Trauma Informed or Entombed

Joel Levin August 2026

Working in engagement and facilitation, the topic of being trauma informed is becoming increasingly important. There is little doubt that current and past trauma can impact people’s emotional, psychological, or physical processing of life (1)(2)

In some way, trauma is an absolute leveller as it can affect anyone, regardless of age, background, or circumstance, and may stem from a single event (acute trauma), repeated experiences (chronic trauma), or exposure to multiple forms of adversity (complex trauma) (3)(4)

Being trauma informed also means recognising that different people will experience different events in different ways. For example, one person might come through a childhood surrounded by family violence and adopt the same dynamics in their relationships, while another person growing up in a similar environment might display the complete opposite behaviours as an adult.(5)

This means that there is a subjective element to how different people process these events (6)(7) The subjectivity is not an invitation for projection or expectation on those working in this space, but presents a key point of observation working in spaces where trauma is a factor.

In our current times, there seems to be a hyper-vigilant focus on people feeling included and ‘safe’, and the result is that real conversations are avoided. This article offers a scale that recognises there is trauma, and that we can do people a disservice if we think about trauma as something static and unmoveable. Again – this is not saying it’s our job to ‘fix’ others, or force change – but it is saying we can do people a disservice by avoiding conversations just because they might make others uncomfortable. Avoiding these conversations can carry an implicit suggestion that the person isn't able to cope.

This scale is not a scorecard that other people should use to judge others by or set expectation that people are somewhere on this scale that they are not.

The scale is based on the reality that how people relate to traumatic experiences can shift over time (8)(9).Where someone is on this scale, is simply that: where they are. An Individual’s experiences of trauma are not to be minimised and there is no prescribed timeframe to transition from one point on the scale to another.

However, I have seen an entombing effect when the systems around a person operate as if this scale does not exist. Those systems that are supposed to be designed to "support" end up doing these people a disservice. It is a sound idea for people to feel safe, but if we remove the reality that discomfort can accompany healing, we fail to help people move through this scale.

This might seem counter-intuitive, but it's a very natural part of much healing. If a leg is broken and placed in a cast, once that first phase of healing is done and the cast is removed, there is a second phase that requires a focus on rebuilding strength and movement. That time is not always comfortable, but it's needed.

So how do we set up spaces that recognise discomfort is, at times, needed?

How do we truly assist and support people if we do not have a willingness for discomfort to be part of the healing process? Note: not discomfort forced from the outside in, as this would retraumatise, but discomfort that moves from the inside out, as the "sensing" muscles begin to rebuild.

The scale is a thought piece, an offering, and I will leave researchers and clinicians to flesh out its veracity and detail.

As a facilitator, my job is to prompt the conversation.

The above sequence is not a definitive or clinically defined set of stages; it is a representation of what I have seen over the years. As stated, there is no timeframe or expectation that people are anywhere other than where they are, and no prescribed "treatment" to move someone from one stage to the next.

This scale is offered in support of the questions already posed for people working in and around this space:

• How do we set up spaces that recognise discomfort is, at times, needed?

• How do we truly assist and support people if we do not have a willingness for discomfort to be part of the healing process?

• How do we prevent an approach to being trauma informed from becoming one that is trauma entombing?

References

[1] SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (SAMHSA) (2014) SAMHSA’S CONCEPT OF TRAUMA AND GUIDANCE FOR A TRAUMA-INFORMED APPROACH. HHS PUBLICATION NO. (SMA) 14-4884. ROCKVILLE, MD: SAMHSA.

[2] AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION (2022) DIAGNOSTIC AND STATISTICAL MANUAL OF MENTAL DISORDERS. 5TH EDN, TEXT REVISION (DSM-5-TR). WASHINGTON, DC: AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION.

[3] VAN DER KOLK, B.A. (2014) THE BODY KEEPS THE SCORE: BRAIN, MIND, AND BODY IN THE HEALING OF TRAUMA. NEW YORK: VIKING.

[4] COURTOIS, C.A. AND FORD, J.D. (EDS.) (2013) TREATING COMPLEX TRAUMATIC STRESS DISORDERS IN ADULTS: SCIENTIFIC FOUNDATIONS AND THERAPEUTIC MODELS. NEW YORK: GUILFORD PRESS..

[5] WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION (2013) GUIDELINES FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF CONDITIONS SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO STRESS. GENEVA: WHO.

[6] HERMAN, J.L. (1992) TRAUMA AND RECOVERY: THE AFTERMATH OF VIOLENCE—FROM DOMESTIC ABUSE TO POLITICAL TERROR. NEW YORK: BASIC BOOKS

[7] SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (SAMHSA) (2014) SAMHSA’S CONCEPT OF TRAUMA AND GUIDANCE FOR A TRAUMA-INFORMED APPROACH. HHS PUBLICATION NO. (SMA) 14-4884. ROCKVILLE, MD: SAMHSA.

[8] HERMAN, J.L. (1992) TRAUMA AND RECOVERY: THE AFTERMATH OF VIOLENCE—FROM DOMESTIC ABUSE TO POLITICAL TERROR. NEW YORK: BASIC BOOKS.

[9] NEIMEYER, R.A. (2006) LESSONS OF LOSS: A GUIDE TO COPING. MEMPHIS, TN: CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF LOSS AND TRANSITION.