Understanding Childhood Trauma in Child Welfare and Family Law
I have spent much of my life looking at child abuse from different sides of the system.
I was raised in foster care. I later became a child abuse investigator for the Florida Department of Children and Families. Today, as a family law attorney, much of my work still involves children, family separation, allegations of abuse, and decisions about what truly serves a child’s best interests.
Because of that background, I thought I understood a great deal about the long-term effects of childhood trauma.
My recent conversation with Dr. Frank Putnam reminded me how much more there is to understand.
Dr. Putnam has spent decades studying abused children and following their development into adulthood. His research shows that childhood trauma does not simply disappear when the immediate danger is removed. Its effects can continue through childhood and into adulthood, affecting behavior, relationships, mental health, and even physical health.
For those of us working in child welfare and family law, understanding trauma is not an academic exercise. Decisions about safety, removal, placement, reunification, and family relationships can affect a child long after a case is closed.
Childhood Trauma Does Not Stay in Childhood
One of the most striking parts of my conversation with Dr. Putnam was learning just how deeply childhood trauma can affect development.
His longitudinal research found differences extending beyond emotional and behavioral health. Early trauma can affect biological development and is associated with increased risks for serious health problems later in life.
For me, the larger lesson is what this means for the decisions we make about children today.
A child welfare case may eventually close. A divorce or custody dispute may eventually end. A child may leave foster care or move into a permanent home.
But the child’s experience does not necessarily end when the legal case does.
That is why decisions involving children have to consider not only the immediate conflict, but also what gives that child the best opportunity for long-term safety, stability, and healthy development.
We Have to Stop Calling Trauma “Bad Behavior”
Children who have experienced significant trauma frequently exhibit behaviors that adults do not understand.
They may be aggressive, have difficulty sleeping, appear oppositional or tell inconsistent stories. Children who have experienced sexual abuse may display behaviors that are frightening or confusing to foster parents and caregivers.
And sometimes the conclusion becomes: this is a bad child.
But what if we are looking at trauma instead of misconduct?
Dr. Putnam explained that children who have experienced severe trauma can struggle with memory, dissociation, and behaviors connected to the experiences they have survived.
That distinction matters tremendously in child welfare and family law. Parents, foster parents, investigators, attorneys, and courts are often asked to interpret a child’s behavior. If we fail to understand the possible effects of trauma, we risk misunderstanding what that behavior is telling us.
A Safe Placement Is Not Enough. A Child Has to Feel Safe.
This may have been one of the most important points in our entire conversation.
Protecting a child obviously begins with making that child physically safe. But Dr. Putnam emphasized that children also have to feel safe.
A child who has lived with abuse or the constant possibility of abuse does not immediately turn that fear off simply because we change where the child sleeps.
That is particularly important when we make decisions about foster care, placement, and reunification.
A stable and predictable environment with adults who understand trauma can become an important part of helping a child heal. That also means giving foster parents the training and support necessary to understand the children placed in their care.
Sometimes Helping the Family May Be Better Than Removing the Child
This is an issue I struggled with when I was a child abuse investigator, and it continues to influence the way I think about child welfare today.
There were situations where I would walk into a home and think: this parent doesn’t need to lose a child. This family needs some help.
Maybe they needed transportation. Maybe they needed childcare. Maybe they needed some relatively modest financial assistance.
Yet sometimes the resources available to remove and place a child were greater than the resources available to stabilize the family.
There are absolutely circumstances where removal is necessary. A child’s safety has to come first.
But removal has consequences too. A child may lose daily contact with parents, siblings, grandparents, and extended family, along with school, friends, and everything familiar. Some children then experience repeated foster placements, creating even more disruption.
That is why we have to ask not only whether intervention is necessary, but what kind of intervention will actually help the child.
If a child can safely remain with a family that can be stabilized with appropriate services and support, we should recognize the value of preserving those relationships. When removal is necessary, we should also understand the trauma separation can create and do everything possible to provide stability afterward.
One Supportive Adult Can Make a Difference
Dr. Putnam’s research also offered something hopeful.
Among the girls he followed, supportive relationships with adults outside their immediate family could make an important difference. Sometimes it was a teacher, coach, aunt, mentor, or older sister — someone who provided stability, guidance, and a relationship the child could trust.
That finding was personal for me.
When I think about my own childhood, I can identify people outside my immediate family who helped me. Teachers. Members of my community. A preacher and his wife. Adults who provided encouragement and stability at times when I needed it.
I cannot prove what my life would have looked like without those people.
But I know they mattered.
You may never know the entire story of what a child is experiencing. Simply being a trustworthy, consistent adult in that child’s life may have an impact far beyond what you can see at the time.
What This Means for Child Welfare and Family Law
Dr. Putnam’s decades of research also examines how the effects of childhood abuse can extend across generations. It reinforces the importance of understanding not only what is happening to a child, but what parents and caregivers may have experienced themselves.
Understanding history does not mean ignoring a child’s safety. But it can help us determine what intervention is actually needed and whether there is an opportunity to strengthen a family and break a cycle.
Not every family law case involves child abuse or the child welfare system. But many involve children experiencing enormous changes in their lives.
Parents separate. Homes change. Relationships become strained. In high-conflict cases, adults can become so focused on one another that it becomes difficult to see the situation through the child’s eyes.
That is one reason my experience in child welfare continues to influence how I practice family law.
We have to keep returning to the child.
What has this child experienced? Does this child feel safe? What relationships provide stability? Are we interpreting this child’s behavior accurately? What decisions give this child the best opportunity to move forward in a healthy way?
Those questions do not always produce easy answers. But I believe they are the right questions to ask.
We Know More Than We Are Doing
Near the end of our conversation, Dr. Putnam made an observation that stayed with me: we know far more than we do.
We know more about childhood trauma, prevention, early intervention, trauma-informed care, and supporting foster families than we did decades ago. The challenge is putting that knowledge into practice.
For me, this conversation reinforced something I have believed throughout my career. We cannot protect children only by reacting after something terrible has happened.
We have to listen sooner, support families when support can safely prevent removal, help foster parents and professionals understand trauma, and keep the well-being of the child at the center of every decision.
Instead of looking at a traumatized child and asking, “What is wrong with this child?” perhaps we should begin with a different question:
What happened to this child, and what does this child need from us now?
My conversation with Dr. Frank Putnam covered much more, including his groundbreaking longitudinal research, foster care, family separation, prevention, generational abuse, and what he has learned after nearly 50 years of studying childhood trauma.