The Impact of Intergenerational Trauma on the Mental Health of Black Men
On 16 July, attendees gathered for “The Impact of Intergenerational Trauma on the Mental Health of Black Men,” presented by Natesha Yanguba and Melissa Adefisan as part of the Black Voice of Social Work discussion group with the Developing Together Social Work Teaching Partnership.
The presentation examined how historical British colonial machinery, transatlantic slavery, and the legacy of the Windrush scandal continue to shape mental health outcomes and access to care today. By framing behaviors through the lens of transgenerational trauma and epigenetics, the facilitators explored how “survival armour” such as hyper-independence and help-seeking avoidance develops as a rational response to historical and systemic harm.
The session highlighted stark UK disparities, including how Black men are four times more likely to be detained under the Mental Health Act, up to eight times more likely to be placed on Community Treatment Orders, and disproportionately affected by restraint in crisis care.
Attendees went into breakout rooms to consider a case study on David:
Clinical dilemma: David, a 34 year old black man of Jamaican descent, presented with heart palpitations and server panic. He completely rejects NHS talking therapies, stating: “in this country, if you complain, they don’t help you – they detain you.”
Debrief focus: Link his sever workplace stress, his grandmother’s Windrush survival strategies, and his deep fear of detaining to ancestral and systemic safety boundaries.
Points were given for breakout group discussions:
- How does David’s statement act as protective survival armor rather than “uncooperative” or “non-engaging” behavior?
- How might generational trauma from the Windrush scandal affect David’s trust in British institutions today?
- Imagine David comes in contact with the system: how might he be misdiagnosed or labeled when he rejects therapy? How might an anti-racist, trauma-informed practitioner respond to David?
The themes from these breakout rooms were as follows:
- Individualization, story, and curiosity – Attendees emphasized the need to look beyond static assumptions and maintain professional curiosity. Understanding David as an individual means taking time to explore his personal story, validating how his past experiences shape his present mistrust, and recognizing that effective practice cannot rely on a generic approach.
- Rational suspicion vs. pathologising behavior – Discussions highlighted that David’s statement about detention is an experiential reality supported by UK detention statistics. Rather than mislabeling his rejection of therapy as “non-compliance,” paranoia, or aggression, practitioners must recognize his caution as a rational defense mechanism rooted in real systemic risks.
- Institutional distrust and the Windrush legacy – Attendees reflected on how generational memories of Windrush, state betrayal, and harsh immigration enforcement create lingering, rational distrust toward British institutions. Service providers who lack cultural knowledge can inadvertently deepen this distrust, making service users feel unsafe to speak freely.
- Representation and culturally safe spaces – The groups discussed the impact of representation, noting that seeing Black practitioners or culturally knowledgeable professionals can help build safety. Rejection of standard interventions often stems from a fear that traditional therapy models will judge or penalise cultural norms.
- Anti-racist practice and co-produced safety – The discussion reinforced that anti-racism requires moving beyond surface-level “cultural competence”. Anti-racist practitioners must actively validate an individual’s historical mistrust, work within their self-defined safety boundaries, and co-produce support plans with community-led, non-police alternatives during a mental health crisis.
