Rebuilding From the Ground Up: What Trauma-Informed Athlete Development Actually Requires

There's a particular kind of institutional failure that happens when systems designed to develop excellence instead produce trauma. Elite sport environments—especially high-cost, high-pressure ones—have accumulated decades of evidence showing they can damage the people they claim to serve. Abuse scandals surface periodically, mental health crises among elite athletes make headlines, and we collectively express shock before returning to business as usual. What we've been slower to acknowledge is that these aren't aberrations or failures of individual bad actors. They're predictable outcomes of how elite athletic systems are structured, and addressing them requires more than policy statements or awareness campaigns. It requires fundamental redesign.

The research on trauma-informed models for athlete development makes clear that meaningful change isn't about adding mental health resources to existing frameworks or training coaches to be slightly less harmful (Walton et al., 2023; Purcell et al., 2022; Pilkington et al., 2024; Hertzler-McCain et al., 2023). It's about rebuilding from foundational principles that center athlete wellbeing, that recognize trauma as response to systemic conditions rather than individual pathology, and that prioritize psychological safety alongside—or even above—performance outcomes. This represents a paradigm shift that many elite sport organizations claim to want but few have actually implemented.

Psychological safety emerges as the foundational requirement, the bedrock without which other interventions become performative rather than protective. Psychological safety means athletes can express vulnerability, seek help, and show their authentic selves without fear of stigma, punishment, or negative consequences for their careers (Walton et al., 2023; Purcell et al., 2022; Pilkington et al., 2024). This sounds simple until you consider how thoroughly elite sport culture has been organized around the opposite principle—that vulnerability is weakness, that seeking help suggests insufficient mental toughness, that authentic self-expression risks revealing the psychological complexity that might make coaches question your commitment or capability.

Creating psychological safety requires more than declaring it important. It demands policies that protect athletes who disclose struggles, leadership that models vulnerability rather than just demanding it from athletes, and cultural norms that genuinely normalize mental health challenges rather than treating them as aberrant (Walton et al., 2023; Purcell et al., 2022; Pilkington et al., 2024). This means coaches acknowledging their own difficulties, organizational leaders discussing mental health without euphemism or minimization, and visible consequences for anyone who uses athlete vulnerability against them. Without these structural supports, athletes rationally calculate that vulnerability is dangerous and continue suffering in silence.

Early identification and intervention for trauma and mental health symptoms becomes possible only within psychologically safe environments. Regular screening, open communication, and accessible referral pathways to trauma-informed professionals can prevent escalation and support recovery—but only if athletes trust these systems won't punish them for disclosing (Aron et al., 2019; Purcell et al., 2019; Purcell et al., 2022). The screening itself can become retraumatizing if conducted without sensitivity or if results get used to justify deselection. The communication feels dangerous when athletes have watched peers lose opportunities after admitting struggles. The referral pathways remain unused when accessing them means outing yourself to coaches and administrators who might interpret your mental health needs as liability.

This highlights a fundamental tension in elite sport's relationship to mental health: organizations want to identify problems early while athletes have learned that revealing problems often carries professional consequences. Resolving this requires demonstrable commitment to protecting athletes who seek help, which means sometimes accepting short-term performance costs in service of long-term wellbeing. Most elite systems aren't willing to make that trade-off, which is why their mental health initiatives often fail despite stated good intentions.

Coaching redesign represents another essential element, though one that challenges entrenched practices and power dynamics. Trauma-informed coaching emphasizes empathy, consistency, and relationship-building rather than the authoritarian, emotionally volatile approaches that have historically dominated elite sport (Hertzler-McCain et al., 2023; McMahon et al., 2022; Dohsten et al., 2018). Coaches need training to recognize trauma responses—the dissociation, hypervigilance, emotional dysregulation that might look like poor focus or attitude problems but actually signal psychological distress requiring different intervention than traditional discipline.

Avoiding re-traumatization means coaches understanding how certain practices—public shaming, unpredictable punishment, withdrawal of care as behavior management—replicate dynamics of abusive relationships and can trigger trauma responses in athletes with relevant histories. It means reframing mistakes positively as learning opportunities rather than as evidence of inadequacy requiring harsh correction. It means coaches seeing themselves as trusted adults who connect athletes to resources when problems exceed the coach's expertise, rather than as sole authority who must solve everything or whose authority is threatened by athlete struggles (Hertzler-McCain et al., 2023; McMahon et al., 2022; Dohsten et al., 2018).

This represents profound shift from how many elite coaches understand their role. The authoritarian model—where coach has unquestioned authority, where emotional volatility is interpreted as passion rather than abuse, where "tough love" justifies treatment that would be recognized as harmful in any other context—remains culturally dominant in many elite sport environments. Trauma-informed coaching challenges these traditions directly, which generates resistance from coaches who feel their methods are being wrongly criticized and from organizations invested in preserving practices that have historically produced competitive success even at athletes' psychological expense.

Mentorship and onboarding programs provide another intervention point, particularly for athletes transitioning into elite sport environments. These programs should prepare athletes for emotional and practical challenges of elite sport, encourage exploration of identity beyond performance, and foster resilience through self-compassion, adaptive coping, and mindfulness (Pilkington et al., 2024; Purcell et al., 2022). The research emphasizes preparation rather than just reaction—giving athletes frameworks for understanding and managing difficulties before crises emerge, normalizing struggle as part of elite sport rather than as personal failure.

What's notable about effective mentorship programs is their focus on identity diversification. They actively work against the identity foreclosure that elite sport typically promotes, encouraging athletes to maintain interests, relationships, and sense of self beyond athletic achievement (Pilkington et al., 2024). This directly contradicts the traditional message that successful athletes prioritize sport above everything else, that divided attention signals insufficient commitment. Trauma-informed approaches recognize that narrow identity increases psychological vulnerability and that athletes with multidimensional selves are better equipped to handle the inevitable difficulties of elite sport.

Holistic, athlete-centered care systems represent the most comprehensive intervention, viewing athletes as whole people requiring integrated support for mental, physical, social, and vocational development (Pilkington et al., 2024; Purcell et al., 2019; Walton et al., 2024; Purcell et al., 2022). This ecological framework means multi-disciplinary care teams where psychologists, physicians, coaches, and other support staff coordinate rather than operating in silos. It means peer support systems that leverage athletes' natural tendency to trust and confide in teammates. It means education for all stakeholders—not just athletes but coaches, administrators, support staff—about trauma, mental health, and their role in creating healthy or harmful environments.

The community of care concept extends this further, involving survivors of abuse and trauma in education and policy design to ensure practices are genuinely safe and effective rather than replicating harmful dynamics under new language (McMahon et al., 2022). This survivor involvement matters because people with lived experience often recognize risks and gaps that others miss. They understand how well-intentioned policies can be weaponized, how systems claiming to prioritize safety can actually create new vulnerabilities. Their input is essential for developing interventions that work rather than just sound good in strategic plans.

What makes implementing trauma-informed models difficult isn't primarily technical—we know what these systems should look like, understand the mechanisms, can point to examples where elements have been successfully implemented. The difficulty is primarily institutional resistance to changes that threaten existing power structures, challenge entrenched coaching practices, and require prioritizing athlete wellbeing over short-term competitive outcomes. Trauma-informed development means coaches having less unilateral authority. It means athletes having more voice in how training operates. It means organizations accepting that protecting athlete mental health might sometimes cost medals or wins.

These trade-offs feel unacceptable to organizations and individuals whose entire identity and success is defined by competitive achievement. The coach who's won championships using authoritarian methods doesn't want to hear those methods caused trauma. The organization that's produced Olympic medalists through systems we'd now recognize as harmful resists acknowledging that success came at unconscionable psychological cost. The broader sport culture that celebrates coaches who "demand excellence" regardless of methods pushes back against trauma-informed approaches as soft or insufficiently competitive.

But the research makes clear that trauma isn't a necessary cost of excellence—it's a consequence of how we've chosen to pursue excellence, and those choices can change (Walton et al., 2023; Purcell et al., 2022; Pilkington et al., 2024; Hertzler-McCain et al., 2023). Psychologically safe environments don't prevent high performance; they enable sustainable high performance by supporting athlete wellbeing rather than extracting it. Trauma-informed coaching doesn't eliminate accountability; it provides accountability within relationships of care rather than fear. Holistic support systems don't coddle athletes; they recognize that humans facing extraordinary demands need extraordinary support to thrive rather than just survive.

The evidence for trauma-informed approaches comes partly from elite sport research but also from broader trauma-informed care movements in education, healthcare, and youth services. These fields have learned that recognizing trauma, creating psychological safety, and building relationships of trust produces better outcomes than systems organized around authority and compliance. Elite sport is decades behind in applying these lessons, continuing to operate on models we'd recognize as harmful in other contexts but somehow excuse as necessary for competitive excellence.

Perhaps what's most troubling is how elite sport organizations increasingly claim commitment to athlete mental health while maintaining structures that reliably damage it. The statements acknowledge problems, the initiatives gesture toward solutions, but the fundamental redesign required for genuine trauma-informed development rarely happens. Athletes get access to sports psychologists while training in environments that cause the problems psychologists then try to treat. Coaches receive brief training on trauma-informed practices while organizational cultures continue rewarding exactly the behaviors those practices are meant to eliminate.

This gap between stated values and actual practice isn't usually cynical deception—it's organizational failure to understand that trauma-informed development requires systemic change, not supplementary programs. You can't bolt trauma-informed care onto fundamentally traumatizing systems and expect meaningful improvement. The redesign has to be comprehensive, affecting coaching practices, organizational policies, cultural norms, and power distributions throughout elite sport environments.

The research provides the blueprint: psychological safety as foundation, trauma-informed coaching as practice, holistic support as structure, early intervention as protection, community involvement as accountability (Walton et al., 2023; Purcell et al., 2022; Pilkington et al., 2024; Hertzler-McCain et al., 2023; McMahon et al., 2022; Aron et al., 2019; Purcell et al., 2019). Whether elite sport organizations will actually implement this blueprint or continue with superficial reforms that preserve harmful status quo remains an open question. The answer will determine whether the next generation of elite athletes develops in genuinely supportive environments or continues experiencing trauma we could have prevented but chose not to.

References

Aron, C. M., Harvey, S., Hainline, B., Hitchcock, M. E., & Reardon, C. L. (2019). Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and other trauma-related mental disorders in elite athletes: A narrative review. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 53(12), 779–784. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2019-100695

Dohsten, J., Barker-Ruchti, N., & Lindgren, E.-C. (2018). Caring as sustainable coaching in elite athletics: Benefits and challenges. Sports Coaching Review, 9(1), 48–70. https://doi.org/10.1080/21640629.2018.1558896

Hertzler-McCain, E. K., McQuillen, A., Setty, S., Lopez, S., & Tibbetts, E. (2023). Trauma prevalence and desire for trauma-informed coaching in collegiate sports: A mixed methods study. Social Sciences, 12(10), Article 550. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12100550

McMahon, J., McGannon, K. R., Zehntner, C., Werbicki, L., Stephenson, E., & Martin, K. (2022). Trauma-informed abuse education in sport: Engaging athlete abuse survivors as educators and facilitating a community of care. Sport, Education and Society, 28(9), 958–971. https://doi.org/10.1080/13573322.2022.2096586

Pilkington, V., Rice, S. M., Olive, L. S., Walton, C. C., & Purcell, R. (2024). Athlete mental health and wellbeing during the transition into elite sport: Strategies to prepare the system. Sports Medicine - Open, 10(1), Article 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40798-024-00690-z

Purcell, R., Gwyther, K., & Rice, S. M. (2019). Mental health in elite athletes: Increased awareness requires an early intervention framework to respond to athlete needs. Sports Medicine - Open, 5(1), Article 46. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40798-019-0220-1

Purcell, R., Pilkington, V., Carberry, S., Reid, D., Gwyther, K., Hall, K., Deacon, A., Manon, R., Walton, C. C., & Rice, S. M. (2022). An evidence-informed framework to promote mental wellbeing in elite sport. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 780359. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.780359

Walton, C. C., Purcell, R., Henderson, J. M., Kim, J., Kerr, G., Frost, J., Gwyther, K., Pilkington, V., Rice, S. M., & Tamminen, K. A. (2024). Mental health among elite youth athletes: A narrative overview to advance research and practice. Sports Health, 16(2), 166–176. https://doi.org/10.1177/19417381231219230

Walton, C. C., Purcell, R., Pilkington, V., Hall, K., Kenttä, G., Vella, S. A., & Rice, S. M. (2023). Psychological safety for mental health in elite sport: A theoretically informed model. Sports Medicine, 54(3), 557–564. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-023-01912-2