Tag Archives: mediation

‘Zero Tolerance’ of bullies? Hungary’s schools offer another response to conflict mediation

Posted on by
Reply

As school boards, state and local governments draft legislation to respond to increased reports of bullying, the term “zero tolerance” often comes up. When New Jersey recently implemented its sweeping “Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights,” the “zero tolerance” formula appeared in several news reports.

I posed a question to a restorative justice discussion group on LinkedIn.com, asking if a zero tolerance approach is the wisest choice for conflict management. Not surprisingly, the RJ practitioners and volunteers who responded were unanimous: No, it is not the wisest approach.

One member, writing from London, England, pointed me to a video — Intertwined –produced by a school-based conflict management program in Hungary. When he added that the video includes English subtitles, I gave it a click, and I include the link here and embed the video below.  The fairly fast-paced video includes a lively music track.

Readers who are familiar with restorative practices will immediately see those practices acted out in the various scenarios by the students and faculty. Instead of isolating, stigmatizing and expelling troublesome students, the program emphasizes creating an inclusive climate through peer support and engagement. Conflicts aren’t ignored or dismissed, but they are not reflexively handled through heavy-handed discipline or ostracism.

Special thanks to Martin Wright of the Lambeth Mediation Service, and contributor to the website RJ Online.

Intertwined – community conflict resolution in school from Balazs Benedek on Vimeo.

Oprah Winfrey Network reprises ‘Confronting’ series featuring victim-offender face-to-face conferences

Posted on by
1

Victim-offender conferences are a primary tool used in restorative justice programs. Tonight (Sept. 17, 2011) at 10 p.m. Eastern time, the Oprah Winfrey Network (OWN) will reprise its Confronting series, featuring an example of a victim-offender conference.

Tonight’s episode features the face-to-face meeting between a mother whose son was killed on his prom night and the woman whose impaired driving under the influence caused his death.

According to the OWN website:

“Confronting… documents the powerful and sometimes painful mediation process, where victim and offender come together to find some measure of closure. Mediation programs currently exist in 48 states across the country, and with each encounter the results are dramatic and life changing for both the victim and the offender. Every episode will follow both victim and offender as they prepare to come together, face to face, for the most important conversation of their lives.”

At the risk of seeming picky, practitioners of restorative justice often differentiate between the term “mediation” and the process they call “victim-offender conferencing,”  although the face-to-face conferences certainly involve elements of mediation.  The terminology has evolved as restorative practices have been introduced and followed.

Here is a sneak preview of tonight’s program.

http://www.oprah.com/common/omplayer_embed.html?article_id=30608

Unfortunately, access to this excellent program is limited to pay-TV subscribers whose cable packages include Oprah’s network. It’s another example of the digital divide.
[amazon_enhanced asin="1561485861" /]

Anti-bullying bill: Did NJ go too far?

Posted on by
3

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

 Reporter Chris Jansing posed the question on NBC Nightly News last Wednesday (Sept, 7, 2011).  Her report focused on the implementation of New Jersey’s Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights, signed into law January 6, 2011, by Gov. Chris Christie.

Both houses of the New Jersey legislature passed the anti-bullying bill in November 2010, with strong bipartisan support and wide margins.  Driven by the highly publicized case of homophobic cyber-bullying, resulting in the suicide of Rutgers University student Tyler Clementi, the law is considered the strongest, most comprehensive anti-bullying legislation passed so far in any of the 50 states, as governments attempt to address  social problems with stringent laws.

Several sources included in Jansing’s report cited the unintended consequence of adding strain on school systems imposed by the new anti-bullying bill — systems already dealing with a host of social problems in addition to violence and bullying in schools.  Specifically, they pointed to the additional training requirements, the appointment of anti-bullying specialists in each school and the manadatory requirement to report all incidents of bullying.  [pullquote]Is zero tolerance blocking flexibility right up front?[/pullquote]
The issue not addressed so far is whether yet another “Zero-Tolerance” policy is the wisest approach to social problems.  In its laudable, swift passage of the Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights, did the legislators have to impose a zero-tolerance policy, which inherently diminishes the ability of teachers and administrators to use wisdom and discretion in incidents which are unique and complex?

Is the zero-tolerance approach to social problems just another example of “get tough on crime” laws which provide emotional satisfaction to voters and policymakers, but which bring a host of unintended results and court orders?  One need look no further than the crisis in prison overcrowding, which can be traced directly to the passage of “get tough” policies such as “three strikes and you’re out,” or mandatory sentences for specific offenses.

Certainly, bullying in schools and communities, cyber-bullying and violence of all kinds demand swift and wise responses.  But the question should be asked:  why not address child welfare through a range of options — including mediation, peer counseling, anti-bullying curricula such as this and this,  and books — as part of broader focus on creating what Dr. Tom Cavanagh has called a “culture of care” in schools?

Raising these issues about zero tolerance policies is not intended to detract from the value of the landmark legislation now being implemented in New Jersey.  I applaud this bold and comprehensive effort to address the range of social problems posed by bullying, harassment and violence system-wide. In fact, maybe these actions in New Jersey will play a role in “helping seat-of-the-pants peacemakers see they are not alone.”

In Colorado: Crime Victims’ Right to Know Restorative Justice is Available

Posted on by
Reply

Restorative Justice legislation is moving ahead in the Colorado Legislature, in the form of  HB-11-1032.

It acknowledges a crime victim’s right to know about restorative justice, and to choose to participate in restorative process.

This legislation is being carried forward by Colorado State Rep. Pete Lee (reppete@gmail.com)

(If the link above does not work, copy and paste this link into your browser:  http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/clics2011a/csl.nsf/fsbillcont/
D9ABC2E028CA4D3487257808008012EA?Open&file=1032_ren.pdf)

Isn’t it worth a few keystrokes to send Rep. Lee a message of support?  Is this some news you could tweet or repost?  How hard is that?

Special thanks to Lisa Rea.

Add New

 

Handling hurtful statements

Posted on by
4

Let’s say you’re a classroom teacher, or a parent, and you face a situation you’d really like to resolve, peaceably, for all parties involved.  Maybe you’re a pastor or a small-time lawyer, or soccer coach, and you just need some simple, practical help in resolving a dispute, without banging heads together or involving the U.N.

If you Google “mediation” or “mediator,” you’ll find screens full of hits involving high-powered corporate lawyers and court-ordered cases.  Where is a “seat-of-the-pants” peacemaker supposed to turn?  For selfish reasons, I will say, this blog, of course!

Combatants almost always resort to “hurtful statements”:   vicious, well-targeted verbal attacks that are proven to draw blood.  You step in, metaphorically (or even literally) covered in spattered blood.  What guidelines should you, Accidental Peacemaker,  use?  Even the list below will have to be adapted, because of the heat of battle and the real-world demands of the situation at hand.

Erin Brit is a professional mediator.  Her background is in the law.  On her blog, she posted some practical advice for handling hurtful statements.  Check out her six tips and see if they might fit the situation you’re facing.  In my humble opinion (IMHO), they apply to every human interaction.  Please share your own responses in the comment area below.

Here’s what Erin Birt suggests:

Hurtful statements can derail and/or prolong mediation and the collaborative process.  It is a common occurrence which must be addressed immediately in order to stay focused on the main goal of resolving a legal issue.  Below are some general principles for how to handle hurtful statements during mediation or a collaborative meeting (or at home).

As a party, when a hurtful statement is directed to you, it is important to pause, breathe, think, and try not to respond immediately. If needed, ask to take a break. Give yourself time to acknowledge how you truly feel about the person’s comments.  Often if you wait a few minutes to respond, you will understand better why the person said the hurtful statement.

Hurtful statements can be a result of ignorance, confusion, misunderstanding, or lack of information.  If you can determine the possible motivation for the hurtful statement, you can respond appropriately.

If you chose to respond, the following are general principles:

1. Be direct.  Talk to the person that offended you and not to others.

2. Be specific. Be brief and explain exactly what offended you.

3. Be timely. Do not address this issue days or weeks later. Memories will fade and perceptions will change.

4. Use “I” statements to communicate how the statements affected you.

5. Explicitly state what changes you want the person to make. Ex: Do not make derogatory remarks in front of the children.

6. Acknowledge change.  Express appreciation for the change in behavior, if possible.

Remember, not all hurtful statements need a response. If you determine the statement was made due to ignorance or ill will, it is okay to decline to respond.

A lot of time in mediation and settlement conferences is devoted to addressing hurtful statements. As a practitioner, keeping an open mind and asking additional questions when hurtful statements are made can help clear up misunderstandings and allow the parties to refocus and resume working on resolving the legal issues.

Meet Janice Jerome: A Passion for Peacemaking Circles and Restorative Justice

Posted on by
Reply

A friend from my church’s Education for Ministry class offered to introduce me to a practitioner and trainer of Restorative Justice methods, the kind that utilizes peacemaking circles.

Janice Jerome, peacemaker, mediator.

On a rainy, ugly Saturday Georgia afternoon, Janice Jerome drove 45 minutes to share her passion for peacemaking with me.

Janice burst forth from her truck, offering a welcoming hug.  No handshakes for us!  She returned to her vehicle to retrieve a book bag filled with a mini-library.   She shared with me two books from the series, The Little Books of Justice and Peacebuilding, one by a grandfather of the restorative justice movement, Howard Zehr, the other by Kay Pranis, a noted author, trainer and practitioner in the field, based at the Minnesota Office of Corrections.

Right away, Janice disabused me of the notion that Peacemaking Circles are limited in application to the justice system.  She reeled off a list of settings in which the methodology has worked, based on her own experiences.   Wherever there is a community facing a challenge, a conflict, a rupture, the method offers the potential of restoration and wholeness, she said.  Success depends on the community members, she said, though it seemed clear to my “newbie” eyes that the facilitator brings much to the process.

Janice believes there are individuals who know early in life that they are peacemakers.  Their circumstances will vary, but their orientation toward peacemaking is distinctly present.

At some point during her presentation, Janice commented, “You may have noticed that I haven’t said anything about God or Jesus.  That’s because God is a given.”   I asked, “God is the ground of our being?”  and she went right back into her presentation.  I took that to be a yes.

Among her mentors, Janice counts Dominic Barter, who pioneered the use of restorative circles in the poverty-stricken favelas of Brazil. [pullquote] [Editor's Update:  Dominic Barter, will be sharing the Restorative Circle process during a 5-day learning event in Champaign, IL October 12-16., 2011.][/pullquote]

As we shared a few personal experiences,  Janice pointed out the difference between love and understanding.  The primary thing is love, she said. Understanding may not come right away.  The point is, love is what we have to offer, even before understanding comes.

To reach Janice, email her at:  Janice.Jerome@live.com

What makes a Peacemaker tick?

Posted on by
2

Peacemakers.  Mediators. Negotiators.  What makes them tick?  Don’t they hold any strong beliefs or opinions they’d rather defend than compromise?  Are they squeamish about disagreements, conflicts, arguments, so they feel compelled to plead with all parties to “be nice”?

Or, do they really believe there is a middle way to be found, even in the hottest conflicts? Do any of them really believe peace is possible between sworn adversaries and parties to blood feuds that have lasted for generations?

This blog will explore peacemaking and mediation in its many settings, with a special focus on the individuals who feel called to stand in the breach and dare to envision the possibility of agreement, conciliation…maybe even PEACE.

Naturally, peacemakers on the world stage will be subjects for discussion.  But this blog will look first to the schoolyard peacemakers, the classroom teachers of fairness and mutual respect, and the people of conscience who stand up to bullies in all settings.

No discussion of peace can go very far without incorporating the idea of justice.  There is great wisdom in the slogan, “No justice, no peace!”  It’s more than likely the concept of Restorative Justice and Peacemaking Circles will enter the conversation early and often.

Before venturing, like a peacemaker, into the fray, however, I knew I’d need to look first for signs of a sense of humor among the practitioners of the peacemaking arts.   Let’s face it, the idea of being the person who brings peace can tempt even the humblest to grandiosity and bloated ego.   Evidence of self-deprecating humor among mediators would be a promising sign.

Fortunately, John Kenyon showed the promised might be fulfilled in his posting, Mediation Jokes II, at mediate.com:

Judge Roberts chipped out of the bunker for the fifth time and grumbled “I don’t know how you managed to get your handicap down again. I don’t have any time to practice with all the cases I have on my docket.” “Well I’ve got a full docket as well, but I don’t actually try them all. I send every case to volunteer mediators and that reduces my work load by two thirds. And the best bit is it doesn’t cost a penny!” said Judge Fowler lining up a 15 foot putt. Judge Roberts looked confused “Why would anyone volunteer to mediate court cases for free?” “Oh its simple.” replied Judge Fowler beaming as the putt went in. “Thirty years ago we told them it would provide social justice, improve community relations, provide the underprivileged better access to the legal system, and be the first step towards world peace. Don’t you just love it when the socially responsible forget they live in a capitalist system?

So, if you are a peacemaker/mediator with a sense of humor, have at it.  Or, if you are a wannabe peacemaker with a little idealism and plenty of questions, you are welcome here.