NEAR@Home was designed for home visitors and provides that training, Russell. Since there isn't a sector that can't use trauma-informed and resilience-building practices based on ACEs science, I expect that a wide variety of standards will be developed for each sector and sub-sector. e.g., although there will be overlap, there will likely be a different set of standards for ER nurses than for ICU nurses. There will be different standards for substance abuse counselors who work with youth than there will be for those who work with adults or seniors. And, the standards are likely to be flexible so that, as we learn more, we'll refine them more, and refine them for different populations (ethnicities, gender, geographic area, economic level, religion, nationality, disability, etc.).
Jane Stevens posted:NEAR@Home was designed for home visitors and provides that training, Russell. Since there isn't a sector that can't use trauma-informed and resilience-building practices based on ACEs science, I expect that a wide variety of standards will be developed for each sector and sub-sector. e.g., although there will be overlap, there will likely be a different set of standards for ER nurses than for ICU nurses. There will be different standards for substance abuse counselors who work with youth than there will be for those who work with adults or seniors. And, the standards are likely to be flexible so that, as we learn more, we'll refine them more, and refine them for different populations (ethnicities, gender, geographic area, economic level, religion, nationality, disability, etc.).
yes, thank you, granted all that, and it's a matter of verb tense -- I was asking about what IS, as opposed to WILL BE.
So, certainly, the future looks bright and exciting (that is, except for people in New Zealand). But, in the meantime, pretty frustrating. One area that's especially relevant, perhaps most in need, is suicide prevention. I recently was in some discussion (BRIEF "discussion") with people from a new "suicide prevention" service here, "Life Matters") who "closed down" their thinking as soon as some of the research was mentioned concerning ACEs and suicide risk -- perhaps because they felt they were being blamed for things they had done, or not done, as parents -- and that of course was the last thing on my mind.
I was once in a residential treatment service years ago where, roughly, at least 80% had experienced a variety of ACEs but that service had no component where ACEs were addressed systematically -- imho it could have made for a very useful treatment component -- I'm in favour of addressing such things using both individual and group therapy (one standard I'd like to see implemented in such treatment services). I don't know how it came to be but even some victims of most heinous offences (repeated anal rape; being sexually abused by one's father, in a group of men, and being passed around to the others for her to be abused again and again) might have hated men, but were very understanding and compassionate towards their father, say, because he had gone through such experiences as a child himself. So, we don't judge parents, but see broader opportunities for change. (providing the abuse stops).
"I dream of things that never were and ask why not".
I appreciate this string. And again, I am hopeful of future, but pointing out that the systematic neutralization of ACEs memories offered by EFT is notably swift, gentle and effective. While you can in fact use the protocols for almost anything, in skilled hands, its application in trauma relief is remarkable, and one I hope to teach anyone who wants to learn how to integrate this into their care complement. Russell, it beautifully adapts from strategic/intervention use, to single session therapeutic use and on into groups, both private/closed and public/thematic, again, in skilled hands. I would like to offer a ZOOM call to present an introduction to these tools for this use, if people on this blogspace would let me know they are interested. Kind regards for everyone's work, Jondi Whitis.
The standards weâre all looking for, in any modality, are firstly what works (and doesnât).
The stepwise, methodical, safety-focused and thorough techniques of any modality are under discussion, I believe. And I willingly offer those in this group a chance to experience and discuss how the general standards weâre all discussing are met with this protocol, and open to whatever questions or other solutions my colleagues have found.
I am always willing to learn from anyone elseâs experience, and their generosity in sharing solutions, whenever they offer.
To that end, I offer a private call to this group if anyone is interested, to discuss and experience one way Iâve found to meet current, common âstandards' of efficacy, safety and application. Connecting one another with the best hands-on information we all have found, we grow more capably able to help others.
Thank you all, for all you do, in helping people heal.
> On Oct 16, 2016, at 9:42 AM, ACEsConnection <communitymanager@acesconnection.com> wrote:
>
There is definitely a shortage of "Practice Standard for Trauma Work". As I bring ACEs Awareness to the field, I know that most will find the clinical setting of the past. One without ACEs science.
Two weeks ago Saturday, I responded to a motorcycle accident. Five men raced down a local road on crotch rockets. The lead bike reached an estimated speed of 150 mph. By a stroke of misfortune born in hell, a turkey vulture flew out and knocked the bike out of control. The driver's first strike of the pavement was marked by a single one inch piece of red thread embedded into the pavement from his hoody . As he tumbled a few more single strands. And then 2, 3 strands and then patches of threads from his tumbling. This continued for over 300 feet. The bike continued for another 300 feet from where he came to rest in a ditch. His best friend cradled his head in his lap. The best friend, the godfather to the unborn child the victim's fiancÃĐe has been carrying for 7 months. I worked the cardiac arrest on the scene and the medics continued on the way to the hospital.
I can't imagine what the four remaining riders witnessed. Their friend tumbling down the pavement for such a long way. All of their hands were holding their friend as the body was going through end of life. The remaining dozen turkey vultures were watching from the peak of an old barn in the distance. How can they make sense with what just happened? The best friend was the only one able to speak English. He wanted to know if his friend was going to make it. He wanted to know why this happened. All this while he looked me in the eye for answers.
"High risk behavior" I said. "You and your friend have had a tough life. A tough childhood." His eyes,with a head nod, acknowledged my explanation. Overwhelmed from grief, he trembled. I approached and I held him in a hug. Police gathered statements and as the riders left the scene, they shook my hand and thanked me for the empathy I showed them.
Was it appropriate? Knowing what I know now from ACEs, I know not to ask "What's wrong with you?" I know to ask "What happened to you?" Most people don't go 150 mph. Especially a road they are not familiar with.
So yesterday, two weeks later almost to the hour, I'm driving down the same road. Four Hispanic adults were on the road. My gut told me that they were family. I took a deep breath and turned around. Sure enough. The mother wanted to see the spot were her son came to rest. I showed her. A women spoke English. She relayed my condolences to the mother. I relayed to this women the distance the accident covered. She was on a witch hunt to find blame with the survivors. Again I bring in high risk behavior and its roots with trauma. They didn't know the speed of the vehicle. She understood me and she was pondering the new information. I don't know if she bought it.
"One person caused this accident. No one else," I said. I told her to put a crucifix on the end of a grape post and to get off the highway. It was getting dark.
What does this have to do with the present thread? None of these people will receive any relevant counseling because of the shortage of therapists. And I think it's safe to say especially Spanish-speaking therapists. Not even for ambiguous loss let alone the relevance of ACEs and generational behavior.
Peter Chiavetta posted:There is definitely a shortage of "Practice Standard for Trauma Work". As I bring ACEs Awareness to the field, I know that most will find the clinical setting of the past. One without ACEs science.
Two weeks ago Saturday, I responded to a motorcycle accident. Five men raced down a local road on crotch rockets. The lead bike reached an estimated speed of 150 mph. By a stroke of misfortune born in hell, a turkey vulture flew out and knocked the bike out of control. The driver's first strike of the pavement was marked by a single one inch piece of red thread embedded into the pavement from his hoody . As he tumbled a few more single strands. And then 2, 3 strands and then patches of threads from his tumbling. This continued for over 300 feet. The bike continued for another 300 feet from where he came to rest in a ditch. His best friend cradled his head in his lap. The best friend, the godfather to the unborn child the victim's fiancÃĐe has been carrying for 7 months. I worked the cardiac arrest on the scene and the medics continued on the way to the hospital.
I can't imagine what the four remaining riders witnessed. Their friend tumbling down the pavement for such a long way. All of their hands were holding their friend as the body was going through end of life. The remaining dozen turkey vultures were watching from the peak of an old barn in the distance. How can they make sense with what just happened? The best friend was the only one able to speak English. He wanted to know if his friend was going to make it. He wanted to know why this happened. All this while he looked me in the eye for answers.
"High risk behavior" I said. "You and your friend have had a tough life. A tough childhood." His eyes,with a head nod, acknowledged my explanation. Overwhelmed from grief, he trembled. I approached and I held him in a hug. Police gathered statements and as the riders left the scene, they shook my hand and thanked me for the empathy I showed them.
Was it appropriate? Knowing what I know now from ACEs, I know not to ask "What's wrong with you?" I know to ask "What happened to you?" Most people don't go 150 mph. Especially a road they are not familiar with.
So yesterday, two weeks later almost to the hour, I'm driving down the same road. Four Hispanic adults were on the road. My gut told me that they were family. I took a deep breath and turned around. Sure enough. The mother wanted to see the spot were her son came to rest. I showed her. A women spoke English. She relayed my condolences to the mother. I relayed to this women the distance the accident covered. She was on a witch hunt to find blame with the survivors. Again I bring in high risk behavior and its roots with trauma. They didn't know the speed of the vehicle. She understood me and she was pondering the new information. I don't know if she bought it.
"One person caused this accident. No one else," I said. I told her to put a crucifix on the end of a grape post and to get off the highway. It was getting dark.
What does this have to do with the present thread? None of these people will receive any relevant counseling because of the shortage of therapists. And I think it's safe to say especially Spanish-speaking therapists. Not even for ambiguous loss let alone the relevance of ACEs and generational behavior.
Hear you, man. That must have done oh so awful painful. Really don't know how you guys manage to keep on doing it.
Standards -- ensure that when you need a place to ventilate, you've got one, and the support of others.
Go well
That's quite a story, Peter. Thanks for sharing it. You're providing people with some very powerful knowledge.
Peter Chiavetta posted:There is definitely a shortage of "Practice Standard for Trauma Work". As I bring ACEs Awareness to the field, I know that most will find the clinical setting of the past. One without ACEs science.
Two weeks ago Saturday, I responded to a motorcycle accident. Five men raced down a local road on crotch rockets. The lead bike reached an estimated speed of 150 mph. By a stroke of misfortune born in hell, a turkey vulture flew out and knocked the bike out of control. The driver's first strike of the pavement was marked by a single one inch piece of red thread embedded into the pavement from his hoody . As he tumbled a few more single strands. And then 2, 3 strands and then patches of threads from his tumbling. This continued for over 300 feet. The bike continued for another 300 feet from where he came to rest in a ditch. His best friend cradled his head in his lap. The best friend, the godfather to the unborn child the victim's fiancÃĐe has been carrying for 7 months. I worked the cardiac arrest on the scene and the medics continued on the way to the hospital.
I can't imagine what the four remaining riders witnessed. Their friend tumbling down the pavement for such a long way. All of their hands were holding their friend as the body was going through end of life. The remaining dozen turkey vultures were watching from the peak of an old barn in the distance. How can they make sense with what just happened? The best friend was the only one able to speak English. He wanted to know if his friend was going to make it. He wanted to know why this happened. All this while he looked me in the eye for answers.
"High risk behavior" I said. "You and your friend have had a tough life. A tough childhood." His eyes,with a head nod, acknowledged my explanation. Overwhelmed from grief, he trembled. I approached and I held him in a hug. Police gathered statements and as the riders left the scene, they shook my hand and thanked me for the empathy I showed them.
Was it appropriate? Knowing what I know now from ACEs, I know not to ask "What's wrong with you?" I know to ask "What happened to you?" Most people don't go 150 mph. Especially a road they are not familiar with.
So yesterday, two weeks later almost to the hour, I'm driving down the same road. Four Hispanic adults were on the road. My gut told me that they were family. I took a deep breath and turned around. Sure enough. The mother wanted to see the spot were her son came to rest. I showed her. A women spoke English. She relayed my condolences to the mother. I relayed to this women the distance the accident covered. She was on a witch hunt to find blame with the survivors. Again I bring in high risk behavior and its roots with trauma. They didn't know the speed of the vehicle. She understood me and she was pondering the new information. I don't know if she bought it.
"One person caused this accident. No one else," I said. I told her to put a crucifix on the end of a grape post and to get off the highway. It was getting dark.
What does this have to do with the present thread? None of these people will receive any relevant counseling because of the shortage of therapists. And I think it's safe to say especially Spanish-speaking therapists. Not even for ambiguous loss let alone the relevance of ACEs and generational behavior.
That was an excellent story, Peter. I think that's the kind of thing that motivates me to keep offering help within every possible context, and teach others to do similarly. We learn for ourselves and from one another how to best help others overcome 'everyday adversity', and be stronger, better, wiser for it. Thank you.
Well said and hugely powerful. Thank you for sharing.
Frustrated with the lack of training translating evidenced based research and information into practice for non-clinicians, author Shenandoah Chefalo (Garbage Suitcase: A foster care memoir) and I founded Good Harbor Institute.
Our focus is to translate evidenced-based research on toxic stress/trauma/adversity into real skills which can be used immediately for change.
The objective of the Creating Good Harbors Program is to support everyone in the organization to learn skills to move beyond just understanding what adversity and trauma are to taking immediate action to implement change. We offer a variety of training options and we travel to your site.
Wishing you well,
Cathy
This is very exciting, Cathy. I'd love to hear more; it sounds immediately useful and accessible, two of my requirements in this time of info overload. Thank you,
Jondi
Gail, would love to view webinar by PESI, but cost bit prohibitive. Any way around this for those interested for personal use, at this stage, that you know of?
Mem Lang posted:Gail, would love to view webinar by PESI, but cost bit prohibitive. Any way around this for those interested for personal use, at this stage, that you know of?
One thing I didn't like about the Intro was that it was suggested that there was some divide between "addiction" and mental health -- I underwent training at least 15 years ago that said if someone presents (the training was for clinicians) with either one or the other one should as a matter of course ask about the other, since "patients" so commonly suffered from both. And fortunately, but more recently, the old fallacy that substance abuse induced things like depression has been debunked, and people need more treatment for depression than just stopping substance abuse.
Friday night spelling mistakes? The original idea for depression and addiction being separable (of course) in many cases was Kim Mueser's (American of later Schiz rehab fame) I think, so NZers only had to read this research, which was published many many moons ago. Still most psychiatrists clung to the notion (as many psychiatrists and GPs still do) for many years -- biological reductionism, as opposed to the "European" idea of social factors being influential in etiology of depression.
I think it was an Australian guy! (at ANU) who did the more recent research I was referring to before.
Which education program are you referring to? If it's NZ-developed, Kiwis would love it. If not, they almost wouldn't acknowledge it. What the objective quality of the program is is another story entirely.
Still, one wouldn't want to get too far into social factors underlying substance use -- have a look at the journal Addiction's focus, of a few years ago, on the "self-medication hypothesis".
Mem Lang posted:Russell, do you mean the PESI intro? That would be unfortunate if there was a suggestion that there was a divide. May be New Zealand wasn't so backward - as you have suggested a few times! - As an aside, NZ is very proud of the education program as it currently stands ATM!
When you read that ice addition apparently only occurs in 10% of users, you can bet they're users for a reason. Such additions are the tip of the iceberg. Just below is depression and below that I believe lies the core of the problem. The tricker, harder to deal with by both user and therapist: the core underlying issues. It would be sad to think anyone could now think any differently to this. And yet... It is such an important and fundamental distinction. And I know relatively little - about the multitude of addictions one can use to numb the pain, and the academic research around this. Yet through lived experience and observations (this sure counts for something, I'm not minimalising this acquired 'wisdom') this is a no brainer!
I do get frustrated when I hear everyone isn't on the same page about such important yet basic knowledge and the same attitudes are churned out from universities and organisations.