This month’s Khulisa Voice column is written by Amania Scott-Samuels, a Criminal Justice and Criminology student. Amania interviewed our Director of Evidence and Innovation, Lisa Rowles, for her masters thesis titled “Should we be using Trauma-Informed Approaches for knife-affected young people and offenders in London?’
In this blog Amania shares the findings of her research interviewing both trauma informed practitioners & young people affected by knife crime.
My final dissertation was inspired by the change I’ve seen in the eyes of so many (young) people affected by knife crime. It was rooted in my belief that trauma is both a cause and effect of knife-related crimes and supported by the known victim-perpetrator overlap that has told us many of those that carry a knife have been attacked or threatened with a knife in the past.
As part of my research I interviewed both trauma-informed practitioners and young people affected by knife crime. During the course of these interviews trauma was highlighted as a consistent factor in knife crime.
For the young people I interviewed, regardless of the type of contact they had with knife crime, they all mentioned the experience leading them to question how safe they felt. As such, carrying a knife became primarily a form of protection.
‘Having a knife comforts them in this world.’
All but one participant mentioned witnessing or experiencing bodily impacts of trauma particularly sleeplessness or insomnia, paranoia and restlessness. This was often accompanied by an often unconscious yet understandable withdrawal process. This is of particular interest as withdrawal can often be perceived as someone being remorseless.
Similarly, both young people and professionals mentioned the media as exacerbating trauma, playing a major role in creating the image of what knife crime offenders look like whilst justifying harsh punitive responses. There was notable pain expressed by young people when discussing the biased reporting on (or lack of reporting of) victims from a certain demographic. This supports ideas of a hierarchy of victims, a refusal to acknowledge the victim-perpetrator overlap and was similarly applied to the language that is used by police when dealing with young victims of county lines activity. One young person highlighted how often the term “gang association” was used when describing knife affected young people instead of “exploitation.”
My research also suggested that contact with the police was often highly traumatising and re-traumatising for young people. For young people who have grown up with a deep sense of shame and guilt due to past trauma and abuse, they said that further contact with police often played into them being governed by fear.
‘You're a slave to that to that fear…You know how slaves are… just scared so everything they do is scared…’
When a young person is traumatised, their survival responses (fight/flight) kick in which can at times be interpreted by police as the young person resisting arrest or assaulting police.
The standout finding was the overwhelming sense of hopelessness reported first-hand by knife-affected young people. There was an acute awareness of how easily and frequently life can be lost.
‘They’re supposed to have their whole lives ahead of them but they feel like it can be gone at any moment…’
Pessimism and distrust were conveyed as entrenched and evident in the negative language often used to describe themselves, their lives and circumstances. This is undeniable evidence of Dittman and Jensen’s ‘fractured protective shield’ post-trauma – which is when a young person doesn’t believe they have any trusted adults who can protect them. The young person I interviewed all spoke of feeling like they didn’t have a voice, being ignored and feeling dismissed by the government.
The largest perceived barrier to wider implementation of trauma-informed approaches to youth justice as a whole and with the knife-affected population specifically was the culture of the current system. One area this was referenced was with regards to measurement of outcomes, where battles for funding often see outputs favoured over outcomes. This reflects an inability to appreciate the qualitative impact much trauma-informed work will have and the often contrasting objectives of organisations and policy-makers.
‘The language barriers are literally between words and numbers …they want numbers, how many young people have completed a course, that's not what it's about!’
Interestingly, both youth and practitioner participants mentioned this funding issue and expressed frustration at the larger amounts of money seemingly ending up in the hands of those that don’t actually know what to do with it. It was acknowledged by all participants that the work needed to really reshape how the justice system currently works (and how we see and treat young offenders, particularly of this category) requires time and energy that is unlikely to be seen in our current climate. These difficulties are supported by literature that advocates for such a transition whilst acknowledging that a radical overhaul would be needed to be able to fully endorse and embody trauma-informed and responsive practice in our youth justice system.
Yet ‘pockets of brilliance’ were mentioned by practitioners in reference to specific police forces, and institutions that are open to and engaged in learning in the area of trauma and are seeing notable improvements as a result. In keeping with this, practitioner and youth participants alike mentioned the tendency of youth to sense practitioners’ authenticity and the specifics of their responsiveness –which are key to trauma-informed and responsive practice. The consistent, committed and individualised responses trauma-informed practice offers were found to make all the difference from both perspectives, which reaffirms what has been noted about just how being trauma-informed is effective. Practitioners expressed that the best possible outcome from their perspective, is long-term positive change for a young person and they acknowledged this will likely vary from person to person. Here lies another example of the differing priorities and understanding of practitioners and policy-makers respectively.
Ultimately, my research found that trauma as a concept at play within the lives of knife-affected young people’s lives. It was taken as a given that all the young people would have sustained some form of trauma, that it would follow them, underscoring many of their actions and reactions, but is not often mentioned as something important or relevant. Nobody seems to know how to get rid of it and nobody else has taken the time to teach them it’s possible to live and even thrive with this shadow as an important but non-defining part of you. It is my belief in all young people’s right to live and thrive that makes me sure trauma-informed and trauma-responsive intervention is pivotal for the knife-crime-affected youth population.