1311: "Not Broken, But Injured"

Interesting Things with JC #1311: "Not Broken, But Injured" – A girl gets detention. What doesn’t get recorded? The trauma behind her behavior. A landmark study rewired how we ask: not what's wrong...but what happened?

Episode Anchor

Episode Title: Not Broken, But Injured
Episode Number: #1311
Host: JC
Audience: Grades 9–12, college intro, homeschool, lifelong learners
Subject Area: Psychology, Health Sciences, Sociology, Education Policy

Lesson Overview

By the end of this lesson, students will be able to:

• Define trauma-informed care and the goals of the ACE Study.

• Compare traditional disciplinary models with trauma-informed frameworks in education and justice systems.

• Analyze how early life trauma manifests in health outcomes and brain development.

• Explain the historical shift from punishment to care in institutional systems based on data and neuroscience.

Key Vocabulary

• Trauma (ˈtrô-mə) — A deeply distressing or disturbing experience. The episode highlights childhood trauma such as neglect, abuse, or loss of a parent.

• ACE Score (ās skôr) — A number indicating how many adverse childhood experiences a person has had. Higher scores correlate with worse health and behavioral outcomes.

• Trauma-Informed Care (ˈträ-mə in-ˈfȯrmd ke(ə)r) — A systems-based framework that seeks to understand behaviors as symptoms of injury, not deviance.

• Recidivism (ri-ˈsi-də-ˌvi-zəm) — The rate at which previously incarcerated individuals reoffend. Shown to decrease under trauma-informed corrections practices.

• Amygdala (ə-ˈmig-də-lə) — A key part of the brain affected by trauma; processes fear and emotional memory.

Narrative Core

• Open – A teenage girl is punished for being defiant and disruptive at school, but her unseen struggle—grieving her mother's death, lacking housing, and surviving on vending machine snacks—frames a deeper story of trauma misunderstood as misbehavior.

• Info – Institutions have historically treated behavioral issues with discipline and control, asking “What’s wrong with you?” instead of considering underlying causes. The 1995 ACE Study sought to uncover how childhood adversity correlates with long-term health outcomes.

• Details – The ACE Study, conducted by Dr. Vincent Felitti and Dr. Robert Anda, surveyed over 17,000 adults on ten categories of childhood trauma. The results were striking: trauma increased risks for heart disease, depression, and suicide exponentially. These were not just emotional wounds—they affected brain development and physical health.

• Reflection – SAMHSA formally defined trauma-informed care in 2014, with six guiding principles focused on recognizing, responding to, and avoiding re-traumatization. When adopted in schools, hospitals, and justice systems, outcomes improved—suspensions dropped, recidivism declined, and staff gained tools to support healing over punishment.

• Closing – Not all institutions make the shift, but where trauma-informed care is embraced, lives are changed. The question is no longer “What’s wrong with you?” but “What happened to you?”—because most people aren’t broken. They’re injured. And healing begins when someone finally asks the right question.

Transcript

A teenage girl gets written up at school—“disruptive,” “defiant,” “disrespectful.” The forms are filled, the behavior noted. What’s not recorded? Her mother’s sudden death, the nights she’s spent couch-hopping, the fact she’s surviving on vending machine snacks.

For most of the last century, institutions responded to people like her with discipline. They asked, What’s wrong with you? That question was baked into detention slips, prison intake, and psychiatric charts.

In 1995, Dr. Vincent Felitti at Kaiser Permanente and Dr. Robert Anda at the CDC launched a study that would quietly rewire that mindset. Known as the ACE Study, it surveyed 17,421 adults. It asked about ten types of childhood trauma—abuse, neglect, divorce, addiction in the home.

What they found changed everything. The more trauma a person experienced before age 18, the more likely they were to suffer chronic disease. An ACE score of 4 or more increased the risk of heart disease by 220%, depression by 460%, and suicide attempts by 1,220%.

Trauma wasn’t just psychological. It showed up in blood pressure, immune function, and early death. The data was undeniable.

In 2014, the U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration—SAMHSA—formally defined trauma-informed care. It wasn't a treatment—it was a framework. A way of recognizing that behaviors often mask injuries. It outlined six principles: safety, trustworthiness, peer support, collaboration, empowerment, and cultural sensitivity.

Instead of asking, What’s wrong with you?, the model urges systems to ask, What happened to you?

That change took root. In Massachusetts, juvenile justice programs rewrote disciplinary procedures. In Oregon, early childhood centers trained staff in trauma recognition. In New York City, several hospitals added ACE screenings to intake protocols.

Results followed. In one Wisconsin school district, suspensions fell by 40% (2013–2016) after adopting trauma-informed practices. In juvenile corrections, recidivism dropped where trauma frameworks were fully implemented.

Neuroscience backed the shift. Trauma alters the amygdala, hippocampus, and prefrontal cortex—areas responsible for fear, memory, and reasoning. These aren’t attitude problems. They’re brain responses.

Not every system makes the shift. But where it’s applied, outcomes improve. And people—especially kids—are treated as humans first.

Because most aren’t broken. They’re injured. And healing starts when someone finally asks the right question.

These are interesting things, with JC.

Student Worksheet

1. What key shift in thinking did the ACE Study encourage in public institutions?

2. Name at least three types of trauma included in the ACE Study.

3. What were the long-term health effects associated with a high ACE score?

4. How did trauma-informed practices impact school suspensions and recidivism?

5. What brain regions are altered by trauma, according to the episode?

Teacher Guide

Estimated Time
1–2 class periods (45–60 minutes each)

Pre-Teaching Vocabulary Strategy

• Provide vocabulary flashcards with images and definitions

• Facilitate a mini-lecture on ACEs using anonymous case profiles

Anticipated Misconceptions

• Students may believe trauma is only caused by violence

• Some may assume trauma-informed care excuses bad behavior rather than addresses root causes

Discussion Prompts

• How might school discipline change if educators used trauma-informed care?

• Can the brain “heal” from trauma? What does current neuroscience suggest?

• How can asking different questions lead to different solutions in institutions?

Differentiation Strategies

• ESL: Use simplified text and visual scaffolding

• IEP: Pre-fill worksheet examples and allow oral responses

• Gifted: Compare trauma-informed care to other international models of restorative justice

Extension Activities

• Design a school policy that includes trauma-informed principles

• Write a first-person narrative of a person navigating a system with or without trauma-informed care

Cross-Curricular Connections

• Biology: Study of stress-related hormones and brain anatomy

• Sociology: Systems of inequality and social support structures

• Government: Public health policy and education reform

• Health Science: Preventive care and mental health services

Quiz

Q1. What question defines trauma-informed care?
A. What’s your diagnosis?
B. Why are you angry?
C. What happened to you?
D. Are you okay?
Answer: C

Q2. What year did SAMHSA formally define trauma-informed care?
A. 1995
B. 2004
C. 2014
D. 2020
Answer: C

Q3. What type of study was the ACE Study?
A. A psychological experiment
B. A long-term case study
C. A large-scale survey
D. A clinical drug trial
Answer: C

Q4. What percentage did suspensions drop in one Wisconsin district after trauma-informed adoption?
A. 20%
B. 30%
C. 40%
D. 50%
Answer: C

Q5. Which part of the brain is associated with emotional memory and altered by trauma?
A. Occipital lobe
B. Amygdala
C. Hypothalamus
D. Cerebellum
Answer: B

Assessment

1. Explain how the ACE Study changed the way institutions understand and respond to childhood behavior.

2. Describe the long-term effects of childhood trauma, using evidence from the episode to support your answer.

3–2–1 Rubric

• 3 = Accurate, complete, thoughtful

• 2 = Partial or missing detail

• 1 = Inaccurate or vague

Standards Alignment

• Common Core (CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RI.11-12.1)
  Cite strong textual evidence – Students must cite data from the ACE Study and policy examples to support their analysis.

• NGSS HS-LS1-2
  Develop and use models of systems – Explores the impact of trauma on biological systems like the nervous and immune systems.

• C3.D2.Civ.2.9-12
  Analyze roles of institutions – Evaluate how schools and justice systems shift practices based on new health knowledge.

• ISTE 1.7.a
  Students use digital tools to explore real-world issues – Research ACE-based reforms and their outcomes in various systems.

• AQA A-Level Psychology 3.2.2 – Biopsychology
  Explains neurological changes from trauma in areas like the amygdala and hippocampus.

• IB DP Psychology – Biological Level of Analysis
  Applies the neurobiological basis of behavior in trauma research.

• Cambridge IGCSE Sociology (0495) – Section B: Social Inequality
  Explores how trauma and institutional responses affect different populations unequally.

Show Notes

In this powerful episode of Interesting Things with JC, the story of one teenage girl becomes a lens through which an entire shift in institutional thinking is explored. Punished for being disruptive, her deeper truth—grief, instability, and hunger—is invisible to a system trained to punish rather than understand. JC explores the landmark 1995 ACE Study, which linked early trauma to long-term health effects such as heart disease and suicide, and paved the way for a systemic overhaul in how schools, hospitals, and juvenile justice programs respond to youth.

The concept of trauma-informed care—formally defined by SAMHSA in 2014—emerges not as a treatment, but as a cultural and structural shift in how organizations view human behavior. Grounded in neuroscience and backed by measurable outcomes, trauma-informed approaches reduce suspensions and recidivism by asking a new question: not “What’s wrong with you?” but “What happened to you?” This episode is essential listening for anyone interested in psychology, public health, education, or justice—and especially for those who believe systems should serve people, not label them.

References

• Felitti, V. J., Anda, R. F., et al. (1998). Relationship of Childhood Abuse and Household Dysfunction to Many of the Leading Causes of Death in Adults. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 14(4), 245–258.

• SAMHSA. (2014). SAMHSA’s Concept of Trauma and Guidance for a Trauma-Informed Approach. HHS Publication No. (SMA) 14-4884.

• Harvard Center on the Developing Child. (2010). The Science of Early Childhood Development.

• Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction. (2016). Trauma-Sensitive Schools Initiative Summary Report.

• National Child Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN). Effects of Complex Trauma. Retrieved from www.nctsn.org