Yet again I write this with some hesitation aware that I risk offending colleagues in the field; my apologies if I do since that is not my intention. My only concern is with the best interests of the people with whom, and for whom we work, our clients. As with neurodivergence trauma is now in the process of being turned into a specialism; a field of practice so distinct and so different is being constructed that only those with specialist training should contemplate offering a service, only practitioners who have studied and understood the impact of trauma on the brain and its working, should consider themselves appropriately qualified, and only ‘trauma-focused’ models should be utilised. Over the course of more than 50 years working with people I can recall at least two previous occasions when areas of work were defined as so particular that specific training was required in order to approach them. The first was back in the 1980’s, when sexual abuse was ‘discovered’ and the second shortly afterwards when the prevalence of racism in society was realised and the extent to which psychological and mental health services were understood to be institutionally racist, such that working with ethnic minority clients was deemed to require very particular training. On both occasions an area of professional endeavour was delineated, professionals practicing in the field were ‘found’ to be incompetent, and a large number of consultants and trainers emerged, certification from whom was necessitated. Given that the same process seems to be taking place with regard to trauma, it is hardly surprising that practitioners coming across the Solution Focused approach have been led to doubt the efficacy of SFBT when working with trauma, and in particular with ‘complex trauma’. But what if SFBT worked with this population? Would it not be wrong and unfair to deprive clients of an easily accessible approach that could well make a difference to them?
So how does SFBT think about its efficacy in the field of trauma? Perhaps we can start from this position. SFBT practitioners will work with anyone. No referral information is required. The client is not required to ‘disclose’ the problem that is bothering them. No assessment is carried out. The worker starts work from the very moment of referral and the approach works well. But how does this relate to trauma? Well a very significant percentage of the population is thought to have experienced trauma; Adam Froerer (2026) cites Galea et al. (2005) in arguing that ‘two thirds of the general population will endure at least one traumatic experience at some point in their lives, and one in five will encounter a traumatic experience in any given year’ (p18). If this is indeed the case then it is inconceivable that Solution Focused practitioners are not working, successfully, with people who either have experienced or who are at the point of referral experiencing trauma.
If we move beyond this very general argument, after all it is possible that no-one that SF practitioners work with are experiencing trauma, or that, and this is statistically unlikely, all of the traumatised clients fall within the group of people who do not change, then Solution Focused practitioners have expensive experience of working with people who during the course of conversation report experiences of violence, or abuse, of bullying all of which are often associated with trauma. And since SF practitioners both experience and report success with people who refer to such experiences, and since these experiences tend to be associated with trauma, then we can argue that SF works with trauma. Of course it could again be argued that the client population with whom SF works may have had these experiences and yet are not experiencing and have not experienced trauma. This is again possible and yet, given the argument for the preponderance of trauma in the population made by ‘trauma experts’ this does seem unlikely.
Finally Adam Froerer in his brief and interesting chapter ‘The impact of Solution focused conversations on the structure of the brain (and why we should all be using this approach to treat trauma)’ (2026) sets out, using the arguments put forward by the trauma field regarding the impact of trauma on the brain, his argument that SFBT, whilst not a ‘trauma-focused approach’, specifically makes a difference in those areas of the brain affected by trauma, ‘the hippocampus, the amygdala, and the medial prefrontal cortex’ ( p20). In addition citing Keyan et al. (2024) Adam Froerer lists the elements required for therapy to be effective in this area in order to reverse the physiological impacts of trauma. These are said to be as follows: ‘Effective therapy should 1) focus on improving emotion; 2) remove rumination of negative thought patterns; 3) decrease dysphoria; 4) improve executive functioning; 5) improve pro social interactions; 6) address shame and guilt; and 7) let people choose their own form of treatment’ p20). Adam argues that ‘SFBT is uniquely qualified and meets each of these recommendations’ (2026, p20).
So in conclusion it seems likely that SFBT is already proving its worth with people who have experienced and who may well still be experiencing trauma and Adam Froerer lightly argues the case within the trauma field’s own terms.
Froerer, Adam , von Cziffra-Bergs, Jacqui , Kim, Johnny and Connie, Elliott. (2018). Solution-Focused Brief Therapy with Clients Managing Trauma. New York: Oxford University Press.
Froerer, Adam., (2026) The impact of Solution Focused conversations on the structure of the brain and why we should all be using this approach to treat trauma). In Perry, Nick (ed.) (2026) Solution Focused Practice and Mental Health Crisis: Inclusive Support towards Safety and Hope. London: Routledge.
Galea, G., Nandi, A., & Vlahov, D. (2025). The epidemiology of post-traumatic stress disorder after disasters. Epidemiological Reviews, 27, 78 – 91.
Keynan, D., Garland, N., Choi-Christou, J., Tran, J., O’Donnell, M., & Bryant, R. A. (2024). A systematic review and meta-analysis of predictors of response to trauma-focused psychotherapy for posttraumatic stress disorder. Psychological Bulletin, 150(7) 767 – 797.
Perry, Nick (ed.) (2026) Solution Focused Practice and Mental Health Crisis: Inclusive Support towards Safety and Hope. London: Routledge.
Evan George
London
28 June 2026
