Thread by @suzannezeedyk

There is a long forgotten story in Britain's history which shows how class & privilege intersect w/ the push for trauma-informed policies. It helps us understand resistance to change. It starts in 1945 in children's hospitals. A THREAD.
Warning: You will need #FierceCuriosity.

2. There was a mum. Her name ws Patricia. She had a little boy she loved a lot. His name ws Conrad. One day, whn he was 7, he got a high fever & needed to be admitted to hospital. Here's a picture of her - although on t night he ws so sick, she probably looked a lot more frantic.

3. When she turned up at hospital, she had a fight with the staff (probably the nurses), because she refused to leave, as they asked her to. She held out for 12 hours, until the doctors arrived. She was eventually forced to leave her little boy for the night.

4. Back she came t next morn. Her son told her that t nurses had "threatened to smack him" if he kept asking for his mother. And they had taken his teddy bear too. Patricia was so outraged to learn how her son had been treated in her absence that she wrote a letter to The Lancet.

5. There was one more crucial detail revealed in her letter. She told how the medical staff suddenly changed when they realised "who she was". She was LADY Patricia Russell, the wife of philosopher Bertrand Russell. Once that was known, she was "treated with utmost courtesy".

6. Her letter made clear that she opposed t hospital rules that separated children frm parents. She also made clear that she realised t "gross neglect, rudeness & enforced separation" were reserved for a particular CLASS of families. She regarded that treatment as "inhuman".

7. Guess what? Her letter provoked all sorts of reaction from the medical profession. Some said it couldn't be true. Others said "everybody would deplore the continual presence of a mother at the bedside of a sick child". Some accused her of being "a socialist". Some cheered her.

8. My point? Class & privilege intersected in t way professionals treated a child. It also intersectd in t way 'the system' listened to what she had to say. Class & privilege shaped resistance to thinking abt children's needs. Want to read more of Patricia's story? Here you go...

9. Let's jump to the story of a second family. Now we're in 1965. TWENTY years later. (Conrad Russell is safely grown up & on his way to becoming a Professor of History.) The campaign to change parents' visiting rules has continued. There's another letter in The Lancet.

10. ...because there's another child in hospital,whose parents hadn't been allowed to stay w/ her. I don't know their names. I don't hv a photo. I hv only their story - the story of ordinary parents frm a lower social class, who loved their little girl. And who changed history.

11. But that change came from pain. So: Trigger Warning...
That mother's letter told of how her 3-yr-old had gone in for a tonsillectomy. She was allowed to stay only 1 hr on admissn & could not visit after t operation. She called repeatedly on t phone. They made her wait 3 days.

12. When she got there? The doctors were "busy" with her child. So she had to wait longer. When finally the doctors saw her, it was to tell her that her child had died. The cause was hemorrhaging - blood loss.

13. In her letter, the mum wanted to know somethng. She had been told that her child had not stopped crying during those 3 days. "She couldn't help thinking that the crying caused the bleeding." She wondered whether, if she had been allowed to come, her child would hv lived.

14. The historians who compiled t stories I hv been re-telling concluded that it was t horrendous situation faced by this one family that FINALLY led t medical profession to make substantial changes in visiting policies. Until a public tragedy, strident resistance had remained.

15. Why am I telling these stories? Because they are in the past. That makes it easier to see what was overlooked, how blaming & shaming & power functioned. (Yep, that mum was told by one doctor that she hadn't 'sufficiently prepared' her child for the operation.)

16. It is harder to see what is overlooked in yr own time. It can feel confusing and exhausting when blaming & shaming & scapegoating & power is operating in real time around you. I hope a historic lens can help in making sense of resistance to relational approaches now, in 2022.

17. Campaigns like @GiveTimeScot & @UpstartScot & @ThePromiseScot are tellng us what we're overlookng. @lokiscottishrap is findng success shining a light on privilege. Voices like @gerrydiamond71 & @Mr_PaintPots & @MineEYMind & @TIGERSEYAcad help us see how to make things better.

18. It turns out that resistance is just part of t deal. In the 1950s, we were beginning to learn much more about how human beings develop, about what children need to thrive emotionlly, about how trauma works. Not everyone wanted to know it then. Not everyone today does either.

19. If you want systems that are trauma-informed & relationally-grounded, know that you hv made a CHOICE about t world you want to live in. Know that you can work to bring that world abt. There are lots of us working for that world. It is messy & hard &, in my view, worth having.

20. And if you want more historic stories that can help you gain perspective, then you might start with the 2012 paper from which I've been quoting. I'm grateful to historians van der Horst & van der Veer for all the work they put into writing it. researchgate.net/publication/24…

21/end. It takes #FierceCuriosity to face the pain of children, to see how parents are shamed, to acknowledge the harm caused by professions & systems of which we are members. I salute all of you who find ways to embrace curiosity instead of denial. I hope my stories help.