The concept of being trauma informed is a relatively recent development in therapy, and a very important and valuable one.

I believe, though, that the term trauma informed itself isn’t very helpful. Because all therapy, from its very origins, has been about dealing with past adversity, or adverse experience, that has had a lasting impact on the person. That’s really what therapy is, and always has been.

So the idea that some therapists are not trauma informed, whereas some are, seems slightly bizarre. It’s like saying: this doctor is not disease informed, whereas that doctor is disease informed.

All therapy is about trauma – if we’re using the term trauma to mean the lasting impact of prior adversity. So I believe that a more accurate term for this recent shift in therapy would be body oriented,.

Therapies that are widely labelled as trauma-informed (EMDR, Somatic Experiencing, Sensorimotor Psychotherapy….) are broadly all about the presence of trauma within the body and the nervous system, and how these hold old traumatic experiences. They are an orientation towards the individual’s experience within their body, rather than within their mind. And just to be clear: this is an incredibly valuable idea.

But all therapy is trauma informed. All therapy, whether it does so explicitly or implicitly, addresses how past experience shows up in the present, and how to free the present from the impact of that past (traumatic) experience. Some do it more through a talk orientation, and some do it more through a body orientation. The distinction is right there, and not in an implied difference in how “informed” they are by the trauma itself.