Wednesday was the first morning I woke to find less than prefect weather outside to greet me for my morning run. It was the kind of dark and stormy that looked like it could really let loose. There was a greenish tint to the clouds hanging just over downtown Minneapolis, and a wind that whispered of a possible wickedness. Throwing caution to a mounting wind, I decided to walk the three something miles to the Mill City Museum. I had attempted to see this museum on Monday, as it came highly recommended for it's unique history and design, but found it closed after taking the longest rout possible to get there. But I was ready to give it another shot, and thought it would be the perfect thing to do before my meeting with Nancy Riestenberg that afternoon at a nearby coffee shop.
Now looking back, I'm not totally sure why I didn't bring my rain jacket, I guess I had built up a false sense of security after so many gorgeous days. About half way there I started to smell the rain, and felt the first few drops, leaves started ripping through the streets in huge yellow clouds. I quickly tucked all electronics into the inner belly of my backpack, and started to pick up my already fast pace. And then it totally ripped. Looking a lot like a hurricane on the Mississippi, it probably would have been a good idea to just follow what others were doing and duck inside some nearby building. However, encouraged by the few other reckless souls still skittering about, I headed across the bridge that would bring me to the museum side of the Mississippi. I was soaked within minutes, so by the time I reached the museum I looked more like I was ready to go swimming in the river than tour this cities' tribute to their history of grain production. The receptionist's face looked like she was in agreement, but there was no way I was turning back now especially after Monday's debacle and the effort of the last half and hour.
I resolved to buying a sweatshirt from the gift shop to change into, and hang up as many layers of wet cloths as was socially acceptable in the coat room. I ended up in just my soaking leggings, sans skirt, and newly purchased sweatshirt. Embarrassing or not, that was the plan and I was sticking to it. The museum itself was really well displayed. I was impressed that the first exhibit I looked at was a photo journal of a homeless woman who had occupied the mill with many others before the final fire that destroyed it. The entire museum was set within the ruins of the old grain mill and allowed for a good sense of just how huge the whole production was. Some of these ruins were still intact and part of the tour was going up an old elevator to the eighth story of a grain tower to see some of the remaining equipment, and go out on an observation deck with an incredible view of the river and city below. It was about this time that I realized that my undergarments were soaking through my sweatshirt, most notably across my chest and in excess under my armpits. It was time to go.
Questionably dry, still wearing my new sweatshirt, I headed back across the bridge to meet with Nancy. I faced this meeting with a similar disbelief as my meeting with Denise, especially because of my trouble getting to her the day before, but all in all this interview thing was starting to feel a lot more natural. So when she she showed up, it was with excitement that I introduced myself and settled into a booth with warm drinks. I started with a brief overview of what I am doing and looking for, and the experiences that have brought me to restorative justice. Immediately she knew what she wanted me to get out of the meeting. I very quickly realized and felt thankful for the fact that I was getting a one-on-one crash course from the woman who the Department of Education has hired to teach this stuff professionally to people all over the county. So I scribbled notes as fast as possible, and tried to keep up with the quite strength and conviction of her expert words as she presented a spirited crash course on RJ 101.
First things needed to be set straight. What was the difference between mediation and restorative justice, and what is the continuum of restorative justice? Nancy described the difference between mediation and restorative justice as being one of power. Mediation is used in a situation where two parties have equal power(i.e. both parties have grievances), and come together in a process that is facilitated with the goal of coming to a win-win situation. Restorative justice is used in a situation where harm has been inflicted by one party, which means there is an imbalance of power between the victim and the offender. Methods of restorative justice therefore try to even out this imbalance by first requiring that the offender acknowledges and recognizes the harm they have inflicted.
She explained that at its core restorative justice is about relationships, and repairing damaged relationships. This varies greatly from the traditional judicial system which is about laws and rules and the main issue is about the enforcement of laws and punishment for breaking laws. Restorative justice takes a different approach that sees the main issues as the harm done by an offense to the individuals and the community and is therefore based on individuals' interaction with the crime. This method recognizes that the harm done by an action is different every time according to who the victim, offender, and community is. In this way the victim is seen as an individual, not just a victim of vandalism/rape/murder/theft but so-and-so who experienced vandalism/rape/murder/theft. This approach takes into account how the individual received that harm; was it monetarily, physical, emotional, psychological, was there secondary harms such as shame, exclusion, isolation(only the victim can provide this information)? Through careful consideration and involvement of the individuals, there is room to acknowledge that while these acts are never ok, people respond to them differently and so need different measures to feel like the harm has been mended. This reasoning is also applied to the offender, and looks at the offender as an individual as well as the reasons for that person committing the harm. By separating the action from the person, there is room to hold offenders accountable while maintaining that they are good and needed members of society. By seeing victims as individuals who are more than just the harm that was done to them, there is room to separate the shame, guilt, and rage caused by the offense from the possibility of leading a full, healthy, safe, and respected life in the community.
In order for this to work restorative justice requires that the three parties, victim, offender, and community, are represented and participate throughout the circle process. In order to find out what harm has actually been done, there needs to be conversations with the victim, and this information is central in all else that happens throughout the process. There also needs to be conversations with the offender and the community about the offense committed. The process requires that all parties willingly agree to participate in further communication and action through the process, and come to a consensus about the action that the offender needs to take to restore the harm done. Nancy clarified that while there are programs and models that call themselves restorative justice, if they do not involve these three parties and come to a consensus about the action that needs to be taken it is not truly RJ. These other court systems or approaches may be alternatives to traditional judicial avenues but unless they include the voice of all three parties at every level of the process, they are still punitive by nature and are focused around the punishment placed on an offender. The involvement of the offender in coming to consensus about the action they must take creates a much greater sense of by in, commitment to, and engagement with the mending of harm. It allows them to see that they are fixing what they did wrong. Because this is supported and agreed upon by both the victim and community, the offender sees that they are forgiven and welcomed back into the community by the very people they hurt.
Essentially there are three parts to the restorative justice circle process. First is preparation of the three parties through individual meetings where the facilitator asks and answers questions. These questions include asking what the participant needs to feel safe and comfortable, whether that be the presence of a safe person or object that will put them at ease and allow them to engage. Participants are also informed about what the process will look like and how it will go so that they can be as much at ease as possible during the process(this is dramatically different from the punitive system we are all use to, so if you're having a gut reaction to the idea of being concerned with an offender's level of comfort please take a deep breath and a big step back. Remember that the goal of this process is to have this person engage as a healthy part of the community, not keep them down 'where they belong' forever paying for their action without the chance of reconnecting. Interesting how our incarceration system constantly worries and talks about recidivism, but offers no real way for offenders to find the acceptance, connection, and forgiveness that is necessary to re-enter their community successfully). The next step is the actual circle process where everybody is in one room and meets to discuss each person's experience of the offense. The way this is conducted is in a circle and a talking piece is used so that everybody knows that whoever has the object is the only one who is speaking, no exceptions. This way everybody is hears what is said without interruption, and will be heard by everybody else present. The offender starts first by acknowledgment the offense, and it goes from there that the victim, community, facilitator, and offender take turns voicing their thoughts and responding to the others. Through this method a consensus is reached about what action needs to be taken to mend the harm. Four things this agreement needs is: ways for the offender to make amends with the victim, a plan to not recommit the offense, a way to give back to the larger community that was harmed, and anything else besides those things that the victim may need to feel ok with moving forward(like for real feel ok, all out on the table, to the point where they can walk away and feel good about continuing their life, wow). The last part is following up with everybody to see what their experience was during the process, and talking with the offender to plan out and help them take the steps they need to take the agreed upon actions.
This all seems too good to be true right, but it is happening right now in real life, and it is working. And not just for small ticket able offenses, but big-time dirty, scary, terrify offenses like abuse, rape, and murder. This approach is being applied at all levels taking into consideration the level of experience and skill of the facilitator, and again as always, on a case by case basis. This led me again to my reoccurring question, how do I USE this extremely powerful information?!!!!! Nancy?
Great, she had an answer for me, whew. We talked for the remainder of time about principles of the circle process that I can start applying to my work with disengaged youth, people who have been through trauma, and general community members while working on art projects. One way to start incorporating this model is simply to start each art session with the circle process and a talking piece In this way I can start to ask simple get to know you questions that lead to more challenging get to know you questions throughout our time working together. The first session may ask questions like where are you from, what is your name, what is your favorite color? The second session may ask questions about their experience with art, views on tagging, community art, and how the community may feel about tagging. By using this model of the circle process positive and strong relationships can be built very quickly by holding the standards of common respect and acknowledgment of individuals and creating a sense of security and being valued. As Nancy pointed out about half of any group is introverted, and the circle process slows everything down so that everybody has a chance to participate with no one person dominating. It also allows for acknowledgment of everybody even if they don't talk, when they are holding the talking piece that is their time to be recognized as part of the group. For those of you who have worked with youth, perhaps specifically teenagers, you know that questions like “what is your name” are perfect grounds for a power struggle(what more perfectly infuriating thing than refusing to say your name). However the circle process bypasses all of that by making the goal something different entirely, the goal is to respect, see, and welcome each member to help them to feel safe to engage. Its not about forcing participation, its about getting them to WANT to participate(again going back to switching the win-lose paradigm). From there we get to go do whatever fun project we're working on, but this sense of by-in to their own self-worth and respected place in the community is the real objective. Add to that the power of art and the act of creating with teenagers' incredible energy, and BAMO I think it could be pretty amazing!
Parting ways with Nancy, I had the sense that there were so many more things I didn't even know to ask about that she had knowledge of. What an incredible participant in this movement, and excellent teacher of restorative justice as an applicable model. I feel so fortunate to have revived such direct guidance and help in understanding the basics of the restorative justice model, and walked through the ways it can be immediately applied to community involved art. So thank you Nancy!
Nancy is currently in the process of publishing a book through Living Justice Press called Circle in the Square. Her other book recommendations are:
Heart of Hope
Reengaging Disconnected youth
Unlearning Violence
The Little Book of the Circle Process
Tomorrow I get the chance to talk with another organization, Kulture Club, which is an arts based program that works with disadvantaged youth in downtown Minneapolis. I look forward to talking with them, and adding another piece to the puzzle.
No comments:
Post a Comment