Healing Through Relationship: A Lifetime in Therapeutic Care

An Ordinary Life Is the Great Aspiration

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

You can listen to Adela here:

You can watch at the link below:

About Adela

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

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

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

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

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

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

Related Podcast Interviews

Dr Kiran Modi

Listen here:

Watch here:

Richard Cross

Listen here:

Watch here:

Transcript:

Colby: 0:00

Welcome to the Secure Start podcast.

Adela: 0:02

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

Adela: 0:31

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

Colby: 1:39

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

Colby: 2:45

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

Colby: 4:20

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

Adela: 5:22

Thank you, colby, good to be here.

Colby: 5:25

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

Adela: 5:59

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

Adela: 6:45

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

Adela: 7:24

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

Adela: 8:12

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

Adela: 8:56

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

Colby: 9:30

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

Adela: 9:48

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

Colby: 10:03

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

Colby: 10:47

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

Adela: 11:00

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

Adela: 11:19

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

Adela: 11:59

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

Adela: 12:54

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

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

Adela: 14:09

No.Colby: 

14:10

No.Adela: 

14:11

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

Adela: 14:15

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

Adela: 15:27

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

Adela: 15:57

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

Colby: 16:29

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

Colby: 17:13

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

Adela: 17:21

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

Adela: 17:58

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

Adela: 18:37

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

Adela: 20:08

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

Adela: 20:41

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

Adela: 21:34

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

Adela: 21:41

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

Colby: 23:25

Probably just stirs them up.Adela: 23:27

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

Adela: 23:56

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

Colby: 24:05

I thought you were going to say that.

Adela: 24:08

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

Adela: 25:15

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

Colby: 25:45

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

Colby: 26:03

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

Adela: 27:00

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

Adela: 27:27

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

Adela: 28:12

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

Colby: 28:34

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

Adela: 28:47

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

Adela: 29:09

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

Adela: 30:30

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

Colby: 31:51

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

Adela: 32:14

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

Adela: 32:27

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

Colby: 33:40

I remember.

Adela: 33:43

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

Adela: 34:10

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

Adela: 35:29

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

Adela: 37:10

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

Colby: 37:38

I think it’s someone else’s problem.

Adela: 37:39

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

Adela: 38:15

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

Adela: 38:36

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

Colby: 40:12

More sympathetic perhaps.

Adela: 40:14

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

Adela: 41:13

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

Adela: 41:46

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

Adela: 42:12

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

Colby: 43:06

Then you had to do it.

Adela: 43:08

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

Adela: 43:32

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

Colby: 45:07

TAC2, yeah.

Adela: 45:10

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

Colby: 45:38

At the right time. At the right time.

Adela: 45:40

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

Adela: 47:20

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

Adela: 47:41

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

Colby: 48:07

It’s relationships.

Adela: 48:09

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

Adela: 48:36

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

Adela: 49:36

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

Colby: 49:57

And their children.

Adela: 49:58

Because he supported it.

Colby: 50:00

Yeah, and their children and their grandchildren.

Adela: 50:04

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

Colby: 51:02

Yeah, figuratively and actually.

Adela: 51:06

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

Colby: 52:07

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

Adela: 52:35

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

Adela: 53:20

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

Adela: 54:35

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

Colby: 54:53

Contained adults.

Adela: 54:56

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

Adela: 55:33

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

Colby: 57:00

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

Adela: 57:19

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

Adela: 58:29

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

Adela: 58:53

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

Colby: 59:13

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

Adela: 59:26

I’m always up for it, but.

Colby: 59:28

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

Adela: 59:54

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

Adela: 1:01:04

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

Adela: 1:01:48

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

Colby: 1:02:46

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

Colby: 1:02:57

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

Adela: 1:04:00

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

Adela: 1:05:08

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

Colby: 1:05:36

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

Adela: 1:06:05

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

Colby: 1:06:19

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

Colby: 1:07:41

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

Colby: 1:08:36

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

Adela: 1:09:10

No, I think I’m a record breaker.

Colby: 1:09:18

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

Adela: 1:09:54

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

Adela: 1:10:37

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

Colby: 1:11:26

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

Colby: 1:11:41

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

Colby: 1:12:10

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

Colby: 1:12:40

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

Adela: 1:12:54

Great pleasure. Thank you very much, Colby.

Reunifying 1,200 Children: The Connecting Families Story with Sally Rhodes

Family Preservation Through Trauma Informed Practice

Family reunification is one of the most challenging yet rewarding areas of child protection work. In this powerful conversation between Colby Pearce and Sally Rhodes, we gain insight into how one practitioner’s passion for keeping families together has led to the successful reunification of over 1,200 children with their families over two decades.

Sally Rhodes’ journey into family preservation work began in her childhood, influenced by her father’s stance against injustice and her early exposure to children living in institutional care. This formative experience sparked a lifelong commitment to questioning why children were separated from their families and exploring better alternatives. Her professional path took her from residential care in 1985 to intensive family preservation services, eventually leading to the establishment of Connecting Families in 2004 – now South Australia’s largest reunification service.

What makes Connecting Families so successful? Sally emphasises the importance of a team aligned in values, approach and commitment to social justice. Unlike competitive tendering processes that disrupt continuity of care, Connecting Families has built a stable team of practitioners who have worked together for decades, creating a collective wisdom that grows over time. This consistency allows them to develop deep expertise and speak with an authoritative voice when advocating for families within the child protection system.

One of the most fascinating aspects of the conversation centres on how practitioners approach cases involving denied child abuse, particularly unexplained injuries to infants. Traditional child protection approaches often demand admissions as prerequisites for reunification, creating a significant barrier when shame, fear of criminal charges, and potential social ostracism make such admissions extremely difficult. Through her Churchill Fellowship, Sally studied the Resolutions Approach developed in the UK, which offers an alternative pathway focused on building safety without necessarily requiring full admissions.

The parallel between team dynamics and therapeutic relationships with families emerges as a powerful theme. Just as practitioners create psychological safety for vulnerable families to engage meaningfully in change processes, teams need to establish the same conditions for themselves to navigate the challenging terrain of child protection work. This secure base allows practitioners to be vulnerable, make mistakes, challenge each other’s thinking, and ultimately provide better support to families.

Perhaps the most profound insight from Sally’s decades of experience is the long-lasting impact of child protection decisions. “Think very, very carefully about what you write, what you decide, because it has consequences,” she advises, acknowledging that with greater knowledge and experience, she would now make different decisions in some past cases. This humility and willingness to evolve one’s thinking over time reflects the continuous learning journey that characterises effective practice in this complex field.

For those working in child protection, family preservation, or any helping profession, this conversation offers valuable reflections on creating practice environments that balance rigour with compassion, accountability with understanding, and ultimately prioritise keeping families safely together whenever possible.

Listen here:

Watch here:

About Sally

Sally has a Master of Social Work, and a Graduate Diploma in Family Therapy.

Sally, commenced working in residential care in 1985, then followed her passion for strengthening families through working intensively in family preservation services.

In 2004 Sally established Connecting Families, a therapeutic Reunification and Family Preservation service, which has grown to 17 practitioners.

Sally is trained in Narrative Therapy, Marte Meo, Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy, the Neurosequential Model of Therapeutics, and Signs of Safety.

Sally was awarded a Churchill Fellowship to work in the UK with the Resolutions Approach – Working with Denied Child Abuse.

Connecting Families is now the largest Reunification Service is South Australia and, together the team has safely reunified over 1200 children, and prevented the removal of many more.

In Connecting Families, Sally has selected practitioners who share her commitment to social justice and human rights, and ethically driven practice.

Sally provides training and consultation to Government and Non-Government organisations and remains a strong advocate for vulnerable families.

Sally has been integral in leading the development of a Partnering for Safety approach to child protection through training and consulting, and is passionate about family led decision making and bringing the child’s voice into child protection work.

Related Podcast Episodes:

Adriana Dias

Listen here:

Watch here:

Patricia Sheridan

Listen here:

Watch here:

Lighthouse Foundation

Listen here:

Watch here:

Transcript:

Sally: 0:01

I think I always knew this, but I know it far more powerfully now, is that the decisions that we make, the things that we write, the recommendations that we make about families have long-lasting impact. So, therefore, think very, very carefully about what you write, what you decide, because it has consequences, and I know that to be so true now that I probably didn’t know as strongly back then.

Colby: 0:40

Hi and welcome to the Secure Start podcast. Hi and welcome to the Secure Start podcast. I’m Colby Pearce, and joining me for this episode is a highly respected practitioner in my home jurisdiction. Before I introduce my guests, I’d like to acknowledge the traditional custodians of the land that we are meeting on the Kaurna people, and the continuing connection they and other Aboriginal people feel to land, waters, culture and community. I’d also like to pay my respects to their elders, past, present and emerging. So my guest for this episode is Sally Rhodes. Welcome Sally, thanks Colby. Welcome Sally, thanks Colby. So Sally is, as I said, a practitioner in my home jurisdiction here and we’re both used to paying our respects to the traditional custodians of the lands we meet on. So, for those who may be listening or watching overseas, this is a customary paying of respect to those traditional owners.

Colby: 1:56

Now Sally has a Master of Social Work and a Graduate Diploma in Family Therapy. Sally commenced working in residential care in 1985, then followed her passion for strengthening families through working intensively in family preservation services. In 2004, sally established Connecting Families, a therapeutic reunification and family preservation service, which has grown to 17 practitioners. Sally is trained in narrative therapy, matrimony, dyadic, developmental psychotherapy, the neuro-sequential model of therapeutics and signs of safety. Sally was awarded a Churchill Fellowship to work in the UK with the resolutions approach working with denied child abuse. Connecting Families is now the largest reunification service in South Australia and together the team has safely reunified over 1,200 children and prevented the removal of many more. In Connecting Families, sally has selected practitioners who share her commitment to social justice and human rights and ethically driven practice. Sally provides training and consultation to government and non-government organisations and remains a strong advocate for vulnerable families. Sally has been integral in leading the development of a partnering for safety approach to child protection through training and consulting, and is passionate about family-led decision-making and bringing the child’s voice into child protection work.

Colby: 3:38

Wow, there was a lot there, sally. Obviously I’m going to need the editor, all right. Obviously I’m going to be the editor, all right. So, sally, um, I guess, uh, I just really want, um, for our listeners to hear more about you, um, as a person and also as a professional. So my first question to you is how did you come to this field of endeavor?

Sally: 4:04

yeah, well, you know I I had cause to think about this last year when we were celebrating 20 years of connecting families, and I actually really stopped and thought about how did I get here, really? And, um, because nothing’s ever by accident, is it, you know? And so I started to think about my childhood and where I grew up and what my influences were. And you know, it occurred to me that my dad was a really big influence in my life in terms of thinking about injustice and standing up for the oppressed. He always stood up for me, you know, which was something that was. I was a bit of a naughty kid, so you know, I used to get in trouble at school a lot and he always wanted to know.

Sally: 4:55

You know my side of the story, which was refreshing and not normal back then, like you know, I’m talking the late 60s, early 70s, and also mum and dad volunteered at a children’s home. It was run by nuns and there were homes it was about four. My memory was that there were like four homes on this property and they had 10 kids each in them and mum and dad would go there on weekends, like rostered on, to support the nuns looking after the kids. So I would tag along. And it just struck me that this was a really unusual situation for children not to be living with their families, and I think that that was my first exposure to it and I was exposed to it for a long time, you know, over three or four years probably that mum and dad went there, that I would go with them, and I knew these kids too. I went to school with a lot of them, so that was that. And then I and I think that sparked something in me that I wanted to do. So I didn’t know what it was, and then I didn’t go straight into social work, but I knew that that’s what I wanted to do. But I went and did nursing first, which I hated, and I left very quickly. And then I went and studied and I found my way.

Sally: 6:24

So this was in northern New South Wales, so not the state that we, you know we currently are in now. This was in a little town called Grafton, but then I moved over here to South Australia in 1985 and I got a job with the Department for Community Welfare, as it was known then, in um, residential care and um. I was 22 and I just thought at that point. I was too young to do sort of generic social work. I, you know, and I wanted to work with young people. That felt the right thing to do. So I, I was there and I stayed in residential care for eight years and I think that experience really fuelled again.

Sally: 7:13

This sort of kids just need not be in these situations, you know. If they can’t, if they, you know, we really should be working to try to keep children at home. So a family preservation service in South Australia started in 1993. That was the first one called Keeping Families Together, and I won a position in that and I stayed in doing that from 1993 to 2004 in various different roles but all like all working intensively with families and either in family preservation or reunification. And then the agency that I worked for, anglicare, lost the tender to continue doing that work and I was approached to set up on my own well, set up to work with the families that had been in our service, because the agency who won them that contract to carry on the work, for whatever reason, didn’t set up and so, fortuitously, these sort of families fell into my lap and and that’s how it started in terms of connecting families, um, just yeah, and then, and that’s all I’ve ever wanted to do. Really, it’s a long-winded answer to your question.

Colby: 8:42

Colby, no, not long-winded, but very interesting. It really goes to show, I guess, that when you, you know how influential our experience is growing up, our experiences in childhood, are in terms of the future course of our life. Yeah, in fact, research that I can remember hearing about a long time ago about who enters the helping profession who enters the helping profession, so to speak, tend to be people who have been in some sort of caring role as they’ve been growing up. Yeah, yeah, as they’ve been growing up.

Colby: 9:27

Yeah, yeah and yeah. I think that rings true not only for myself, but a lot of people I’ve spoken to about this and, interestingly, just to pick up another point that you made in there is that the impact that residential care had on you and on practice and a sneak peek into another podcast episode is that I’ll be speaking to someone who ran a residential care home in the UK for a very long time and then moved across to run the UK’s first therapeutic fostering service, so our listeners can listen out for that as well. So, just moving on, you’ve talked about your dad as being a significant personal influence on you growing up and you’ve probably also referred to your observations of the children and the environment that they were living on as major influences environment that they were living on as major influencers but who were your professional major professional influencers?

Sally: 10:51

would you say, yeah, look, many and varied really. But you know, and I guess I didn’t really, I suppose I did, but I can’t even remember who they might have been, you know, but you know, but certainly when I came to um, a therapist well, psychologist, called Alan Jenkins, um, his partner, maxine Joy, Rob Hall, a social worker, um, these were locally based, Adelaide, um, but I think world renowned really in their craft and their expertise, so, and Alan used to come to our team meetings when I worked in keeping families together and consult with us and I just used to sit there in awe, really, so he was a really big influence to me. And of course, you know Michael White and the whole narrative therapy, dulwich Centre, in terms of, you know, I, and to think more deeply about that, I suppose you know, and so they were a big event. And then, over the years, people like Dan Hughes, bruce Perry, you know yourself, colby, in terms of your writings around attachment and the science of safety, people Like you know, all of that has influenced me and I’ve been.

Sally: 12:58

You know that all of those people that I’ve named, their work and their way of thinking just resonated with my way of thinking and it helped me, you know, move forward in being able to help families, have that breadth of sort of knowledge and expertise, I suppose, to be able to think come to, you know, talk with people with a whole lot of different things in your head and frameworks to operate from.

Colby: 13:27

Yeah, so quite a diverse group there. Yeah, I think you know, thinking about my own professional journey and the work of Michael White and others and Alan and the Dulwich Centre, who I was probably exposed to at a similar time to you when I was a developing practitioner, I think a lot of what I heard from them resonates more and more with me as I move on with my life and career. Certainly the stories that we tell about ourselves I think are are very powerful in the way in which we approach life and relationships.

Sally: 14:28

Yeah, yeah, yeah, I think that’s true actually, in terms of for me. You know, probably at the time I didn’t realise how influential they were and that they were and how privileged I was to have them so accessible. You know they’re in my hometown. You know I’ve got video of Michael White interviewing me.

Colby: 14:50

You know it’s precious now to look back on that and yeah, and maybe we need to be, you know, maybe we need to have practised, I guess, for a period of time to be able to join the dots up. I guess, for a period of time to be able to join the dots up, I guess, in a sense, around those early influences and the impact that they’ve had on us and our professional journey and the way in which we approach our professional and personal life. Yeah, it’s very interesting. Our professional and personal life. Yeah, it’s very interesting. I’m also aware, and I mentioned to you, mentioned in the intro that you did do a Churchill Fellowship in the UK and I know a little bit about what a Churchill Fellowship is. But I wonder if you would mind just describing it, what a Churchill fellowship is and what it was like completing it, who you did it with or who you, yeah, work with and how it’s influenced your practice going from there yeah.

Sally: 16:03

So the Churchill Fellowship was actually set up by Winston Churchill really for um, you know, australians to have the experience, to be able to go abroad, um, you know, to um to expand their skills and knowledge in a specific area that they weren’t able to get in in Australia. You know, like, so this was the original sort of thinking around it and that you could then bring back that skill and knowledge to better the community. So that was sort of the broad and I think that still holds true. However, you know, with the modern technology these days you really don’t have to travel. You know you can do it, but you know they’re still offered.

Sally: 16:51

So I, when actually talking about influences, there’s some other people who were very influential in my life before I did the Churchill, and they were the John Gumbelton, colin Luger, susie Essex John Gumbelton, colin Luger, susie Essex three UK social workers, therapists, who worked for the NSPCC Is that right? Yeah, and they started writing about the resolutions approach, which is a way of working with families where there’s denial around and particularly around injury, unexplained injury to infants. So those very, you know, polarising as well as perplexing cases where you’ve got a baby that’s got injury and parents who basically say they don’t know how it happened, and in a medical profession saying, well, this is how we think it happened. And and so you know they become very stuck cases that you know and and I was coming across them in my, in my work of um you know families with with seemingly no other kind of factors that would have caused concern to anybody but a baby that had these unexplained injuries, and so you ended up with a situation that either the children just didn’t go home because of this stuckness around the acknowledgement or they did go home because people just gave up and put them home and so no work was ever done and I didn’t think either of those scenarios were good, basically.

Sally: 18:31

So I started looking for um you know any any ways of working around this really and um, it came across these guys, um and made contact with them in the uk, um by email and phone, and um started having some consultation with colin luger, one of them um, and then the idea of applying for churchill came up. So I did and it’s quite a daunting process really. You know it’s um. They give away about a hundred nationally a year, but in south austral I think the year I went there were nine given away and you have to, you know, put in an application. It has to be very succinct, to you know, to basically explain to a group of people not from this profession. You know a wide range of people making decisions about who gets them and then go to it, get to an interview process, which is, you know, 20 people. There was sitting around a big boardroom table and coming in and actually doing a presentation and then getting questions. Anyway, I was lucky enough to get one. I think it was so interesting.

Colby: 19:44

You know, I think it is interesting, you know.

Sally: 19:46

I think it really piqued the interest of the people who were making that selection. So I went to the UK. I went to Bristol, which is where Colin and John live. Colin has sadly passed away. He passed away in 2015. But you know, obviously when I went he was still alive. But you know, obviously when I went he was still alive and I spent six weeks there in the UK with them doing, you know, travelling all around England because even though they were based in the UK, their referrals came from all different parts of the UK so we would travel to meet with family.

Sally: 20:25

So I watched them, I talked to them, I talked to families about their experiences, I interviewed judges, um, children’s solicitor, uh. I met with some other academics I met with. I met peter dale, who’s another influencer, mel, is people remember now peter dale? Um, he wrote a book called fine. Who’s another influencer? I mean, people don’t remember now Peter Dale? He wrote a book called Fine Judgments. He’s another UK social worker, psychiatric social worker, and yeah. And then I came back, I had to write a report about that for the trust and I went and met with the youth court here in South Australia to talk about it because really if I could get the court understanding it, that was going to help. You know, I did presentations to the department about it and I think it has it influenced me. You know, in a sense around that there were people on the other side of the world thinking exactly the same way that I do.

Sally: 21:36

You know, I think there was something really heartening and a sense of security about that you know, that these issues were were happening everywhere and that, um, that there were people who were turning their mind to. How can we actually help these families stay together, but in a safe in? In a safe way, um, and you know they are the trickiest cases because people do take such a stand about we need to know. We need to know what happened. If we don’t know what happened, how can we ever make this safe? So there’s a I’ve done a lot of talking with people over the years around trying to get them to think about that in a different way and why people wouldn’t talk about it. You know the sense of shame, all of the disincentives to to talk about how an infant got injured. You know the criminal charges, loss of friends, family, whole range of things. You know.

Sally: 22:48

So, yeah, and as far as I know, we are probably the only service that provides resolutions way of working, certainly in South Australia, if not across Australia. I haven’t come across anybody else. So it’s a niche and I think that nicheness you know that, you know helped in terms of gaining reputation across the sector around. You know, here’s some people who will actually work with these kind of families, but rigorously, it’s not fluffy work in any sense. Yeah, and so Colin and John continued to be Colin, particularly up until his untimely passing like he was very unexpected and in terms of him getting sick, that was. But he, I continued to consult with him up until then, and then John for a little while after that as well, and I’m still in touch with John. He’s retired, yeah, yeah, they were great, great influences really.

Colby: 24:09

Yeah, they are difficult cases.

Sally: 24:11

Yeah.

Colby: 24:12

From my own work. While you’re talking, I’m immediately thinking of a couple of cases, one in particular that I became involved in or was asked to become involved in very early in my career and, similarly to you, I was aware that local child protection authorities, the emphasis that they placed on admissions and admissions as being a precursor to looking at the possibility of reunification or reunifying, and I remember even then being very much aware of or thinking a lot about all the impediments to making those admissions and whether, as you say, whether there is actually another way that can ensure safety but doesn’t rely on an admission.

Sally: 25:27

Yeah.

Colby: 25:29

And I think there are ways to go about doing that, and you referenced one of those models or approaches.

Sally: 25:41

Yeah, I think it’s very much a way. I mean they are approaches, but it’s very much a way of thinking rather than a way of doing. In a way, you know there are certain things, steps through the process, but it is. You can’t actually do the work if you don’t sort of think about this in. You know it’s about being able to hold a degree of uncertainty and not knowing.

Sally: 26:05

But, also, you know suspending doubt, like all of these sort of principles of the model really around. You know thinking about denial, like when I’ve done some training on this. You know I remember talking to a bunch of supervisors when I first came back and I said to them I want you to turn to the person next to you and tell them the thing that you are most ashamed of in your life. They all just stood there and stared at me. You know, like I was mad. But you know the point I was trying to make was that’s what you’re asking families to do.

Sally: 26:42

You’re asking them if we take on that belief that, yes, they’ve they’ve unintentionally caused some injury to their child that they then have become aware of. And then you’re asked and they’re so deeply ashamed of that. You know that you’re asking them to tell you a pillar of power in their life what you did. And I just think it’s unless you get alongside of people and approach them with empathy and compassion, in a non-judgmental stance, that’s going to shrink shame and you may get some partial acknowledgement. You certainly get people motivated to make sure that what happened will never happen again, and that’s all we want to do is just to make sure future harm doesn’t occur.

Colby: 27:40

Yeah, I think the shame element is a powerful impediment and the regulation of that shame is a powerful way forward.Sally: 27:50

Yeah.

Colby: 27:51

And I remember something that well. You said something a little bit earlier where you were saying that not only the making of the admission means that not only do child protection authorities know about what happened, but it comes out one way or another that family and friends may also find out more about that. And I’ve done a similar activity when I’ve done training in the youth justice area and I had practitioners come one by one in and disclose similarly to me an act that they were it’s going back a few years ago now, but it was an act that they were ashamed of doing and it may well have also had an offending element to it, and they had to disclose it to me one by one and they had a choice about whether they come in and do that or not. Everyone did it, but everyone seemed to be quite uncomfortable about it. I will note that I was never asked back in service.

Colby: 29:04

I had met one of the person in subsequent training that I also delivered in the youth court, but I was never asked back. And I think it’s when we expect families to make admissions and the whole movement forward depends upon it. They’re not just making admissions to child protection authorities, they’re making admissions, potentially, to their family and friends as well, as you say. So that little activity that you did and that I did and that I did, as uncomfortable as it was, probably still doesn’t really get at what it’s like to make admissions in child protection processes. Because, to make it similar, we would broadcast what was disclosed to the group at least, and to family and friends.

Colby: 30:10

And so, yeah, there are very powerful disincentives to make admissions. And, yeah, I always thought that. I always think that nobody does anything for no reason, and I’ve always applied that in my practice with children, or for as long as I can remember, and I think that in trauma-informed practice it’s all about responding to the reason, and I think, similarly, it is possible to navigate a way forward by responding therapeutically to the reasons for a child to be hurt, without necessarily hanging it all on an ambition.

Sally: 31:04

Yeah, hanging it all on an ambition, yeah, and also, you know, there’s this big focus on acknowledgement and admission or whatever. And you know, and I guess my way of thinking after years and years of working with families in this area, is that acknowledgement of its own doesn’t necessarily bring about safety. You know, people can acknowledge that they’ve done something or they’ve behaved in a particular way.

Colby: 31:31

It doesn’t mean they’re not going to do it again.

Sally: 31:33

So you know it’s not enough, and I think that’s what certainly the you know the science of safety model, you know the principles and practices of that model, and that approach got me really thinking about that as well that you have to be actively demonstrating a change or doing something differently over a period of time. It’s not enough to say oh yeah, you know, yeah, you know.

Colby: 32:02

There seems to be a belief that an omission is an acknowledgement of a preparedness to change. Yeah, and it may be the case in some instances, but my thinking about it is that the admission is probably not the main incentive to change. Rather, it’s the therapeutic relationship that we develop with the parent-client and our endeavours to regulate shame and regulate them being closed off and rather to opening them to meaningful conversations and what follows from that as being probably the what we should be putting most emphasis on as a starting point.

Sally: 33:16

Yeah.

Colby: 33:17

Parents engaging with the process rather than parents making an acknowledgement. Yeah, yeah.

Sally: 33:26

Yes, certainly, seeing, you know, and because I think that, um, the focus on you know you must acknowledge, and this is not necessarily even in denied childhood, just in anything really you must acknowledge, you know this, or you must acknowledge the harm that you’ve caused your child, or you must you know the the way that that the statutory organisations come to try to get people to do that is just not therapeutic in any way.

Sally: 33:51

It’s very shaming and, you know, potentially quite frightening really for people because they don’t know the consequences of if they do acknowledge you know. So, yeah, I agree, and I think it’s, you know, when you know, thinking about this work, I mean I don’t think I would have known this 30 years ago. You know this has been a process for me also around, just, you know, I remember way back there was a book written by Maluccio and Pine which is around reunification and because people just talk about the stages, you know the steps and the thing, and it’s not like that. You know it’s because of this what we’re just talking about now. You know it’s really around understanding the complexities of people’s lives and experiences and building relationships so that they can navigate their way through that, to come out of that you know in a way that they can demonstrate to people that I A want to be a safe parent and I can be.

Colby: 35:08

I A want to be a safe parent and I can be. Yeah, shame is such a destructive or can be such a destructive emotion, and a process that deepens shame works against a goal of a safe reunification between the child and their parents. Yeah, yeah, I feel like we could talk about it for a long time. There’s some other things I wanted to ask you, though. I wanted you to just you’ve given a little bit of an intro to how Connecting Families came about, but perhaps you can tell me a little bit more, or tell us, the audience as well, a little bit more about the work of connecting families, and you mentioned 1,200 safe reunifications since 2004. What do you think? What are the ingredients for both the success of connecting families and reunification work more generally?

Sally: 36:12

Yeah, I mean that’s interesting, isn’t it too? Because, you know, connecting families in 2004 was me, so, and then by 2006 there were three of us. But the three of us were so Deb Pickering and Sarah Gray, whom I worked with in Anglicare in reunification and family press services. So they were. We’d already had existing relationships and they had the same values and attitudes and beliefs that I do. And because I was just getting inundated with referrals, I just couldn’t and you know what it’s like in private practice, you just never say no to anything so I needed to bring people on to help with that, and so that’s kind of what happened. Over a period of time, more and more people came on board that I had selected based on my previous working relationships with them, knowing what their attitudes and values were to sort of over the time.

Sally: 37:17

So, mac Davis another person from you know when I was in Anglicare, tracy Laddams, who I worked with in residential care. So Tracy and I have been now have a 40-year-long working relationship. Wow, it’s amazing to think about, really. Tracy was in keeping families together as well and then connecting families. And Mac, you know, 30 years, deb, 30 years We’ve been working together for a really long time. The core group of connecting families that has now expanded, expanded 17 in that bio since then with one. One person has left, so it’s 16, um, and they are people that I have come across in my career, um, where, where we have, we’ve gelled and I’ve known that they approach the work the same way that I do Others.

Sally: 38:15

Yeah, so you know, we’ve got a large team now with three men and we did have three Aboriginal practitioners.

Sally: 38:23

We now only have two and I think the reason why we’ve been so successful in the work is because we are a collective voice. You know, when I stop to think about it there’s you know it’s hard work. You know this, colby, you know it’s really hard work and often we are butting heads with the statutory agency, we are butting heads with the court, we’re butting heads with everybody because we might approach it differently and have a different view. And I think, with us being having so many people in the team and we all approach the work in the same way and think about families and that children ought to be with their families, if that’s at all possible and if not, with very close, enduring connection to family, that having many of us speaking that I don’t know what it is, but it just brings about a sense of safety in the team to be able to do that and a sense that you know we’ve got each other’s backs we can support each other and to continue to do the work.

Sally: 39:47

Support each other and to continue to do the work.

Sally: 39:49

So I think you know I despair at competitive I don’t know what happens in other parts of the world, but competitive tendering processes where agencies win a tender to provide a service for three years and then they put it out again and then someone else might win it.

Sally: 40:05

So no one develops long-term practice, wisdom, you know long term, and that you have people that are really passionate about this work. It’s not just a job, it’s not, it’s actually a career, it’s a. So I think that’s what I’ve been able to gather together and when I think about 21 years now, almost, that we’ve been going as connecting families you know that’s a long time for one service and I don’t see it ending anytime soon and so that collective wisdom just grows and grows and grows. And I think that’s why we are successful, because A the values and the attitudes and the beliefs, but also the skill set that people develop over time and then can pass on to each other is immeasurable. I don’t know how you measure that, I don’t know how you replicate it, and you know I feel really lucky to have this group of people around me.

Colby: 41:11

So I think, that?

Sally: 41:11

yeah, that’s why.

Colby: 41:13

I think, yeah, yeah, thank you for that. I think what you’re what I’m hearing you say is the importance of a team that is aligned in their approach to practice and speaks with a consistent voice, and I think there is something very psychologically safe about teams where people are all on the same page and aligned in their practice. People are all on the same page and aligned in their practice. I think, you know, in some respects we celebrate diversity, but also I think we need to acknowledge that teams work well in this kind of way of being aligned and supportive of each other and speaking with a collective voice. I think the collective voice provides is authoritative in the work that we do, and I think you mentioned I go back to one of your responses about the Churchill Fellowship we think about.

Colby: 42:36

We’ve talked a little bit about in our backwards and forwards conversation here, about things that are really powerful in, you know, factors in human behavior and and um, the way in which people approach life and relationships. We thought a bit about the role and importance of shame, um, but also validation. You know, the, the, the experience that, um, that we’re not just the only one thinking and working in this way, that our thoughts and beliefs and approach are valid, are acceptable, are worthy. These are very powerful conditions, I think, in which to, in our shared areas of endeavour, approach the work with as much psychological safety as we can muster to protect ourselves, because it is a difficult area of endeavour and when you’re working over a long period of time, I don’t think you can do it. I don’t think you can do it without depleting yourself drastically if you don’t have a team and peers who, as you say, have got your back but who also believe in what you believe in.

Sally: 44:12

Yeah, yeah, and I think also it can challenge you, you know, because you know I often think about, you know, the work of Eileen Munro and you know her talking about, you know the sort of I can’t remember the actual quote, but the most protective thing is to admit that you might have got it wrong. And I think, and I in child protection work, you know, and I think that having a team around where we can talk about, you know, you can get different perspectives on things. You can be going. You know, am I missing something here? You know, I think that having a collective voice is not just about being, you know, gee, we’re all right, and that’s not what I mean, and it’s really more around saying we want to come at things with rigour. You know, we want to make sure we’re doing things properly and right and thoroughly, and I think when you’re on your own you can lose that objectivity. You know you, basically it’s good to, it’s healthy to have people around to sort of go. Yeah, I’m not quite sure about that.

Colby: 45:31

So we do a lot of co-working in this as well.

Sally: 45:33

A lot of the team, you know, will work with two practitioners. Sometimes we might have a family where they might end up with five of the team because someone’s doing Marta Mayo, someone’s doing Circular Security of the team, because someone’s doing mud and mayo, someone’s doing circular security, tracy might be doing, you know, a relapse prevention plan around substance misuse. So they’re seen by a lot of people in the team and we don’t always agree about where the families are on their and the progress that they’re making, and I think that’s really healthy.

Colby: 46:07

It is. I agree, and I guess most people who talk about teams, I would anticipate talk about the importance of having diversity of background and diversity of beliefs and opinions. And yet I would say that those things are fantastic where there is a secure base within the team. And the secure base is one that regulates shame or is non-shaming. The secure base is one where we feel of togetherness and connection and belonging. And in another podcast shout out to Lynn Pateman, her Success is Never Accidental podcast I talked about how teams are very functional. Teams are very much like an attachment relationship and I think, in order to explore other ideas, to take risks, to explore other ideas to take risks carefully managed risks, to make mistakes, own up to them, learn from them, move on from them you need the security that we’re talking about, the psychological safety that we’re talking about yeah, yeah safety that we’re talking about, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Sally: 47:48

I think the um, the preparedness to be vulnerable and know that you can be vulnerable in that space and people will will just um, hold you really in that and and for me it’s very much a parallel process about what we’re trying to do with families is to is to support them to be vulnerable, um, but to feel that that there’s safety in doing that. So, and there’s.

Colby: 48:18

That’s very much aligned with what a, what a an attachment relationship is. Yeah, looks like what attack. What we’re talking about with attachment Attachment is about a relationship in which the person can be vulnerable or is vulnerable and can orient to someone who is able to support them, protect them, respond to their needs and create a situation and a circumstance where the person can grow.

Sally: 48:56

Yeah.

Colby: 49:01

So just moving on, because it’s been a long chat already, although I’m aware that there are podcasts out there that run to three hours.Sally: 49:10

Oh, my goodness yeah.

Colby: 49:13

But I wanted to ask you what advice you would give to your younger self starting out in your professional journey now and you’ve made some reference to it, but perhaps if you could just expand upon that- yeah, um, look, lots of things, probably, colby.

Sally: 49:35

Yeah, look, I feel like I have touched on something, you know, certainly I don’t think I ever thought that I knew everything back then anyway, but I but I would certainly be saying to myself, you know, you’re going to learn a lot along the way. Um, you know that this is, this is continuous learning and continuous growth, and in fact, you’re going to change your mind about things as well, and that’s okay, you know, because you know, some of our ideas are shaped and we haven’t really had enough time to actually think about. Really, really Do I really think that you know? So I think that, and I know we had talked about this once before, but I? I that there’s not a hierarchy of knowledge.

Sally: 50:23

I think, when I was a younger social worker, starting out and this is no offense to psychologists, you know, I think you know, but you know, there was, there was always this thing, and there still is, that psychologists trump social workers in terms of, or then you know, psychiatrists trump psychologists and doctors are somehow the medical profession, are revered and they can never get it wrong. I don’t hold that to be true anymore and that’s not to be disrespectful about any of those professions. I, you know, have respect for all of them, but I have respect for my own and I have respect for the knowledges and wisdom that comes with people who have practised things for a very long time. So I don’t feel so. I think what I would say to my younger self is don’t be intimidated by those other knowledges. They’re valid and they’re, but they’re not the only way of thinking about things, and your way is just as valid.

Colby: 51:35

You know I probably hold.

Sally: 51:37

You know, these days I hold great respect for people, you know, like yourself, like other practitioners, who have stuck it out and have an immense amount of knowledge and wisdom. And you know and I see people in the Department for Child Protection here that have been there for, you know, 30, 35 years and doing a hard job, and I respect them that they’ve stayed there and done that and they have a lot of knowledge. You know so that, and you know it’s okay to make a mistake.

Colby: 52:22

What I really liked. I liked all of that answer, but I think the acknowledgement that you will change your mind, and I think two things about long careers. One is that you’re never going to have the same view. I think or at least it’s healthy to not have the same view a year down the track, five years down the track, 10 years down the track than you have right now. Five years down the track, 10 years down the track than you have right now. You need to be open to that and prepared to accept that with experience and observation, you are going to change your thinking and opinions about things unless you have a very rigid adherence to what you and who would? Who would argue that, uh, it is healthy to maintain a rigid adherence to what you knew when you were fresh out of university or first in this, I don’t know that anyone would um would do that.

Sally: 53:32

Wouldn’t we call that?

Colby: 53:33

stuckness. Yes, you know similarly and I have changed my position on things across a long career, in particular, one area that has been particularly influential with me, for me, two areas actually. One is working very closely with families that are on the cusp of statutory intervention and the validity and importance of intervening in those circumstances where you know it’s 50-50 as to whether statutory authorities should and could get involved. The other area that has been very influential for me is working with care leavers and, in particular, seeing care leavers that I and, in particular, seeing care leavers that I knew as children taken into care. So both of those areas have been very influential in my position.

Sally: 54:46

Yeah.

‘Colby: 54:47

As I’m sure it is with others.

Sally: 54:49

Yeah, yeah, we’ve got a family at the moment in the service. That is for Mac, one of the workers in the team.

Colby: 54:58

fourth generation the oldest of the family. Yeah, yeah.

Sally: 55:05

So you know the dad was an injured infant actually back when, and so we worked with his parents. I was the manager of the team at that point. This is back in anglicare days and then mac had worked with the. This dad’s father was in residential care and then, so mac had met the great well I don’t know, we were just like, yeah, well we’ve been.

Sally: 55:36

We’ve been at this for too long, we’ve been getting to this, but, you know, it was really interesting because this dad, you know, when Mac realised that you know he was who he was, you know we talked about it and I said you have to tell him, you have to let him know that you knew him as a baby, and which he did, and um, and that worked. You know that that was fantastic because they, you know, um, they’ve formed a really close connection actually now and um, and this dad has successfully had his three children returned to his care and is doing really well, you know, and I think that longevity of you know of him, knowing that Mac knew his story, was very helpful, you know. So, whilst it was sad, it was also really it was fortuitous that Mac was the one that you know coincidentally picked it up.

Sally: 56:45

Yeah, yeah, yeah, but I do think that those knowing what’s up, you know, I think that’s the other thing, colby, that I think I, I think I always knew this, but I know it far more powerfully now is that the decisions that we make, the the, the things that we write, the recommendation recommendations that we make about families, have long-lasting impact. So, therefore, think very, very carefully about what you write, what you decide, because it you know it has consequences, and I know that to be so true now that I probably didn’t know as strongly back then. Yeah, because you know, I even think back to families where we recommended that children go into long-term care. That would I do the same now? Probably not, you know, even though they weren’t fantastic home situations, they were better than what got provided in the long run. So I’d probably go back and undo some of the things that I If we could, if I could.

Sally: 58:07

Based on the knowledge that I had at that time, I was probably doing what I felt was the right thing.

Colby: 58:13

Yeah, yeah, similarly, sally. That’s, I think, a very powerful and great place to bring our conversation to a close. Thank you very much for agreeing to be on my podcast, and maybe in the future we might get you back to talk a little bit more about some of this and similar.

Sally: 58:40

No, that would be good. Thank you, colby, it was a good conversation.

Colby: 58:44

Yeah, awesome. Thanks, Sally.