Restoring Trust: Repairing Youth-Professional Relationships After Safeguarding Disclosures

Contextualising Professional Trust and Confidentiality in Safeguarding

Professional relationships between young people and those who support them are fundamentally built upon trust, especially concerning confidentiality. Young people often share sensitive information with professionals precisely because they believe their disclosures will remain private. This trust enables the openness crucial for effective support and timely intervention in youth services.

However, safeguarding professionals occasionally encounter scenarios where the ethical and legal duty to protect young people from significant harm necessitates breaching confidentiality. Examples include disclosures of abuse, self-harm, or other serious threats to safety. Although essential, these breaches can profoundly impact young people's sense of safety and significantly erode their trust in professionals (Schweitzer, Hershey and Bradlow, 2004). Such disruptions often leave young people feeling betrayed, making them hesitant or even unwilling to engage in future support, thereby negatively affecting their developmental and emotional trajectories (Main and Whatman, 2023).

Statement of Purpose and Central Thesis

This article addresses the intricate challenge of repairing relationships with young people following a necessary breach of confidentiality in safeguarding contexts. It acknowledges that safeguarding actions are non-negotiable but argues that deliberate, structured, and empathetic relationship-repair strategies are essential to re-establish trust and encourage ongoing engagement.

Our central thesis is that systematically applying transparent communication, trauma-informed approaches, and restorative practices can effectively mitigate the negative impacts of confidentiality breaches. By employing these strategies, professionals can foster renewed trust, enabling young people to continue accessing crucial support without feeling further alienated or harmed by the protective actions taken.

Significance and Implications for Practice

The consequences of compromised trust go beyond individual experiences; they threaten the effectiveness and credibility of the broader youth support systems. Research highlights that one critical factor influencing young people's disengagement from education and support services is the absence of meaningful and trusting relationships with adults and peers (Bland, Carrington and Brady, 2009; Main and Whatman, 2023). Therefore, the ability to repair damaged relationships following breaches in confidentiality is crucial for sustaining engagement in educational, social, and therapeutic contexts (Main and Whatman, 2023).

This article provides practitioners, policymakers, and researchers with a robust framework to navigate these delicate and emotionally charged scenarios. By underscoring the necessity of proactive, ethically sound, and compassionate interventions, this analysis promotes practices that not only safeguard young people's immediate welfare but also nurture their long-term emotional well-being, resilience, and sustained trust in supportive relationships (Yarborough and Sharp, 2002).

The Ethical Foundations of Confidentiality

Confidentiality represents a cornerstone of ethical practice within youth work, crucial in creating safe spaces where young people feel secure enough to disclose deeply sensitive or personal information (Rogers and Draper, 2003). By assuring confidentiality, youth workers empower young people, reinforcing their sense of autonomy, self-determination, and active participation in decisions affecting their own welfare (Boyd, 1992). This trust encourages openness, enhancing the professional's ability to deliver targeted and effective interventions.

However, confidentiality is inherently situated within an ethical tension, balanced against the professional’s legal and moral obligation to safeguard young people from significant harm. For instance, a youth worker might need to breach confidentiality if a young person reveals imminent risk, such as intentions of self-harm or experiencing ongoing abuse. Such breaches, while ethically justified and mandated by safeguarding protocols, carry substantial risks, potentially causing emotional distress, feelings of betrayal, or withdrawal from essential support services, complicating future professional engagement and intervention efforts.

Thus, navigating this ethical complexity requires careful, compassionate, and transparent management, balancing confidentiality's fundamental principles with safeguarding obligations to protect young people's immediate and long-term well-being.

Legal Obligations and Statutory Requirements for Safeguarding

Legal frameworks and statutory guidance define specific circumstances in which confidentiality obligations must be overridden to protect young people. In the UK, landmark legislation such as the Children Act 1989 and subsequent amendments through the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006 explicitly mandate professionals to share confidential information when there are substantial concerns about a child's safety or welfare. These statutory obligations take precedence over individual confidentiality agreements whenever a credible risk of serious harm is identified (Khan and Stirling, 2002).

For example, a youth worker learning of ongoing abuse must report this, despite assurances of confidentiality. Similarly, medical professionals are bound by stringent patient confidentiality codes, but these can and must be breached in scenarios involving significant public interest or imminent harm (Catterall, Gibson and Barber, 1973; Braunack‐Mayer and Mulligan, 2003).

Recent statutory guidance, such as Working Together to Safeguard Children (2018) and Keeping Children Safe in Education, emphasises professionals' duty to share critical information proactively to ensure young people's safety. Failure to comply with these obligations not only places young people at continued risk but can lead to serious professional repercussions, including disciplinary actions or legal liability.

Nevertheless, these legal requirements create challenging dilemmas for professionals, as safeguarding duties inherently conflict with the ethical imperative of maintaining trust and confidentiality. Navigating this complexity demands careful judgement, transparency, and proactive, empathetic communication to minimise the emotional and relational impacts of necessary confidentiality breaches.

Professional Codes of Conduct and Ethical Dilemmas

Professional bodies such as the British Association of Social Workers (BASW), UK Youth, and the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) provide codes of conduct that guide practitioners through the ethical complexities of confidentiality and safeguarding. These codes typically mandate that professionals clearly explain the boundaries of confidentiality—including when information may need to be shared—at the outset of the relationship (Braunack‐Mayer and Mulligan, 2003). Transparent communication at this early stage helps set realistic expectations and can reduce the sense of betrayal if confidentiality must later be breached.

Nonetheless, ethical dilemmas often arise in practice. One of the most challenging situations occurs when a young person discloses serious concerns but explicitly asks that the information not be shared—while the professional, based on their duty of care, identifies an imminent risk to safety (Clough and Conigrave, 2008). In such cases, the professional is legally and ethically required to act, yet must also remain attuned to the relational and emotional fallout this may cause.

Navigating these dilemmas demands more than compliance with guidance—it requires sound professional judgement, thorough documentation, and a trauma-informed approach that prioritises both the young person’s immediate safety and their longer-term trust in support systems. Wherever possible, professionals should explain their actions, validate the young person’s emotions, and continue to offer consistent and respectful engagement to begin the process of relational repair (Tamin, 2010).

Trust is a complex and dynamic construct that encompasses perceptions of reliability (keeping promises), competence (having the skills to help), and benevolence (genuinely caring about the individual’s wellbeing). These components form the foundation of safe, effective, and emotionally supportive human relationships, especially within youth work (Main and Whatman, 2023).

When young people trust professionals, they are more likely to disclose difficult experiences, engage with interventions, and participate actively in their own development. Trust enables them to feel heard, respected, and emotionally safe—conditions essential for meaningful support.

However, when confidentiality is breached, even with the clear intent to protect, this trust is often disrupted. Young people may feel betrayed, angry, or silenced, which can lead to disengagement, emotional withdrawal, or reluctance to seek future help (Schweitzer, Hershey and Bradlow, 2004). For some, this experience confirms existing fears that adults cannot be relied upon—a belief often rooted in previous trauma or inconsistent care.

Recognising the fragility and significance of trust is the first step in planning compassionate, deliberate actions to repair it and rebuild a sense of safety and connection.

The Psychological Impact of Breached Confidentiality

When a breach of confidentiality occurs—even when done to protect—the psychological consequences for young people can be profound. Many experience feelings of betrayal, anger, shame, or a deep sense of powerlessness. Such emotional responses are particularly intense when young people were not adequately prepared for the limitations of confidentiality, or when the breach contradicts previous assurances of trust (Main and Whatman, 2023).

This disruption can manifest in a variety of ways: increased anxiety, emotional withdrawal, or a reluctance to engage with professionals in the future. For some, it reinforces pre-existing beliefs that adults are not safe or dependable, especially if they have experienced previous trauma or disrupted caregiving relationships. Over time, this can affect relational development, undermining the young person’s ability to form trusting connections not only with professionals but also with peers, carers, and educators (Ho, Shin and Lwin, 2017).

Importantly, young people may internalise the breach as a reflection of their own worth or as a punishment for speaking out, which can further erode their self-esteem and willingness to disclose distress in the future.

It is therefore essential that professionals recognise these psychological risks and actively work to reframe the experience through open, validating dialogue and reparative relationship-building. As later sections will explore, trust can be rebuilt—but only through sustained, transparent, and trauma-informed practice.

The Role of Autonomy, Agency, and Voice in the Youth-Professional Relationship

Safeguarding decisions often require professionals to act in ways that override a young person’s wishes—but maintaining a sense of autonomy and agency is still essential for preserving their dignity, trust, and emotional wellbeing. Autonomy refers to a young person’s ability to make choices, while agency reflects their sense of control and influence over their own life. When these are respected, even within necessary adult-led decisions, young people are more likely to stay engaged and feel safe.

When young people feel heard, validated, and consulted, the negative emotional impact of a breach in confidentiality can be significantly reduced (Bland, Carrington and Brady, 2009). This doesn’t mean that their preferences can always be followed—but that their perspectives are taken seriously and considered with empathy and transparency.

Creating opportunities for meaningful participation—such as involving young people in how disclosures are handled, or what follow-up support looks like—helps rebuild a sense of self-determination. These practices are not only ethically important but psychologically protective, reinforcing a sense of worth and agency in the aftermath of distressing events (Dillard, Newman and Kim, 2019).

Safe, inclusive spaces such as talking circles or informal feedback sessions allow young people to process their experiences in ways that feel empowering. For those with anxiety or low confidence, such settings can offer a critical sense of liberation, validation, and emotional safety (Main and Whatman, 2023).

Prioritising voice and agency, even when full confidentiality cannot be maintained, lays the groundwork for repairing trust and re-establishing connection in the youth–professional relationship.

Relationship Repair Models in Social Work and Psychology

Restoring trust with young people after a safeguarding-related breach of confidentiality requires more than goodwill—it demands intentional, evidence-informed strategies grounded in psychological and social work theory. Several established models offer valuable insight into how trust can be rebuilt over time.

Attachment theory highlights the importance of secure, reliable relationships in fostering emotional resilience. Following a perceived betrayal, young people may experience emotional dysregulation or withdraw from relationships entirely. Repairing trust, therefore, requires attuned, consistent responses that re-establish safety, predictability, and emotional availability (Guidetti et al., 2023).

Cognitive-behavioural approaches can also support the process by helping young people identify and reframe negative thought patterns that arise after the breach—such as “I can’t trust anyone” or “It was my fault for speaking up.” These models provide tools for emotional processing and support the rebuilding of adaptive beliefs and relational confidence.

Empirical studies suggest that trust, once damaged, can be gradually restored through a pattern of consistent, trustworthy behaviour—demonstrating reliability, transparency, and genuine care (Schweitzer, Hershey and Bradlow, 2004). However, when the breach involves intentional deception—such as giving false assurances of total secrecy—trust may be irreparably harmed, even with later apologies or positive actions. This highlights the ethical importance of honest conversations about confidentiality from the outset of any professional relationship.

Additionally, evidence from youth re-engagement programs shows that the quality of interventions—rather than their duration—is the most significant predictor of successful outcomes (Main and Whatman, 2023). High-quality interventions are those that are emotionally attuned, strengths-focused, and offer meaningful opportunities for young people to re-establish agency and connection.

By drawing on these frameworks, professionals can develop intentional, relationship-focused practices that support both recovery and long-term relational healing.

Cultural and Contextual Considerations in Restoring Trust

The restoration of trust following a breach of confidentiality is not a one-size-fits-all process. It is deeply influenced by cultural norms, identity, and individual life experiences, all of which shape how young people perceive betrayal and how they respond to repair efforts.

Cultural background can profoundly affect expectations around privacy, authority, and emotional expression. For example, in some collectivist cultures, disclosing personal matters outside the family may be viewed as disloyal or shameful. In others, there may be strong deference to authority figures, making a breach of confidentiality feel especially disempowering or dishonourable (English-Lueck, Darrah and Saveri, 2002). Understanding these nuances allows professionals to engage in ways that are respectful, appropriate, and more likely to re-establish trust.

A culturally sensitive approach means taking time to understand each young person’s values, beliefs, and communication styles. This may involve using interpreters or cultural brokers, avoiding assumptions, and asking respectful, open-ended questions about how they define trust and safety.

In addition to cultural norms, contextual factors—such as past experiences with institutions, family dynamics, racialised trauma, or involvement with social care—can all shape a young person’s interpretation of confidentiality breaches and their readiness to re-engage (Binzel and Fehr, 2010). A young person who has experienced systemic discrimination, for example, may see a safeguarding disclosure as yet another betrayal by a system that has historically failed to protect them.

By recognising and responding to these intersecting cultural and contextual dimensions, professionals can avoid retraumatisation and lay a more authentic, compassionate foundation for relational repair.

The Erosion of Trust and Engagement with Support Services

Breaching a young person’s confidentiality—even when ethically and legally justified—can trigger a cascade of relational and systemic consequences. On an individual level, such actions may severely damage a young person’s trust in professionals, leading them to withdraw not only from the individual practitioner involved, but from support services more broadly.

This erosion of trust often generalises, fostering a deep scepticism toward adults, authority figures, and institutions. The young person may feel betrayed, unheard, or punished for opening up, which can result in avoidance of future help-seeking, refusal to engage with mental health or safeguarding interventions, and even defensive or disruptive behaviours.

Research highlights that young people with behavioural difficulties or additional needs frequently report negative relationships with teachers and a weakened sense of school belonging, which correlates strongly with disengagement from education and support systems (Dimitrellou and Hurry, 2018). For these pupils, a safeguarding breach—however well-intentioned—may confirm a narrative that adults do not understand, respect, or prioritise their needs.

Such disengagement is not merely relational; it poses a significant risk to the young person’s safety and long-term well-being, as they may withdraw from the very systems designed to support and protect them. Furthermore, at a systemic level, it can undermine the effectiveness of multi-agency safeguarding efforts and compromise professionals’ ability to deliver early interventions.

Addressing these consequences requires not only an understanding of trauma and relational dynamics but also a system-wide commitment to restoring trust through transparent, compassionate, and youth-centred practice.

Internalised Stigma and Defensive Disengagement

Following a breach of confidentiality—even one made to protect them—young people may internalise feelings of shame, exposure, or betrayal. They often fear being judged, labelled, or misunderstood by both peers and professionals. This can lead to defensive disengagement, where they distance themselves emotionally or physically from support networks to avoid further hurt. For some, this might look like shutting down during sessions, skipping appointments, acting with hostility, or pretending they no longer care (Main and Whatman, 2023).

Overcoming this defensive stance requires more than reassurance. It demands sustained, sensitive relational work where professionals consistently demonstrate respect, predictability, and emotional safety. Validating the young person’s feelings, allowing space for anger or disappointment, and involving them in decisions wherever possible are key to restoring a sense of agency and trust.

Balancing Protective Duty with Relational Repair

Professionals must navigate a persistent tension between their legal and moral duty to protect and their commitment to relational continuity. While safeguarding is non-negotiable, the way information is shared—the tone, timing, and framing—can significantly influence whether the relationship survives or breaks down.

When interventions are executed without regard for the emotional aftermath, young people may experience further isolation, confusion, or even a “hardening” of resistance to help. In contrast, thoughtful handling—where the young person is kept informed, given space to process, and supported throughout—can reduce relational fallout and support recovery.

These twin challenges—internalised fear and structural tension—underscore the urgent need for safeguarding practices that are not only compliant, but compassionate and trauma-informed, addressing both immediate safety and long-term relational health (Yarborough and Sharp, 2002).

Use Transparent Communication and Foster Collaborative Decision-Making

Rebuilding trust after a safeguarding breach begins with clear, honest, and emotionally attuned communication. Professionals must explain the reasons behind the safeguarding intervention in a way that is straightforward yet compassionate—acknowledging the young person’s feelings without minimising their experience or over-justifying the decision.

Even when full confidentiality cannot be maintained, involving the young person in decisions about their ongoing care helps restore a sense of control. Where appropriate, this might include co-developing safety plans, setting goals, or creating shared agreements about communication and boundaries. These actions support re-empowerment, which is crucial for young people who may feel exposed or disempowered following a disclosure (Bland, Carrington and Brady, 2009).

Providing clear expectations and involving students in co-designing their learning or social environments can also restore a sense of belonging and emotional safety—key protective factors in preventing disengagement (Main and Whatman, 2023).

Apply Trauma-Informed Approaches to Relationship Repair

A trauma-informed approach recognises that a breach of confidentiality—even when necessary—can be re-traumatising, particularly for young people with a history of loss, betrayal, or inconsistent caregiving. This framework prioritises six key principles: safety, trustworthiness, peer support, collaboration, empowerment, and cultural sensitivity.

Professionals can embody these principles by creating environments that are predictable and non-threatening, responding calmly to emotional reactions, and allowing young people to express their feelings without fear of judgement. For example, giving a young person the space to say, “I trusted you and now I don’t,” without interruption or defensiveness can be a powerful moment of healing (Main and Whatman, 2023).

Over time, these consistent responses help re-establish the sense of emotional safety and control needed for relational recovery.

Use Restorative Practices to Rebuild Connection

Restorative practices provide a structured and emotionally safe way to acknowledge harm, rebuild understanding, and restore trust. Rather than focusing on blame, these practices create opportunities for dialogue, reflection, and repair.

Key elements include:

• Facilitated talking circles, which provide a safe, no-judgement space for young people to articulate how they were affected, while also hearing the professional’s rationale and expressions of empathy or regret (Main and Whatman, 2023).
• Explicit teaching of social-emotional skills, embedded within the school or service setting, to help young people better understand and manage emotional responses to complex relational situations.
• Co-creating behavioural expectations and boundaries, which supports fairness, accountability, and shared responsibility for community wellbeing.

By fostering a sense of shared humanity and belonging, restorative practices help young people move from relational rupture to reconnection—a process essential not only for individual wellbeing but for the health of the wider support system.

Synthesising Key Findings and Theoretical Implications

Safeguarding young people often requires professionals to override confidentiality—a protective act that can, paradoxically, damage the very trust needed for effective support. As demonstrated in this article, such breaches can lead to emotional distress, disengagement from services, and lasting damage to young people's sense of safety within professional relationships.

Rebuilding that trust is challenging, but crucial. The conceptual shift proposed here is that safeguarding interventions must not only prioritise safety, but also integrate relationship repair as a central, co-equal objective. This includes validating the young person’s experience, communicating with transparency and empathy, and applying trauma-informed and restorative strategies to rebuild a foundation of relational safety.

Recommendations for Policy, Practice, and Future Research

To improve outcomes for young people post-intervention, the following recommendations are proposed:

• Develop standardised guidelines for post-safeguarding relational repair that centre trust restoration alongside risk management.
• Integrate advanced training on managing confidentiality breaches, emotional repair, and trauma-informed responses into safeguarding CPD pathways.
• Prioritise young people's voice and agency throughout all stages of the safeguarding and support journey.

Future research should examine the long-term impacts of restorative interventions, particularly those that blend trauma-informed practice with youth-led engagement. Longitudinal studies and comparative analyses across sectors would help identify best practices and improve relational outcomes across diverse safeguarding contexts.

Pathways Forward: Reimagining Trust in Safeguarding Relationships

To reimagine trust in safeguarding relationships is to acknowledge that a breach does not have to mark the end of connection. Instead, it can be a critical turning point—a moment to demonstrate to young people that relationships can survive rupture and be rebuilt with care, consistency, and respect.

This requires a systemic commitment to relational safeguarding: one that protects, but also listens; that intervenes, but also repairs. By placing relational integrity at the heart of safeguarding, we strengthen not only the resilience of young people, but also the legitimacy and humanity of the systems that serve them.

When trust is rebuilt, young people are far more likely to stay connected, stay safe, and thrive.