How Should Trauma Informed Care (TIC) Differ?
In my last post, I talked about how trauma-informed care (TIC) is legislated in some states. And I promised information and ideas on how it should differ. Now I’m not some big wig or a government supported agency–I’m a person on the ground who has lived through decades of care and who has provided decades of education, supported research, and led initiatives for change at the grassroots and county agency level.
Here’s what I know.
1. TIC recognizes (even when providers don’t) that many people who become mental health care providers are likely as injured as the people who pay them for services are.
2. TIC mandates culture change in the organization to make the risk of injury, attrition, and toxic culture lower for providers and service recipients.
3. TIC mandates the removal of denial of the presence and impact of all trauma, well beyond abuse and neglect.
4. TIC positions learning and practice of new behaviors as enhancers of health and lessens the focus on medication as the primary response.
5. TIC is present-focused, strength-based, and growth oriented, using the power of relationship and skill building as method for enhancing service recipients’ capacities for coping.
So where’s the rub? Check our next post for the key conflicts in current systems of delivery and TIC.
Power, E. (2017). How Should Trauma Informed Care (TIC) Differ?. Psych Central. Retrieved on June 27, 2017, from https://blogs.psychcentral.com/organizations/2017/04/how-should-trauma-informed-care-tic-differ/