This article was downloaded by:
On: 16 March 2011
Access details: Access Details: Free Access
Publisher Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 3741 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t792303975
Child and Adolescent Trauma across the Spectrum of Experience: Research
and Clinical Interventions
Amy C. Tishelmanab; Robert Geffnerc
a
Harvard Medical School, b Children's Hospital Boston, Boston College, c Alliant International
University,
Online publication date: 08 February 2011
To cite this Article Tishelman, Amy C. and Geffner, Robert(2011) 'Child and Adolescent Trauma across the Spectrum of
Experience: Research and Clinical Interventions', Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma, 4: 1, 1 — 7
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/19361521.2011.545982
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19361521.2011.545982
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf
This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma, 4:1–7, 2011
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1936-1521 print / 1936-153X online
DOI: 10.1080/19361521.2011.545982
Introduction
Child and Adolescent Trauma across the Spectrum
of Experience: Research and Clinical Interventions
AMY C. TISHELMAN 1,2 AND ROBERT GEFFNER3
1 Harvard
Medical School
Hospital Boston, Boston College
3 Alliant International University
Downloaded At: 20:32 16 March 2011
2 Children’s
This article introduces the first in a two-part special issue focusing on child and adolescent trauma across the spectrum of experience. This issue examines current research
and clinical interventions specifically geared toward an array of possible traumatic
events in the lives of children and adolescents. We briefly introduce the articles, which
address the areas of child sexual abuse, traumatic loss, complex trauma in young children, exposure to severe natural disasters, and refugee youth mental health services.
We then highlight factors that need to be accounted for in all interventions for children
and adolescents impacted by trauma, including incorporating developmental, cultural,
and ecological perspectives into intervention approaches.
Keywords child trauma, adolescent trauma, ecology, culture, child sexual abuse,
natural disaster, traumatic loss, grief, refugee youth
The topic of psychological trauma has generated extensive professional attention during
the last decade, with significant basic and applied research efforts escalating in intricacy.
Increasingly, issues specifically pertinent to child and adolescent trauma have been examined separately from trauma in adult populations, with the recognition that children are
not merely “small adults”; instead, theory and literature have converged, suggesting that
although child and adult trauma are consistent across many variables, important distinctions need to be understood and accounted for (e.g., Cook et al., 2005; Scheeringa,
2008). These are related to the types of potential traumatic experiences often encountered
by children versus their adult counterparts; contextual and ecological factors associated with these events; the multiplicity of adversities experienced; symptom expression;
and the modifications in developmental trajectories represented by traumatic experience,
including psychobiological factors. All of these factors and many others (such as individual and unique child variables) impact overt indices of trauma, intervention approaches
Submitted November 23, 2010; revised December 2, 2010; accepted December 3, 2010.
Address correspondence to Amy C. Tishelman, Children’s Hospital Boston, I.C. Smith
Building, 300 Longwood Avenue, Boston, MA 02115. E-mail: amy.tishelman@childrens.
harvard.edu
1
Downloaded At: 20:32 16 March 2011
2
A. C. Tishelman and R. Geffner
and strategies, and ultimately outcomes for children. Some of these issues have sparked
significant debate, infused into current discussions of possible modifications to the extant
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (American Psychiatric Association
[DSM-IV-TR], 2000) definition of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). An example is
the possibility of adding a new syndrome, developmental trauma disorder, to DSM-V
(e.g., see American Psychiatric Association, 2010; van der kolk, 2005 for further information), to reflect developmental aspects of childhood trauma. The latter effort would lead
to a fresh diagnostic outlook on child and adolescent traumatic response and a change
in diagnostic decision making for clinicians. This would be a dramatic departure from the
long-term reliance on the PTSD diagnostic category to capture the mental health challenges
associated with trauma for both children and adults.
The current issue of the Journal of Child & Adolescent Trauma is devoted to further
parsing facets of child and adolescent traumatic experiences by examining in detail current
research and clinical interventions specifically geared toward an array of possible traumatic events in the lives of children and adolescents. We have undertaken this effort with
the recognition that, although it is common to speak of child and adolescent trauma as a
singular entity, “traumatic” experiences vary widely and intervention research has increasingly accounted for the unique characteristics associated with the spectrum of traumatic
events. As noted in the brief explication of the articles later, traumatic experiences can
range from discrete or acute to chronic, can involve interpersonal betrayal (as with incest)
or not (as with certain disasters), can involve intense and sudden loss (e.g., death of a
close family member), and can impact a child’s entire ecology or be more focused yet
not necessarily less severe. Some forms of trauma for children (e.g., neglect) can impact
their fundamental ability to form a secure basis of primary attachment from the very start
of life (e.g., Arvidson et al., this issue), while others instead disrupt already established,
significant, and secure caregiving relationships, as may occur with the death of an important attachment figure such as a parent (e.g., Mannarino & Cohen, this issue). We contend
that in order to develop meaningful models of trauma and effective interventions, these
distinctions need to be elucidated. Indeed, as can be gleaned from the ensuing discussion,
extant research has focused on intervention approaches researched independently based on
trauma-specific variables. In the following we briefly introduce the articles in this special
issue and then highlight some of the important factors that need to be accounted for in all
interventions for children and adolescents impacted by trauma.
Articles in This Special Issue
The articles in this special issue, the first of two consecutive issues, were chosen to broadly
represent the literature devoted to the spectrum of traumatic experiences. The articles
focus in depth on unique factors associated with these potential traumas for children and
adolescents. Although the perspectives presented represent a range of outlooks, many of
the authors interweave discussion of theory as well as context, culture, and a developmental perspective into their explanations of intervention approaches and current research
reviews.
We begin this issue with Olafson’s excellent synthesis of literature regarding demographics, impacts, and interventions related to child sexual abuse (CSA). She distinguishes
predominant risks unique to sexual abuse versus other forms of child maltreatment and
highlights the diversity of experiences that can qualify as CSA, the variability in outcomes
for children, and the particular type of interpersonal relationship betrayal that so often
characterizes CSA, especially when it occurs by an adult known to the child. Interpersonal
Downloaded At: 20:32 16 March 2011
Child and Adolescent Trauma
3
betrayal is often a distinctive and profoundly salient variable associated with CSA, not
necessarily as prominent in other forms of significant childhood adversity, and arguably
related to some of the more problematic and complex outcomes for children and adolescents. Although CSA differs in many regards from other common forms of childhood
traumatic events, a noted similarity across types of extreme stress is the potential shielding effect for a child who has at least one protective caregiver devoted to his or her
well-being.
Mannarino and Cohen (this issue) also address an aspect of interpersonal disruption
and trauma with their discussion of traumatic loss and grief in children and adolescents.
Mannarino and Cohen’s groundbreaking work in the application of Cognitive-Behavioral
Therapy to the treatment of child and adolescent trauma is well known (e.g., Cohen,
Mannarino, & Deblinger, 2006) and has been widely accessible through web-based training (http://tfcbt.musc.edu). Here they distinguish traumatic grief and loss from child and
adolescent trauma in general and discuss the challenges faced by children who lose a family member. They note that this combination of traumatic stress and loss (often with the
death of a family member) uniquely characterizes Childhood Traumatic Grief (CTG). As
they explain, CTG has been challenging to define, describe, and treat; therefore, their summary of distinguishing factors, research, and promising treatment paradigms is timely and
a significant resource. Importantly, Mannarino and Cohen observe that a developmental
paradigm has rarely been sufficiently utilized in research to date. Therefore, consensus has
not yet emerged on how to recognize or evaluate posttraumatic symptoms in very young
children. Consistently, at the present time, no validated assessment measure of CTG in
very young children is yet available. This is an area of paramount importance in guiding
the field in future efforts.
Significantly, compatible with Olafson’s discussion, Mannarino and Cohen highlight
the potential deleterious impact of parental negative emotional responses on outcomes for
children, as represented in general trauma research. They also observe that the empirical
research is yet to be forthcoming examining the associations between caregiver reaction
and CTG.
Continuing with the theme of interpersonal trauma, Arvidson et al. address research on
complex trauma in young children. As opposed to the articles described earlier, they specifically focus on a treatment model for addressing developmental and cultural factors when
very young children are impacted by a complex array of significant stressors, which often
involve severely traumatizing and chronic adversities including maltreatment. As they
define it, complex trauma refers to the “dual problem of exposure and adaptation” observed
in young children, which can impact the ability to form and sustain important developmental milestones, with potentially severe negative impacts on numerous critical domains of
function. In a notable consistency across articles, they emphasize the importance of including the caregiving system in treatment for this population, while also underscoring the
essential need to address ethnocultural factors and resources, which are not always directly
integrated into intervention approaches.
The authors highlight the Attachment, Self-regulation and Competency (ARC) intervention model as a promising approach to treatment. The ARC model, as they point out,
is an emerging, theoretically grounded, treatment approach, developed in partnership with
the National Child Traumatic Stress Network (see Blaustein & Kinniburgh, 2010, for a
more complete description of this promising intervention). The ARC model is designed to
address three critical domains of function impacted in young children exposed to chronic
interpersonal trauma, as noted in its title: Attachment, Self-Regulation and Developmental
Competencies. The authors are able to illuminate aspects of this model by presenting
Downloaded At: 20:32 16 March 2011
4
A. C. Tishelman and R. Geffner
clinical illustrations and preliminary evidence of effectiveness from a program evaluation
conducted in the unique setting of the Alaska Child Trauma Center.
Finally, the last two articles in this issue move away form the realm of interpersonal trauma and instead involve in-depth discussions of natural disasters and refugee
populations, respectively. Importantly, these situations can be quite complex, involving disruptions in the most fundamental aspects of a child’s life. Often, interpersonal trauma may
also be co-occurring, which can exacerbate mental health risks for a child. Both articles
address the complexity of providing important mental health services while accounting
for significantly compromised circumstantial factors. These “ecological” factors, such as
destruction of homes and disruptions of important aspects of social life (e.g., peer groups)
and social supports impact children in and of themselves but also at times impact the
ability to provide services in traditional settings and/or through traditional means (e.g.,
stand-alone outpatient mental health clinics). In addition, many of these children have
also experienced a multiplicity of other traumas including, as noted earlier, tremendous
loss with associated grief. Clearly, developmental and cultural factors vary by child and
situation but can profoundly impact associated outcomes as well.
Overstreet and her colleagues (this issue) present a superb review of research on
clinical interventions for children postdisaster, highlighting the more salient challenges
associated with effective treatment. These include the many secondary stressors cooccurring in postdisaster environments. Additionally, Overstreet et al. are able to use
vignettes from Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath to exemplify many of the issues they
address. As they note, the incidence of natural disasters has been rising globally and not
surprisingly negative mental health effects have been linked to such events. Thus, it is critical to vigorously pursue an understanding of the factors facilitating positive child mental
health outcomes and resilience even in the framework of dire circumstances and chaotic
disruption. Among the many challenges is the need to have planned research ready to
be rapidly implemented following disaster. This is critical if we hope for an empirical
foundation for the interventions we employ in such times.
Overstreet et al. emphasize that mental health reactions of children are linked to
those of their caregivers, a point repeatedly reinforced by other authors in this special
issue. Similarly, in their discussion of refugee children and trauma, Ellis, Miller, Baldwin,
and Abdi (this issue) draw attention to the fundamental need to integrate caregivers into
treatment whenever possible. Overstreet et al., as well as Ellis et al., point to the potentially crucial roles of schools as the point of delivery for mental health interventions.
Both articles also emphasize the necessity of utilizing ecologically based, culturally sensitive services, including participatory and collaborative approaches to child and adolescent
interventions.
Ellis et al., in the final article in this issue, provide a thoughtful description of obstacles to mental health treatment for refugee youth and an applied approach to intervention.
They describe several prominent barriers to mental health service access similar to, but
distinct from, the challenges discussed by Overstreet et al. and associated strategies to
address these barriers effectively. As with Overstreet and colleagues, Ellis et al. advocate
a tiered approach to intervention, ranging from community education and parent outreach
to intensive intervention, utilizing the Trauma Systems Therapy (TST) model. TST is a
multidisciplinary approach to treatment of traumatized children and adolescents, based
on a social ecological model (see Saxe, Ellis, & Kaplow, 2007 for further information).
Overstreet et al., similarly, propose a tiered approach to postdisaster services, based upon
a public health model, with universal programs for all children and selected treatments for
those with the most profound needs for services. Ellis et al. provide a detailed description of
Child and Adolescent Trauma
5
a model program, Supporting the Health of Immigrant Families and Adolescents (Project
Shifa) representing an important intervention with Somali children and their families.
Downloaded At: 20:32 16 March 2011
Future Directions
Several variables stand out as particularly important when considering intervention for
any traumatized, or potentially traumatized, child. These include the singular value of
a protective, stable, and committed caregiver; developmental factors; and cultural and
ecological variables. As noted earlier, the current definitional structure of PTSD in DSMIV-TR is under review and has been critiqued with regard to its lack of developmental
perspective. Some authors (e.g., Koenen, 2010) suggest that a developmental perspective is necessary even for understanding PTSD in adult populations. Fundamentally, a
diversity of issues is associated with the gamut of potential traumatic stressors, implying
that trauma is not uniformly experienced or expressed and that unique contextual factors
must be accounted for, a view that is consistent with well-documented developmental
and ecological analyses described in literature (e.g., Belsky, 1993; Freisthler, Merritt, &
LaScala 2006; Lynch & Cicchetti, 1998; Zielinski & Bradshaw, 2006). For those of us
who embrace the idea of empirically informed intervention, acknowledging some of the
areas in which research has lagged behind need is informative and should help to inspire
future efforts. This should include developing and researching developmentally adaptable
paradigms. For instance, Arvidson et al. do an excellent job of embedding their intervention within a developmentally informed framework. However, much more can be done
along these lines. We need to not only account for the developmental impact of traumatic
stress in children but also adapt intervention approaches to be optimally useful for the
range of children and adolescent presenting with treatment needs. For instance, Mannarino
and Cohen emphasize that traumatic reactions are not well understood in young children.
Similarly, Olafson acknowledges that assessment of CSA concerns has not reached the
sophistication levels in young children that are available in latency-aged and older children, when language skills are more mature. We suggest that, regardless of intervention
approach, models should be tailored for use with children at all developmental levels.
This can only be accomplished by acknowledging fundamental developmental characteristics, such as expectable abilities and milestones (i.e., competencies) across a range of
domains and accounting for these during treatment design, implementation, and associated research. Models can also be modified to account for those children with atypical
developmental patterns, such as those associated with autism spectrum disorders, learning disorders, and intellectual disabilities. We anticipate that the next decade will bring
with it substantial new research integrating numerous perspectives including developmental neurobiology, epidemiology, and psychology, all of which can inform the approaches
we use to optimally intervene with children, and facilitated by a new diagnostic system
that may be poised to address the traumatic reactions of a greater range of children and
adolescents.
Several of the articles in this issue recognize the importance of adopting both cultural and ecological perspectives in the construction of treatment approaches. Intervention
models can be designed based on known intraindividual psychological and behavioral constructs and processes. However, a number of the articles in this issue (e.g., Arvidson et al.;
Ellis et al.) suggest that, although necessary, this alone is insufficient. Instead, treatment
efforts are likely to suffer in the absence of implementation strategies accounting for cultural values and expectations, coping practices acceptable within the particular culture,
societal roles, assumptions, and resources. Recent publications have called for a culturally
Downloaded At: 20:32 16 March 2011
6
A. C. Tishelman and R. Geffner
informed understanding of trauma (e.g., Ford, 2008; Lewis-Fernandez et al., 2010; Zayfert,
2008). In general, this is a priority for research, which can help extend and integrate cultural
conceptualizations into empirically valid treatment practices.
As noted earlier, the articles in this issue cite a significant body of literature indicating that caretaker presence and behavior is singularly linked to child mental health
outcomes. This finding exemplifies the broader principle that factors outside of the individual child, in the context and ecology of his or her life, fundamentally influence treatment
success. Ecological factors, aside from those related to parents, are also pertinent and can
be explored with relevance to mental health outcomes for children and building resilience.
We know, for instance, that some child trauma is related to loss of a caregiver. Therefore,
other opportunities to support children should be available in these unfortunate circumstances or to provide extra support even when another positive parent–child relationship
exists. For example, Overstreet et al. as well as Ellis et al. discuss the school as a site of
intervention. Others (e.g., Tishelman, Haney, Greenwald O’Brien, & Blaustein, 2010) have
explored the ecology of schools as a potential source of support for a traumatized child,
rather than as simply a convenient alternative location for traditional mental health services
to be conferred.
In summary, child and adolescent trauma has been studied in a number of domains
in the last decade, with treatment increasingly grounded in theory and empirical research.
Overall, traumatic experiences in the lives of children and adolescents are all too common, while the mental health risks are quite serious. Therefore, sophisticated intervention
research should be a priority, increasingly accounting for circumstance, culture, and
ecology and embedded within a strong developmental framework.
References
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders
(4th ed. text revision). Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychiatric Association. (2010). Posttraumatic stress disorder. Retrieved from
http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/Pages/proposedrevision.aspx?rid=165#
Belsky, J. (1993). Etiology of child maltreatment: A developmental-ecological analysis.
Psychological Bulletin, 114, 413–434.
Blaustein, M., & Kinniburgh, K. (2010). Treating traumatic stress in children and adolescents: How
to foster resilience through attachment, self-regulation, and competency. New York, NY: Guilford
Press.
Cohen, J. A., Mannarino, A. P., & Deblinger, E. (2006). Treating trauma and traumatic grief in
children and adolescents. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Cook, A. Spinazzola, J., Ford, J., Lanktree, C., Blaustein, M., Cloitre, M., et al. (2005). Complex
trauma in children and adolescents. Psychiatric Annals, 35, 390–398.
Ford, J. (2008). Trauma, posttraumatic stress disorder, and ethno-racial minorities: Toward diversity
and cultural competence in principles and practice. Clinical Psychology: Research and Practice,
15(1), 62–67.
Freisthler, B., Merritt, D. H., & LaScala, E. A. (2006). Understanding the ecology of child maltreatment: A review of the literature and directions for future research. Child Maltreatment, 11,
263–280.
Koenen, K. C. (2010). Developmental origins of posttraumatic stress disorder. Depression and
Anxiety, 5, 413–416.
Lewis-Fernandez, R., Hinton, D. E., Laria, A. J., Patterson, E. H., Hofmann, S. G., Craske, M. G.,
et al. (2010). Culture and the anxiety disorders: Recommendations for DSM-V. Depression and
Anxiety, 27(2), 212–229.
Child and Adolescent Trauma
7
Downloaded At: 20:32 16 March 2011
Lynch, M., & Cicchetti, D. (1998). An ecological-transactional analysis of children and contexts: The longitudinal interplay among child maltreatment, community violence, and children’s
symptomatology. Development and Psychopathology, 10, 235–257.
Saxe, G. N., Ellis, B. H., & Kaplow, J. B. (2007). Collaborative treatment of traumatized children
and teens: The trauma systems therapy approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Scheeringa, M. S. (2008). Developmental considerations for diagnosing PTSD and acute stress
disorder in preschool and school-aged children. American Journal Psychiatry, 165, 1237–1239.
Tishelman, A.C., Haney, P., Greenwald O’Brien, J., & Blaustein, M. (2010). A framework for schoolbased psychological evaluations: Utilizing a ‘trauma lens.’ Journal of Child and Adolescent
Trauma, 3, 279–302.
van der Kolk, B. (2005). Developmental trauma disorder. Psychiatric Annals, 35, 401–408.
Zayfert, C. (2008). Culturally competent treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder in clinical practice: An ideographic, transcultural approach. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 15(1),
68–73.
Zielinski, D. S., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2006). Ecological influences on the sequelae of child
maltreatment: A review of the literature. Child Maltreatment, 11, 49–62.