What I'm mainly wondering about is how you would specify (operationalise) healthy, supportive relationships between adults and youth and healthy peer to peer relationships. How do you detect their presence or their absence?

I cannot speak for child peer to peer relationships.  But "healthy" relationships between adult and child and the support of community are necessary not simply for the psychological comforts and emotional tools they provide, but for the fact that children are dependent upon others for their basic welfare: nourishment, safety, education.  Children who survive trauma often cannot rely either on their families or communities for these things, depending on the source of the trauma.  It is one thing to speak of confidence, being strong, having emotional companionship and encouragement.  But without the guarantee that you will be fed, be safe, be given the information and resources you need to live in the world, all of which require the time, money, and commitment from other humans, invested in the future of these children, resilience is compromised.  So the role of community and healthy relationships in resilience, I think, must be rooted in their ability to provide -unconditionally, for a child- these practical resources.  

I think to the state of mental health care in America.  There is no shortage of support groups, therapies, etc.  Most of the people I have met in the mental health system have suffered some kind of trauma as a child, be it severe poverty, sexual and physical abuse, abandonment ...  which throws them into a cycle of disenfranchisement because those supports that were supposed to be there from the outset were not : being moved from home to home, having no one to advocate for their education or health care, living in fear of adults, a family, violence, being used to meet the needs of others (sex, drugs, whatever) and not having their needs met.  Then once they reach adulthood, all of the strength and self-worth and kind platitudes in the world can't save them if they cannot hold a job or manage finances, form healthy relationships, if they have no access to good health care, if no one has made any long term investment in them and their success.  And that investment is more than emotional support.  It has to be financial.  It has to involve long term education.  It has to extend beyond the age of 18.  And I believe therein lies the key to resilience.  It's no 100% guarantee.  But without these things, it's an almost 100% guarantee that their ability to be resilient will be compromised.  

I really believe this.  I really think that yes, most people are capable from recovering from anything that doesn't kill them.  But it's not a matter of willpower and confidence and warm fuzzy relationships, though those are important.  I think educational, health & financial resources have to be there for psychological recovery to occur.  For one, I think these are basic necessities for emotional strength anyway.  Also, they keep a person in a community, rather than on the fringes enfranchising them.  And this enfranchisement  provides opportunity to learn basic life skills and acquire resources (human, financial, informational) -which will make any kind of relapse less dangerous- that you can't get if you are feeling really strong and valuable but living on the street, doing drugs, or just hustling your way through life because some childhood trauma put a roadblock between you and where you were going.

Also, "90-95% of people who have traumatic experiences can eventually return to pre-event levels of mental health."  I'm not sure what that means.  Esp. if we are talking about childhood trauma.  You go back to the mental health of an adolescent?  Anyway, I think humans are constantly evolving, adapting, changing.  I don't think you can "go back" to who you were before x, y or z happened.  That doesn't mean you can't be fabulous though.

"This is nothing compared to how Putin rigged Eurovision."