In psychological practice, a child’s silence in the context of traumatic experiences is one of the most common sources of confusion and misinterpretation. Although, intuitively, adults may assume that if something serious had happened, the child would speak out, clinical reality shows exactly the opposite: the more overwhelming and relationally charged the experience, the greater the likelihood of silence.

Silence is a form of communication in itself. It reflects a complex interplay between emotional, cognitive, relational and neurobiological factors. Understanding this complexity is essential to avoid intrusive or ineffective interventions and to create contexts in which the child can, at their own pace, access and express their lived experience.

Silence as an adaptive mechanism

From a psychological perspective, silence can be understood as an adaptive mechanism for regulating distress. When faced with an experience that exceeds a child’s capacity to cope, the psyche seeks ways to reduce the emotional impact.

Talking about the experience involves:

• reactivating the associated emotions;
• confronting the meaning of the event;
• accepting possible consequences.

For the child, all of this may be perceived as more dangerous than silence. Thus, silence represents an active strategy to avoid being overwhelmed.

Internal conflict – when safety and danger coexist

One of the most difficult contexts for disclosure is one in which the person causing the suffering is simultaneously an attachment figure. In this situation, the child experiences what the specialist literature argues lies at the root of the formation of disorganised attachment: the same person is both a source of security and a source of danger.

This dual reality gives rise to a profound conflict:

• closeness is necessary, but dangerous;
• distancing is protective, but threatens the attachment system.

In this context, silence allows the child to maintain the relationship without risking its loss. Speaking out could trigger consequences that the child cannot anticipate or control.

The dynamics of loyalty and the protection of the abuser

Children not only depend on adults, but also build their identity and emotional security through their relationship with them. In situations of abuse, the child may develop a form of paradoxical loyalty, in which they protect the person who is hurting them.

This loyalty may be fuelled by:

• moments of affection alternating with abuse;
• direct requests such as ‘don’t tell anyone’;
• fear that the adult will face serious consequences.

The child may come to believe that speaking out would do more harm than good. In this sense, silence becomes a form of prematurely assumed responsibility.

Toxic shame and its effect on the self

Shame associated with abuse is not merely an emotion; it can become part of the child’s identity. Unlike guilt (‘I have done something wrong’), shame involves an overall judgement of the self (‘I am bad’).

This form of shame:

• inhibits expression;
• reduces the initiative to seek help;
• leads to social withdrawal.

The child may avoid speaking not only out of fear, but also out of the conviction that they do not deserve to be listened to or protected.

Anticipatory fear and catastrophising

Children have a limited capacity to realistically assess consequences, but a high capacity to imagine them in a catastrophic way.

Disclosure may be associated with scenarios such as:

• the break-up of the family;
• loss of their home;
• extreme reactions from adults.

In the absence of previous experiences of protection, the child prefers the control offered by silence to the uncertainty of change.

The neurobiological dimension

Research in the neuroscience of trauma, including that of Bessel van der Kolk, shows that traumatic experiences can affect the functioning of the brain areas involved in language and narrativisation.

In situations of intense arousal:

• access to language may be reduced;
• experiences are stored in a fragmented manner;
• the child may feel emotions without being able to verbalise them.

This phenomenon explains why a child may have intense emotional reactions without being able to provide a coherent account.

Dissociation and the fragmentation of experience

Dissociation is a mechanism by which the mind separates certain aspects of experience in order to reduce suffering.

In the case of children:

• memories may be incomplete;
• sequences may be confused;
• access to the experience may fluctuate.

This makes recounting the experience difficult or inconsistent, which can lead to misinterpretations on the part of adults.

The role of the environment in learning to remain silent

Silence is a reaction that is also shaped by the environment in which children live. They quickly learn whether or not it is safe to speak.

Factors that reinforce silence:

• dismissal: ‘it’s no big deal’;
• distrust/doubt;
• intense reactions from adults.

In these circumstances, the child internalises the idea that speaking out is risky.

Silence as a form of control

In situations where the child feels powerless, silence can become one of the few things they can control.

The choice not to speak can offer:

• a sense of autonomy;
• protection against intrusion;
• a sense of distance from the experience.

In this way, silence also becomes a means of regaining personal control.

Principles for creating the conditions that enable a child to speak

Given the complexity of this mechanism, intervention requires a careful approach, centred on the relationship and a sense of safety.

1. Safety before information

A child will only speak when they feel safe. What this entails:

• consistency in the adult’s behaviour;
• predictability;
• the absence of pressure.

2. The relationship as a foundation

The relationship is the environment in which disclosure occurs. Recommendations:

• active listening;
• empathy;
• patience.

3. Validation without intrusion

Validation means acknowledging the child’s emotional experience, as they present it.

4. Respect for the child’s pace

Haste and pressure can hinder the process of self-disclosure. The following are important:

• accepting silence;
• respecting pauses;
• returning to the conversation gradually.

5. Adapting language to the child’s developmental level

The child needs language that is accessible and non-intrusive.

6. Support for the adult

The adult must have good emotional self-regulation skills in order to support the child.

7. Specialised intervention

In many situations, psychological support is essential to facilitate emotional processing and the sharing of experiences.

A child’s silence is a complex protective mechanism. It reflects an attempt to adapt to a difficult reality, in which speaking is not yet perceived as safe. Rather than forcing words, it is essential to create the context in which they can emerge. In this sense, the relevant question would not be: ‘What does this child need in order to be able to speak?’.

Bibliography:

Judith L. Herman (1992). Trauma and Recovery. Basic Books.

Bessel van der Kolk (2014). The Body Keeps the Score: Brain, Mind, and Body in the Healing of Trauma. Viking.

Article by Diana Munteanu, clinical psychologist & psychotherapist, Barnahus Centre