybe can help.

Bruna: 1:02:05

Yes, in the first. Firstly, it was that the first objective about our work. But when we started working with the families, we changed a little bit and we would like to promote health relationships with them. So our model was a little bit different. Because we were, we came to the houses and worked there with the family In the context of feminism.

Bruna: 1:02:46

So we, and it was a little bit different because the family wouldn’t be arriving to the cabinet or a meeting in the house, in the living room. No, we would come to the houses and work with them, with the family.

Carla: 1:03:08

And with different people of family, as well the significant ones. Yes, we work with all of the system, so it was a logic of a systemic and family approach. In a systemic way empower families in their context and fill their routines.

Carla: 1:03:29

They are part of the solution, not part of the problem. So that is a different vision and we believe also, Bruna and Adriana, it was someone else who is a family therapist also. The purpose was this to make family to be the authors of their change, the responsible for their change, and in order to believe they are skilled and they can do it.

Bruna: 1:03:57

Of course, not all stories are of success, but the main purpose is to promote their skills and relationships. So that was accomplished.

Carla: 1:04:10

Something is very challenging for all of us is that the kids are removed from the home, their home, their natural places, and they were the victims, and then somehow there is an expectation of they go back to family, like if for magic, everything is okay after working with the kids in, uh out of their natural context. So the natural context must be interviewed and must be skilled.

Maria: 1:04:40

For since first moment maria go ahead, I was um, just going to add because it might sound a bit confusing, when bruna was doing this project, she was not a reference technician in the house.

Maria: 1:04:53

Yes, so she was not part of the team, she was an external, she had been working with us, but then she left and she started this project with adriana, which is a who is a family therapist with a specific methodology of intervening with family, guided by this university in Coimbra, with reference university, in systemic intervention with families, with their supervision and consulting. And she was not a part of the technical team. Otherwise it would be kind of a conflict of yes, yes, and then, after this project finished, then bruno was started to working with us and we also aim to make a second application to continue this project.

Carla: 1:05:49

It was a pilot one. It was also written like the structure of the program, the model we are implementing, and now maybe next year we plan to have another application to keep going on on this work, with some revision of the model we’re implementing about family. But also this intervention about family is part of our model, just like work with the carers of Livramento and with the eldest girls and so on, schools as well.

Colby: 1:06:28

Sorry, the schools. Do you interact with the schools that the girls go to?

Carla: 1:06:35

yeah, maybe you can explain better. It’s a very close relation, must be a very close relation with schools to prevent lots of things and promote lots of things.

Colby: 1:06:45

But maybe they can explain better than me because they are the ones who are working on it.

Ivone: 1:07:02

We contact not just with the director, the principal teacher, the reference teacher. But we also promote meetings with psychologists and the teachers, or pedopsychiatrists and the teachers’ network.

Maria: 1:07:22

We work with them, network, special network of the yes, and also there are elements very important. The staff from the school that are not teachers, the staff from the school that are not teachers that see?

Ivone: 1:07:44

they, yes, and they are important to know if they are well to give them information about the girls, they pay attention when they are playing or they share important information with elements from the school.

Carla: 1:08:04

They are strategic people on the field.

Bruna: 1:08:08

Yes on the field.

Ivone: 1:08:09

Yes, they are very possible to us, and then we make an intervention together.

Colby: 1:08:19

It sounds holistic, isn’t it?

Ivone: 1:08:22

Yes, that’s it.

Colby: 1:08:24

Yes, yes Must be. It sounds so wonderful what you’re doing. The jurisdiction in which I live and work residential care is very different to the way you describe it. There are a number of questions that I’ve had in my mind as each of you have been talking. I think it sounds like to me it would be fair to say that there’s been three significant transformations at Liveramento, particularly within, say, the last 50 years. So from the orphanage and the question I had was who was staffing the orphanage before the nuns were brought in, before?

Carla: 1:09:09

the nuns were brought in. Poor ladies Two very severe ladies Okay, managed about. I think we reached 136 girls in the beginning and then 18, 19, two severe ladies. When Engineer Almeida Sousa was invited in the 70s, he said he made a revolution. Yeah, so there was this he was making a revolution, and he started a revolution then, and then it was. In that period of time came the nuns, the nuns and did those.

Colby: 1:09:44

So a couple of things that are probably relevant to some of the previous conversations that we’ve had on our podcast, including about the transformation in the Cotswold community from a reformatory they call it a bore store, I think in the UK, but it’s young offenders, young male offenders to a therapeutic community around the same time. I would say but the person that you are referencing comes in. What do those two women do?

Carla: 1:10:17

They just take care of basic needs. The old girls were just very equal with themselves. They were not individual needs who responded, just they feed, they work on domestic tasks. They didn’t go to school. School it was inside, only the basic knowledge that only after 18 years old they was going out, but before that they were just closed like a kind of a prison we can say. So it was a very severe thing. Yeah, um, and that was like that not only in the middle, but it was a cultural thing in society in institutions across the portugals told that the children, the young girls between 14 and 18 wouldn’t leave.

Maria: 1:11:22

So they would stop leaving the house and the facilities when they got to the teenage years, or more or less 13, 14 years, and they did have kind of workshops where they would learn useful things like sewing et cetera. And then I think the thing that happened the most, as Ingeniero Almeida also told us, was that they would leave these facilities to go to families and like high society families and work like cleaning and cooking, etc. Um, and they would not leave before the age of 18. And he would tell other things that were not very pleasing to hear, like having windows painted, not to to, to look outside to the street, etc.

Carla: 1:12:17

So it was very much a closed institution and yeah institutionalized, but uh, basically yeah, and he comes 50 years back. We’ve made a big change.

Colby: 1:12:30

Yeah, and so he comes in. Did those ladies leave Livramento at that point in time? And the nuns came.

Colby: 1:12:41

Yeah, and the nuns came in, and he drew the nuns from outside of Portugal as well as within Portugal, is that right? Yeah, yeah, and so the whole culture, I guess, of the facility would have changed from one of basic subsistence and subservience to one of you described a focus on education and developing the individual and their capacity to lead a normal life, I guess an ordinary life, in the community at some point, and so that was quite revolutionary, as you described for such facilities as Liveramento was at that point in time. And then so they were there you said the nuns for about 40 years, so they must have overlapped with you, maria, and you and Von you were there when they were there, and you as well, carla, yeah, and me too also.

Liliana: 1:13:53

But you was just I was with them like one year and it was very interesting because my my admission was really but good, one can contextualize better my admission was concerning their um mission was concerning their um replacement living. Yeah, when I want to play about that, it’s like I’m I’m the one that was like the yes you are right.

Carla: 1:14:19

You are right, lilliana, and they still have the nans, because they are our friends. The, they still have here a home whenever they come to porto to go for a consultation and so on. They can sleep here and they come to visit us, they sleep here, they are invited so they still are part.

Colby: 1:14:36

Yes, yeah, wow, um, there’s so many questions I can, uh, could, ask you, but but, um, I’ll just go on with my little um. First little bit about the transformation. So, when that first major transformation, it was very much an opening up and a focus on education and developing the girls for life. And then you mentioned the nuns left and you had professional carers, I guess come in to the role. So that was, I think, and expectations that were imposed by the authorities in Portugal about what these therapeutic, what these residential care homes would look like and what would be the practices there.

Colby: 1:15:49

The education element continued to be very strong, the education element continued to be very strong, the education focus continued to be very strong, and then maybe even another time of transformation or whether it’s, you know, in actual fact, I’m starting to think that it’s just growth, it’s incremental growth and development of Livermento, where, from that time in the 70s where the new director came in and the nuns, and then what was set out by the authorities, I guess in the mid 2010s to then developing therapeutic model and, alongside that, what we would call a transition from care program. But the older girls, liliana, that you talked about, talked about and also the project to look at family connection and family reunification. So it’s really been, as far as I’m imagining it to be, a continuous growth and development over these past 50-odd years for Liveramento.

Maria: 1:17:17

And.

Colby: 1:17:18

I just think it’s remarkable, really, what you describe, what is happening and in amongst so many questions I could ask you, and in a month, so many questions I could ask you. I guess I was struck by how much of a family environment it must feel, which would be in many jurisdictions and many contexts, to describe a residential care facility as a family environment. People would think that that was not true, not accurate, yeah, but but you talk with I’m imagining in my mind girls from six and older growing up. They can see older girls who are going to going to private schools, um, graduating to, to the, uh, the older girls program, university, and that’s what happens in a regular family, isn’t it? You observe your older siblings as they progress and it sets aspirations, you know, aspirations beyond survival to aspirations of flourishing and thriving. How many girls kind of start 6, 7, 8, 9 and go right through and into the older girls’ program, to the apartment and beyond? Have you had, how many girls have you had that have been able to make that full progression?

Carla: 1:18:53

so in the last 15 years, there are a big change about the social protection system, because when I started and marie and carla, almost 80 percent of girls were less than 12 or 15, less less than 15. So and now we have only one girl with 10 years old and the average age is about 16 years old. The average age is different. More than 30% are 18 or plus. So, however, that was the question.

Ivone: 1:19:31

It was? Was it the girls that enter here with six years and go through and yeah, and?

Carla: 1:19:36

for one hand, we see, so we have some critical positions because we really do believe. I really do believe that residential care homes may be the best opportunity to life change of some girls in some situation and sometimes, when they come with 16 and 17, we don’t have much time to work on them because it’s different the time we have to transform For other hands. We also yes, hands. Because of this, we also. We also yes.

Ivone: 1:20:11

It’s first because of the attachment because they can live at 18.

Bruna: 1:20:17

If they can live, they can decide if they want, if they want.

Ivone: 1:20:22

They can live at 18. If they came here at 17, we have few time to have a secure attachment with them, so they yes, sometimes we didn’t have time to to to work on that less time with more problems.

Carla: 1:20:38

For another hand, we also have this experience of admissions of girls with 17 18.

Carla: 1:20:46

They ask to come to residential care home because they have this consciousness of how important it is to be protective and the difficulties families sometimes have concerning relation and interactions with families. So, however, I must say that, more than before, we have academic success, because we are between 99% and 100% of success in academic progress. Although all these challenges we have, the biggest challenge is whenever they come with 16-year-olds. They already were absent at school, they had problems at school and so on, were absent at school, had problems at school, and so on. So a protective factor, like we said, is not going to the same kind of schools from those they came, but to a different kind of schools. But that means a different kind of friends, of relationships, a different kind of vision about the future, of another significant ones around the social context they start to live, and that is empowerment also because they see how this is different, I can do like the other girls, I can do like this and then they become ambitious. So I don’t know if you answer your question, colby now we have just one.

Ivone: 1:22:09

Now we have just one girl, I, I think that came here at 5.6 and is in university. We have five. We have five girls.

Colby: 1:22:22

Five currently at university.

Maria: 1:22:24

I was doing the exercise and I can remember at least five girls that started really little in Livramento and that are between the 20 and 25, yeah, years old, yeah, and that’s over.

Colby: 1:22:40

Well, that would be over the last 20 years, within the last 20 years, I guess yeah yeah, yeah, and so I guess what I’m also understanding is that there has been a change that is probably roughly 10 years or so ago, where the complexity and the age of the girls went up when they came in. Am I right in thinking that? Yeah, so that interests me a great deal from the point of view of what you’re doing, bruna. So are we saying that these are girls who are 15, 16, 17,?

Bruna: 1:23:25

that you’re looking at family reintegration with, or are they younger girls On that program.

Colby: 1:23:31

It was that ages. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So they, yeah. And were they coming? Where are these girls coming from that are coming at 15, 16, 17? Are they coming from foster care? Are they coming from their birth family? Where are they coming from?

Carla: 1:23:48

Well, in Portugal we are just as you know. We have the opposite rates concerning the rest of Europe and the world. So 80% of Portuguese girls with these factors live in residential care homes. Only now we are trying to change this percentage, this weight concerning foster families. So we are still very, very we have very few foster families, maybe 2% of the young people in the system, so mostly they are. They come from families directly to residential care home, also because of their age, because it’s easier to go to a foster care family when they are younger, not with 16 or 17. That pushes to think about the prevention intervention, preventive intervention in the prevention intervention, preventive intervention in the field. How it happens, because I believe, if the girls can, with 16 or 17, the risk factors were there since long time back and never changed, so that is another situation that’s it to to get.

Colby: 1:25:15

If those girls are primarily coming from their birth family and the birth family are um, um, I struggle with their parents are struggling greatly to provide the level of care, uh and that that they need, it’s remarkable to see a transformation whereby they can either, or both, successfully reintegrate into a family environment that is much safer and much more able to respond to their needs. It’s also remarkable to think that those young people have an opportunity to complete their education and go on to higher education as well. I mean, we know that education really is the key to rising out of poverty and for our children and young people in out-of-home care, for them to change the trajectory of their life, and in doing so, of course, we’re changing lives of their children and grandchildren and so on. So there’s tremendous human capital built through services like yours, where you are changing the trajectory of the lives of young women. When your former director, when he arrived in the early 1970s, how many girls were in the orphanage at that time?

Carla: 1:26:59

I remember when he came, yeah, oh, more than 80. I believe 86, 87. And then when I start, I remember 76, 77, when I start, then, when I became director, it was an objective to have less girls here, objective to have less girls here, and then we reach the number of 45, our protocol. But these 45 are divided in units of 9.

Colby: 1:27:39

I’m just wondering how that was achieved to reduce the numbers of girls at Livramento.

Carla: 1:27:51

How we did it. Yes, we proposed to social services to reduce the number because at the same time we became working more in individual process of the girl, with more trying to promote the development, to organize everything of each goal. They have a different level of intervention. The nuns intervention it was very good but it was a very family in a very family way also, very family in a very family way also. So we felt it was not standable. We could not stand to work with so many girls and to go deeply in the work on them. Even today we feel they are too much.

Carla: 1:28:38

So maybe the girls are too much, or maybe we are too few, the human Christophs. So we then made a proposal, and that it was accepted to videos.

Colby: 1:28:50

Okay, it’s been quite the process of developing and rolling out the therapeutic model with Patrick’s assistance. I’m just curious as to how it’s been received by the carers on the ground, the carers that look after the young people. How have they received it? Have there been any challenges in being able to implement with them?

Maria: 1:29:24

implement with them. Well, we decided that the best way to start implementing the model was to use the training as a source of gradually promoting the appropriation of people and being such a challenging work and emotionally challenging work for them who are in the front line of everyday management with the work, to absorb whatever tools or reflections or knowledge towards the work. It’s interesting that we were just focusing on the changes, because I think one of the challenges of implementing the model was also the clash between recent entries, professional entries in Livramento, and the professionals that were already working in Livramento for several years. And we do still have a few educators that worked there for several years, even though the majority are more recent recruitments.

Maria: 1:30:48

And I think the challenge in the beginning was this is not safe, you know, because everything was done in a certain way and now people are expecting us to think about the work, to express ourselves about the work.

Maria: 1:31:07

To express ourselves about the work, to agree on certain basic things and anchor things and to agree on things that have to change. And there are cultural issues that are very positive, of a religious background and a certain way of managing things, but there are also not that positive things associated with that culture and that we have to change, and that we still have to change. We have to be very aware of things that are very rooted in the way of managing things and that are not helpful, and and so that was one of the challenges, the resistance to change, um, but I think that throughout the process of doing the trainings, I think people understood that it was more helpful than damaging to participate, to engage in reading the materials that we distributed. We also do manage the training rotatively. I mean, I’m leading the project, but I’m not the only one that is doing the sessions. Every one of us is doing them, and everybody is doing them and everybody.

Maria: 1:32:28

So everyone is doing it and we do, everyone in the technical team, obviously, and everyone is attending to the sessions.

Maria: 1:32:37

Uh, even the boards of administration has sessions to have a certain level, appropriate level of knowledge of what is being done in livramento and what is working with traumatized people and what helps and what not. Helps the cooks have, the general services have, the educators have sessions, and that is very relevant. Our method is this we share a bit of material, we share a bit of the model, but we can share things that are not part of the model. An article we can build a two or three pages on an issue that is became relevant in a certain point of time, and then we don’t do like a very uh, like class, uh, format. You know, we share the material material ahead and then we discuss uh, what were the thoughts about that, what experiences are we having related to this issue, what did people do, what they think about, what they felt about it. And then, in this way, I think we are not giving all the answers, we are just giving a way of thinking about the work and a way of reflecting about the work and the needs of the girls.

Colby: 1:34:07

We want people to think about what they’re doing and to be supported and encouraged to stop and think about the work, how it’s impacting us, what we’re doing, and one of the other things that’s really came through in these podcasts is the importance of doing that right through the organisation you know and across all the roles in the organisation. You want an organisation that is aligned, that has a common knowledge base, has a common philosophy or approach and there’s an understanding across the organisation of what that looks like.

Carla: 1:34:57

Yeah, something else we felt it was very important and it was a change is about the recruitment process, because the characteristics and profile of staff are very, very important and in Portugal they are not obliged to be graduated the one who take care directly with children. Sometimes they are not so much skilled and our recruitment process we made a system with the help also of Patrick is focused on the character, the sense of mission, the sense of purpose and so on, the values of people and the resilience also, because that’s very important. It’s very easy to become vicarious, trauma or burnout, so it must be emotionally very strong and also with sense of purpose to work in a place like this one, and the recruitment process becomes a very important instrument.

Ivone: 1:36:02

We made about different moments, that we have different moments, methodology that we apply of support the educators, the carers in meetings to the technical and the carer or in a group, and also the training meetings and the training. Can you help me, Maria João?

Maria: 1:36:30

just clarify what I’m saying so um, when we thought about the model and the appropriation of the model. This is the more formal way of appropriating, but what Carla is saying is that we also thought about all the of the group processes inside Livramento, and the group processes go from the start the group process from children until the group process between different layers of the team, and so we are responsible for a set of people each one of us and so we have the responsibility to meet in a trustworthy how do you say it? Frequency, and in those meetings that can be in a one-to-one or one-to-three groups, we discuss what is going on, what people are feeling about what’s going on and what strategies may be put in place to manage what’s going on, what people are feeling about what’s going on and what strategies may be put to place to manage what’s going on. Um, we also have these meetings with yvonne. We have these meetings with the ones that are at our responsibility.

Maria: 1:37:36

The educators have these meetings with the girls, with the group assemblies, and we do have meetings directly with the girls in a holistic way, as we spoke before, but also in a in a more internal way of managing things with, for example, the assessment of their development and and the building of the plan of intervention with the girls, and so all of this is support. All of this is also appropriation of the model and a way to maintain as healthy as possible dynamics inside the liveramento and if this is reliable and systemic, etc.

Maria: 1:38:21

it’s less probable for collusions and subcultures to develop, etc, you know, or it’s difficult for them to happen without visibility. That’s what I mean to say.

Carla: 1:38:36

And we also have supervision, you know, with Patrick and the team and me too, and now the team felt the need of having some more clinical supervision. Let’s say and we add someone to this team and maybe something we didn’t say about all the applicants we tried to have a scientific committee that could go through all the phases of the application of the projects and also reflect with us at the same time. So it was a supportive system all the time in our situations.

Colby: 1:39:17

I mean, I expect nothing less of Patrick, of course, and the contribution that he’s made and the contribution that he’s made. I recall a conversation that I had with Patrick some time ago where I’m just I’m trying to think of the. We were talking about questions that you might ask an organisation or ask a group of practitioners about the work, to kind of draw out what’s really important. And in the context of that conversation I said I’ll. I think there’s only really three questions that you need to ask and answer Maria just said two of them, but in your presentation earlier all three were encapsulated and that is to be able to stop and think what’s really going on here that’s question number one and to have a theoretical framework which helps us answer that question what’s really going on here? What’s going on for our clients, but also what’s going on for ourselves?

Colby: 1:40:29

The next question is what can we do to respond therapeutically to what’s really going on here? And that’s where the model of care comes in. And often the model of care can have both it can have the understanding of what we need to know and how we best understand our service recipients and also what we need to do to respond therapeutically. And then the third question, of course, is how do we know we’re making a difference? And I think you talked about a constant process of evaluating and, of course, if we don’t turn our minds to what success looks like in our endeavours, then all the problems just take up our attention and we struggle to see those things.

Colby: 1:41:24

So I think you know evaluation and constant evaluation, review and improvement is so important and very much based on having in our minds what success, what a good outcome looks like. So I’ve heard all of those things today, so that’s terrific. I know we’re sitting on just a little bit over an hour and a half. I usually give people who come on the podcast the opportunity to ask me a question if they like. I probably would suggest that we don’t have five questions of me, but did you think about a question that you might like to ask me before we go, because I love answering questions without notice?

Maria: 1:42:18

Yeah, we discussed a little bit before the beginning.

Maria: 1:42:23

So recently I mean, I’ve heard about your podcast, uh, because patrick told us about it, and uh, I went and searched and heard I think three episodes and I thought it was. I was really blown away by the work of dr nicola sullivan I think it’s her name and the work that Sally Rhodes did with families, which sounded very innovative and very mind blowing, I thought. And so I was like Colby has access to people that are doing good and innovative things, good and innovative things. And so, since you have that access and you are doing this that you’re doing, we would like to know, from your position and your lenses, looking out not only in Australia but throughout the world, what innovative things have been or have been coming up to you in the field of residential care that you think it’s relevant to share with us and with whoever is listening okay, um, there’s so many things that that I would um say so far, from the various podcasts with people with experience in residential care, the things that really stick out for me, one is preserving family connection, I think.

Colby: 1:43:58

Well, I don’t think. I believe that our attachment style, the way in which we approach life and relationships, is an amalgamation of all of our significant attachment experiences. They’re all of our important relationships, contribute to our overall attachment style. So you have attachment relationships and those relationships can be secure, insecure, disorgan, disorganized, whatever. And then you have attachment style, which is how a person approaches life and relationships in consideration of all of their attachment experiences and how that is reflected in their internal working model or attachment representations model or attachment representations. So it’s very difficult to achieve attachment security in terms of security of attachment style when you leave certain relationships damaged, when you leave certain relationships damaged unrepaired, and that happens too often in our out-of-home care system.

Colby: 1:45:12

So I think, one of the things that has really stood out for me, and even going back to the Cotswold community in the UK where Patrick first started his work, the Cotswold community in the UK where Patrick first started his work what I understand to be the case about other such programs and therapeutic schools the Mulberry Bush School is this acknowledgement of the importance of preserving and repairing and strengthening connection with family and how those places including now in the supported accommodation facilities in the UK that I know of the children go home?

Colby: 1:46:00

They go home for special occasions In the therapeutic schools. They go home in the holidays, special occasions In the therapeutic schools, they go home in the holidays. So these are very, I guess is full of risk, that we can’t get rid of all risk for our young people, that we need to be able to manage risk, but we also need to ensure that our children have good family connection. So, in a nutshell, I think it’s been, with various programs, the totally different approach to preserving birth-family connection. Yeah, and that’s why I was really interested to hear about the work that Bruna had been doing as well and that you’re seeking to do more of had been doing as well, and that you’re seeking to do more of.

Colby: 1:47:28

I think you brought. You mentioned two of our previous guests, maria and Sally. Sally is from my jurisdiction. I provide clinical supervision for her team and they do terrific things in terms of getting children home, getting children, young people home. Nicola is in Ireland and a secondary interest for me beyond residential care is supervision, supervision and support, and what I’ve noticed with most of my guests is this idea of you know everyone in the organisation having supervision.

Colby: 1:48:19

Now, you referred to meetings as well as supervision, but what I mean by that is that everyone has the opportunity to stop and think and reflect and talk about the work and talk about the individuals where that’s appropriate. So I think that’s it shouldn’t be innovative, but it is. Would be my observation. And look, and I don’t have thank you for suggesting it might be the case, maria, but I don’t have necessarily the reach that you were saying in terms of people I know from the jurisdictions in which I have worked is that you know not everyone in the organisation.

Colby: 1:49:12

In fact, very few people in our statutory child protection departments, for example, have even the opportunity to just stop and think about the work that they’re doing, its impact on them, what’s really going on for them and for the children and young people that they’re making decisions about how to respond to their needs therapeutically and how we know that we’re making a positive difference in our lives. I think without supervision, without that setting aside of time to stop and think, the work becomes very, loses its heart and just becomes very procedural. I’ve said that in other podcasts as well when we stop thinking about what we’re doing, we just become very heartless and procedural and that’s awful for our young people. Sorry, maria.

Maria: 1:50:13

No, that was a great answer and I do agree with everything that you said. I think we all do, and I think this is also a challenge, you know, because we have this in this structured way since we designed the model. Obviously, meetings happened before that, but we didn’t think about the flux of meetings in a systemic and systematic way. Flux of meetings in a system, systemic and systematic way, and maintaining it, it’s a very for us at least, it’s a very great challenge because, uh, because of several factors, but one of them being that our context is very unpredictable, although we try to bring the most predictability that we can. And it’s challenging not to reschedule, not to drop the meetings that are planned, etc. But I do think that this is essential to our work to have. They might be small, like short slots of conversations, or longer, it doesn’t matter.

Maria: 1:51:35

I think anxieties go down when people know that they can count on this one meeting that they are going to have in two days and that it’s very probable that it’s not going to blow away and not happen.

Maria: 1:51:52

You know, and when we have adults that are less anxious, we will have children that are probably less anxious also, and so there, I realized that we all reckon that, uh, when we started doing this, you know you can always spot on people that are struggling, and I think the nature of human beings is jump to judgments and think, oh, that person has a problem, she she’s not fitting in, or or she’s always struggling in the same issues, and it’s very easy for us to personalize an issue on someone rather than on the way things are happening on around and in the system.

Maria: 1:52:42

And what was kind of evident to me is that we will always have people that are struggling and whose profiles might be relevant to the good work. But when the system is working, it’s less probable that this is going to have a negative impact in the girls and the young people. And I’m not saying that we don’t sometimes fail, I mean, and that a meeting doesn’t happen. But I am also very aware that when that happens, things start to happen, you know, like anxiety starts to arise and issues that might have been contained in a certain point are are not contained. And so that’s why we all of us value so much this consistency and this stream of places where people can think about what they’re, what is going on, what they’re feeling about the work and the girls, but not only the girls the work in general and feel supported and listened to, and that is one very, very relevant issue of our work.

Colby: 1:54:03

Well, listen, thank you again for um agreeing to take part in the podcast. Hopefully, um, you, we, we kind of uh are able to present all the things that you wanted to present. Um, I think it is such a it’s such a fantastic endeavour that you’re involved in and I’m really pleased to be able to make it public through this podcast. So I just wish you all the best in your continuing endeavours on behalf of the young people, and maybe we might have another chat another time if you’re open to it.

Liliana: 1:54:51

Yes, of course.

Carla: 1:54:52

Yes, thank you very much.

Bruna: 1:54:56

Thank you very much, Colby

.Ivone: 1:54:57

Thank you.

Liliana: 1:54:58

Thank you, thank you All right.

Breaking Cycles: Healing Across Generations with Dr. Lisa Cherry

The Transformative Power of Trauma-Informed Practice: Insights from Dr. Lisa Cherry

In a compelling conversation on the Secure Start podcast, Dr. Lisa Cherry shares profound insights on trauma-informed practice, drawing from her 35 years of experience working with vulnerable children and young people. As the Director of Trauma Informed Consultancy Services Limited and author of several influential books, Dr. Cherry brings a unique perspective that combines academic knowledge, professional expertise, and powerful lived experience.

One of the most striking themes throughout the discussion is the concept of breaking intergenerational cycles. Dr. Cherry reflects on raising her own children, now 26 and 28, and how this process confronted her with her own childhood experiences. “People often talk about breaking cycles,” she notes, “and for me, it’s about breaking cycles. There are some things that just repeat, but actually there are some cycles that can be broken.” This perspective highlights the intergenerational nature of trauma work – we’re not just helping individuals in front of us but potentially influencing generations to come.

Dr. Cherry’s journey from being in care herself to becoming homeless, then eventually finding her way to university and a career advocating for vulnerable young people, provides a powerful narrative thread throughout the conversation. Her experience of writing to the director of social services as a child and making complaints in children’s homes foreshadowed her future career path. This early advocacy demonstrates how lived experience can shape professional passion and purpose, providing authentic insight that academic knowledge alone cannot offer.

Language emerged as a critical focus in the discussion. Dr. Cherry emphasizes the urgent need to address how we talk about children and young people in care systems. “The language that is used to describe children and young people is hugely problematic,” she states. “It’s hugely problematizing of those children and young people, and it shapes and forms the way that they are viewed and the way that they are seen.” This observation highlights how seemingly small linguistic choices can perpetuate harm and influence both service delivery and children’s self-perception.

Another key insight focuses on understanding behaviour as communication. Dr. Cherry challenges practitioners to recognize that children rarely have the capacity to articulate their trauma verbally. Instead, they show their struggles through behaviour. This perspective requires professionals to develop self-awareness about their own nervous system responses and relationship with shame. As Dr. Cherry explains, “It’s very, very difficult to think about behaviour as communication if you don’t have the time and space to think about how you communicate your own distress when you’re distressed.”

The podcast conversation also examines the systemic challenges facing care and education services. Dr. Cherry highlights how reduced funding, diminished capacity, and increasingly procedural approaches make genuine relational work more difficult. “We have to stop thinking about people as machines fulfilling a role,” she insists. “This is relational work. Relational work is deep, it’s meaningful, it’s connecting.” This observation points to the need for systems that prioritize connection and proper staff wellbeing to enable truly transformative work with vulnerable young people.

Dr. Cherry’s three books – “The Brightness of Stars,” “Conversations that Make a Difference for Children and Young People,” and “Weaving a Web of Belonging” – each contribute unique perspectives to the field of trauma-informed practice. Her focus on making these books accessible and practical for busy practitioners demonstrates her commitment to creating real-world impact. Her current focus on supporting the wellbeing of practitioners themselves recognizes that those doing the direct work with traumatized children need profound support themselves.

Listen here:

Watch here:

About Lisa:

Dr Lisa Cherry is the Director of Trauma Informed Consultancy Services Ltd leading a dynamic and creative organisation that provides a ‘one stop’ approach to delivering on research, consultancy and learning and development.

Lisa is an author, researcher, leading international trainer and consultant, specialising in assisting schools, services and systems to create systemic change to the way that we work with those experiencing and living with, the legacy of trauma.

Lisa has been working in and around Education and Children’s Services for over 35 years and combines academic knowledge and research with professional expertise and personal experience.

Lisa has worked extensively across many sectors with Social workers, Educators, Probation Workers and those in Adult Services, training and speaking to over 35,000 people around the world including in the US, Australia and Pakistan and across the whole of the UK.

Lisa has produced multiple pieces of research for various settings and Lisa’s own MA research looked at the impact on education and employment for care experienced adults who experienced school exclusion as children in the 1970’s and 1980’s.

In February 2024 Lisa completed her DPhil research at The University of Oxford in the Department of Education. The research asked “How do care experienced adults who were also excluded from school make sense of belonging?”

Lisa is the author of the hugely successful and award winning book ‘Conversations that make a difference for Children and Young People’ (2021), ‘The Brightness of Stars’ 3rd Edition (2022) and Weaving a Web of Belonging: Developing a Trauma-Informed Culture for All Children (2025).

Related Podcasts:

Dr Hayley Lugassy

Listen here:

Watch here:

Transcript:

Colby: 0:01

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast.

Lisa: 0:04

Taking your children into adulthood is probably one of the deepest education experiences that I’ve had. People often talk about breaking cycles, breaking the cycle and for me it’s about breaking cycles. There are some things that just repeat, but actually there are some cycles that can be broken, and being able to really be present, be connected, be consistent, for my children as adults feels to me like a really beautiful breaking of a cycle. We have to stop thinking about children coming out of care and that’s the end of service. The people who are doing the work you know the direct work are giving something of themselves every time they do that, and what I’m focused on in my next book is how do we make sure that those people, that the people doing that work are looked after in a really deeply and profound way so that they can do that work?

Lisa: 1:20

We need to sort out the language. The language that is used to describe children and young people is hugely problematic. It’s very, very difficult to think about behaviour as communication if you don’t have the time and space to think about how you communicate your own distress when you’re distressed. And this is what happens when you starve systems and you reduce capacity and you take away funding and you make the work really, really intense. Unfortunately, it makes real relational work much harder.

Colby: 2:01

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast. I’m Colby Pearce, and joining me for this episode is an author, researcher and leading international trainer and consultant who specialises in assisting schools, services and systems to create change to the way that we work with those experiencing and living with the legacy of trauma. Before I introduce my guests, I’d just like to acknowledge that I’m meeting with them on Kaurna land, and I’d just also like to acknowledge the continuing connection that the living Kaurna people feel to land, waters, culture and community, and pay my respects to their elders, past, present and emerging. My guest for this episode is Dr Lisa Cherry. Lisa is the Director of Trauma Informed Consultancy Services Limited. She leads a dynamic and creative organisation that provides a one-stop approach to delivering on research, consultancy and learning and development.

Colby: 3:12

Lisa has been working in and around education and children’s services for over 35 years and combines academic knowledge and research with professional expertise and personal experience. Lisa’s MA research looked at the impact on education and employment for care experienced adults who experienced school exclusion as children in the 1970s and 80s. In February 2024, lisa completed her Doctor of Philosophy research at the University of Oxford. The research asked how do care experienced adults who are also excluded from school make sense of belonging. Lisa is the author of the hugely successful and award winning book Conversations that Make a Difference for Children and Young People, published in 2021, as well as the Brightness of Stars, which is in its third edition, and Weaving a Web of Belonging Developing a Trauma-Informed Culture for All Children, which has been published this year. Welcome Lisa.

Lisa: 4:23

Thank you, Colby. It’s lovely to be here and thank you for such a warm introduction.

Colby: 4:30

You’re welcome. Is there anything that I left out that you think is important for our listeners to know about the work that you’ve done and continue to do?

Lisa: 4:40

Well, listen, bios are just inherently quite uncomfortable to listen to, aren’t they? Because they sound so, you know, like Formal, like yeah, they’re just like a lot, which is lovely, and at this stage of life, you would expect to have a bio that’s got quite a lot of stuff in it, because you know you’ve been yeah, I’ve been around a long time. I guess the only other thing that would be worth mentioning is that I have two adult children and I’m a grandma, and um, taking your children into adulthood is is probably one of the deepest education experiences that I’ve had.

Colby: 5:26

I’ve always said the same yeah, I mean, it’s probably our greatest achievement, isn’t it? And also our greatest. Our kids are often our greatest teachers.

Lisa: 5:38

Oh God, I mean, it’s really difficult to even talk about them without feeling emotional. You know it’s such an emotional thing and I think, when you’ve also had to recover from your own childhood experiences and felt some of the weight of that appear in your own children in that intergenerational way, that that works. That is very confronting. It’s very confronting.

Lisa: 6:12

There were periods that were like being in therapy every day you know, as as that experience is mirrored back and I’m now at a place they’re 26 and 28, and I’m now at a place where I see what’s mirrored back is more healing and more recovery and just how much connection and support your children need, with a deep, deep awareness that I had nothing like that. And so when we think about I listen to people often talk about breaking cycles, breaking the cycle, and for me it’s about breaking cycles. There are some things that just repeat, but actually there are some cycles that can be broken, and being able to really be present, be connected, be consistent for my children as adults feels to me like a really beautiful breaking of a cycle.

Colby: 7:20

Yeah, yeah, wonderful. We’ve heard some other stories on the podcast so far, one in particular in Graham Kerridge’s podcast that really reflected the significance of breaking the cycle, and it’s something that is very near and dear to my heart. It’s something that is very near and dear to my heart, and I often think that our work is intergenerational as well in its impacts. Sure, and so it’s not just the person or the people in front of us that we’re effectively working with. We’re working with their spouse, future spouses or part life partners there and their own children and grandchildren through, as you say, what transmits through, through the generations so it’s very powerful and important work that we do.

Lisa: 8:22

Yeah, I love that and I love that kind of circle of life. You know, and I always talk about healing Often we might be healing an ancestral wound we don’t even know we’re carrying. That is from somewhere completely different. And when we’re talking about children and young people who’ve experienced fractured childhoods and adoption and care and all of those things, then they’re often working with something within themselves which will appear across the life course that they might not know where that comes from, they might not know they’re even healing and that’s deep.

Colby: 9:05

And then when you bounce into the future and you start thinking about the future, those future spouses and future children I just think it’s such, it’s such a privilege and it’s such beautiful work yeah, it was interesting because, um, graham got me thinking about this and his training was as an economist and his interest was in human capital, and it was such a totally different way of thinking about the work we do, because I’m not an economist.

Colby: 9:43

In fact, um, my bank balance reflects very, very well that that that is the case, but, um, yeah, yeah, but I mean it was it’s a nice way of putting it anyway the looking at it from a human capital point of view, that I hadn’t done that before, but, yes, certainly I have been for a while, um, very much aware of that intergenerational impact of our work. Lisa, I think people who know you would know that your work in this space is influenced by personal experience growing up. Um is influenced by personal experience growing up, um, but I wonder if you, if you can perhaps say just in your own words, what got you into the work, um, that you’ve been doing this past 35 years or so?

Lisa: 10:40

yeah, I mean it’s. It’s a really interesting one, isn’t it? And, without a shadow of a doubt, my experience of being in care has, you know, provided me with my work, and I guess there are aspects of that that are part of me and my personality and the things that I care about and I’m passionate about, like you know, I remember as a very young child being very passionate about justice, being very passionate about the society that we lived in, um, and so I guess I could have gone into different avenues. I wanted to be Kate Adie. I wanted to be a war correspondent. You know I was.

Lisa: 11:22

I thought that looked absolutely amazing and, of course, going in know, doing research is is kind of like, really sophisticated. You know, I don’t know if researchers would like this, but journalism and research really sit closely together and I was always very interested by journalism and wanting to tell stories and wanting to highlight things that were wrong and that needed change, and I felt that very much growing up. But going into care of course exposes you to a world that is very different than a world that you would see if you weren’t in care. So you start being exposed to a whole range of professions you might be, you’ll be exposed to residential social workers, to foster carers, to social workers. Nowadays you’ll also have CAMHS workers and of back then also IROs, you know, an independent reviewing officer, and there’s all these different types of jobs.

Lisa: 12:29

And if you’re not really engaged in education for because you’ve got like loads of stuff going on um, then it’s almost like a kind of careers um opening up. You know there’s all these types of jobs and there’s these ways of doing things. So I think the combination of who I was and I was the sort of um child who was often writing to the director of social services and making complaints and, you know, kind of seeking justice in the in in the children’s home and stuff like that um and that combination I think, then of seeing people and also experiencing um a social worker I’m still in contact with Eunice who, who I always refer to as the the only social worker whose name I remember, you know we’d sit in her Ford Escort. I’d be crying, going why is everything so shit, and she’d be making me feel better and I thought that looks like a great. Get a ford escort and you get to make people feel better.

Colby: 13:31

Give me the ford escort bit a bit yeah, what’s not to love about that?

Lisa: 13:37

you know, so, at sort of 15, 15, 16 she. She was my social worker only for about a year and a half, but, um, very influential. Um, probably not at the time realizing how influential she was, but I kind of looked at um different social workers and thought I like I would like to do that, so that’s, those seeds were then planted. I mean, unfortunately, coming out of care I then had, I was homeless for a couple of years and I didn’t have an education because I had been expelled from schools. And you know, that came a bit later and I was lucky enough to get some funding to do a sociology degree, um, at the age of 21. Um, I had to do a couple of a levels which I was pretty diabolical at, but I obviously ticked the right boxes help me the right, help me boxes and and got into uni and and did sociology, which just further really cemented um how I felt about wanting to create change socially. Um, so, yeah, yeah and Lisa I’m.

Colby: 14:52

There’s a lot in there, but I’m the first thing that I was recalling, and I think you shared you must have shared this video at one stage was a younger version of yourself on a. Was a younger version of yourself being interviewed on a talk show about. That must be back around that time that you were at university and maybe even before. But talking about young people in care.

Lisa: 15:16

Yeah, so I guess because I was very articulate, pretty feisty and have a bit of a streak of determination in me, that did get picked up when I was younger, from different organizations and I’d been in a night shelter um around the age of 17, 18 um called Centrepoint um who are a big charity for youth homelessness in the UK and at the time a man called Nick Hardwick was the CEO and once I’d come out of that we’d kind of stayed in touch a bit. I’d been housed. I was then at uni and he asked me if I’d go on this Channel 4 programme about homelessness with John Snow, who’s an incredibly wonderful journalist, who’s retired now from his time on Channel 4 News element and wanting to create change and going through that process of being quite vulnerable. Because you know, I think when I met Nick many years later you know he said that they had only just started thinking about children coming out of care and homelessness. That actually the vision at the time so I’m going back to the late 80s, early 90s was very much that homelessness was a step you know this idea of an older male drinking.

Lisa: 16:55

You know that there wasn’t a real deep understanding about children coming out of care and being homeless, which which so many of us were, and that piece was part of a massive campaign. We did lots of things. We did Channel 4. We did lots of newspaper items and magazines and all sorts of things to really raise awareness that children were coming out of care and they were becoming homeless for lots of different reasons, you know. One of them might have been just to get as far away from that care experience as possible, thinking you can cope and you can do stuff, and not being able to Alongside. We didn’t have legislation back then that made sure that children weren’t homeless and that there were lots of options. There weren’t lots of options, actually, when you came out of care, so it was a really, really tricky time.

Colby: 17:52

Yeah, and I think it’s something that’s still being grappled with in many jurisdictions around the world. In my own local jurisdiction, um and I think you mentioned something in there that resonates with me that often my observation with young people and I’ve worked long term with the young people that I do see and will continue to see them professionally post care but oftentimes the last thing that they want is for any authority to be assisting them in any way. They just want done with the government running their lives and sadly, I mean that’s a bit of an indictment on their experience in care and also sadly sets them up for a tough run, as you experienced as well, with homelessness and various other challenges being part of their experience post-care.

Lisa: 19:03

And that’s why we have to stop thinking about children coming out of care and that’s the end of service. That has to be in the same way that you have with your own children. There has to be that ability, you know, because your own kids might turn around as well. You know, both my kids were trying to live independently long before they could and I think that’s quite a normal thing to happen. But of course there’s that elastic band, that continuous coming back. We need to really think about services in a very different way that understands the science that underpins child development, for a start, and that also understands 18 to 25 year olds in terms of a um, the, the work that’s been done around contextual safeguarding um, so that we, so that people have that opportunity to recover from some of those experiences. But they can also come back, just like your own kids can.

Colby: 20:10

Yes, and I’ve already done a podcast interview with Kiran Modi, who set up Udain Care in India, and remarkable, remarkable person and what they’ve done. And, as you say, they provide a place and people that care leavers can come back to right through to their mid-20s and beyond. They have what she called volunteer mentor parents in their residential homes who are parental figures for life for the young people that go through there. Oftentimes, I think we I wonder about this, I wonder whether in our white Western, you know, first world kind of mentality, we think we’re doing it better than um anyone else and and and uh, the challenges that we have would be the same everywhere. But um, you know, you know, my experience just very recently in talking to someone from india is that you, you can do it um very differently and provide extraordinary levels of support and opportunity for our young people.

Colby: 21:27

Um, anyway, uh, the other thing that that stood out for me in when you were talking was you talked about Eunice and her. I think it was Eunice and her Ford Escort and um, I wonder if there was any. And you also talked about um john snow, the journalist, but also the other chap put you in touch with him and um, I was wondering if there’s anyone else that you’d like to you know, acknowledge, or that you would acknowledge uh as having had a really important and significant um uh impact on you travelling this path, walking this path.

Lisa: 22:08

Yeah, I mean to be honest, I wouldn’t know where to start and I think that’s really part of our work, really, isn’t it, that people influence you along the way. I do remember somebody else I don’t know their name, but I was living in Cornwall. I’d gone down to Cornwall, I was homeless. I was. I lived across all sorts of different types of non-housing across Cornwall for for a few months before I went to London, which is where I kind of Cornwall for for a few months before I went to London, which is where I kind of uh was, was saved, if you like. Um and some journalists came down from shelter and did a piece on homelessness and as soon as I got to London, I went straight down to the shelter head office on Old Street and became a really pain in the arse volunteer um, which was, um, one of the first experiences that I had, but it was again. It was. It was a stunning experience because it was the 21st uh anniversary. So it would have been, I suppose, 1987, something like that, the 21st anniversary of Kathy Come Home. And we had this amazing event with all these very famous people, and there’s a wonderful picture of me stood next to Jeremy Irons, kind of gazing at Jeremy Irons on this stand, this podium stand, at the age of I must well, maybe I was 17, 18, and so those were the kind of things that really, really influenced me.

Lisa: 23:46

But, as I say, you can’t take away who you are as a person as well, because the first thing I did when I got to London was I’m going to find that journalist, that person who did that writing piece.

Lisa: 23:59

I want to be there, I want to do that, you know, and I think that’s why it’s so important for children, young people, to meet as many different types of people as possible.

Lisa: 24:09

I can’t remember her name, but what happened was a chain of events that led me into a campaigns department, that led me to start writing articles for their magazine, you know, all of those kind of things that really showed me where my passion was, and so, mostly across my work, I’ve never felt like I’m working because I found that passion, I found what I wanted to do, and if we can give that gift I found what I wanted to do and if we can give that gift to to young people, how incredible is that to have this exposure to so many different people with different ways of life that spark and ignite a passion that, yes, you’re not. You’re not always going to be doing the things that you really want to do, but you’re going to be in that field. So, yeah, I feel very, very fortunate and can’t ever really feel cross about the experiences that I had, because they gifted me those types of events that have given me the ability to work from a place of passion.

Colby: 25:27

Yeah, it’s a not uncommon, I guess, response from people who have experienced hardship in their life, but it has, and who have overcome it and, um, they, they wouldn’t. It’s quite common to say they wouldn’t change. Um, those difficult, you know, those things that shape those experiences, that shape them. And what’s really coming through, lisa, listening, listening to you talk, is how driven you were to, even in the latter stages of your time in care. You’re being driven to try and to stand up and say this is not good enough for me, nor my peers who are in this space.

Lisa: 26:34

Yeah, yeah, and again I feel very blessed that you know I have that within me.

Lisa: 26:41

You know you’re very focused on attachment and I absolutely believe that the first attachment relationship that I had with my grandmother was profound in terms of of my development, and you know she was present, you know she could give me things, emotionally and through that attachment relationship that I couldn’t get from my mother. You know that wasn’t and still isn’t possible, and so I have so much gratitude for that because I think if I hadn’t had her, I’d have been in care from very young, you know, and that would have brought a whole other set of challenges and difficulties and it would be as much as there are no regrets in the sense of what the experience gave me. There’s still sadness and there’s still loss and there’s still grief, and I think it’s really important to hold both of those things. And I wonder, anyway, I’ve met enough humans, many, many humans, to know that sadness, loss and grief is part of the human experience and that, whatever experiences you’ve had, invariably most people are grappling and dealing with their, their own?

Colby: 28:30

families and their own beginnings in life. Yeah, yeah. So, um, at some point you you kind of started out your your advocacy in care about the conditions within the care arrangement that you were in, and then moved to the homelessness of care leavers, post-care, and at some point in time you turned your attention to schools and, uh, the experience of of, of young people who had experienced relational trauma, and, uh, and their experience of schools. Do you mind telling us a bit about that?

Lisa: 29:17

yeah. So once I’d got my degree, I moved into um, I worked in leaving care teams, uh, for nearly 10 years and then, and then I moved into and then lots of things changed. I didn’t like it. I didn’t like it anymore. It became very admin-y, um, it lost some of the fusion with youth work that Leaving Care Work had back then, which I loved and which was very relational and consistent and it was lovely work. So I wandered across the road and went into the education department and that was a very different experience. All of a sudden, you know, know, I was not in my jeans anymore. I was, you know, covering my tattoos. It was all very, very um, I don’t know how to describe it, but it was a cut. It was a bit of a culture shock. Everyone was very proper and social work had it.

Lisa: 30:25

It’s just not, it’s not quite as proper yeah it’s got a bit of activism and it’s got some rebellion in it. It’s got, you know, social work often brings people in with all sorts of different lived experiences. Education back then was incredibly straight, um, and so I had a bit of a steep learning curve, but I met some amazing people who kind of taught me how to be in the education space, and I spent time working in schools. I spent time working with people who children and young people who were not attending school, and we would be setting up like different tutoring arrangements and alternative plans so they could stay on roll at school. It was very much about reducing exclusion, preventing exclusion. So, yes, I did that for 10 years, um.

Lisa: 31:45

So yeah, so I did that for 10 years, um, and I kind of got to a point because I also had two young bringing the body into the way that I had been thinking about the work that I was doing, and that was around 2005 2005, so 20 years ago and then I did a small piece of work with a local authority which was very much about creating services across different sectors and getting people around the table, and that was an amazing piece of work because it really taught me how long it takes to build relationships, not just the relationships that you’re having, but when you’re trying to engage other sectors, to sit around a table and talk to each other and become friends. That takes a long time, um, so that was a real gift to watch that process, um, and then it was after that, because we had we had, um a change of government and the financial crash and, uh, I also had something personal happen in my life that just threw everything open, and that’s when I became self-employed 15 years ago.

Colby: 33:08

Yeah, and you’ve been very active in that 15 years, as you likely were prior to that. Amongst other things you’ve done is you’ve written three books, which I mentioned earlier in the intro.

Lisa: 33:41

I wonder if you just would like to talk a little bit about each of those books and what particular messages they might have for children’s services and for schools. Yeah, so well. The first book was the Brightness of Stars, and I wrote that back in 2012, 2013. And I wrote it because I’d hit a bit of a roadblock. I wasn’t particularly open about my experience, I hadn’t really talked about it, but I was very aware, like lots of people who get to their kind of late 30s, early 40s, that midlife period, that it had massively influenced me and that whatever I hadn’t dealt with in the recovery journey I’d had so far, I was going to have to deal with. And that led me to think. But there must be lots of other people with this experience. Where are they? I mean, think about this there there’s no Facebook groups, there’s no social media where everyone’s connecting.

Lisa: 34:30

I think we were sort of very much at the beginning of that um, and so I had a few connections and I wanted to share stories. You know, as I where I started at the beginning of this podcast talking about sharing stories and journalism and I wanted to share stories and I’ve been fortunate enough that Routledge republished that book, because I’d self-published originally and they published it and what was beautiful about it was when I read what I’d written. It wasn’t relevant anymore. I’d written it wasn’t relevant anymore. I didn’t have those feelings about it anymore and it made me think. Everybody that was in it needs to write. What do they think about it?

Lisa: 35:11

Now, 10 years later, let’s have an exploration of the healing journey and how, at different points in your life, something really troubles you and is really defining and is really intense.

Lisa: 35:23

And 10 years later, when you’ve processed it and used writing to make sense of it and perhaps had some therapy and perhaps done some body work and all of those things, um, that help us process stuff. So there’s a there is a new section in there as well that’s more contemporary, but there’s that beautiful section at the beginning that’s got the reflections of what people had written to use earlier. So that’s wonderful. So I guess the messages in that book are about what does the experience look like and what does a healing journey look like? You know, it’s really good for people to know that over time we change and we grow and we transform and I think that that’s that’s a real gift of of the third edition. Conversations that make a difference is very much a book that infuses, as everything that I do I try and infuse, with academic knowledge, professional practice and lived experience, and that book infuses that conversations that make a difference for children and young people and the opening chapters with unis are wonderful which is wonderful, um.

Lisa: 36:39

So there’s there’s a whole range of conversations in there. It’s a lovely way of sharing conversations in a book like that, because it’s quite easy to read, and I’ve tried to make most of my books easy to read. Practitioners are busy. We haven’t got time to get through Dostoevsky, you know, like you’ve got to be able to just dip in and read something that really makes a difference and that makes you think about something in a different way. So there’s lots of reflections and then weaving a web of belonging, which has just come out this year, is very much underpinned by the research, uh, the PhD that I did, the research, um, which again was a really interesting experience.

Lisa: 37:28

There’s lots of voices in there, but writing academically is so hard and so dry, um, and it felt equally hard to strip the dryness back and create a practice book. So it’s very much underpinned by extensive research, but again, I’ve tried to make it very readable. I’ve even got some recipes in there, some grounding exercises, you know, anything that makes reading about some really difficult stuff just just a bit more manageable, because the people who are doing the work you know the direct work, um are giving something of themselves every time they do that, and what I’m focused on in my next book is how do we make sure that those people, that the people doing that work, are looked after in a really deeply and profound way so that they can do that work.

Colby: 38:39

That sounds wonderful. I look forward to reading that book as well. Lisa, I think you’ve. I mean, writing a book is a very generous thing to do, I think, and particularly when you have such extensive lived experience and knowledge and drive. And I’m really just really pleased to hear that your books do well. And see all the posts on social media of people who’ve got the latest book on belonging yeah, that’s just wonderful. If you could sit down with, you know, the heads of education or the heads of child protection, child safeguarding statutory authorities, what do you think you’d say to them?

Lisa: 39:38

So I guess I mean I’d say a lot, but I think there’s two things that I think are really important and really misunderstood. So the first thing I’d say is we need to sort out the language. The language that is used to describe children and young people is hugely problematic. It’s hugely problematizing of those children and young people and it shapes and forms the way that they are viewed and the way that they are seen. So language is the first thing. Let’s get on with a piece of work sorting that out. Let’s get on with a piece of work sorting that out.

Lisa: 40:22

And I guess the second thing that is also hugely misunderstood is that behaviour is communication. That seems to me to be such a difficult concept for people to understand. It’s almost as if people think children have an articulation of their trauma that it can take you decades to get of their trauma, that it can take you decades to get that they can somehow come and say to you I’ve got to have a chat with you later because I’m really struggling with something and I’d like to walk it through. You know, and of course that is not possible, but that’s the expectation. So when a child shows you which is what children will always do that they are struggling with something.

Lisa: 41:04

I would say that’s something that I would really like to be understood more. First, ways of understanding that is, for people to drop into their own central nervous system, their own relationship with shame and their own relationship with struggle. And if they can do that and that’s some of what I try and do with people if they can do that I try and do with people if they can do that, then that expands that space of compassion, because then there’s some compassion for self. It’s very, very difficult to think about behavior as communication if you don’t have the time and space to think about how you communicate your own distress when you’re distressed. So I think that would be what I would be looking at. Let’s give people some space for reflection. Let’s give people some space for some really good training opportunities. Let’s give people some space to drop into their own bodies, um, so that that exploration can happen.

Colby: 42:19

Yeah, I think listeners of this podcast will be very, very familiar with me saying that um, one of my um and another issue that’s very close to me, um is the fact that too many practitioners in education and also in child safeguarding are so flat out with the work that they don’t have time to stop and think about what they’re doing. And it manifests to me in a couple of things. I’ll often ask people, you know, if we, they’ll say they’ll give me the shopping list of problems with a young person and then, and I’ll say to them a couple of things, one of them would be if my intervention was successful, what would you expect to see? What would be different? And people find that very hard, very, very hard to answer because, as you say, they’re so stuck in a problem focus and talking about the problems of the children. I also say to people and I think this ties very much in with what you’re saying about just take some time to think about what it would be like we, if you were struggling, if you were having some of these experiences. I asked, I asked three questions if the child could or would, how would they truthfully describe themselves, other people and their world? How fast does their motor run and what did they learn in their first learning environments about how you get your needs met? Again, really difficult questions to answer, I’ve found, but I do think you’re right. I think, if I think, I think and again, people need time I think, if you can, if people have the time to drop in and reflect on their own experiences of struggle, or you know what it would have, what, what they can imagine it would be like to experience significant struggle. I remember the first. It was not the first time I thought about it, lisa, but it’s one of the first times that it really stood out, so much that I remember Very early in my career, mid-90s, in my first posting as a clinical psychologist doing assessments of young people, I had a young person that I was expecting to see first thing in the morning at the office, and when I arrived I used to live on one side of my home city of Adelaide and work at the far extremity of the other side and, depending on traffic in between, that journey could be elongated or otherwise.

Colby: 45:18

But anyway, I walked in and I walked into one of the at uh, the professional areas of the building and, and, and there was the young person I knew it would be her because she had a distinctive um background. So I immediately knew, ah, this must be the, the young person that’s come to see me. And I was very aware of her surroundings at that time and what she made of them and the fact that the taxi driver a taxi driver had collected her from her placement and dropped her at the office and she was about nine years old from memory. So, yeah, just really. From then on it was very much foremost in my mind the experience of our young people. It’s very hard. If you don’t give people the time to stop and reflect, then they just become very procedural and the work loses a bit of its heart and it becomes heartless and procedural. I think.

Lisa: 46:29

We have to stop thinking about people as machines fulfilling a role. You know this is relational work. Relational work is deep, it’s meaningful, it’s connecting um and so people. And this is what happens when you starve systems and you reduce capacity and you take away funding and you make the work really, really intense. Unfortunately, it makes real relational work much harder. Now I say that knowing that some areas that I work in prioritise it above all else. But it does mean that something else has to give. So there’s an intentionality when you’re thinking about belonging relationships, connection, proper staff well-being not, you know, let’s go bowling every fortnight or something, but the proper stuff that really nourishes and fills people’s cups. And you know you’re absolutely right when, when we don’t have that, then that’s where the procedural stuff comes in and burnout and secondary trauma and you know all of that stuff kicks in one other thing I just want to say I the the language we use.

Colby: 47:52

My first edition of the attachment book I. I say I wrote I didn’t write two editions. I wrote two of the attachment book. I say I wrote I didn’t write two editions. I wrote two books, the first book and the second book. They’re different books and the language is quite different. And a little example when I do, every now and then I’ve spoken to our heads of our child protection department here in my local jurisdiction department, here in my in my local jurisdiction. But I, on the language thing, I’ll say um, because one of one another thing that’s really near and dear to my heart is is the main, where possible, the maintenance and I think it’s more possible than we we think but the maintenance of good connection with birth family. So I I will say you could probably achieve a lot in terms of practice by changing one word in the sentence that is routinely said about our children and young people.

Lisa: 48:50

What’s routinely said and written is that they cannot be safely cared for at home and I say replace cannot with couldn’t or could not, and I I dare say you would, yeah, you would um notice a big, I mean language is powerful it’s so powerful and maybe could not right now, you know like allow parents the opportunity that we all afford ourselves of transformation and recovery and wellness and sobriety and all those other things you know, in a dynamic, trauma-sensitive way in the writing. You know that, but right now that wasn’t possible. That doesn’t mean it’s not possible later on. It’s just not possible now and it’s those kind of things, isn’t it’s having that, that, that eye for the life course? But services, unfortunately, are so divided and siloed into what you know how they work that the life course approach and that holistic approach is often lost. And look at us, we could talk for hours I think so we could.

Colby: 50:07

I was literally I I say to the kids, when the you know you’re supposed to say, colby, get out of my head, it’s rude, you gotta ask permission. Permission before you’re reading my mind. But you were just literally reading my mind then, lisa, because I was going to say, yes, we could talk for hours. Maybe we’ll just have to do this conversation in installments perhaps, but if you’re keen, I do give all of my guests an opportunity to ask me a question without notice at the end. We’ve heard a lot of my voice already. I’m not sure if you had something that you wanted to ask me.

Lisa: 50:46

Well, I don’t have anything to ask you today because I’ve already interviewed you on my podcast. So I asked you lots of questions. So if anybody wants to hear those questions, then I’m sure Colby will drop that episode into the show notes and you can listen to me ask you lots of questions.

Colby: 51:06

Yeah, I think I’ll do that. Well, I mean, is that a bit I’ll do it because you’ve raised it? It’s an invitation.

Lisa: 51:14

It’s an invitation and it would be lovely to share that conversation and it’s it’s been really lovely to be on the other side of that and, um, and be asked lots of questions, so thank you for having me yeah, well, thank you for agreeing and uh, yeah, I hope you have a good day and you continue to be well, lisa as well as you can be.