Creating safe spaces is at the heart of trauma-informed practice. This reflection explores how safety is built through the quiet art of noticing without judgement — in our environments, our policies, and our relationships. It reminds us that safety begins in the small moments, shaped by the calm, compassionate presence of practitioners who hold space for others and for themselves.
Introduction
In trauma-informed practice, creating safe spaces is not a single action but a continuous way of being. Safety is both physical and emotional — it is something we build, nurture, and sustain. It exists in the felt sense of trust, predictability, and compassion. For those who have experienced trauma, safety becomes the foundation upon which regulation, learning, and healing can occur (SAMHSA, 2014).
As practitioners, we must remember that safety is rarely created through grand gestures. More often, it begins in the small moments: a calm tone, a steady presence, a gentle response when emotions rise. These moments signal to a child or young person’s nervous system, “You are safe here.” Safety, in this sense, is not only environmental — it is relational. It lives in the quality of connection we offer and the consistency with which we offer it (Perry & Szalavitz, 2006).
The Quiet Art of Noticing Without Judgement
At the heart of trauma-informed work lies what I often call “the quiet art of noticing without judgement.” This is the practice of slowing down enough to truly see what is in front of us — not through the lens of behaviour management, but through curiosity and compassion.
Children and young people who have experienced trauma often communicate distress through behaviour. When we respond with frustration or quick correction, we risk reinforcing patterns of shame and mistrust. When we notice, pause, and reflect — without judgement — we create the space for understanding.
This kind of noticing invites us to move from “What’s wrong with you?” to “What’s happened to you?” and, ultimately, to “What do you need right now?” (Bath & Seita, 2018). It allows us to respond rather than react, to stay grounded even when the moment feels chaotic.
Noticing without judgement requires emotional regulation, empathy, and humility. It means being attuned not only to the young person’s signals but also to our own. Our nervous systems are constantly communicating — and in trauma-informed practice, the practitioner’s calm, regulated state becomes the child’s anchor.
Environment: The Architecture of Safety
A trauma-informed environment is not simply a physical space; it is a message. The sensory and relational qualities of an environment can either reinforce safety or trigger stress responses in those with trauma histories (Perry & Winfrey, 2021).
Predictability, comfort, and choice are the key architectural elements of safety. Predictable routines help children’s brains relax from hypervigilance. Calming colours, soft textures, and clearly defined spaces provide containment and comfort. Offering small, meaningful choices — such as where to sit or which activity to start with — helps to restore agency and a sense of control (Lotty, 2021).
However, it is the emotional environment that most powerfully determines safety. The tone of an adult’s voice, their posture, and their attuned presence all shape how the environment feels. A trauma-informed setting communicates, both implicitly and explicitly: You belong here, and you are safe to be yourself.
Safety begins in the small moments — in how transitions are managed, how emotions are met, and how boundaries are held with kindness. These micro-moments build trust, slowly teaching the nervous system that the world can be predictable and kind again.
Policy: Embedding Compassion into the Framework
Policies form the scaffolding that supports trauma-informed practice. They transform good intentions into consistent, sustainable actions across an organisation. When policy frameworks are grounded in compassion, transparency, and flexibility, they become a form of institutional care (SAMHSA, 2014).
Trauma-informed policies ensure that safety and wellbeing are not left to chance. They promote restorative rather than punitive approaches, value relational repair over blame, and embed reflective supervision as a protective factor for staff (Bath & Seita, 2018). They also recognise that staff wellbeing is not secondary but central — because the wellbeing of practitioners directly affects the wellbeing of those they support (Figley, 2012).
Policies written through a trauma-aware lens remind everyone in the organisation that empathy, respect, and dignity are non-negotiable. They also ensure that when difficult situations arise, the response remains grounded in care rather than control.
A trauma-informed policy is ultimately a promise — a commitment to uphold safety for both staff and children through consistency, respect, and reflection.
Practitioner Wellbeing: Holding Space for Ourselves
Working within trauma-informed frameworks can be deeply meaningful, but also emotionally demanding. Bearing witness to trauma stories, managing dysregulated behaviours, and maintaining empathy under stress can take a quiet toll on practitioners. Without adequate support, this can lead to compassion fatigue and secondary traumatic stress (Bride, 2007).
Practitioner wellbeing, therefore, is not an optional extra — it is an ethical responsibility. A trauma-informed organisation must care for its workforce as intentionally as it cares for its service users (Lotty, 2021).
Reflective supervision, peer support, and access to debriefing spaces are essential. These structures allow practitioners to process emotional load, make sense of challenging moments, and restore their own regulation. As Perry and Szalavitz (2006) note, a regulated adult is the most powerful tool for helping a dysregulated child.
Wellbeing also grows in the everyday rhythms of work — the shared humour, the quiet pause before responding, the moments of recognition from a colleague. These are shared spaces of safety where staff feel seen, valued, and supported. When practitioners experience safety and connection, they are better able to co-create those same conditions for others.
From Safe to Healing Spaces
When environment, policy, and practitioner wellbeing align, safety evolves into something deeper — it becomes healing. Healing spaces are those where people can show up as their whole selves, where mistakes are met with reflection rather than shame, and where relationships are prioritised over compliance.
In these spaces, the messages are clear: You matter. You are safe. You are not alone.
This is the heart of trauma-informed practice — a movement from fear to trust, from isolation to connection.
As Bath and Seita (2018) describe, healing environments are grounded in the “three pillars of transforming care”: safety, connection, and emotional regulation. When all three are present, the potential for growth and resilience is profound.
Conclusion
Creating safe spaces is an ongoing, relational act — one that begins with noticing without judgement and expands into systems that sustain care. It is both a professional practice and a personal discipline, requiring us to be reflective, grounded, and compassionate even in moments of challenge.
Safety does not come from policies alone, nor from environments alone. It is built through the consistent, human presence of practitioners who embody calm, empathy, and care. As SAMHSA (2014) reminds us, trauma-informed practice rests on four essential principles: realising the impact of trauma, recognising the signs, responding appropriately, and resisting retraumatisation.
Each time we notice, respond gently, and hold space with kindness, we strengthen the fabric of safety within our settings. Over time, these safe spaces become not just protective — but transformative.
References
Bath, H. and Seita, J. (2018) The Three Pillars of Transforming Care: Trauma and Resilience in the Other 23 Hours. Reclaiming Youth at Risk.
Bride, B. E. (2007) ‘Prevalence of secondary traumatic stress among social workers’, Social Work, 52(1), pp. 63–70.
Figley, C. R. (2012) Compassion Fatigue: Coping with Secondary Traumatic Stress Disorder in Those Who Treat the Traumatized. Routledge.
Lotty, M. (2021) ‘Making sense of the practice of trauma-informed care: A response to the need to implement trauma-informed care into front-line practice, Irish Social Worker, pp. 160-17
Perry, B. D. and Szalavitz, M. (2006) The Boy Who Was Raised as a Dog: And Other Stories from a Child Psychiatrist’s Notebook. Basic Books.
Perry, B. D. and Winfrey, O. (2021) What Happened to You? Conversations on Trauma, Resilience, and Healing. Bluebird.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) (2014) SAMHSA’s Concept of Trauma and Guidance for a Trauma-Informed Approach. Rockville, MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Dr M’s thoughts 