ACES Economic HealthCare Burden 14 Trillion Annually (Cape Breton University Project)

The Invisible Cost:

The Long Term Impact of Adverse Childhood Experiences On The   Healthcare System.

Below is the thorough work of Cape Breton students from Dr. Philip Eappen’s, Understanding Child Protection Systems: Metrics and Politics class submitted March 25, 2025. KARA argues that America’s decades of failure to interrupt generational child abuse and heal traumatized children is having a cascading economic impact on all U.S. institutions. This paper addresses the healthcare burden. KARA is seeking university help to continue this investigation into ACEs burden on education, law enforcement and impact on America’s workforce efficiency. If your university or organization would like to help in this project, contact KARA ([email protected]) with Economic Impact in the subject line.

Changing the narrative and improving life for abused and neglected children will take all of us. Share this article widely, especially your State Representative – find them here.

 

From the Abstract:

Recent findings reveal that ACEs are linked to an estimated annual economic burden of around US$ 14.1 trillion in the United States. This staggering figure encompasses both direct medical costs and the broader implications of lost productivity due to health issues stemming from childhood trauma. Through a thorough review of existing studies, it revealed that individuals with higher ACE scores are at a greater risk for developing chronic health conditions, which leads to increased visits to healthcare providers and rising costs.

Signup For KARA’s FREE Friday Morning Updates

Complete Abstract:

Prepared By:

Oneika Bogle

Nisha Virdi

Namitha Benny

Excellence Ojone Abalaka

Oluwasegun Gerry-Buraimoh

Abisola Idowu

 

Submitted To:

Dr. Philip Eappen

 

March 25, 2025

 

 

 

THE INVISIBLE COST: THE LONG TERM IMPACT OF ADVERSE CHILDHOOD EXPERIENCES ON THE HEALTHCARE SYSTEM.

 

Abstract

Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) are increasingly becoming a serious public health issue. They are real struggles faced by millions of individuals and families worldwide. These experiences, which can include abuse, neglect, and household dysfunction, have profound effects that ripple through a person’s life, influencing their health and well-being long into adulthood. This research paper examines the long-term impact of ACEs on the healthcare system, focusing on the prevalence of ACEs, their association with chronic illnesses, and the resulting financial implications. It also assesses the effectiveness of trauma-informed care (TIC) on improving healthcare delivery and examines how data-driven technology can be leveraged to guide policies and programs intended to safeguard vulnerable children.

Recent findings reveal that ACEs are linked to an estimated annual economic burden of around US$ 14.1 trillion in the United States. This staggering figure encompasses both direct medical costs and the broader implications of lost productivity due to health issues stemming from childhood trauma. Through a thorough review of existing studies, it revealed that individuals with higher ACE scores are at a greater risk for developing chronic health conditions, which leads to increased visits to healthcare providers and rising costs.

By exploring the connections between childhood trauma, long-term health challenges, and the impact on the healthcare system, this paper aims to shed light on what we call the “invisible cost” of ACEs. Our findings emphasize the urgent need for early intervention strategies and collaborative efforts across various sectors to support vulnerable children. Ultimately, this research seeks to inform policies and practices that not only address the immediate needs of those affected by ACEs but also work towards healing and prevention, fostering healthier communities for future generations.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table of Contents

Abstract

1.0 INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………….. 1- 2

1.1 Background………………………………………………………..            2-3

1.2       Problem Statement………………………………………………..            3

1.3       Statement of Purpose…………………………………………….. 3

1.4       Research Objectives……………………………………………… 3-4

1.5       Conceptual or Substantive Assumptions……………………….. 4

1.6       Rationale and Theoretical Framework…………………………. 4

1.7       Scope of the Study…………………………………………………            4

1.8       Definition of Key Terms…………………………………………..            5

 

2.0       LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………………………………            5

            2.1        Historical and General Background……………………………..     6-7

            2.2       Analysis of Existing Studies………………………………………            7-9

            2.3       Methodological Insights…………………………………………..            10-12

            2.4       Theoretical Framework and Policy Implications……………….  12-14

            2.5       Comparative Analysis of Intervention Strategies………………         14-15

            2.6       Future Directions and Research Gaps……………………………        15-16

            2.7       Societal and Economic Implications……………………………..     17-18

            2.8       Integration of Neurobiological Evidence………………………..       18

            2.9       Implications for Public Policy and Practice……………………..     19-20

            2.10     Summary of Literature Review…………………………………..      20-21

 

 3.0 METHODOLOGY………………………………………………………..            21

            3.1        Research Design……………………………………………………            21

            3.2       Data Collection…………………………………………………….            21-22

            3.3 Assumptions…………………………………………………………            22

            3.4 Limitations…………………………………………………………            22

 

 4.0      DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION…………………………………            23

            4.1       Healthcare Financial Burden…………………………………….. 23

            4.2        Implications for Criminal Justice and Education……………….          24

            4.3        Adverse Childhood Experience Relationship and

            Socioeconomic Outcome…………………………………………………..            25-26

            4.4 Discussion………………………………………………………….            26

            4.5        Suggestions for Upcoming Studies……………………………….           27

 

 5.0      SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATION………………..      27

            5.1 Summary……………………………………………………………            27

            5.2 Conclusion…………………………………………………………            28

            5.3 Recommendation…………………………………………………..            28-29

 

  REFERENCES…………………………………………………………….            30-35

 

 

 

 

 

1. INTRODUCTION

Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) are a pervasive public health issue. The impact of childhood trauma on a person’s overall physical and emotiona health has gained much attention, however, the effects goes deeper, causing a significant burden on the society including the  healthcare system, education system, and justice system. The research seeks to assess the effects of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) on the healthcare system.  Studies have reported that persons who have suffered adverse trauma at a young age are likely to suffer from long-term health disorders and mental illness like heart disease, cancers, diabetes, high blood pressure, obesity, addiction to drugs, suicide, depression, anxiety, etc. The healthcare system is now faced with the challenge of treating and managing patients who are struggling with symptoms of childhood trauma and requiring healthcare services frequently, such as mental health services, emergency medical services, and other specialized care.  An increase in healthcare utilization by individuals who have had childhood trauma subsequently leads to higher healthcare costs (Hargreaves et al., 2019).  A meta-analysis conducted by Bellis et al. (2019) states that annual healthcare costs attributable to ACEs are approximately $748 billion in the United States and $581 billion in Europe. That figure has increased significantly to US$ 14.1 trillion annually (Peterson et al., 2023).  Adverse Childhood Experiences are preventable and treatable with the right approaches and strategies.  One approach being utilized in some healthcare organizations is Trauma Informed Care (TIC). This approach is used to gain insight into a person’s traumatic experiences and ensure that a safe and supportive environment is created to promote healing and prevent re-traumatization. Prevention and mitigation of the impact of adverse childhood experiences are crucial to the health of vulnerable children, families, communities and society in general. Among some of the advantages associated with intervention and prevention activities that take place early are improved school performance and reduced depression, suicidal ideation, arrest, incarceration, and use of drugs in adolescence and adulthood (Peterson et al., 2023).   However, the success of reducing the effect of adverse childhood trauma requires collaborative effort across multiple sectors including the government, social services, education, and public health.

 

• Background

Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) refers to traumatic events that occur in a child’s life, effects of which may prolong into adulthood, and even to future generations (CDC, 2024).  ACEs include any form of abuse (physical, sexual, emotional), neglect, domestic violence, or alcohol/drug abuse within the home. Traumatic experiences can interfere with a child’s physiological, cognitive, social, emotional, and behavioral development. ACEs were initially discovered in 1998 when Kaiser Permanente and the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) completed its Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study, whereby it studied the link between early childhood traumatic exposure and adverse adult health outcomes. The findings showed that there was a dose-response association between the extent of exposure to severe childhood stress, resulting from ACEs, and the probability of an individual developing physical, behavioral, and social problem in adulthood.  According to CDC statistics, approximately 34.8 million children living in the United States have experienced one or more ACEs. Later research uncovered that 64% of American adults had one or more ACE prior to age 18, and 17% had two or more ACEs. Adverse childhood experiences are also strong predictors of unhealthy behaviors, alcohol and drug abuse, low socio-economic status and chronic physical and mental disease (Valdez, R., 2024). After the completion of the initial ACE study, additional research studies on the effects of ACEs on adult’s health and well-being continued across the United States, Canada, and several other countries.

 

• Problem Statement

The consequences of childhood trauma extend beyond the affected individual, causing societal implications that are not immediately visible.  The development of chronic diseases and mental health disorders due to adverse trauma experienced by children and adolescents may require frequent use of healthcare services, therefore placing significant burden on the healthcare system.

• Statement of Purpose

The research seeks to assess the impact of Adverse Childhood Experiences on the healthcare system, by examining how trauma experienced in childhood affects long-term health, utilization of healthcare, and overall burden on the system. By knowing more about the adverse effects, healthcare providers, policymakers, and community organizations can create evidence-based early intervention policies and prevention programs, which will in turn reduce the long term health outcomes and societal burden resulting from adverse trauma.

 

• Research Objectives

• To assess the prevalence of Adverse Childhood Experiences and their associations with other chronic illnesses.
• To evaluate the financial consequences of adverse childhood trauma on the healthcare system.
• To assess the applicability of trauma-informed care (TIC) in enhancing health care delivery
• To assess how data-driven technology can be utilized to promote and strengthen the development of policies and programs to protect vulnerable children.

 

• Conceptual or Substantive Assumptions

• Chronic health conditions may be caused by unresolved adverse childhood trauma.
• Child abused and neglect is prevalent among individuals from economically disadvantage backgrounds.
• The effects of adverse childhood experiences can be reduced through early intervention and prevention programs.

 

• Rationale and Theoretical Framework

The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) framework explore how different types of traumatic experiences in childhood, including abuse, neglect, or exposure to violence can have lasting effects on a person’s life. The ACEs framework explains the increase risk of health and social problems in individuals who are exposed to childhood trauma.  Identifying the impact of ACEs can inform policy and program implementation to prevent and mitigate the negative outcomes.

 

• Scope of the Study

The research focuses on examining the impact of adverse childhood experiences on the healthcare system, specifically the financial burden associated with ACE-related health conditions in adulthood. For this research, we will review and extract data from research studies conducted primarily in the United States.

• Definition of Key Terms

Adverse Childhood Experiences: Traumatic experiences occurring in a child’s life which may have short and longer term effects.

Trauma-informed care: An approach used in healthcare setting to gather information about a person’s past traumas and the support needed to heal.

 

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

Childhood trauma is being more widely acknowledged as a potentially widespread public health crisis that has implications both at the individual level and for society as a whole. Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) are associated with not just derangements of neurological, psychological, and social development but also chronic health problems, poor educational outcomes, and economic hardship (Peterson et al., 2023). This literature review summarizes publications from 2020 and onwards to form a thorough description of the societal impact of childhood trauma. In this context, the review traces the trajectory of trauma research, examines the economic and social effects of ACEs, discusses advances in methodology, and explores implications for public policy and practice. In doing so, this highlights the critical time for effective, systematic, culturally inclusive intervention action to enable more effective management of the “invisible cost” of childhood trauma on society (Downey & Crummy, 2021). This review not only summarizes what is known but also identifies key knowledge gaps that future work must address.

 

 

 

2.1       Historical and General Background

Evolution of Childhood Trauma Research

Previously, studies of childhood trauma focused mainly on its psychological and emotional impact on the individual. Early studies tended to focus on short-term behavioral and emotional effects. But with the ACE framework, came an amazing paradigm shift. Pioneering studies formed that adverse experiences in childhood increase susceptibility to a wide variety of long-term physical, mental, and social health problems (Nie et al., 2022). Just in recent years, the research has branched out to study the wider impact of ACEs — including the tremendous cost that these experiences impose on not only healthcare systems, but society at large (Hughes et al., 2021). Recent meta-analyses have also started to address the phenomenon of intergenerational trauma, showing how the consequences of childhood adversity are conveyed across generations, thereby magnifying the societal costs (Heberle et al., 2020).

Broadening the Definition of Trauma

In its initial conception, childhood trauma was defined too narrowly, in terms of physical or emotional abuse. More recent studies acknowledge a wider range of negative experiences, including neglect, exposure to domestic violence, parental substance abuse and community violence. This extension has broadened our perspective by demonstrating that traumatization need not be direct to influence development in impactful, permanent ways (Downey & Crummy, 2021). The combined impact of this range of adverse experiences, researchers say, is important for understanding the total burden of trauma on society. This more detailed working definition offers a better foundation for the development of intervention strategies and emphasizes the complexity of the issue.

Economic and Social Disruption

The consequences of childhood trauma reach far wider than the individuals involved. Hughes et al., (2021) estimate that ACEs contribute to higher healthcare costs, decreased workforce productivity and greater public assistance costs. In fact, people with high ACE scores have a higher risk of chronic illnesses requiring long-term treatment, increasing medical spending while decreasing economic productivity. Moreover, ACEs are associated with social instability i.e., unemployment, homelessness, and criminal justice involvement (Heberle et al., 2020). Such adverse physical and mental outcomes not only are costly for families but also create a burden on public resources, raising the need for early, preventive interventions

 

• Analysis of Existing Studies

Direct Economic Costs and Healthcare Expenditures

Recent research has documented the direct economic burden of ACEs quantitatively. Peterson et al. (2023) estimated a considerable economic burden of Accountability: Estimated that adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and other accounting determinants of health in the United States alone cost up to $14.1 trillion annually. This figure encompasses direct medical costs and indirect costs such as lost productivity. They found that individuals with very high ACEs have a higher prevalence of chronic diseases—like diabetes, cardiovascular disease (CVD), and mental health disorders—which leads to increased healthcare consumption and costs (Peterson et al., 2023). Koball et al. (2020) similarly found that households with high ACE scores incur significantly higher out-of-pocket costs, demonstrating very tangible financial burden to affected households.

Socioeconomic Outcomes and Social Service Demands

Beyond direct medical costs, ACEs are certainly associated with socioeconomic disadvantage too. ACE also has a similar association with unemployment rates, housing instability and dependency on public assistance programs (Downey & Crummy, 2021). We know from their large-scale analysis that childhood trauma sparks a cascade of negative sequelae that not only shape the trajectory of lives but impose massive costs on social service systems. This looks like an increased demand for welfare, food assistance, or housing subsidy in those communities with high ACEs. These findings highlight the reality that childhood trauma takes an all-too-wide, multidimensional social toll.

 

Educational and Criminal Justice Implications

Studies have also shown strong links between childhood trauma, school achievement and crime. Hughes et al. (2021) found that children exposed to high amounts of trauma achieve less in school, which reduces their lifetime earnings potential and preserves intergenerational poverty cycles. Moreover, Reese et al. (2022) note that higher ACE scores are more likely to lead individuals into contact with social and criminal justice systems, demonstrating that the cycles of trauma produce the behaviors that get replicated and compound the burdens on society. These effects highlight the multi-dimensional nature of childhood trauma, with impacts spilling over across sectors, including education, employment, and law enforcement, contributing to large-scale social inequities.

 

 

Neurobiological Evidence

Recent work using neuroimaging data adds layers of detail to how the effects of childhood trauma manifest. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), Leal and Silvers (2020) demonstrated that high ACE score individuals have significant and measurable differences in brain regions involved in emotional regulation, impulse control, and decision making. This biological evidence can provide some degree of certainty for the notion that the impact of trauma can affect the brain at both a structural and functional level, and further strengthen the case for early intervention. While advances to date in ACE research using neurobiological data have much increased our understanding of underlying mechanisms, they have also suggested some possible biomarkers for identifying at-risk individuals before adverse outcomes are observed.

Comparative Evaluations of Intervention Strategies

An examination of various studies on interventions shows that both preventive and early intervention programs can mitigate the negative ramifications of ACEs significantly. Soltan et al. (2022) confirms the link between community-based resilience-building and parental support initiatives with lower rates of ACEs and later better outcomes on children. Research by Mazzeo and Bendixen (2022) has shown that culturally tailored approaches are more effective than generic versions that do not take into account these specific needs of diverse populations. They note that it has been found that integrated models, such as those that involve educational support, mental health services, and family counseling all together have had significant success in decreasing the incidence and severity of ACEs (Downey & Crummy, 2021b). The studies together call for comprehensive, context-specific strategies for reducing the societal cost of childhood trauma.

 

• Methodological Insights

Quantitative Approaches

The majority of studies investigating childhood trauma in recent years have taken quantitative approaches, and although these are invaluable for uncovering potential dose-response relationships of ACEs, it is longitudinal studies which shed light on their long-term implications. Longitudinal studies follow individuals over long periods of time and allow researchers to establish temporal relationships and causal inferences between early trauma and later outcomes (Juruena et al., 2020). Despite limited causal interpretation, cross-sectional studies are crucial to measure the prevalence of ACEs and the identifying the risk factors present in different populations. These quantitative methods are the foundation behind a great deal of the existing literature, generating strong, statistically significant findings regarding long-term outcomes that stem from early trauma exposure.

Mixed-Methods Research

To grasp the complexity of childhood trauma, the researchers are increasingly using mixed-method approaches. These methods integrate both quantitative data and qualitative interviews, allowing for a more complex picture to emerge of the trajectories of trauma survivors’ lives. However, literature has shown qualitative perspectives allow for the bringing to light personal stories or accounts missing in larger scale quantitative solutions. Interviews with trauma survivors, for example, are rich with the cultural and socioeconomic nuance that provides some of the details that explain the divergences that we see in the presentations of ACEs. The integration of both methods will improve the reliability of research findings, and then will further facilitate the development of more appropriately targeted intervention programs (Finkelhor, 2020).

Advances in Neuroimaging Techniques

The most important methodological innovation in the last few years has been to apply neuroimaging technology to ACE studies. Hakamata et al. conducted functional MRI studies (2022), have measured how the brain looks and develops if we grew up experiencing trauma as a child. This line of research has uncovered structural and functional changes in quirky circuits for regulating emotion and cognitive control, particularly in the prefrontal cortex and amygdala. This neurobiological evidence makes a case for intervening, and potential biomarkers could be used to identify children at risk. Additionally, these advances provide new methods for evaluating how an intervention acts in terms of structural and functional changes in the brain over time.

Adaptations for Cultural Diversity

Responses vary depending on cultural context, and new scholarship has called for culturally appropriate research methods. Mazzeo and Bendixen (2022b) suggest that if ACE assessment is to expand its applicability beyond European and North American contexts then existing measurement approaches must be modified in ways that enable contextual and cultural variation to be better accommodated, including the two we describe in this article. Such adaptations are important to ensure accurate knowledge about childhood trauma and are not bias to certain populations. Researchers can also adapt methods used in sampling and surveying to estimate prevalence with greater accuracy and better target interventions to communities that are underrepresented.

Integration of Multidisciplinary Data

Integration of multi-discipline datasets is a novel direction in ACE research may hopefully contribute to get the holistic picture of consequence of childhood trauma. This model combines neurobiological, psychosocial and economic data into a single framework for the first time to understand the full burden of trauma. Other research with long-term socioeconomic data that is supplemented with fMRI data provides more insight into the long-term impact of early adversity on brain and life (Moustafa et al., 2021). Integrative approaches like these are essential for building robust models that guide effective intervention and sound public policy.

 

• Theoretical Framework and Policy Implications

Expanding the ACE Framework

The ACE framework is one of the older ways of studying childhood trauma. Emerging literature have proposed that the framework needs to move beyond dyadic forces, and it must consider broader socioecological factors, including community violence, structural discrimination and economic instability (Reese et al., 2022b). This broader frame understands trauma as something not merely personal, but socio-culturally rooted. The incorporation of these dimensions allows the model to better account for the ways in which trauma manifests in both individuals and collective society. This awareness of trauma is essential to developing interventions that address not only the traumatization but more fundamentally, the problem.

 

Economic and Social Policy Implications

ACE’s are a huge societal factor and one that costs society in numerous ways. Hughes et al. (2021b) found that ACEs increase health care costs, lost productivity, and dependence on social services. Such aggregate costs impose a significant burden on public budgets and limit economic growth. As noted by Mao and Agyapong (2021), investing in early intervention programs — like quality early childhood education, mental health services, and family support initiatives — can save large amounts of money in the long term. Their research shows that for every dollar invested in preventive activities, several dollars are saved in future costs for health care and social services.

Integrating Neurobiological Data into Policy

Hakamata et al. (2022) show that neurobiological changes that result from childhood trauma can be detected early and may provide a biomarker for detecting those children at highest risk for future trauma exposure. Inherent in the use of such screening tools in routine pediatric practice could be expeditious initiation of intervention which may mitigate downstream societal costs. Such efforts hold promise for significantly improving early diagnosis and treatment outcomes and thus should be funded by policymakers in addition to traditional psychosocial assessments.

Bridging Research and Practice

A major challenge continues to be translating research into actionable policy solutions. The paper highlighted the ongoing importance of working alongside the diverse range of stakeholders involved in the prevention and treatment of childhood trauma (Peterson et al., 2023a). Integrating insights from multiple disciplines as a basis for public policy, imagine multidisciplinary task forces of experts in economics, neurobiology, psychology and social work could provide a more straightforward basis for public policy, for example. Collaborations such as these are critical in developing and executing strategies that can both decrease the prevalence of ACEs and also lessen their lasting consequences for communities.

 

• Comparative Analysis of Intervention Strategies

Community-Based Interventions

Community-based interventions are undeniable agents of change, and have proven to be one of the most promising standards for addressing the impact of childhood trauma. Community-driven programs aimed at building resilience, educating parents, and providing social support have proven capable of significantly reducing the prevalence of ACEs (Mazzeo & Bendixen, 2022a). When adapted to the cultural and socioeconomic context of the community where the target population lives, these programs reduce rates of child maltreatment and improve long-term outcomes.

School and Educational Programs

Schools are key places for early intervention. Education programs that introduce trauma-informed practices become key in finding and providing resources for at-risk kids. Peterson et al. (2023) have shown that integrating mental health services in schools not only improves academic performance, but also reduces behavioral problems found to be attributed to trauma. These approaches often involve teacher training, student counseling, and social-emotional learning curricula. Schools that create comprehensive systems to meet the needs of trauma-exposed students can help move broken spirits up the academic ladder and provide a return on investment to the overall community for years to come.

Multidisciplinary and Integrated Approaches

There’s significant promise in an integrated approach, one that addresses medical care, mental health services, and social support. Madigan et al. (2023) point out that multidisciplinary interventions involving neurobiological screening, counseling, and family services represent a more comprehensive approach to trauma in childhood. These integrated approaches protect against the symptoms of trauma, leading to better outcomes and diminishing the economic toll in the long run. These models integrate data at multiple levels (individual, community, and systemic), more accurately reflecting the complexity of ACEs and their impact on individuals’ well-being.

• Future Directions and Research Gaps

Long-Term Evaluation of Intervention Programs

Though the literature advances the knowledge on the role of ACEs, there are still substantial gaps in the literature regarding long-term intervention effectiveness. Peterson et al. (2023) advocate for more longitudinal studies, which track participants over a longer period, to better understand the longevity of benefits from the intervention. Future work should measure the cost-effectiveness of specific programs, as well as the essential elements that lead to sustainably improved health and socioeconomic outcomes.

 

 

Development of Culturally Adaptive Models

The heterogeneity of childhood experiences across various communities necessitates culturally adaptive intervention models; however, the family-centered intervention is a common theme across different cultures. Obvious implications from studies include the necessity for clinicians and managers to tailor interventions to the cultural and contextual realities of target populations (Mazzeo et al., 2022). Future research should explore the development and robust evaluation of culturally congruent programs, using assessment tools and intervention strategies that are culturally appropriate and address areas of need.

Multidisciplinary Integration

Lastly, a promising path in future research can be integrating multidimensional data to study ACEs better. Where neurobiological, psychosocial and economic data are available, studies integrating these can shed further light on the mechanisms whereby early life adversity has such long-lasting impact. This integrated approach is critical for developing increasingly accurate predictive models as well as for implementing interventions that are consistent with the full scope of trauma’s impacts (Hakamata et al., 2022).

Innovations in Technology and Data Analysis

Machine learning and big data analytics among other modern tools enable more robust ACE research. Future research needs to study these technologies in large datasets to uncover patterns and predictor of adverse childhood trauma out-comes. In fact, the use of these technologies in conjunction with traditional research methods could yield clearer and actionable insights, which, in turn, could serve to assist those devising interventions by providing evidence-based data.

• Societal and Economic Implications

The Broad Economic Burden   

These issues pose a huge economic cost, because childhood trauma has an adverse effect not only on individual health outcomes, but also on national productivity and public expenditure. Peterson et al. (2023a), they show that high ACE scores are associated with higher medical expenditures, lower earnings, and greater reliance on social services. These experience-based costs accumulate, weighing on families and public systems. The evidence shows that this kind of early intervention can prevent chronic illnesses and alleviate these economic burdens, leading to better social and economic outcomes.

Impact on Social Inequality

Second-hand harm widens the socio-economic divide as the most disadvantaged are victims of childhood trauma. Additionally, structural factors such as poverty, discrimination, and lack of access to quality education exacerbate the effects of ACEs and contribute to cycles of disadvantage that can be difficult to escape from (Peterson et al., 2023a). Childhood trauma can be reduced with targeted policies and community support programs that address these systemic issues. Addressing these specific audiences may be more effective in promoting social equity and long-term resilience than interventions aimed at the population more broadly.

Return on Investment in Prevention Programs

In the long run, investing in prevention programs has many significant economic benefits. Mao and Agyapong (2021) estimate that for every dollar spent on early childhood intervention, many dollars will be saved in healthcare, social services, and criminal justice spending. This return on investment is convincing evidence in favor of public policy being there for prevention — not just for intervention. Work integrated early childhood education, mental health services, and family support proves to be especially effective in decreasing the lifelong economic cost of ACEs on society music that brings about a significant social and economic returns.

• Integration of Neurobiological Evidence

Advances in Neuroimaging and Early Detection

New studies and neuroimaging research provide unique insights into the biological impacts of childhood trauma. Hakamata et al. (2022), it has been shown that those with high ACE scores experience distinct changes in brain areas related to emotional regulation and decision-making. This is essential for punctual treatment, and these neurobiological markers create a new opportunity here. As research continues to evolve, it is conceivable that pediatric screening will eventually incorporate neuroimaging assessments as part of the clinical evaluation process, enabling early identification and intervention strategies that could decrease long-term adverse effects.

Linking Biology with Policy

Neuroimaging evidence not only corroborates the deep biological effects of ACEs, but also offers objective measures that can indicate the impact of early intervention programs. Policymakers could support research that combines neurobiological assessments with traditional social and economic metrics to develop diagnostic and intervention models.

 

 

• Implications for Public Policy and Practice

Policy Recommendations Based on Empirical Evidence

In the light of the overwhelming evidence of the societal implications of childhood trauma, this calls for strong public policies focused on prevention and early intervention. Policy Recommendations include:

• Investing in Early Childhood Programs funding high quality early education, mental health services and family support initiatives is critical for decreasing the incidence and long term impact of ACEs (Peterson et al., 2023a).
• Gaining Access to Mental Health Services: Expanding access to mental health care, especially in underserved communities, may reduce the harmful effects of childhood trauma (Mazzeo & Bendixen, 2022a).
• Integrating Neurobiological Screening: In accordance with the promotion of trauma-informed care, neuroimaging and other biological assessments should be incorporated (where feasible) into pediatric care to assist with the early detection of trauma-related changes and thereby inform early intervention (Hakamata et al., 2022).

 

Bridging the Gap between Research and Practice

For true policy formulation, there needs to be a strong bridge between what is research in academia and what gets executed on the field. It is therefore important to collaborate with researchers and clinical practice and policy makers to implement initiatives based on research evidence. Task forces combining wisdom from various disciplines — including economics, neurobiology, psychology and social work — can help craft policies that effectively address the root causes of childhood trauma while efficiently allocating resources. Those partnerships are vital to creating sustainable solutions that have the potential to make an impact on society for generations.

Evaluating the Cost-Effectiveness of Interventions

Another developing area for proposed policy is the rigorous evaluation of intervention programs. Future studies should include strong cost-effectiveness assessments that calculate the economic benefits of early intervention compared with the costs associated with implementation of these interventions. Mao and Agyapong (2021) opine such type of analyses are vital to justify public expenditure on prevention programs. Providing sound evidence that early investments can generate large savings over the long term, these studies should help make the economic case for a shift in policy toward prevention.

 

• Summary of Literature Review

The literature discussed in this chapter maintains significant evidence for the ubiquitous and profound impact of childhood trauma on society. Since 2020, the incorporation of economic evaluations, neurobiological perspectives, and culturally bound approaches to the science of task avoidance has deepened our understanding of these compounding issues. ACEs are major contributors to healthcare costs, loss of productivity, social unrest, and intergenerational impoverishment. Sector strengths, such as the existence of effective prevention and intervention strategies, are also offset by weaknesses, such as a dearth of evaluation of long-term outcomes of these programs, as well as their contextual and cultural adaptation.  Future work needs to use longitudinal designs that appropriately assess the cost effectiveness of integrated interventions. Additionally, emerging programs that take into account the specific demographics of representative populations are critical. Because neurobiological measures are likely additive in their unique contributions alongside traditional psychosocial and economic measures, the simultaneous inclusion of neurobiological markers may to enable enhanced early detection and tailored interventions.  Policymakers are encouraged to take a big-picture, multidisciplinary perspective in dealing with childhood trauma. Society can mitigate the long-term burden of ACEs by shifting resources towards primary prevention, increasing access to mental health services, and introducing innovative screening programs. By doing so, not only will they improve the lives of individuals but their communities will in turn enhance their social and economic health as well. The arguments made here should compel urgent, coordinated action to mitigate the “invisible cost” of childhood trauma, and build a more resilient, equitable society.

• METHODOLOGY

3.1       Research Design

A narrative literature review is selected in order to present a comprehensive and critical analysis of current studies on adverse childhood experiences and their long-term effect on the healthcare systems. The method provides the opportunity to choose and incorporate various sources such as theoretical frameworks, empirical studies, policy reports, and specialist opinions.

 

3.2       Data Collection

A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Google Scholar, and CBU library for literature published between 2000 and 2024.  Inclusion criteria were:

• Research evaluating the prevalence of ACEs and their relationship with chronic disease.
• Research analyzing healthcare utilization patterns among individuals with ACEs.
• Economic analysis of ACE-related healthcare costs.

Keywords Searched: Childhood trauma, Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs), long-term healthcare impact, mental health outcomes, chronic diseases, healthcare burden.

3.3       Methodological Assumptions

• It is expected that the literature search will retrieve all studies related to the topic.
• The information presented is accurate and studies are peer-viewed.
• Sufficient time will be available for literature search, extraction of data, analysis and reporting of findings.
• The studies included in the meta-analysis are assumed to be independent of each other.

3.4        Limitations

• Variation in the measurement of ACEs and healthcare use between studies can create may affect comparability.
• Validity of the analysis depends on data accuracy and completeness as reported in prior research.
• Studies available may be outdated, therefore may not reflect current trends
• Insufficient peer viewed literature related to the subject.

 

 

 

• DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

4.1       Healthcare Financial Burden

Unfavorable health outcomes are significantly increased by adverse childhood experiences (ACEs). This is consistent with research by Bellis et al. (2019), which found that the estimated annual health care costs resulting from ACEs were $581 billion in Europe and $748 billion in North America. According to (Peterson et al., 2023), the annual economic cost of ACEs has risen to $14.1 trillion. Therefore, these results confirmed that childhood trauma had had long-term physiological, psychological, and behavioral effects that increase the demand for healthcare services, which would be needed to assist users who may have related issues arising later on in their lives after the traumatic effect occurred earlier on in their childhood. According to a study done by Webster (2022), chronic illnesses such as cardiovascular diseases, mental health disorders, diabetes, and obesity are strongly associated with ACEs, leading to higher hospital visits, medication use, and emergency care utilization. A recent systematic review also showed that compared with people with no experience of childhood adversity, individuals with four or more childhood adversities were at notably greater risk of a wide range of health problems including mental illness and self-harm (Hughes et, al., 2017). Although ACEs lead to higher healthcare utilization, they may not be the only factor influencing poor health outcomes; therefore early intervention can significantly reduce future healthcare expenses (Webster, 2022). Genetics, lifestyle choices, and exposure to socioeconomic situations are some of the variables that might result in these negative consequences; these factors can interact with ACEs to affect health trajectories (Webster, 2022).

 

• Implications for Criminal Justice and Education

The few previous studies that have examined this relationship have found a history of ACEs to be associated with poor education outcomes related to academic success (Blodgett and Lanigan,2018), school engagement (Bethell et, al., 2014), school drop-out (Morrow and Villoda,2018), and school attendance (Stempel et, al.,2017]. School-aged children residing in the United States with a history of ACEs (defined as two or more ACEs) had increased odds of poor education outcomes, including lower school engagement, more specialized individual education plans, more school absenteeism, and more grade retention (i.e., repeating a grade) compared with school-aged children without a history of ACEs (Bethell et, al., 2016).

Research has also demonstrated a high correlation between crime and early trauma. According to Hughes et al. (2021), children who experience high levels of trauma do worse academically; this lowers their lifelong earning potential and maintains intergenerational cycles of poverty. Furthermore, Reese et al. (2022) point out that people with higher ACE scores are more likely to interact with the criminal justice and social services, proving that trauma cycles result in actions that are repeated and increase societal burdens. These consequences demonstrate the complex nature of childhood trauma, with repercussions extending into fields such as law enforcement, work, and education, ultimately leading to widespread social injustices. Children with a history of child protection involvement, including documented child maltreatment and exposure to intimate partner violence (IPV), were shown to have poor reading and math scores in a separate study that used administrative school data from Minnesota (Kiesel et al., 2016).

 

 

• Adverse Childhood Experience Relationship And Socioeconomic Outcomes

In addition to the financial strain on the healthcare industry, there is strong evidence linking various forms of childhood adversity to heightened vulnerability to adverse circumstances in later life (Allen & Donkin, 2016).  This has been particularly influenced by the work of (Felitti et, al.,1998) in the USA who used the phrase ‘adverse childhood experiences’ (ACEs) to describe multiple facets of such adversity. The authors defined ACEs in terms of both direct child maltreatment (abuse and neglect) and a wider set of experiences related to family and household circumstances (termed ‘household dysfunction’) (Felitti et, al.,1998). The latter included having an adult household member incarcerated or experiencing parental separation, as well as living in a setting where there was adult domestic violence, mental illness, or substance abuse (Walsh et al., 2019). Such childhood experiences are common; studies have indicated that 46% of children in the United States experience ACEs (Murphey, 2014). This prevalence is higher among disadvantaged populations, including those who are homeless and incarcerated (Ford et al., 2014), and the effects of the experience later in life are strong (Ross et al., 2013). The following causal pathways have been suggested to explain these associations: a higher chance of acquiring unhealthy habits; detrimental effects on significant social health determinants (such as income, work, and education) in adulthood; and specific biological pathways associated with stress (Allen & Donkin, 2016). Additionally, there is some evidence that certain types of childhood support, like having access to a so-called “trusted adult,” may reduce the risk of negative outcomes for those who have experienced childhood adversity (Bellis et al., 2018). In light of this evidence, many governments have made ACEs a priority for their policies (Walsh et al., 2019). Therefore, by putting into practice comprehensive methods that include socioeconomic policies, public health initiatives, and mental health assistance, treatments to lessen the negative impacts of ACEs and enhance general well-being may be feasible.

• Discussion

            Childhood socioeconomic status (SEP) and the likelihood of enduring ACEs and maltreatment are clearly correlated. This seems to hold true across nations, adversity and SEP metrics, and the age at which adversity is quantified. The question of whether poverty itself qualifies as a “adverse childhood experience” is currently up for debate, but it is evident that poverty is socially patterned by the high rates of substance abuse (ISD Scotland, 2017), adult incarceration (Houchin, 2005), domestic violence (Murray, 2016), and child abuse that are common in impoverished areas (Bywaters et al., 2015). Some scholars have suggested this (Braveman et al., 2018), while others have rejected it as “conceptually muddled” and possibly leading to the neglect of important socioeconomic determinants of health (Taylor-Robinson et al., 2018). Given the causal pathways connecting health-related exposures and outcomes, this is clearly pertinent to a larger discussion about the connection between SEP and childhood adversity.  Walsh et al (2019). Although a substantial amount of research has linked ACEs to poor health outcomes in adulthood, much more has to be discovered about how ACEs affect other crucial facets of a person’s wellbeing, such schooling. Furthermore, we don’t fully understand how children and adolescents perceive ACEs, how these experiences vary among populations living in different parts of the world outside of the US, or how other childhood adversity experiences, aside from the common ACEs examined, affect significant outcomes (Stewart-Tufescu et al., 2022).

 

• Suggestions for Upcoming Studies

            Understanding the larger socioeconomic background is crucial in the current discourse about childhood adversity and its connections to a number of detrimental social and health effects. Therefore, people who are now suffering it need to be assisted by policy and practice (Walsh et al., 2019). Research should be integrated into multidimensional data to better study ACEs, for instance, and investment in machine learning and other contemporary tools to enable more robust ACE research should be taken into consideration to gain better insight into adverse childhood experiences. Future research should also examine the development and robust evaluation of programs by using assessment tools and intervention strategies in the appropriate areas.

• SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1       Summary

The results emphasize that adverse childhood trauma has lasting physiological, psychological, and behavioral effects, creating a growing demand for healthcare services. Many individuals continue to need medical and psychological care long after their traumatic experiences have ended. Several factors contribute to these negative outcomes, such as genetic predispositions, lifestyle choices, and socio-economic conditions. These factors interact with Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) to shape long-term health. For example, individuals with a genetic tendency towards mental health conditions or chronic illnesses may be more vulnerable and seek healthcare services more frequently. Additionally, lifestyle behaviors like poor diet, lack of exercise, and smoking which often develop during childhood can worsen health risks, further increasing the need for healthcare over time.

5.2       Conclusion

The significant, long-lasting effects of childhood trauma are well-established in the literature. ACEs are strongly linked to higher healthcare costs in adulthood, placing a heavy strain on public healthcare systems and social programs. Addressing the long-term consequences of childhood trauma is essential, as its impact goes beyond individual health to affect societal and economic well-being. The rising demand for public assistance underscores the importance of proactive measures to reduce the negative effects of ACEs and lessen their financial and social burdens.

5.3       Recommendations

To better address the long-term effects of childhood trauma, future research should focus on assessing the effectiveness of prevention programs and culturally appropriate interventions. By identifying gaps in existing studies, policymakers and healthcare providers can more effectively allocate resources to initiatives that reduce the societal burden of ACEs.

Key recommendations include:

• Conducting more comprehensive studies to ensure that findings apply to diverse populations.
• Implementing standardized ACE assessment tools to improve consistency in research findings and make cross-study comparisons easier.
• Evaluating the effectiveness of trauma-informed care and ACE prevention programs in reducing long-term healthcare costs.
• Policy initiatives should also prioritize enhancing trauma-informed care practices and increasing access to early intervention programs. These steps will lead to more accurate, useful insights about the long-term effects of ACEs.

Additionally, understanding the broader societal impact of childhood trauma can help shape evidence-based policies aimed at preventing and mitigating its negative outcomes. Key organizations, like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), have an important role in addressing ACEs by:

• Innovating data collection and surveillance to better understand the prevalence and effects of ACEs.
• Expanding ACE prevention programs and promoting positive childhood experiences to build resilience and support at-risk families.
• Raising awareness among policymakers, educators, healthcare professionals, and community leaders to address ACEs across multiple sectors.

Advocating for the impact of ACEs in healthcare requires viewing childhood trauma as a public health issue rather than just an individual concern. Advocacy efforts should focus on transforming healthcare systems to provide better support for those affected by ACEs. By raising awareness, implementing systemic changes, and prioritizing prevention and healing, society can reduce the effects of childhood trauma and improve long-term health outcomes for future generations. To foster a healthier society, it is crucial to support laws that protect both children and adults impacted by ACEs, while creating environments that reduce the risk of harm. By investing in children, supporting families, and strengthening communities, we can prevent ACEs and reduce their long-term impact, ultimately creating a safer society for everyone.

 

 

 

REFERNCES

Allen, M., & Donkin, A. (2015). The impact of adverse experiences in the home on the health of children and young people, and inequalities in prevalence and effects. London: UCL Institute of Health Equity.

Bellis M.A, Hughes K, Ford K, Ramos Rodriguez G, Sethi D, Passmore J. (2019). Life course health consequences and associated annual costs of adverse childhood experiences across Europe and North America: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Public Health 4(10), e517-e528. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31492648/

Bethell, C. D., Newacheck, P., Hawes, E., & Halfon, N. (2014). Adverse childhood experiences: Assessing the impact on health and school engagement and the mitigating role of resilience. Health affairs, 33(12), 2106-2115.

Blodgett, C., & Lanigan, J. D. (2018). The association between adverse childhood experience (ACE) and school success in elementary school children. School psychology quarterly, 33(1), 137.

Bywaters, P., Bunting, L., Davidson, G., Hanratty, J., Mason, W., McCartan, C., & Steils, N. (2016). The relationship between poverty, child abuse and neglect: An evidence review. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

Center for Disease Control and Prevention (2024). About Adverse Childhood Experiences.  https://www.cdc.gov/aces/about/index.html

Downey, C., & Crummy, A. (2021). The impact of childhood trauma on children’s wellbeing and adult behavior. European Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 6(1), 100237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejtd.2021.100237

Felitti, V. J., Anda, R. F., Nordenberg, D., Williamson, D. F., Spitz, A. M., Edwards, V., & Marks, J. S. (1998). Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to many of the leading causes of death in adults: The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study. American journal of preventive medicine, 14(4), 245-258.

Finkelhor, D. (2020). Trends in Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) in the United States. Child Abuse & Neglect, 108, 104641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104641

Ford, K., Barton, E., Newbury, A., Hughes, K., Bezeczky, Z., Roderick, J., & Bellis, M. (2019). Understanding the prevalence of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) in a male offender population in Wales: the prisoner ACE survey.

Hakamata, Y., Suzuki, Y., Kobashikawa, H., & Hori, H. (2022). Neurobiology of early life adversity: A systematic review of meta-analyses towards an integrative account of its neurobiological trajectories to mental disorders. Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology, 65, 100994. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yfrne.2022.100994

Hargreaves, M., Mouton, C., Liu, J., Zhou, Y., Blot, W. (2019). Adverse Childhood Experiences and Health Care Utilization in a Low-Income Population. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved.  https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31130549/

Heberle, A. E., Obus, E. A., & Gray, S. a. O. (2020). An intersectional perspective on the intergenerational transmission of trauma and state‐perpetrated violence. Journal of Social Issues, 76(4), 814–834. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12404

Houchin, R. (2005). Social exclusion and imprisonment in Scotland. Glasgow: Glasgow Caledonian University.https://www.gov.scot/publications/scottish-crime-justice-survey-2014-15-partnerabuse/

Hughes, K., Bellis, M. A., Hardcastle, K. A., Sethi, D., Butchart, A., Mikton, C., & Dunne, M. P. (2017). The effect of multiple adverse childhood experiences on health: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet public health, 2(8), e356-e366.

Hughes, K., Ford, K., Bellis, M. A., Glendinning, F., Harrison, E., & Passmore, J. (2021). Health and financial costs of adverse childhood experiences in 28 European countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet Public Health, 6(11), e848–e857. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2468-2667(21)00232-2

Juruena, M. F., Eror, F., Cleare, A. J., & Young, A. H. (2020). The role of early life stress in HPA axis and anxiety. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, 141–153. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9705-0_9

Koball, A. M., Domoff, S. E., Klevan, J., Olson-Dorff, D., Borgert, A., & Rasmussen, C. (2020). The impact of adverse childhood experiences on healthcare utilization in children. Child Abuse & Neglect, 111, 104797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104797

Leal, A. S. M., & Silvers, J. A. (2020). Neurobiological markers of resilience to Early-Life adversity during adolescence. Biological Psychiatry Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging, 6(2), 238–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpsc.2020.08.004

Madigan, S., Deneault, A., Racine, N., Park, J., Thiemann, R., Zhu, J., Dimitropoulos, G., Williamson, T., Fearon, P., Cénat, J. M., McDonald, S., Devereux, C., & Neville, R. D. (2023). Adverse childhood experiences: a meta‐analysis of prevalence and moderators among half a million adults in 206 studies. World Psychiatry, 22(3), 463–471. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.21122

Mao, W., & Agyapong, V. I. O. (2021). The role of Social Determinants in Mental health and resilience After Disasters: Implications for public health policy and practice. Frontiers in Public Health, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2021.658528

Mazzeo, G., & Bendixen, R. (2022). Community-Based Interventions for Childhood Trauma: A scoping review. OTJR Occupational Therapy Journal of Research, 43(1), 14–23. https://doi.org/10.1177/15394492221091718

Morrow, A. S., & Villodas, M. T. (2018). Direct and indirect pathways from adverse childhood experiences to high school dropout among high‐risk adolescents. Journal of research on adolescence, 28(2), 327-341.

Moustafa, A. A., Parkes, D., Fitzgerald, L., Underhill, D., Garami, J., Levy-Gigi, E., … & Misiak, B. (2021). The relationship between childhood trauma, early-life stress, and alcohol and drug use, abuse, and addiction: An integrative review. Current Psychology, 40, 579-584.

Murphey, D. (2014). Adverse childhood experiences: National and state-level prevalence. Child Trends.

Nie, Y., Wen, L., Song, J., Wang, N., Huang, L., Gao, L., & Qu, M. (2022). Emerging trends in epigenetic and childhood trauma: Bibliometrics and visual analysis. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.925273

Peterson C, Aslam M.V., Niolon P. H, Bacon S., Bellis M.A., Mercy J. A., Florence C. (2023) Economic Burden of Health Conditions Associated With Adverse Childhood Experiences Among US Adults. JAMA Network Open.  https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2812583

Reese, E. M., Barlow, M. J., Dillon, M., Villalon, S., Barnes, M. D., & Crandall, A. (2022). Intergenerational Transmission of Trauma: The mediating effects of family health. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(10), 5944. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19105944

Roos, L. E., Mota, N., Afifi, T. O., Katz, L. Y., Distasio, J., & Sareen, J. (2013). Relationship between adverse childhood experiences and homelessness and the impact of axis I and II disorders. American journal of public health, 103(S2), S275-S281.

Scotland, I. S. D. (2017). Alcohol-Related Hospital Statistics Scotland 2016/17.

Soltan, F., Cristofalo, D., Marshall, D., Purgato, M., Taddese, H., Vanderbloemen, L., Barbui, C., & Uphoff, E. (2022). Community-based interventions for improving mental health in refugee children and adolescents in high-income countries. Cochrane Library, 2022(5). https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd013657.pub2

Stempel, H., Cox-Martin, M., Bronsert, M., Dickinson, L. M., & Allison, M. A. (2017). Chronic school absenteeism and the role of adverse childhood experiences. Academic pediatrics, 17(8), 837-843.

Stewart-Tufescu, A., Struck, S., Taillieu, T., Salmon, S., Fortier, J., Brownell, M., … & Afifi, T. O. (2022). Adverse childhood experiences and education outcomes among adolescents: linking survey and administrative data. International journal of environmental research and public health, 19(18), 11564.

Taylor-Robinson, D. C., Straatmann, V. S., & Whitehead, M. (2018). Adverse childhood experiences or adverse childhood socioeconomic conditions?. The Lancet Public Health, 3(6), e262-e263.

Valdez, R. (2024). Healthcare spending 26 percent higher among adults who had adverse childhood experiences | Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

https://www.ahrq.gov/news/blog/ahrqviews/healthcare-costs-childhood-experiences.html

Walsh, D., McCartney, G., Smith, M., & Armour, G. (2019). Relationship between childhood socioeconomic position and adverse childhood experiences (ACEs): a systematic review. J Epidemiol Community Health, 73(12), 1087-1093.

Webster, E. M. (2022). The impact of adverse childhood experiences on health and development in young children. Global Pediatric Health, 9, 2333794X221078708.

 

Signup For KARA’s FREE Friday Morning Updates

All Adults Are the Protectors of All Children

INVISIBLECHILDREN – KARA (KIDS AT RISK ACTION

“What we do to our children, they will do to our society”

(Pliny the Elder, 2000 years ago)

 

#childabuse,#childhoodtrauma,#childprotection,#mentalhealth,#kidsatrisk,#kara,#childwellbeing,#economicburden,#capebretonuniversity,#investigativereport,#publichealth,#mentalhealth