Art Therapy at 11th Street
New Research Published for Sanctuary Model Outcomes in a secure juvenile justice program for girls.
from the publication "Our results indicate that the Girls Secure Juvenile Justice Facility at NCSTU was a safer place for both residents and staff in 2012 after implementation of the Sanctuary Model than it was prior to implementation. Its safety indicators in 2012 also compare favorably to those of the juvenile correctional field in general. This is consistent with a major focus of the Sanctuary Model to make organizational cultures safer by educating staff and residents in the behavioral responses engendered by traumatic experience, by promoting adherence to non-violence and other related commitment such as emotional intelligence, and by implementing protocols, such as regular forums for open communication, that reinforce the need for a safe environment as a prerequisite to personal change and growth (p.215).
Elwyn, L. J., Esaki, N. and Smith, C. A. (2015) Safety at a girls secure juvenile justice facility. Therapeutic Communities: The International Journal of Therapeutic Communities 36(4): 209-218
Featured on WHYY, RadioTimes, 9-23-15 Caregivers a documentary film about caregivers
TRAUMA-INFORMED, TRAUMA-RESPONSIVE, TRAUMA-SPECIFIC
By Sandra L. Bloom, M.D. September 5, 2015
Our field is maturing at a rapid rate but we still have difficulties with definitions. The concept of “trauma-informed” has been extremely important in raising awareness of what needs to happen universally. All systems, all organizations, and all people need to become “trauma-informed”. Basic knowledge about the short-term and long-term impact of trauma, adversity, and allostatic load need to become so well-known that consideration of these impacts is brought into every practice and policy decision, not just in the health, mental health, and social service delivery sectors, but in all spheres of human activity.
Everyone knows about the dangers of smoking or the importance of using safety belts in cars, but the depth and scope of knowledge that is required depends on what we are doing. People doing smoking prevention programs for teenagers require a different knowledge base than a doctor treating lung problems related to smoking. Agencies assigned to enforce seat belt laws need a different level of knowledge than people installing safety belts in new cars. But these and other policy changes have rested on the basic identification of the problem and the potential means to resolve the problem. The notion of “trauma-informed” encompasses that basic identification of the problem and leads to an array of opportunities to resolve the problems related to exposure to adversity and trauma.
Too often, however, there appears to exist within some systems a notion that training about trauma or about ACEs means that programs are now trauma-informed. Similarly, at other places, there exists a notion that they are trauma-informed because they sent a few clinicians away for specialized training in a specific treatment approach and that is all that is required to make sure that trauma survivors get the attention they require. Well, in a way that is true – everyone who attends the training does know more. And it is helpful to have appropriate trauma treatment available. But in the existing definitions of what it means to be trauma-informed, much more is either implied or stated.
When such a gap exists between what is meant and what actually happens, there usually is a need for more clarification. In order to truly meet the needs of people who have experienced trauma and adversity, once a greater knowledge has been achieved, it is necessary to achieve a more significant level of responsiveness to those needs that derives from the increased knowledge. The degree of responsiveness that is necessary will depend on the goals and mission of the organization. And once that responsiveness has been achieved, there needs to be more specialized treatment available for people having the most severe symptoms related to a past history of exposure to trauma and adversity.
If we want to make sure that this movement embraces a significant change in our public health strategies, maybe it would be helpful to expand the precision of our definitions. Perhaps an expanded terminology might help us to better hone in on the degree of involvement a particular organization may need to best serve the needs of trauma survivors. I am suggesting that we think about a continuum of designations: trauma-informed, trauma-responsive, and trauma-specific. Just as defining the idea of trauma-informed has helped move us forward, we are at a point where more actions have to be taken as standard policy, to actually respond to and treat people with post-traumatic challenges. Better defining what we are talking about may be key to having more resources available for addressing these problems.
In public health, we often refer to three main levels of intervention: primary, secondary, and tertiary. Addressing any kind of public health problem requires intervening at all three levels. Primary prevention refers to universal strategies that apply to everyone in a population – like washing your hands, prohibiting smoking in public spaces, or not exposing children to maltreatment of any sort. Secondary intervention refers to all those in a population who are at risk for developing a problem such as children in foster care. Tertiary interventions are measures applied to those who already have the problem in order to minimize damage and prevent further deterioration such as those who already have the symptoms of PTSD, dissociative disorders and all of the related and complex problems associated with exposure to trauma and adversity. Of course, when addressing any kind of problem there are likely to be only fine line distinctions with a great deal of overlap among these differentiations, but thinking about those three levels can be strategically helpful. For example, a tertiary intervention in a family where the father has combat-related PTSD can be simultaneously viewed as a secondary intervention for the other members of that family, all of whom are at risk for developing problems related to their familial exposure.
For example, a domestic violence shelter offers the opportunity to do primary and secondary prevention. Everyone who comes to such a shelter has, by definition, experienced trauma or they would not be in a domestic violence shelter. That means that everyone connected to the shelter – clients, staff, management, providers of other service, consultants, and board members all need to become informed. Therefore everyone in a domestic violence shelter needs to be trauma-informed as a primary intervention.
But additionally, all of the clients in a shelter are AT RISK for further problems so the shelter will have to decide on and implement secondary prevention strategies. In such a setting, there are great opportunities to respond to the experience of trauma that adults and children in a shelter have already had by organizing the environment around “responding” to the issue of trauma or becoming “trauma-responsive” – secondary intervention. In this case, that will mean equipping the women and the children with basic useful skills and tools to help their clients identify and positively deal with the impacts of exposure to trauma in the present, while preparing them for diminishing risk and improving outcomes for the future.
Some of the clients will require trauma-specific treatment for symptoms that have already developed. Others will need it but their present circumstances make such a treatment focus inadvisable, or they refuse to engage in treatment. A trauma-responsive shelter would probably not be doing actual treatment – tertiary intervention - but would have performed a basic screening and assessment to discover which individuals or families might benefit from or desperately need further treatment. Such a facility would also have made sufficient connections to resources in the community that appropriate referrals could be made and found ways to expedite such referrals.
A trauma-responsive environment then, would do more than educate everyone to make sure they were trauma-informed. They would also design specific practices and policies within their organization to ensure that secondary prevention was a component part of their environment. A trauma-responsive environment would deliberately set about to minimize the risk of making things worse for the individuals or families who have experienced trauma and maximize the possibility of improvement. A trauma-responsive environment would create a dense network of connection with community resources who could provide actual trauma-specific treatment. Some other examples are all child welfare organizations including those involved with foster care, school settings where we know already there are likely to be high levels of ACEs among the children, hospital-based violence intervention programs, and juvenile justice settings of all kinds. It is not sufficient for such organizations and systems to be trauma-informed. They need the resource allocation that enables them to become trauma-responsive to the people they serve and to the staff that provide the service.
Expanded definitions may also help us address another current dilemma. As I go around the country I find that many programs like shelters, schools, and juvenile justice programs that are trauma-informed and becoming trauma-responsive are meeting serious challenges at that interface with their communities – at finding adequate treatment resources. At the same time, treatment programs are struggling with what I am calling here, tertiary interventions – actually treating traumatized people - in part because of a lack of resource, in part because people are not trained in trauma-specific interventions. And in large part because this kind of change for the mental health system demands a change in very basic assumptions.
Just as taking on-board the concept of trauma-informed systems necessitates a change in mental models, so too does understanding exactly what it is we are to treat, who to treat when, and what recovery from trauma and adversity actually looks like. The appropriate theoretical and research base is still evolving. Nonetheless, leaving traumatic fragmentation untreated, when we know resolution and integration is possible, is unconscionable. We all know that if you get a splinter in your arm it must be removed because if it is not, you are likely to develop an abscess which can become the site of a chronic and progressively debilitating infection. You learn to live with it, you adjust to it, but it is still there. If you have a splinter in your foot, you walk differently than you would if your foot was healthy. If you have a splinter in your finger, you adjust your behavior to avoid constantly causing pain in that finger.
Unintegrated post-traumatic fragments of memory and experience are splinters in the psyche. If healing is to occur, those splinters must come out. Trauma-specific treatment is about first, taking out the splinters and then helping the person to adjust to a life that is quite different when those splinters are no longer there as determining factors in self-perception and relationships. David Read Johnson and Hadar Lubin have recently published a book, titled Principles and Techniques of Trauma-Centered Psychotherapy in which they take the opportunity to define these two basic types of trauma-specific treatment: “trauma-focused” - privileging the discussion and processing of the traumatic event throughout the treatment, usually as stand-alone, manualized procedures”, and “trauma-centered”, which they describe as an “intermediate approach where the exploration of the trauma is conducted in the initial phases of therapy and then is utilized as a foundation as the therapy moves into current issues”. They go on to describe the challenges implicit in actually treating trauma and those challenges go a long way toward understanding why trauma specific treatment has not been seized upon as readily as the notion of “trauma-informed”. As difficult as it may be, and as much as trauma-centered treatment may challenge the existing status quo in treatment environments, it is vital that as advocates for change, we advocate for trauma-specific treatment approaches – those that Johnson and Lubin call “trauma-focused” while insisting that all mental health training programs facilitate the development of therapists who are willing and able to engage in “trauma-centered” treatment that becomes integrated into other types of treatment approaches.
Taking a lifespan approach to human problems is fundamental to understanding ACEs and the impact of childhood adversity of all kinds. This necessitates in all of us a willingness to tolerate uncertainty and deal with complexity. Managing complexity, however, does not necessitate randomness or a lack of structure. In addressing this enormous existential issue, we must always be balancing structure with process, order with disorder, and certainty with uncertainty. We know more now than we ever have known before about the ways in which traumatic stress, toxic stress, and relentless stress can overwhelm the human capacity to cope and lead to problematic outcomes. We are learning about how coping can be supported and enhanced. We have learned much about how to treat the complex manifestations of trauma and adversity. We hope that raising public awareness of these issues and what can be done about them will help efforts directed at primary, secondary and tertiary prevention. In doing so, let us hope that we can inspire our policy makers to address the issue of childhood adversity as the public health emergency that it is.
What if We Could PREVENT Most Mental Health Problems?
By Dr. Sandra L. Bloom | August 20th, 2015 | Posted on realmhchange.org
The Adverse Childhood Experiences Study (ACEs Study) may turn out to be the most important scientific finding of the late 20th century, opening up windows of opportunity that could vastly improve mental health care, physical health care, and virtually all of our current major social problems. The ACEs study, along with other major epidemiological studies, show that we have a Major Public Health Epidemic that is actually getting relatively little attention in public discourse and has yet to seriously impact policy.
In two recent bills focused on mental health care (sponsored by Representatives Tim Murphy and Eddie Bernice Johnson in the House and Senators Chris Murphy and Bill Cassidy in the Senate), there is scant attention paid to the issue of trauma, much less to childhood adversity and developmental trauma. Such inattention cannot lead to good policy. It would be like trying to eliminate an infectious disease while denying that germs and viruses even exist!
By 1998 when the ACEs Study was first published, the groundwork for the study had already been laid by scientific research on traumatic stress that accelerated after the Holocaust and the Vietnam War. What began to emerge – with ever-increasing importance – was a clearer picture of cause and effect relationships between what happens to us, particularly when we are young and still so actively developing, and the predictable emergence later of a wide variety of health, mental health, and social problems.
There is now such an extensive body of knowledge, research, and evidence that we can no longer rightfully speak about this as "trauma theory" because there is relatively little that remains theoretical about it. It is time for us to take a lifespan approach to all of our major problems with a focus on treatment, yes, but with a simultaneous focus on prevention. Now we can say with surety what it is we need to prevent. Put simply, the greater a person’s exposure to adverse experiences – and all traumatic experiences are considered to be forms of adversity – the greater is the person’s risk for health problems, a shorter lifespan, a wide variety of mental health disorders, involvement in the criminal justice system, substance abuse disorders, homelessness, workplace difficulties. It is important to emphasize here, however, that the research is pointing to RISK, not inevitability. We can say with surety, given a level of exposure that X% of people will develop problems, but we cannot say which individual person will develop which kind of problem. The ACEs Study and all of the major epidemiological studies to which I am referring, are population studies and this is what makes exposure to adversity a Public Health problem, not just a medical, psychiatric, child welfare, or criminal justice problem.
In public health, we loosely describe three levels of intervention and prevention: primary, secondary and tertiary. Primary interventions are aimed at everyone – universal precautions like washing your hands after using the toilet. Secondary interventions are aimed at people who are at risk for a problem. So children who are not big enough to use seat belts in a car are at risk for serious injury even in relatively minor collisions and therefore we create policies that mandate car seats for young children. Seat belts are a primary intervention while special car seats for children are a secondary intervention. Tertiary interventions focus on trying to help the people who already have whatever problem it is we are defining. In the car example, tertiary interventions could be thought of as airbags – they are only deployed when the crash has occurred and are designed to minimize damage while having emergency medical technicians who come to remove injured or trapped people from car crashes can also be thought of as a tertiary strategy.
If we use such a framework around policy initiatives and trauma, then it is useful to think about primary, secondary, and tertiary initiatives. There is a great deal of talk throughout our service delivery systems about "trauma-informed" care or services. This can be thought of as a primary intervention. Everyone should be trauma-informed. A basic understanding of risk factors for – among other things, the ten most common causes of death – should be public knowledge, just as the general public knows that smoking is not good for your health. "Trauma-responsive" is a useful term for secondary initiatives. To the extent that we can assess who is at risk for problems, our systems of service delivery at every level – healthcare, mental healthcare, child welfare, juvenile and adult justice systems, education at all levels, and all of our social service sectors – need to respond through a trauma-informed lens and to develop specific procedures and policies based on those needs. "Trauma-centered" as recently defined by trauma therapists David Read Johnson and Hadar Lubin, is a term that can be applied to tertiary approaches that are trauma-specific in that they are used to help traumatized people heal.
Based on the knowledge we have now, it is time for all of our sectors to take a lifespan approach. For every person, childhood determines the adults we will become in body, mind, and soul. But change can occur at any time along the lifespan and those changes can make things worse or make them better. Making things better without making them worse requires wise, creative, and long-sighted policy decisions made by people who are motivated toward the future, not just the present or the past. As we learn more about the epigenetics of human experience, we are discovering that the challenges and the responses to those challenges in one generation may get passed down to future generations through our own genetic coding. Such knowledge brings with it a whole new level of responsibility, knowledge that is actually at least as old as the Bible when in Exodus, the writer declares that "He will by no means leave the guilty unpunished, visiting the iniquity of fathers on the children and on the grandchildren to the third and fourth generations." We no longer need to be believers to see how this truism carries forth, even if we deplore the punitive and even unjust premises.
As a society, we have a moral responsibility to do something with the knowledge we now have that most of the suffering brought about in the world today is preventable. In the last century, during World War II, we launched the Manhattan Project to create and detonate the first atomic bombs. Surely we have the ability, though not yet the will, to launch a similar project, only this time not about creating weapons of mass destruction, but instead creating a future worth surviving.
New Article: Trauma-Informed Organizational Change
Middleton, J., et al. (2015). "Transformational leadership and organizational change: How do leaders approach trauma-informed organizational change... Twice? ." Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services 96(3): 155-163.
Featuring Dr. Sandra L. Bloom
Tim Fryett (Videographer, Editor), Vic Compher (Producer and Director), Rodney Whittenberg (Co-Producer),
CAREGIVERS documentary film, in production for release in 2015, will take us on a journey into a world the public has not seen. The film depicts the dramatic emotional costs experienced by professional providers such as doctors, nurses, social workers, firefighters, and first responders who rescue, assist, and when possible heal the injured and traumatized. Through dramatic stories, CAREGIVERS probes the emotionally risky aspects of professional caregivers.
We ask the question: How is the care provider affected emotionally and physically, and who helps him or her?! The audience will discover that engaged empathic caregiving can be an occupational hazard; we explore the painful and human sides of these professions and the professionals’ response to trauma known as Compassion Fatigue or Secondary Traumatic Stress. We also recognize the profound meaning caregivers may experience, sometimes referred to compassion satisfaction.
We have been and continue to be collecting stories for our film and blog from professionals who provide various kinds of important services to traumatized patients or clients. If you are a professional caregiver, please share with us your experiences and how you cope (submit your story or comments to: firstname.lastname@example.org). Whether you are a social worker, nurse, doctor, therapist, or some other kind of caregiver or public servant, we want to know how you have been or are being affected on a professional and personal level by your work—and your ways of healing from stress and professional grief. Our intention through the film and website is to share the story behind the story of traumatized clients—that is, the impact of the work upon the caregivers—and thereby to significantly improve public awareness in this area as well as understanding among professionals themselves. As you tour our website, please think about ways you might like to contribute. We encourage you to also learn about our supportive staff development workshops for professional caregivers. (Workshops) And please contact me with any questions you may have.
Vic Compher, Executive Producer and Director (email@example.com)
See our Short Trailer (one minute): https://vimeo.com/63415291
The Raising of America: Wounded Places
Featuring Sandra L. Bloom, M.D, Dr. Theodore Corbin, Dr. John Rich
Watch the full episode here.
Traveling to Philadelphia and Oakland, this episode chronicles the stories of children shaken by violence and adversity and asks not “What’s wrong with you?” but “What happened to you?” and “How can traumatized children and neighborhoods heal?”
PTSD isn’t only about combat vets and survivors of natural disasters. Too many of our children, especially children of color living in neighborhoods of concentrated poverty, show the effects of unrelenting structural racism, street violence, domestic instability and other adversities. And their symptoms look a lot like post-traumatic stress disorder. Except for many, there is no “post.”
Wounded Places travels to Philadelphia and Oakland where a long history of disinvestment and racial exclusion have ravaged entire neighborhoods and exposed children to multiple adverse childhood experiences (or ACEs). We meet families and some remarkable young people who have been traumatized not just by shootings, but fear, uncertainty and a sense of futurelessness.
As Stanford physician Victor Carrion explains, “If we are crossing the street and we see that a truck is coming at us, we can manage that situation, get scared, jump, and move quickly. Unfortunately, many children in our society feel like a truck is coming at them all day long, for more days than not, and this really takes a toll.”
We watch as Caheri Gutiérrez, Antonio Carter, Javier Arango and other young people wrestle with their hyper-vigilance, sudden rages, nightmares, inability to trust and difficulty concentrating in school. Now they themselves are counseling others, helping them to “own” their trauma. Yet police, teachers, the media, and even social service workers too often make things worse, pegging traumatized children not as injured and in need of healing but as “bad” or “impaired.”
For instance, in 2012 in Connecticut alone, 2,000 children aged six years and under—overwhelmingly black and Latino—were suspended from kindergarten and preschool, dramatically increasing their risk of eventually dropping out of school and being sent to prison.
We also meet doctors, community organizers and peer counselors blazing a new model of trauma-informed care, including MacArthur Fellow John Rich, MD, Ted Corbin, MD, the director of Healing Hurt People, Dr. Sandra Bloom, the founder of the Sanctuary Model, and Youth UpRising! director Olis Simmons.
Rather than ask, “What’s wrong with you?” they ask, “What happened to you?” and “How can traumatized individuals and neighborhoods heal?” The implications of this simple shift can be transformative—for those suffering from trauma, for neighborhoods and even for the providers themselves.
Content and video provided by The Raising Of America.
Webinar From the Alliance for Children and Families by Villa of Hope, Rochester on the Sanctuary Model
Addressing Childhood Trauma in Schools (2014) The Notebook, November 25, 2014
Bloom, S.L., The Sanctuary Model: A best-practices approach to organizational change, in Best Practices in Community Mental Health, V. Vandiver, Editor. 2013, Lyceum Books: Chicago, IL. p. 303-314.
Bloom, S.L., The Sanctuary Model: Rebooting the Organizational Operating System in Group Care Settings., in Treatment of Child Abuse: Common Ground for Mental Health, Medical, and Legal Practitioners, R.M. Reece, R.E. Hanson, and J. Sargent, Editors. 2014, John Hopkins University Press: Baltimore. p. 109-117.
Bloom, S.L., Creating, Destroying and Restoring Sanctuary Within Caregiving Organisations. , in From Broken Attachments to Earned Security: The Role of Empathy in Therapeutic Change. The John Bowlby Memorial Conference, A. Odgers, Editor. 2014, Karnac: London
Bloom, S.L. and B. Farragher, Restoring Sanctuary: A New Operating System for Trauma-Informed Systems of Care. 2013, New York: Oxford University Press.
Bloom, S.L., The Sanctuary Model: Changing Habits and Transforming the Organizational Operating System, in Treating Complex Traumatic Stress Disorders in Children and Adolescents: Scientific Foundations and Therapeutic Models, J.D. Ford and C.A. Courtois, Editors. 2013, Guilford Press: New York. p. 277-293.
Esaki, N., et al., The Sanctuary Model: Theoretical Framework. Families in Society, 2013. 94(2): p. 29-35.
Esaki, N. and H. Larkin (2013). "Prevalence of Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) Among Child Service Providers." Families in Society 94(1): 31.
Esaki, N., et al. (2014). "Sanctuary Model implementation from the perspective of indirect care staff." Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Human Services 95(4): 261-268.
Ford, J. and M. Blaustein, (2013) Systemic Self-Regulation: A Framework for Trauma-Informed Services in Residential Juvenile Justice Programs. Journal of Family Violence, 2013.
Henry, J., et al., A Grassroots Prototype for Trauma-Informed Child Welfare System Change. Child Welfare, 2011. 90(6): p. 169-86.
Hummer, V.L., et al., Innovations in Implementation of Trauma-Informed Care Practices in Youth Residential Treatment: A Curriculum for Organizational Change. Child Welfare, 2010. 89(2): p. 79-95.
Lee, E., et al., Organizational climate and burnout among home visitors: Testing mediating effects of empowerment. Children and Youth Services Review, 2013. 35(4): p. 594-602.
James, S., What Works in Group Care? – A Structured Review of Treatment Models for Group Homes and Residential Care. Children and youth services review, 2011. 33(2): p. 308-321.
VIDEO: Watch Office of Mental Health, New York Statewide Grand Rounds, Understanding PTSD as a Gateway to More Effective Treatment with Dr. Sandra Bloompanelist Dr. Raul Silva and Moderator, Dr. Richard McCarthy.
AUDIO: Listen to Dr. Bloom and mental health workers from Iraq on NPR news with Maiken Scott.
Download description of the Iraqi visitors to Philadelphia sponsored by the Center for Nonviolence and Social Justice.
ARTICLE IN NONPROFIT WORLD: McSparren, W. and Motley, D. (2010). How To Improve the Process of Change. Non-Profit World 28(6): 14-15.
From November 29 – December 1, 2010, the Juconi Foundation– a member of the Sanctuary Network celebrating their twentieth anniversary of helping children in Puebla, Mexico and Guayaquil, Ecuador – welcomed participants from a number of countries, to the 1st International JUCONI Conference - For a World Without Violence.
Dr. Sandra Bloom gave the opening and closing plenary addresses, while Carol Tracy, Executive Director of the Women’s Law Project in Philadelphia; Dr. Elizabeth Kuh and Dr. Lyndra Bills each offered workshops.
New York NPR channel, www.wnyc.org, does radio report on New York State juvenile justice including interviewing Finger Lakes Residential Center, Alvin Lollie about implementing the Sanctuary Model.
Living Proof is the podcast series of the University at Buffalo School of Social Work. The purpose of this series is to engage practitioners and researchers in lifelong learning and to promote research to practice, practice to research. Living Proof features conversations with prominent social work professionals, interviews with cutting-edge researchers, and information on emerging trends and best practices in the field of social work.
Sandra L. Bloom, M.D., co-creator of the Sanctuary Model, discusses a trauma-informed approach to treatment and systems change. Dr. Bloom describes the paradigm shift needed to understand the psychobiology of trauma and its impact on recovery from mental illness.
Dr. Bloom honored by Creative Alternatives of New York http://www.cany.org/events.htm
Read Dr. Bloom’s comments.Read article. Watch the video.
Broadway at the Boathouse...Encore!
Thank you to everyone who made this CANY's most successful event ever!
Monday, May 17, 2010
Loeb Central Park Boathouse
CADY HUFFMAN, Tony Winner, The Producers
DICK LATESSA, Tony Winner, Hairspray
Dr. Sandra Bloom
Creator of The Sanctuary Model for trauma-informed care
Co-Director, Center for Non-Violence & Social Justice, Drexel Univ.
Featuring performances by the stars of Promises, Promises
KRISTIN CHENOWETH, SEAN HAYES & KATIE FINNERAN
MATTHEW MORRISON, star of hit TV series “Glee"
Guest Auctioneer: Stephanie Landess
Dr. Bloom Honored by Reclaiming Youth International
Spirit of Crazy Horse Award Recipients
The sculptor, Korczak Ziolkowski, came to the Black Hills of South Dakota at the request of Native Americans to create a mountain memorial that would honor the spirit of Crazy Horse. In 1949, Korczak wrote these words about Crazy Horse:
"Crazy Horse was a great leader of his people. He wanted only peace and a way of living for his people without having to live on the white man's reservations. Crazy Horse defended his people and their way of life in the only manner he knew, but only after he saw the treaty of 1868 broken. This treaty, signed by the President of the United States said, ‘Paha Sapa, the Black Hills, will forever and ever be the sacred land of the Indians'. Crazy Horse's tenacity of purpose, his modest life, his unfailing courage, his tragic death set him apart and above the others.’”
Reclaiming Youth International presents The Spirit of Crazy Horse Award to honor those who have a tenacity of purpose in creating courage for discouraged children and youth through their practice, policy development, or research. Beginning in 1994, The Spirit of Crazy Horse Award has been given to the following individuals whose distinguished contributions have helped reclaim our most vulnerable children:
- Jerry Adams, Executive Director, Urban Native Youth Association, Vancouver, British Columbia
- Muhammad Ali, Humanitarian & World Heavyweight Champion, Berrien Springs, Michigan
- Mubarak Awad, Peace Activist, Founder, Nonviolence Int'l and Nat'l Youth Advocate Progr., Gaithersburg, MD
- Bonnie Benard, Founder, Resiliency Associates, Berkley, California
- Peter Benson, President, The Search Institute, Minneapolis, Minnesota
- Marita Bergsson, Director, Jakob Muth School, Essen, Germany
- Mary Beth Blegen, National Teacher of the Year, Worthington, Minnesota
- Sandra Bloom, Founder of the Sanctuary Institute, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
- Larry Brendtro, Founder, Reclaiming Youth International, Nemo, South Dakota
- Martin Brokenleg, Co-Founder, Reclaiming Youth International, Victoria, British Columbia
- Waln Brown, Founder, The William Gladden Foundation, York, Pennsylvania
- Jack Calhoun, Founder, National Crime Prevention Council, Washington, DC
- Duncan Campbell, Founder, Friends of the Children, Portland, Oregon
- Richard Curwin, Co-Founder, Discipline with Dignity, San Francisco, California
- Virginia Driving Hawk-Sneve, Children’s author, Rapid City, South Dakota
- Lesley du Toit, Founder, Child and Youth Care Agency for Development, Pretoria, South Africa
- Frank Fecser, Executive Director, Positive Education Program, Cleveland, Ohio
- Geraldine Fraser-Moleketi, Minister for Public Service and Administration, Cape Town, South Africa
- Thomas Garfat, Youth Consultant/Co-Founder, CYC-Net, Rosemere, Quebec
- Lil Garfinkel, Youth Advocate, PACER, Minneapolis, Minnesota
- Arnold Goldstein, Founder, Center for Research on Aggression, Syracuse, New York
- Judge Ernestine Gray, National Juvenile & Family Court Judges Association, New Orleans, Louisiana
- Mark Greenberg, Prevention Research Center for the Promotion of Human Development, Pennsylvania State University
- Eleanor Guetzloe, Professor, University of South Florida, St. Petersburg, Florida
- Mariano Guzmán, Deputy to the Superintendent of Region 9, New York City, New York
- McClellan Hall, Founder, National Indian Youth Leadership Program, Gallup, New Mexico
- Brian J. Hancock, Deputy Division Director, Department of Children and Families, State of New Jersey
- Margaret Harrison, Founder, Homestart International, London, England
- Kris Juul, Professor, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, Illinois
- Azim Khamisa, Founder of CANEI and Tariq Khamisa Foundation, La Jolla, California
- Jack Kirkland, Professor, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri
- Cathann Kress, Director of Youth Development, National 4-H Office, Washington, DC
- Linda Lantieri, Founder, Resolving Conflict Creatively Program, New York, New York
- Scott Larson, Founder, Straight Ahead Ministries, Westboro, Massachusetts
- Zvi Levi, Founder, Haddisam Youth Village, Haddisam, Israel
- Harry Leibowitz, Founder, The World of Children Awards, Lake Tahoe, Nevada
- Larry Long, American Troubadour, Minneapolis, Minnesota
- Nicholas Long, Founder, Life Space Crisis Intervention Institute, Washington, DC
- The Honorable George McGovern,Former United Nations Ambassador, Rome, Italy
- Allen Mendler, Co-founder, Discipline Associates, Rochester, New York
- Paul Mones, Attorney and author, Portland, Oregon
- Arlin Ness, President Emeritus, Starr Commonwealth, Albion, Michigan
- Gordon Neufeld, Psychologist/Consultant, Vancouver, British Columbia
- Dan Olweus, Professor, University of Bergen, Norway
- The Honorable Landon Pearson, Canada’s Senator for Children and Youth, Ottawa, Canada
- Joe Padilla, Deputy, Office of Athletics and Youth Development, National Guard Bureau, Arlington, Virginia
- Bruce Perry, Senior Fellow, Child Trauma Academy, Houston, Texas
- Father Val Peter, Director, Father Flanagan Girls and Boys Town, Omaha, Nebraska
- Phil Quinn, Founder, ICARE, Hermitage, Tennessee
- The Honorable Janet Reno, Former United States Attorney General, Washington, DC
- Warren Rhodes, Professor, Morgan State University, Dover, Delaware
- Father Chris Riley, Founder, Youth Off The Streets, Sydney, Australia
- Nathan Rustein, Founder, The Institute for Healing Racism, Amherst, Massachusetts
- Keith Spencer, Superintendent of Schools, Nisga’a, British Columbia
- Joe Stewart, Trustee, W. K. Kellogg Foundation, Battle Creek, Michigan
- Carl Taylor, Professor, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan
- William Treanor, Founder, Youth Today, Washington, DC
- Fred Tully, Founder, Black Hills Children’s Home, Rapid City, South Dakota
- Harry H. Vorrath, Founder, Positive Peer Culture Model, awarded posthumously
- Tobias Wolff, Professor, Stanford University, Stanford, California
- Mary Wood, Founder, Developmental Therapy Institute, Athens, Georgia
- Peter Yarrow, “Peter Paul and Mary” New York, New York
The Kim Foundation and station KCRO, channel 660 AM based out of Omaha, Nebraska, have partnered to produce a live, talk radio program focused on behavioral health and recovery. Titled Not Alone, the broadcast was developed by The Kim Foundation through the support of C&A Industries, Inc. in an effort to reduce the stigma often associated with mental illness. The show seeks to assure individuals, families, and communities that they are not alone, mental illness affects us all.
June 15 – Trauma Informed Care
Dr. Sandra Bloom, founder of the Sanctuary Model, and author of Creating Sanctuary will discuss trauma informed care and trauma informed methods for creating or changing organizational culture in order to provide more cohesive healing from psychological and social trauma. Trauma informed care recognizes that by working with youth on how to identify triggers that lead to negative behaviors, and teaching them coping skills to reduce or eliminate those negative behaviors allows for a more idyllic healing process.
Listen to Dr. Ted Corbin and Dr. John Rich discuss the Healing Hurt People Program at Hahnemann Hospital in Philadelphia. WHYY, Radio Times podcast, March 16, 2010
Listen to Dr. Ted Corbin and Dr. John Rich on WHYY Newscast, June 8, 2010
Listen to Dr. Sandra Bloom, Dr. Ted Corbin and Dr. John Rich discuss an innovative, trauma-informed emergency room program for victims of violence, Healing Hurt People recorded on July 26, 2010 WHYY, Philadelphia Public Radio Station episode of "Voices In The Family"
In a city like Philadelphia, emergency room staff handle a never-ending onslaught of shooting and stabbing victims. For many victims, the violence that brought them to the hospital is a constant presence. Often, a violent incident leads to more violence. A Philadelphia program called "Healing Hurt People" tries to offer emotional support and resources after a violent attack. It is run by the Center for Nonviolence and Social Justice at Drexel University, and guest host Maiken Scott will talk with leading staff from the center. Our guests are Sandra Bloom, Theodore Corbin, and John Rich. Sandra L. Bloom, M.D. is an internationally recognized expert on trauma, and co-author of "Bearing Witness: Violence and Collective Responsibility". Dr. Theodore Corbin is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Emergency Medicine at the Drexel University College of Medicine. He also serves as the Medical Director of the Healing Hurt People Program. John A. Rich is Professor and Chair of Health Management and Policy at the Drexel University School of Public Health. His recent book about book about urban violence is called "Wrong Place, Wrong Time: Trauma and Violence in the Lives of Young Black Men." Also featured is an article from Health and Science titled, Program offers resources and support to young victims.
Philadelphia Inquirer article
Healing Hurt People article Drexel
The statistics startle: homicide death rates are more than 17 times higher for young black men than their white counterparts. Rich, chair of the department of health management and policy at the Drexel University School of Public Health, considers the impact of posttraumatic stress disorder on the survivors. His account is professional, as he finds analogies between his subjects and combat veterans and victims of sexual assault, and personal, as he reports how spendingn hours and days with these young men transformed him. Two particularly detailed moments stand out: one follows a young man through emergency room protocols, another follows Rich through prison visit procedures. Although Rich's research spans two decades, he focuses most sharply upon four young men he encountered at Boston City Hospital. The high level of violence in their communities makes young men feel physically, psychologically, and socially unsafe, Rich observes; thus, ironically, these violent young men seem to be looking for safety in a violent world. Rich joins the ranks of Rachel Carson, Michael Harrington and Ralph Nader for bringing attention to a pervasive social problem with a fresh perspective and warranted urgency. (Dec.)
Sanctuary Model in California Endowment Report