One of the biggest misunderstandings when working with children who have SEMH needs or who have experienced trauma is the topic of boundaries and consequences.
Let’s be clear: all children need safe boundaries and all their actions have consequences. I use the term consequences instead of punishment here, quite deliberately. Sanctions are often arbitrary, disconnected from what happened but adapted to universal policy. It can be argued, and often is, that for most children, they serve a useful purpose. I’m not going to start that debate here, I’m focusing on the needs for SEMH and trauma-informed practice. A useful point to remember is that at one point, every child with SEMH needs was once a child without identified SEMH needs. Similar trauma.
I have often seen a trauma-informed practice described as one that removes boundaries and consequences. This is often one of the main reasons why staff may feel helpless and hopeless. If an adult leaves a trauma-informed meeting feeling hopeless or helpless, the process has failed. The adult should provide a consistent and informed way of being that supports the young person as an individual, rather than using approaches that have previously failed.
With this in mind, how can we enforce consequences and maintain boundaries? First, in line with the government’s principles of trauma-informed practice, collaboration is essential. In order to successfully set boundaries, we must first fully understand a young person from their own perspective, but also consider the perspective of the professionals around them. We need to explore their goals wherever possible to show how we are working toward the same goal. We identify and remove barriers where we can, and scale expectations over time where possible. It is necessary to consider a young person’s executive function, their developmental age – what is realistic for this young person with the knowledge we have? Some may describe this as low expectations, but this only feeds the narrative that mental health needs do not have parity with physical health needs – what we cannot see, we do not let’s not make adjustments.
When we have understood the young person as best we can, we can decide on the safest relationship(s) that will help maintain boundaries (for example, responding when things go wrong). It is preferable in a school environment to have 2 to 3 people in order to adapt to illness and absences, but also to show the young person that safe adults are not a coincidence and that they can be loved and appreciated by more than one. adults – they are friendly and have a lot to offer.
It is important that these limits are linked to their objectives. Some limits schools put in place may be much stricter than some other schools or what is considered necessary to successfully access education. Once again, this is a debate that will take place elsewhere. However, it must be considered that when limits are strict, we must first consider those that are necessary for safety and how we can promote respect for them, then the limits of effective education. Some boundaries can be quite difficult to develop for young people with special needs, but can be overcome over time. When it comes to goals, even short term, we can focus the boundaries on what is necessary to stay in school, to be safe in school, to take courses focused on their future (at first time). By collaborating with a young person, they also feel a sense of control and security and are more likely to continue with the plan they agreed to (considered a psychological boost).
Consequences
When things go wrong and consequences need to be applied, these could also have been discussed in advance with a young person, for example, how can we keep you on track to stay safe, stay safe, school, get the grade you want, etc. ? Who responds, when? How do you tell us that you have difficulty respecting these agreements? Going back to the drawing board and reviewing the plan again with a young person is also effective when things go wrong. Letting a child know that things can go wrong is normal but we are all committed to them and their project/place at school is a good way to anticipate future difficulties and provide them with a feeling of security .
The most important When we feel we need to apply logical consequences to a young person, they should be linked to what happened and worded in a way that supports it. There will be rare cases where unrelated consequences need to be applied, such as a serious incident at school that could result in suspension. Consider how we might word this in an effective but authentic way for this young person – a suspension can give adults pause to think about the plan needed to keep the young person in custody. because adults want young people to stay in school because they bring xyz to school, they have the potential to do xyz and they are truly part of the community. How can we use reentry meetings to reinforce this message?
Sometimes staff may wish to regain time with a young person who has acted in a way that has not supported their learning. Once again, how can we frame this so that the young person does not feel ashamed? Time to check in with the child to see what else can be done to support them? An exploration of “what’s wrong” rather than a you hurt me, I hurt you management. This can sometimes fill the void when a narrative around consequences is not enforced. Young people can also understand the need for consequences themselves when this is fully explained.
Many children who have had difficult childhood experiences may have a strong sense of justice, but some young people may feel unfairly treated by default based on what they have experienced. So we need to make it very clear that the same answers are taken for everyone (in most cases). , reasonable adjustments will be made and may be highlighted to the young person to show how staff are working to support them beyond the normal process, i.e. due to identified needs). Some young people may feel that they are intrinsically worth less than other children and punishments may reiterate this feeling and lead to a downward spiral. When we can show that the consequences are logical, make sense, and are used to support them, to keep them safe and in school and moving toward their goals, this can have a real impact on responses to difficult situations.
Conclusion
In summary, consequences can either create belonging or distance. Boundaries need to be informed and start with establishing safety. Collaboration is key, do with it and don’t do it. Being willing, as adult professionals, to say where we could have done better helps model the process for the young person and create an environment in which mistakes do not pose a high risk, thereby lowering the temperature and reducing anxieties that can lead to further escalations.
This article was first written in August 2024 but is subject to ongoing redrafting – none of us are perfect first time! Get in touch, discuss, share, collaboration is the key!