How trauma-informed pedagogy and direct intervention combine to avoid conflict

A former CSEE employee described the current situation as a "disaster". "We don't do much educational work at the centre anymore." The reaction from upper management when an educator criticises practices or offers a different point of view is usually "don't take any chances".

"The last order from above was to simply let the young people do their thing in order to avoid as much conflict as possible." Instead of real supervision, the employee describes a laissez-faire attitude, with other former staff agreeing they felt they were only employed to watch over the young residents instead of working with them.

The order to avoid confrontation was interpreted as being particularly counterproductive. "It meant all we were doing was effectively reinforcing the residents' behaviour." Although there were some less severe cases who responded well to pedagogical work, others were more serious and required a more solid framework. "In some cases, the cuddly approach just doesn't work. You have to be able to discuss with the adolescent to teach what is right and wrong."

Is trauma an excuse for everything?

In the past, the strict approach worked well despite difficulties, with enforced rules and consequences. Now, the ex-employee says: "Today, every teenager is a poor traumatised child who has to be protected and valued."

The centre has a manual specifying how to act in certain situations. It also calls for individual projects to be drawn up for each child. However, in practice, staff are said to never know how they should behave, particularly if a young offender experiences a crisis.

A former employee describes a frequently re-occurring example:

"The youngsters know there aren't any real consequences these days. They say things like, give me a cigarette or I'll become destructive. If you give in to their demands, they win, and they'll do it again next time. If you refuse, if you're consistent, it can trigger a huge row which could escalate. If you report the incident to management they'll just say, well you should have given them the cigarette. But our rule book states exactly what is permitted. Does this mean we have to do things against the rules?"

Another frequent occurrence involves young inmates breaking the rules, or running away from the centre, and the prescribed consequences, such as solitary confinement, or cancellation of weekends at home with family, do not take place. "Often discussions [following rule-breaking] take so long that the young person ends up going home for the weekend anyway. How are they meant to learn from their mistakes?", asks a former staff member.

"I get the impression that staff and management are happy when they have fewer residents on site, as it's less work."

Another former staff member doesn't agree with the above assessments, saying staff worked in accordance with the rules. They added that they didn't experience any issues with management. However, there was not enough time to adapt to the work. "Staff are thrown in at the deep end on their first day. Of course there are things which don't work properly, because we aren't given the right training." In addition, they added it was extremely problematic for a male member of staff to work alone in a position with a group of young girls.

Refugees posing as unaccompanied minors

In recent years, staff have noticed more refugees being placed at the facility. In some cases, the individuals have no identification papers and claim to be minors in order to avoid going to prison. "They're the worst," says one former employee. "Not because of where they come from, but because they are often young adults who have suffered a lot, coming from war zones. It shows in their scars."

These residents are open about the fact they have been to prison in other neighbouring countries, and often share their criminal exploits with other inmates. This poses a risk to staff.

"They often have a bad influence on the other residents, playing at being bosses, or recruiting them into more criminal activities," says a former staff member. There are also communication issues at play.

Languages: an advantage or an obstacle?

In 2022, a private security company was contracted to provide guards for the centre. One ex-employee says in the past it had always worked well with security guards, but that language had posed a difficulty. Some of the private staff spoke Arabic, which was not an issue in itself. However: "The refugees and other young inmates will speak Arabic with the security guards, which means the rest of us are excluded from the conversation. It's a problem because we don't know what they're discussing."

CSEE management refutes claims

The CSEE management disagrees with the language barrier claims and says it has not received negative feedback from staff. On the contrary, upper management believes multilingualism to be one of the CSEE sites' big advantages: "Yes, there are security guards who speak Arabic as well as French. But an Arabic-speaking psychologist also recently joined the team. And a large proportion of staff speak French, German, or both. That has its advantages."

Gilles Dhamen, adviser to the Ministry of Education, Children and Youth, agrees with the above assessment and says that numerous languages on site is a bonus, particularly in crisis situations.

Yannick Gomes, a pedagogue who works at one of the centres, says: "I speak Portuguese as well, for example. If a Portuguese resident is struggling, it's much easier for them to express themselves in their mother tongue, and they're more likely to respond to me if I reply in Portuguese. This also applies to our French, German, or Arabic-speaking staff."

Having staff who speak Arabic on site is extremely helpful, particularly with refugees at the centre, who often have minimal French or Portuguese knowledge, and therefore find it easiest to communicate in Arabic. The centre's management says it cannot understand where the fear that security personnel might be having nefarious discussions with inmates stems from. "The most important thing is that staff can have discussions following a crisis, or a conversation with a resident. It doesn't matter if if has to be translated from Luxembourgish to French, or Arabic to Luxembourgish."

There have certainly been cases, however, of young adults pretending to be minors to escape prison. Such incidents have occurred in waves over the past four or five years, according to management. "These are often young people who have arrived alone in Luxembourg and claim to be minors so they can avoid jail. A medical examination can only confirm they are at least 17 years old, but cannot confirm their exact age. That's how they are housed with us. They often have a different point of view, they have scars, or other illnesses for which they receive prescribed medication. Then they end up flogging the medication here," explains CSEE Deputy Director Joëlle Ludewig.

These young people often have a different approach to violence, in part due to their traumatic experiences in fleeing their homes and crossing the Mediterranean alone.

"So far we haven't had any cases which act like they are minors," Ludewig says. "But we look after them nonetheless. However, they can sometimes have a poor effect on other residents, with some who feel uncomfortable around them, or tell us they are afraid."

As for the CSEE's pedagogical approach, management understands that it can appear lax to outsiders. "Many of our young residents experienced trauma in their early years, whether parental addiction or neglect, to emotional, physical or sexual abuse. The young people arriving here usually don't know how to regulate their emotions, they don't have a sense of security and often don't have any guides for their behaviour outside of their friend circle. When they come to us, we have to try and build a bond."

The sanctions and hard-nosed approach from the past often makes the situation worse - a fact which is backed up by multiple scientific studies.

"We noticed a new form of authority is required," Ludewig explains. "The old methods don't work these days. We need a 'benevolent' authority to help residents feel safe, and let them know we are working with and for them. We are not condoning their behaviour - just punishment, as it's not the right path."

For example, if a resident runs away more than once, they can spend up to 72 hours in solitary confinement upon their return. This can take place in a cell or in their room. The isolation is designed to make the resident reflect - however, numerous studies show that isolation is a counterproductive measure, both for minors and adults.

It is important to work on experience with the young person, and find out what is driving them to run away. "Human beings are programmed to fight or flee if they feel betrayed. Some run away, others become aggressive." This behaviour is often observed among the young residents. The centre believes that creating bonds and a sense of security are important to help residents develop positively. "It doesn't happen overnight - it takes time and it is a lot of work for staff," Gomes says.

Of course, there is never a guarantee that the work will not be undone once the teenager leaves the CSEE, even if they have experienced a change for the better during their time as an inmate. "There are always cases where we think the child will succeed and they're able to return home. But then several weeks later, it turns out it wasn't successful after all and they end up returning to us, and we have to start all over again. We often have good evaluations for the residents, but it's never 100% guaranteed."

Further reading:

- Drugs, sex and lack of oversight: Former employees break silence on life inside youth correctional facilities