Introduction: A Personal Journey Through Trauma Work
Over the past two decades, as a psychiatrist, I have had the privilege—and challenge—of working with traumatised individuals across diverse settings: the public health system, correctional facilities, military and veteran populations, and now the Family Court space. Throughout this journey, classical psychoanalytic concepts have provided both theoretical grounding and practical wisdom for navigating the complex terrain of trauma work.
As I’ve transitioned into the Family Court environment, I’ve found myself drawing heavily on established clinical principles while adapting them to legal rather than therapeutic contexts. While the Family Court setting presents unique challenges—legal rather than therapeutic outcomes, time constraints, adversarial processes—the fundamental principles of trauma-informed work remain remarkably consistent across contexts.
This article represents my attempt to translate clinical insights into practical guidance for family law practitioners who encounter traumatised clients daily.
Understanding Trauma: Four Key Categories
Rather than relying on rigid clinical definitions, trauma is best understood through recognisable patterns. Trauma can be categorised into four main types:
1. Acute Single-Incident Trauma
These are overwhelming events that exceed an individual’s capacity to cope, such as serious accidents, violent crimes, sudden death of a loved one, or single incidents of severe abuse. In Family Law contexts, this might include witnessing domestic violence, experiencing a traumatic divorce revelation, or surviving a family tragedy.
2. Chronic Strain Trauma
Kris (1956) introduced the concept of “strain trauma” to describe ongoing, persistent traumatic experiences. A particularly relevant example he provided was “the ongoing strain trauma of being black in this country“, highlighting how systemic oppression creates continuous psychological strain. In Family Law contexts, this includes ongoing domestic violence, chronic neglect or emotional abuse, persistent discrimination, or long-term financial insecurity that affects family stability.
3. Developmental Trauma
This occurs during critical developmental periods and has a profound impact on personality formation and relationship patterns. Examples include early parental loss, childhood sexual abuse by family members, severe physical abuse during formative years, and disrupted attachment relationships. This type of trauma particularly impacts clients’ ability to maintain stable co-parenting relationships and make sound decisions about their children’s welfare.
4. Intergenerational Trauma
This refers to trauma effects transmitted across generations, such as Holocaust survivors and their descendants, effects of historical trauma in Indigenous communities, patterns of family violence passed through generations, and immigration trauma affecting multiple family members. This type of trauma often emerges in Court proceedings where generational patterns of dysfunction become evident.
The Impact of Trauma on Psychological Functioning
Trauma fundamentally disrupts normal psychological development. As Mahler, Pine, and Bergman (1975) described, healthy development requires the consolidation of self-and-object constancy—the ability to maintain stable internal representations of oneself and others even during times of stress or separation. Trauma interferes with this crucial developmental achievement and also impairs the mind’s capacity to recognise and regulate emotional states.
Understanding Self-Object Constancy in Family Law Practice:
Healthy Self-Object Constancy: When a lawyer needs to reschedule a meeting, a client with intact self-object constancy thinks:
• “I’m disappointed, but I know my lawyer is working hard for me“
• “This must be important—they’re usually reliable”
• “Our working relationship is strong enough to handle this delay“
Impaired Self-Object Constancy: The same situation might trigger:
• “My lawyer doesn’t care about my case“
• “I’m always abandoned when I need people most“
• “They’re incompetent” (all-bad thinking)
• Difficulty remembering previous positive interactions.
This concept helps explain why traumatised clients may experience normal legal processes as personal rejections, struggle to maintain nuanced views of family members, and require extraordinary consistency from their legal representatives.
Four Essential Principles for Trauma-Informed Family Law Practice
1. Create Safety Through Consistent Presence and Welcoming Environment
Traumatised individuals need to experience genuine safety before meaningful work can begin. Ferenczi (1929) described this as allowing clients to experience psychological safety for potentially the first time in their lives.
Practical Applications:
• Begin meetings by acknowledging the stress of legal proceedings.
• Create office environments that feel safe rather than intimidating.
• Maintain consistent communication patterns and reliable scheduling.
• Validate clients’ protective instincts while educating about legal realities.
• Allow clients to bring support persons when appropriate.
• Use language that validates clients’ experiences without making promises about
outcomes.
2. Provide Psychological “Holding” Through Flexible Timelines and Adaptive Approaches
Winnicott (1960) emphasised the importance of “holding”—providing psychological containment that allows individuals to process difficult material safely. Premature pushing or rigid adherence to standard timelines can re-traumatise vulnerable clients.
For Family Law Practice:
• Build additional time into case timelines for trauma-affected clients.
• Allow for multiple meetings before expecting major decisions.
• Modify standard procedures when clinically indicated (meeting locations,
communication methods).
• Recognise that setbacks are a natural part of the healing process.
• Coordinate with mental health professionals when appropriate.
• Break complex legal decisions into smaller, manageable steps.
• Provide extra preparation time before court appearances.
3. Validate Trauma Impact While Maintaining Professional Boundaries
Validation involves acknowledging the reality and impact of traumatic experiences without necessarily adjudicating between competing narratives. This requires sophisticated clinical skills adapted to legal contexts.
Practical Strategies:
• Acknowledge the difficulty of clients’ experiences without requiring detailed trauma disclosure.
• Focus on how past experiences affect current functioning rather than establishing historical facts.
• Avoid minimising trauma with statements like “that’s in the past” or “you need to move on”.
• Distinguish between believing clients’ subjective experiences and determining legal facts.
• Support clients in developing their narrative coherence.
• Separate validation from fact-finding in legal proceedings.
• Create conditions where clients feel safe sharing relevant information when legally necessary.
4. Develop Professional Self-Awareness and Manage Responses to Traumatic Material
Working with traumatised clients inevitably affects practitioners. Developing skills for managing these responses is crucial for effective practice and professional sustainability.
Key Strategies:
• Recognise that intense emotional reactions to client trauma are normal and human.
• Use emotional responses as information about case dynamics and what others (judges, opposing counsel) might experience.
• Seek regular consultation with mental health professionals for both case consultation and personal support.
• Maintain clear boundaries between empathy and over-identification with clients’ experiences.
• Develop consistent self-care practices and professional support networks.
• Understand when personal trauma history enhances versus impairs professional judgment.
• Build referral relationships with trauma-informed mental health professionals.
Conclusion
The integration of classical psychoanalytic understanding with contemporary family law
practice offers a sophisticated framework for working with traumatised clients. The goal is not to become therapists, but to recognise trauma’s impact on legal processes and adapt practice accordingly.
Effective trauma-informed practice requires both genuine human presence and legal competence. As clinical literature consistently demonstrates, neither warmth without expertise nor technical skill without authentic care can adequately serve traumatised families navigating the legal system.
The fundamental requirement remains bringing an authentic professional presence to the work while maintaining appropriate boundaries. This approach not only serves clients more effectively but also provides practitioners with a sustainable framework for managing the emotional demands of family law practice.
Supporting traumatised clients starts with supporting yourself — boundaries, self-awareness, and consistent care are non-negotiable.
Dr. Antonio Simonelli, Consultant Psychiatrist, MBBS (UNSW) FRANZCP Mast. Forensic MH (UNSW)
Dr Antonio Simonelli is a Consultant Forensic Psychiatrist with over 20 years’ of experience within multiple healthcare sectors and across diverse communities – working as a Senior Staff Specialist in public mental health, maintaining a private practice, and provide expert evidence to the NSW Courts. He 6 major qualifications including FRANZCP, Masters in Forensic Mental Health, and specialized certifications bring a broad perspective to his role as an Expert witness in criminal court proceedings (Local, District and Supreme Court matters) and Mental Health Review Tribunal matters. Dr Simonelli has special interest in Sex Offender Assessment and Rehabilitation.
References