When it happened, everyone knew.

When it happened, everyone knew. Some people were gracious about it, others not so much: ‘Where are YOUR parents?’ Also, when meeting new people… For many years, I didn’t know how to talk about it. I always got the same reaction: shock or disbelief.

I was there when it happened, so I went through so much of Court: ‘You’re here to tell the truth,’ they said. But I was just learning to talk, let alone understand all those big words. And I remember bouncing from counsellor to counsellor. I spent so long just telling the story of what happened, that we never got into how to move forward. And it was just exhausting. I can roll it off my tongue and it just sounds like I’m making it up.

You know, knowledge is power. But growing up, I didn’t know what to believe about the homicide. I always felt I was missing a part of the puzzle. I started asking questions. I got shut down. Everything was so taboo. I gathered all the information I could to form my own opinion. There came a point where I went, ‘My life is literally a true crime podcast but no one talks about it.

Nope, I AM talking about it. I’m standing up for what I believe in. This was the extreme end of family violence. Like it or not, that’s what it was.’

How the hell do you compact years of trauma? It is hard to talk and relive it, it is still quite raw. But the more I talk about my life, I find it a lot easier. You know, I went through that trauma, but look at where I am now. How do I tell my story? As an empowering story. Mum’s memory lives on in sharing that story, helping others survive. I still worry what my family will think. But what if me talking helps another person? Then bugger them, the bigger picture is we’ve got to make a better future. But it’s always gonna be the hardest thing I’ll ever have to do.

I’m 16… She’s never going to see me graduate. She’s never gonna see me pass my driving license. She’s never gonna be there when a boy breaks my heart.

Now it’s been more than 20 years. One part of me is that story. I no longer need to tell the story to justify anything anymore.

But now my kids want to know why they never met grandma.

With much care, Kati Marinkovic Chavez created this composite narrative based on our research interviews about the loss of a parent due to domestic homicide.

A key element of Kati’s analysis was how bereaved young people were confronted with stigma and unhelpful narratives by others. Suggestions that they had been too young to remember or comprehend what happened. That they were damaged beyond repair. That they were doomed, destined to become a victim or perpetrator themselves. Or that they should be ‘over it’ by now.

image of a rhino beetle dealing with assumptions, by Thu Huong Nguyen

These imposed narratives continued well into adulthood, and our participants described ways in which they rebelled against those narratives. Kati’s article about it is well worth reading.

It’s one of 8 brief articles about the findings of our research among 70 people with lived, caregiving or professional experience of parental domestic homicide, across Australia, the UK and Ireland, with a focus on Australia. Together with a talented illustrator and people with lived experience we also visualised the findings, with a little rhino beetle as the central character.

In addition to the experiences of stigma and silencing above, we found an absence of child-centred approaches; a deep impact on home life with support for caregivers being rare; only partially realised potential for trauma-informed care within the school context; and a lack of coordinated and evidence-based (mental health) support.

Our participants had several suggestions to improve the situation. We formulated these priority actions (more detail in the report):

  • Record the data. We recommend that state and territory governments systematically record the number of children bereaved by each domestic homicide, and audit subsequent service involvement.
  • Include bereaved children explicitly in domestic homicide inquests and investigations. This should include a review of services provided to children in the aftermath of the homicide, up until the date of the inquest/investigation.
  • Provide a coordinated, multi-agency, outreaching support response in the direct aftermath of a domestic homicide.
  • Provide accessible, tailored trauma- and grief-focused mental health treatment in the aftermath of domestic homicide and beyond.
  • Provide support for caregivers to help them understand and connect with children dealing with traumatic grief and stigma, as well as practical, financial and mental health support.
  • Make available a dedicated team of trained (mental health) specialists who can provide consultation to schools, services and individual professionals supporting families in the immediate aftermath and in the long-term after domestic homicide.
  • Provide guidance materials for child protection, mental health, legal and education professionals regarding the needs of children and wider family bereaved by domestic homicide.
  • Intensify efforts to ensure that schools are trauma-informed, involving teachers, support staff and leadership, providing an understanding and supportive school environment
  • Facilitate the establishment and maintenance of dedicated peer support groups, for children, young people and adults who have been bereaved by domestic homicide.
  • Involve people with lived experience in the design of service improvements and establishment of new initiatives, and facilitate opportunities to contribute to de-stigmatisation.
  • Ensure that a child rights-based, child-centred approach is at the heart of all aspects of post-homicide support provided by professionals and important adults in children and young people’s lives.   

The brief report has more information (and more illustrations!)

If you see an opportunity to share the report with policy makers or practitioners in your network, our team would be very grateful.

Yes, the last post on this blog was a year ago! Aptly called ‘slowing down’… These days, the blog is more an archive of past musings, with an occasional new addtion.

Slowing down

“You see growth was my holy grail.

Yes, it was. And it failed.

It couldn’t last, I do agree.

But in the middle of the hustle, you cannot really see.”

Nynke Laverman’s spoken word/song Your Ancestor has really touched me this year.

The same applies to Kim Nicholas’s book Under the Sky We Make.*

For 2023, I wish for us to slow down where we can. The climate crisis, the biodiversity crisis and our overall limited progress on the SDGs require a radical re-think of our systems and action. Degrowth within rich countries appears to have strong (and growing 😉 ) potential.  

On a personal level, I cycle everywhere in Melbourne and eat increasingly plant based. In the new year, I want to consider my energy use and how my superannuation is invested. Boat trips from Australia are very clunky (I have looked into it) so I still fly. I combine meetings though and am much, much more selective. I hope you take the actions that feel right for you.**

Of course, it is the big industry actors and government decisions that make a real difference, so it may feel ‘tiny’ to tinker on the individual level. Nevertheless, we have influence: as citizens, consumers, investors, professionals and role models. See also Jan Heilinger’s book on cosmopolitan responsibility for extra motivation.

Continue reading

Supporting people fleeing conflict

A friend of mine just got his kids to safety. They will be able to sleep again. Many others are still on the run or staying put in difficult circumstances.

Now these kids were in Ukraine, but it could also have been Ethiopia, Afghanistan, Yemen, or several other places.

Globally, well over 80 million people have been forced to leave their homes due to conflict and human rights violations.

The Australian news has shown a narrative of solidarity with refugees in the past few days. This is heart-warming to see and much needed to support those who are affected.

However, there is another side: Australia has a history of detaining people who are seeking asylum. In particular, those arriving by boat.

People seeking asylum by boat have been ‘processed’ offshore on two Pacific islands – Nauru and Papua New Guinea – and if determined to be genuine refugees, they have not been allowed to resettle in Australia. Many have endured multiple years of immigration detention.  

The concept of moral injury – the experience of your beliefs of what is right and wrong being transgressed – has gained attention in the trauma literature recently. Being exposed to moral wrongs, or even forced to participate in them, is a terrible type of injury.

Our team wanted to better understand experiences of moral injury and mental health related to immigration detention on Nauru.

It is difficult to speak with the people who are directly affected but we were able to interview 13 refugees who had been medically evacuated from Nauru to Australia. On average they had been detained on Nauru for 14 months, though there was quite a wide range (1 month to 3 years).

We derived the following main themes from the interviews:

  1. The risk at home and the expectation of getting protection as main reasons to flee to Australia
  2. The experience of deprivation, a lack of agency, violence, and dehumanization after arrival
  3. The feeling of being irreparably damaged as a result
Continue reading

Thinking of kids in floods and lockdowns – and how this affects us all

Image of a bicycle in floodwater, by Mika Baumeister

My heart goes out to everyone who is affected by the floods in Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands. Over 150 deaths and many people missing. So much new disruption and loss on top of the pandemic.

From a trauma perspective, the key priorities are common sense ones: safety first, good communication, connecting people with loved ones, and reiterating that individuals and the community – with adequate support – can handle this.

Authorities and the community are on it, and both professionals and volunteers have been out in force to reduce the physical impact of the water.

As always, I’m thinking about how this experience may be for the children and young people in the regions that are affected. Many children will have lost a loved one or had scary evacuations. A few will find it an exciting adventure. Most will have to deal with a big muddy mess over the next few weeks.

Every child will have their own story. There will be differences in what happened and is happening, how their parents and other adults around them react, and in how they interpret it all.

What I’m concerned about is the cumulative impact of the pandemic and this disaster. Many children have already experienced major disruptions to their daily life, friendships and routines due to lockdowns, school closures, parents’ job losses and illness in their direct environment.

Still, even in these extra difficult circumstances, a large proportion of children will be resilient. They will find their way through this, bond with friends over it, chat with their parents when necessary, express themselves in a way that’s helpful to them, and continue growing and developing.

Continue reading

Small steps towards the big goal of inclusion

Build solid relationships. Focus on slow, caring science.

Some of the insights that stayed with me from the Zoom calls on making our daily research practice more inclusive. The conversations were so rich (thanks to all 79 participants!) that I’ve summarized them in two parts:

  1. A summary of the presentation on inclusion in trauma research and clinical practice guidelines (published here)
  2. A summary of insights and resources shared (this post).

The starting point was our analysis of children’s voice and cultural representation in traumatic stress treatment guidelines. We found a strong adult-centered, white western lens.

The lack of inclusion is pervasive throughout research fields. So in the two Zoom sessions, we brainstormed tangible next steps for anyone doing research with humans. Obviously, the below is not an exhaustive list, but hopefully a good menu with suggestions for 2021.

We mostly talked about lack of cultural representation and racism, so the suggestions are geared towards that aspect of improving inclusion. But other topics came up as well. Including people with lived experience. Children as co-researchers. Addressing the still problematic gender gap in academia Supporting scholars from the LGBTQIA+ community. Shifting judgements about people from rural communities and low-SES backgrounds. The importance of intersectionality in everything we do.  

And even though we talked about small, feasible steps, it was clear that we want to take a long view: the last thing we want to do is something tokenistic. So planning ahead and slowing down in order to do things really right underpin everything.

Here are some of the specific things we can do:

Educate ourselves. There is plenty of material available, including this webinar on  the anti-racist imperative for public health data and this article on racism and publishing on health inequalities. High on my list is this book on decolonizing methodologies by Maori Professor Linda Tuhiwai Smith.

Search actively for & cite literature written by scholars from underrepresented groups. There are tools to help with this, for example this list of authors of color in social/personality psychology. If you know similar lists for other fields, please share in the comments! Again, this should not be tokenistic: properly read the work and let it inform your thinking and writing. Also, our systematic reviews should assess to what extent the body of work reviewed is inclusive.

Invite speakers from underrepresented groups in a way that works for them. The most well-known scholars from underrepresented groups are overburdened with requests. Search further than that. They may be happy to suggest up- and coming speakers. Another solution is using videos. In this year’s Africa Science Leadership Programme (never a shortage of inspiring speakers, but we wanted to give additional materials) we shared this amazing talk by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie on the danger of a single story.

Stop talking about ‘hard to reach’ communities but connect with them; we often have unrealistic and unhelpful expectations of what it means to build relationships and trust in the context of research with underrepresented groups. “Really struggling to engage participants” is an oft-heard complaint by white/privileged/majority researchers. In this panel session on racism in mental health, one of the experts suggests (paraphrased): If you don’t have any contact with the community you study, how can you expect them to participate?

He had no issues with recruiting racial minority participants, because he had plenty of connection with the community he was studying. I’ve seen this in action many times, such as this fabulous work with Somali youth in the USA, and it was a key factor in the success of our study with young people bereaved by domestic homicide in the Netherlands. We had worked with many families long before we started the research; they knew we cared. One of the participants in our Zoom session said “I think it has to start with us genuinely assessing whether or not we are actually worthy of trust.”

Set up a community advisory board: not for one project but for the broader topic. An engaged community advisory board can provide essential input on design, recruitment methods, interpretation of analyses, any tools or products in development, and dissemination plans. An effective board needs time though. For example, children can be very effective advisors once they understand how research works.

Continue reading