This is why structural incentives, not just attitude, determine whether they exist.
Trauma-informed justice has become fashionable language in court systems. It appears in judicial trainings, prosecutor mission statements, and grant-funded pilot programs. But inside many real courtrooms, especially in rural Michigan counties, trauma-informed practice is rare, inconsistent, or purely cosmetic.
That’s because trauma-informed justice isn’t about tone alone. It requires restraint in the use of power, willingness to slow down, and decisions that reduce harm even when punishment is easier; something that some judges aren’t willing to do, even with their significant ability for discretion.
Instead, these choices are shaped not just by mindset, but entirely shaped by money and how much a historically poor Michigan county can take in.
What Trauma-Informed Justice Is (and Is Not)
Trauma-informed justice begins with a hard truth: the court system itself is often inherently traumatic.
For children, survivors, people with disabilities, people in poverty, and justice-impacted families, court is confusing, destabilizing, and threatening—even when no one is yelling.
Trauma-informed practice does not mean:
- Being permissive
- Ignoring accountability
- Excusing harm
- Replacing law with therapy
It does mean:
- Using discretion intentionally
- Understanding behavior in context
- Reducing unnecessary coercion
- Preventing compounding harm
What a Trauma-Informed Judge Looks Like
DO:
- Explain proceedings in plain, accessible language
- Maintain a calm, predictable courtroom environment
- Allow accommodations for disability, neurodivergence, and anxiety
- Use discretion transparently and explain rulings on the record
- Consider cumulative harm when imposing fines, conditions, or jail
- Acknowledge family impact, especially on children
DON’T:
- Shame, mock, or moralize from the bench
- Treat emotional responses as defiance
- Rush hearings involving vulnerable people for docket efficiency
- Use jail threats as a compliance shortcut
- Assume trauma equals manipulation
A trauma-informed judge understands that judicial demeanor is not neutral—it either stabilizes or destabilizes everyone present.
What a Trauma-Informed Prosecutor Looks Like
DO:
- Charge thoughtfully and proportionally
- Screen cases early for mental health, poverty, and family impact
- Use diversion as a front-end decision, not a bargaining chip
- Communicate clearly and respectfully with defense counsel
- Decline cases where harm outweighs public benefit
DON’T:
- Overcharge to force pleas
- Use pretrial detention as leverage
- Punish poverty-based noncompliance
- Treat trauma as a plea-extraction tactic
- Ignore collateral consequences like housing loss or child welfare involvement
A trauma-informed prosecutor understands that their charging decisions often determine the outcome long before a judge ever speaks.
Why Rural Courts Are Least Likely to Be Trauma-Informed
Trauma-informed practices are least common in rural counties, and the reasons go beyond individual personality or political ideology.
Yes, Culture Plays a Role
Small jurisdictions often operate with:
- Insular professional circles
- Minimal external oversight
- Long-entrenched norms
- Resistance to change framed as “tradition” or “small town values.”
When judges, prosecutors, and court staff all know one another socially, accountability is personal rather than professional. Judges should not be dropping into people’s offices to discuss cases, yet they do. New approaches are viewed as disruption. Trauma-informed reform is dismissed as “urban,” “soft,” or unnecessary.
But culture alone does not explain the resistance.
The Bigger Problem: Courts as Income Generators
In Michigan, trial courts are largely locally funded, not fully funded by the state. That means courts are expected to sustain operations through:
- Fines and fees
- Costs and assessments
- Probation and supervision payments
- Traffic and ordinance enforcement
In rural counties with small tax bases, this pressure is intensified. The result is a structural incentive problem:
- Mercy or leniency directly threatens revenue
- Diversion slows the courthouse cash flow
- Waived fines affect budgets
- Trauma-informed discretion becomes “financial risk”
When courts depend on punishment to survive, trauma-informed justice becomes structurally inconvenient.
This does not mean every rural judge or prosecutor is acting in bad faith. It does mean many are operating inside a system that quietly rewards extraction over care.
Trauma-informed justice cannot fully exist where:
- Court budgets rely on human throughput
- Efficiency is measured in dollars collected
- Discretion is constrained by revenue needs
Until court funding is addressed, training alone will not fix this.
Red Flags of Performative “Trauma-Informed” Courts
Be cautious when you see:
- Trauma language with no policy change
- Specialty courts that jail people for technical violations
- Judges trained in trauma but hostile on the record
- Prosecutors branding reform while opposing every defense motion
Without accountability, “trauma-informed” becomes branding—not reform.
How Communities Can Push Trauma-Informed Practices (Even in Rural Areas)
Real change comes from pressure, documentation, and structure.
1. Demand Written Standards
Ask courts and prosecutors:
- What behaviors define trauma-informed practice here?
- How is it enforced?
- Who is accountable?
2. Track and Document Courtroom Behavior
Court watchers, family advocates, and journalists matter—especially where oversight is thin.
3. Push Funding Reform
Advocate for:
- Increased state court funding
- Reduced reliance on fines and fees
- Budget transparency
Justice should not be self-funded through the people it harms.
4. Use Judicial Evaluations and Reappointments
Public comment, performance reviews, and reappointment processes are entirely fair-game leverage points and should be rightfully leveraged against lazy prosecutors. Use them. Does the prosecutor only work to serve themselves? Kick them out.
5. Amplify Defense and Family Voices
Public defenders and impacted families see the harm first. Their testimony matters and they need to do a much better job of speaking up in rural counties, rather than just collecting a paycheck like they do in Barry County, Michigan.
Trauma-Informed Justice Is Not Soft
It Is Disciplined Power.Trauma-informed judges and prosecutors do not abandon authority. They use it carefully, consciously, and with full awareness of impact.
Communities, urban and rural alike, have every right to demand that level of competence, and it’s time we start doing it before its too late.
SOURCES
- SAMHSA – Trauma-Informed Care Principles
- National Judicial College – Trauma-Informed Courts
- National Center for State Courts – Court Funding and Fines & Fees
- Vera Institute of Justice – The Cost of Justice Fees
