Improving Psychiatric Service Responses to Reduce Re-Traumatisation
Assignment Brief
‘Everyday experiences of using psychiatric services can re-traumatise survivors and actively prevent healing’. How can we improve service responses to reduce re-traumatisation?
Sample Answer
Improving Psychiatric Service Responses to Reduce Re-Traumatisation
Introduction
Psychiatric services are often expected to be safe havens where individuals struggling with mental distress can find support, stability, and recovery. For trauma survivors in particular, these services should offer environments that foster healing and reduce suffering. However, everyday experiences within psychiatric systems can have the opposite effect. Many survivors report that encounters with professionals and service structures reproduce the same feelings of powerlessness, fear, and shame that were part of their original traumatic experiences. This process, known as re-traumatisation, not only prevents recovery but can also worsen symptoms, leading to cycles of mistrust and disengagement. It is therefore essential to re-examine how psychiatric services operate and identify ways to reduce harmful practices, while promoting approaches that respect the dignity and autonomy of survivors.
Understanding Re-Traumatisation
Re-traumatisation occurs when a person is exposed to events, environments, or interactions that resemble their initial trauma, either directly or indirectly. In psychiatric services, this can manifest through a wide range of experiences. For example, the use of physical restraint and seclusion, although sometimes framed as necessary interventions, often replicate dynamics of violence, confinement, and control. Locked wards or sudden restrictions of liberty can also trigger memories of being trapped or powerless. Beyond physical interventions, re-traumatisation may occur at the interpersonal level. When clinicians focus narrowly on diagnoses and symptoms without acknowledging a survivor’s personal history, they risk invalidating lived experiences. Survivors who are not listened to or who are dismissed when they share their stories may feel silenced once again, in a way that painfully echoes the dismissal they endured at the time of their original trauma. Even seemingly minor interactions, such as a lack of eye contact, a rushed tone, or impersonal communication, can evoke deep emotional responses when they align with earlier experiences of neglect or dehumanisation.
Consequences for Survivors
The outcomes of re-traumatisation within psychiatric settings can be devastating. Instead of providing safety and relief, services that reproduce trauma may intensify psychological suffering. Survivors often report heightened anxiety, intrusive memories, and increased symptoms of depression or dissociation following such encounters. The sense that services are unsafe or invalidating can drive people away from seeking help altogether, leaving them isolated in times of great need. Avoidance of care then increases the likelihood of crises, including self-harm or suicide attempts, which in turn leads to repeated emergency admissions. These cycles of disengagement place significant strain on individuals, families, and mental health systems alike. Moreover, re-traumatisation undermines one of the most crucial components of psychiatric care: the therapeutic relationship. When service users feel disrespected, controlled, or unheard, trust is severely compromised. This erodes the possibility of building a meaningful alliance with staff, even though such alliances are strongly associated with positive recovery outcomes. The long-term effect is a widening gap between survivors and the very systems designed to support them.
The Role of Trauma-Informed Care
One of the most effective responses to re-traumatisation is the implementation of trauma-informed care across psychiatric services. Trauma-informed care is not simply a new treatment method but a cultural shift in how mental health is understood and delivered. It begins with the recognition that trauma is widespread and that many service users bring experiences of abuse, neglect, or violence into their encounters with healthcare. Instead of pathologising behaviours such as withdrawal, anger, or resistance, staff are encouraged to interpret them as coping strategies that once ensured survival. This shift in perspective moves professionals away from a deficit-based model of “what is wrong with you” towards a more compassionate inquiry of “what has happened to you.” Trauma-informed practice also prioritises principles such as safety, trustworthiness, empowerment, choice, and collaboration. These values guide interactions and service design so that survivors are not only protected from further harm but also given meaningful opportunities to participate in shaping their care. Importantly, trauma-informed care requires training and ongoing reflection for staff, as it involves challenging long-standing practices and attitudes within psychiatric systems.
Reducing Coercion and Promoting Choice
Among the most significant sources of re-traumatisation are coercive practices, which continue to be widely used in psychiatric services. Restraint, forced medication, and seclusion are often justified as measures to protect both service users and staff, yet they frequently deepen distress, intensify mistrust, and reinforce the feeling of being powerless. Survivors who experience coercion may come away with a heightened sense of fear and humiliation, making them reluctant to seek help again. To reduce these harms, services must adopt approaches that minimise coercion and instead emphasise collaboration and choice. Alternatives include de-escalation training for staff, where communication skills and calming strategies are prioritised over force. Collaborative crisis planning, in which service users contribute to decisions about how they wish to be supported in times of distress, is another valuable tool. Advance statements, where individuals outline their treatment preferences before a crisis occurs, can also ensure that personal autonomy is respected even when they are most vulnerable. By embedding these practices, services can create environments where survivors feel that their voice matters and where healing is possible without fear of being controlled or silenced.
Continued...
