Adverse Childhood Experiences are Symptoms of Economic Trauma
Blaming or claiming ignorance won’t help.
Research into Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) represents the largest public health data collection effort to date. For those unfamiliar, the studies reveal that crappy experiences in childhood, from chronic socio-economic stress to extreme trauma and abuse, result in ongoing negative health outcomes as adults. The concept is illustrated in the pyramid below (CDC, 2021).
As we see from the pyramid, once ACEs have occurred, neurodevelopment is disrupted, resulting an ongoing lifelong cascade of social, emotional, and cognitive impairments, risk behaviors, disease, and early death.
Public health is then obliged to take a systems approach prevention and therefore address the social conditions that emerge from “Generational Embodiment/Historical Trauma”, or epigenetics (Dubois & Guaspare, 2020). The visual schematic of a pyramid then is perhaps misleading, as a vicious cycle, or cyclone, is probably more appropriate.
The graphic illustration below describes well what adversities qualified as “ACEs” in the first studies, the risk factors, prevalence, and outcomes. ACEs research provides the most representative overview of the prevelance and severity of how young people experience Economic Trauma and how society continues to suffer as a result.
The chart illustrates how ACEs had mostly been defined under three essential categories of Abuse, Neglect, and Household Dysfunction, and that only 36% of the San Diego-based population that participated in this original study in the 1990’s did not experience one of these instances (CDC 2021). While people from all socio-economic backgrounds live in San Diego, it is worth noting that such a high rate of trauma emerged in one of our nation’s most affluent places to live.
A more detailed look at ACEs reporting shows that the largest incidence is described by “economic hardship,” at 25.5%. Yet, each of the other incidences also speak very strongly to economic hardship. While the a parent’s divorce does not necessarily result in the children experiencing economic hardship, only a small percentage of parents would not be affected in some way. The economic stress of raising a family and maintaining a household in a single income environment is certainly stressful enough for that stress to present itself in some way to the children. In fact, what economic factors were implicated in the divorce, or even in the marriage? While the accidental death of a parent is not Economic Trauma, suicide, a military death, a gang-related death, or even the kind of accident that may happen in response to myriad external stressors, all of which are implicated in a pervasively scarcity-based economic paradigm. Consider the graph below and the situations that each of these describe. If you can think of a possible economic correlation, it is worth addressing that. Then we can see more alignment in the potential to create solutions.
In addition to these, what other adversities are young people experiencing that impact them well into adulthood?
To answer that question, some studies, such as the Philedelphia Urban ACEs study (2013), expanded the ACEs categories to encompass a child’s broader social context, including racism, bullying, being in foster care, or living in unsafe neighborhoods. Of course, as the list of recognized ACEs grows, so too does the prevelance, as illustrated below.
83.2% of children experience the kind of adversity that implicates a lifetime of negative and costly health outcomes is too high. It is an easy hypothesis that, with pandemic-related social isolation, rising economic insecurity, anxiety about environmental degredation, extreme weather patterns, socio-political unrest, etc., there are increasingly more ACEs to consider in future studies. As the factors contributing adverse and traumatic childhoods experiences increases, prevalence rates will continue to push upward toward a growing population compromised by trauma. Even the spread of a dangerous virus can be attributed to a dysfunctional economic system, including the discordant social response which fundamentally lacks trust in systems and each other. It is time to recognize Economic Trauma for the veritable public health crisis it is. What isn’t Economic Trauma?
At this point, we are still stuck pointing fingers at the capitalists or socialists. An example of the way that blame or denial seem to hyjack the social conversation and thwart a collective and effective response comes alive with this study on eco-anxiety by the Texas Public Policy Foundation.
Defined as “Chronic fear about environmental doom,” 57% of students reported experiencing it (Kramer & Tahuahua, 2021). The study correctly asserts that “Anxiety about the environment should not be getting in the way of teenager’s mental and physical health and their education.” Yet the conclusion is to question the severity of our environmental crisis, and blame a progressive narrative for overblowing the problem in the media and in schools.
The anti-racism vs. anti-critical race theory debate follows the same downward spiral of discord.
When blame and denial are central to important conversations, it is a sure sign that we need to step back and take a new perspective or approach to creative problem solving.
So, beyond recommendations of eating right, sleeping well, getting exercise, and sticking with it (whatever “it” may be… work, school, a health regimen), the public health strategies proposed for preventing ACEs are as follows:
Strategies to help reduce ACEs in families include promoting safe, stable, nurturing relationships and environments for children and families; emphasis on early prevention; and strengthening economic supports for families, such as earned income tax credits and family-friendly work policies. Other strategies involve ensuring a strong start for children such as through early childhood home visitation, high quality child care, preschool programs, and enhanced primary care services for screening, referral and support. (Wyckoff, 2019)
All of the suggestions sound wonderful. Are any if these politically controversial? Would anyone argue with the first strategy of “promoting safe, stable, and nurturing relationships and environments for children and families”?
Focusing on solutions can bring us together. It is simply a fallacious Budget Mentality that perpetuates political inaction, where strategies competing for scarce funds spend more time politicizing and less time solution-testing. The Budget Mentality is another symptom of the rampant Economic Trauma coming from a fundamentally pathogenic system. If finance does not value life, and economic measures do not count life, life ceases to grow and flourish.
The next step to healing the emotional crisis of youth is to recognize that it is a symptom of the broader issue of Economic Trauma, with ACEs, Expanded ACEs, Epigenetic Trauma, Eco-Anxiety, risk outcomes, and so much more falling under together. We can best come to understand what Economic Trauma is by asking what it isn’t (Malisa, 2021).
The complexity of the problem is only matched by a complexity of solutions.
Teaching a process of self-inquiry and relationship building and co-designing prototypes of regenerative economic ecosystems is one of the most affordable, effective, and scaleable solutions at our fingertips.
Organizations like Prosocial Schools, Prosocial Families, and Peace Profits, can bring Relational Design Thinking to classrooms and communities to “cultivate safe, stable, and nurturing relationships and environments for children and families to think and thrive together.”
The process harnesses the principles and practice of deep communication, finding inspiration, and playing in the progenerative sandbox of co-creating economic ecosystems that work for peace, prosperity, regeneration, and wellbeing for all.
In a time of transition, with imminent crises to prepare for and respond to all around, let’s take a walk together in nature and ask, how good can it get?
