Written in collaboration with Amaza “Scottie” Reid, Mediator, Assistant Attorney General, Maryland and Adjunct Professor, University of Baltimore School of Law
As we all viewed the horrific effects of the earthquake in Haiti, thinking back to other “disasters” of recent memory – the Katrina experience as well as the Tsunami – I think we can all agree that these disasters may bring the best out in people and also, at times, the worst. Some of us may have lived through the stress of a loss of a family member; damage to personal property; a missing relative; temporary hunger or thirst; loss of phone service; etc.
But can any one of us really imagine the stress of several of these events occurring at the same time: The fear of imminent loss of life due to a natural disaster that has no known end, but produces shocking immediate consequences acutely perceived by all senses:
The trauma of being trapped:
Children lost; orphaned; confused; scared:
As the dust settles, reality settles in:”Where is my child?””Is Daddy coming back?””I have no water””Daddy, I am thirsty””But officer, my baby needs food!””Can you find my Mommy?””Where should I go, my house is gone?””It is dark””I am hungry””I am bleeding””I am trapped””I cannot see””The hospital is gone””There is no food””Can someone help?”That is the question — Can Mediators help or will they get in the way? Are Mediators able to help? Are there needs which are unmet or inadequately met by the First Responders as we know them now? First Responders are not to be taken lightly. They are perhaps some of the most fearless, caring people the world has to offer each other.They work in the worst of situations; and are pushed, pulled and tugged by those they serve. Some are there to pull people from buildings; others to give medical care; others to feed, clothe and shelter. The success of First Responders is a great cause for celebration :
However, for every success there are far too many stories of frustration and heartache. Stress prevails. The conditions are, understandably, too much for the people affected by the disaster. People are desperately trying to continue their lives, with no water, food or sanitation:
They may have spent the day looking for a relative among the departed:
Or been told to stay away:
Or, told, “You must stay, we cannot let you in here”:
So they react poorly:
People fight for food and water to feed a child, a dying parent or friend. They feel that needs can be met only through aggression. And the aggression increases, as each day passes without food, shelter and sleep. Some choose other behaviors:
Would an organized team of highly trained mediators, conflict coaches, communication coaches, group facilitators, peacemakers and other professionals with the expertise to provide these services be able to intervene in a helpful way? Not to save bodies, but to save minds; to
counsel; to calm; to be of service not only to victims, but also to first responders as well. What are some of the services that an Early Responder team of mediators, supplemented by these other professionals, may provide?:
Communication Coaching
Preparing people for the delivery of emergency healthcare
Explaining triage
How to communicate your needs
Are your expectations reasonable under the circumstance
Understanding your alternatives
Preparing people for the delivery of food/water
Coaching that cooperation speeds delivery
Coaching that order, not chaos, gets results
Teaching cooperation skills
Advocacy Skills Training
How to communicate your needs effectively
How to deal with bureaucracy
A collaborative exchange for more open communication and sharing
Community Trauma Healing
Creating safe and supportive environments
Learning how trauma affects the brain, body, and mind
Learning conflict transformation skills
Supporting peaceful collaboration
Developing rituals – storytelling, play, spiritual practices
Child Trauma Healing
Giving Children a Voice – the needs of children as voiced by the children themselves need to be heard
Sponsoring children’s discussion groups
Creating opportunities for children to play
Can a protocol be developed where these peacemakers, once on the ground may respond to hot spots; are placed at care distribution sites to deal with the high emotions that are prevalent in such situations; to prepare people in advance for a food drop or distribution; to prepare people for an evacuation. In short, to offer meaningful and effective help that complements and supports the work of the First Responders?We welcome your comments.
“That is the question — Can Mediators help or will they get in the way? Are Mediators able to help? Are there needs which are unmet or inadequately met by the First Responders as we know them now? First Responders are not to be taken lightly. They are perhaps some of the most fearless, caring people the world has to offer each other.They work in the worst of situations; and are pushed, pulled and tugged by those they serve. Some are there to pull people from buildings; others to give medical care; others to feed, clothe and shelter.”
Thomas,
You raised a provocative question.
I will admit without apology that I am not an expert on traumatic events on a global scale. However, I do know one individual who is well acquainted with such trauma. He has a triple role in traumatic events: a pastor, a first responder and police/fire department chaplain. Some of the events he has responded to are the bombing in Oklahoma City, the 9-1-1 terrorist attack in New York, the catastrophic floods in New Orleans and many others.
He has shared his experiences with me on a number of occasions in personal conversation, through a video he made of his experiences and lectures. In each presentation he stresses the same thing. First, the scene is carefully sealed (as much as possible in such overwhelming events); second, those who are permitted on the site are carefully screened by physicians, psychologists and the credentialing agency. If one cannot meet all the expectations, he/she will not be permitted to enter the site.
Another problem he speaks of is how absolutely grotesque the scene is. It assaults every sense: sight, smell, hearing, and appetite, when allowed to take a brief break.
The event has a drastic effect on the care-giver’s mind, heart and soul. The psychotic break-down of a volunteer is not uncommon. More common psychiatric result is post traumatic stress disorder.
I write all this simply to give a “reality check”. Only individuals with the strongest constitution, greatest self-confidence (bordering or past the border of arrogance and narcissism).
One personal observation: traumatic situations are times of enormous emotional reactivity.
When that happens, the logical center of the brain shuts down and survival instincts take over.
If nothing else cries out be careful, this should. Only the most experienced, tough skinned, determined, life-giving (because volunteering may result in death) and team oriented mediator should even consider such a situation.
Sometimes the best thing to do is nothing — except pray, donate money and goods, and pray some more.
After doing this free ranging of my brain, I would strongly suggest mediation will not be effective in these situations.
But remember, this is only my opinion. However, I am confident it is based on fact.
Dale
Dale:
Your comment is much appreciated. We are looking for input from everyone. The “reality check” that you write about certainly raises issues that MUST be considered when deciding appropriate team members, qualifications and team structure. It also suggestst that the team itself will need strong leadership and members who can recognize when fellow team members, themselves, are in need of care. Many agree, as you, that ” pray, donate money and goods, and pray some more” – is the best position, as many have done. This discussion is not designed to replace that, but only to explore whether there is more that can be done, and if so, the appropriate timing for earlier interventions. Thanks for writing Dale. Tom
Responding to disaster and crisis can be one of the most taxing and trying experiences an individual can have. I have been in disasters and have responded to disasters. These include hurricanes, tornados, and war. I am left with one central goal as a responder. “Give Hope”.
Providing hope allows those that are frustrated, terrified, desperate, and angry a way to hang on. Sometimes, that is all that can be done while logistical support is being put into place. As the days go by, the need for hope increases. First responders must be hopeful themselves. They must believe that tomorrow will be a better day–or they will not be able to convey that to others. Hope is manifested through a variety of ways. The mediator must be able to connect at a level that is visceral. They must be able to rally the hopeless ,and reach out to the helpless. Whether through religious faith (utilizing song and prayer), or Joking Kinship (I was in a disaster too), the mediator must connect in order to bring a level of hope that allows victims to hang on until critical needs are meet.
Diane,Thanks for your reply. The value in the Thomas Kilmann tool, or others like it, is not only in idiytifneng our own preferences but being reminded, as well, that there is a whole range of other approaches, each as valid as our own depending on personality and circumstances. Value , left on the table or otherwise, is not always easily identified, nor commonly imaged or defined. If we can learn to expand our ability to play across the whole keyboard of options available in our sessions, keying high notes, mid range or low notes as needed, we’ll ultimately serve our clients and process better at least that’s the idea I’m wrestling with here. I suspect your thought about making sure people have the opportunity to push the envelope speaks to the same point. As always, thanks for the good work. John
Tom,
My experience with crisis situations of that scale are limited to money donations and prayers. So everything I am saying here can best case be counted as an educated guess.
Watching Haiti for example from a distance my first impression would be: Let those people who know how to deal with this situation do their job. The first hours require first of all digging, water and medical aid.
Teaching people how to communicate effectively will probably not be as appreciated as we might want to believe. The initial reaction of people who just lost everything in life is not necessarily to see it as a chance to enhance their communication skills.
Nevertheless I believe that mediators could contribute in other ways. What I could think of is supporting the relief and rescue teams in the background. Coach them on how to bring their message across in a more effective way. Help them to communicate with the other teams so that their efforts can be bundled.
Haiti needs people who can coordinate the delivery of support goods. This is where communication specialists could play a role.
As soon as the dust is settled and the first response teams are gone again, this might be the time to come in as a team of mediators/coaches/communication specialists.
Helping people to set the next steps, take charge of their fate and build a new future.
And without a doubt you, Tom, gained a lot of experience in that area through your Katrina project.
Another way to support people in a crisis might be on a proactive basis (and yet again I am just tossing ideas, not experience).
Take all of the knowledge you gained through the Katrina project and offer it proactively to regions / authorities / support organizations BEFORE they have to deal with a crisis.
That could be a big asset.
I am curious to hear more people react to this topic.
Thanks, Tom, for raising this intriguing discussion!
Sabine
can’t really go wrong with meitador in my opinion. mediation is one of those services that yes it cost 200 bucks or so, but if you don’t do it, then you’ll never know how much money you could’ve saved.
Dear Thomas,
I think you raised an important point, and one worth elaborating. My question is: who needs the mediator? What conflicts do you seek to address?
As fellow mediator I am quite convinced of the method as such, clients less so. And especially in emergency situations people have quite a lot on their minds. So I wonder what actor would go to a mediator in an emergency situation.
Situation 1. Conflicts between local beneficiaries of emergency assistance.
Here you’d have to deal with existential issues. As far as I know and have experienced, conflicts arising in emergency assistance are dealt with creative interventions from the side of the international organizations, and less with mediation as a tool. And it has a point: mediation is not perceived as the quickest of methods. So the mediative part is in he design of the interventions. And ibn that, the Do No Harm method for development cooperation movement is getting more influence lately. One example is CARE currently distributing food only to Haitian women, with the expectation that it has a less chance of violently erupting.
Similar to Sabine’s remark that assistence teams could get assistance in getting their message across, I could imagine a mediator assisting in the analysis and the design of an intervention (addressing common interests between possible conflicting groups, new solutions, etc…).
Situation 2. Conflicts between local beneficiaries and representatives of international organizations providing assistance.
This is a tricky one. Although I am quite sure that these kind of situations do exist, I do not expect emergency organizations to be open and willing to address these. First, there’s so much to do. Secondly, I doubt wether the local beneficiary has a chance to speak out to be heard.
Situation 3. Conflicts between (representatives of) international organizations.
As you said, disasters bring the best out in people and also the worst. So between all the good work done, things go wrong. When conditions are hard and several NGOs and GOs intervene, conflicts in the international scene are bound to happen. People step on each other’s toes, and organizations are getting on each other’s turf. This kind of strife is not often talked about, and it’s not well analysed. But it is known as one of the possible causes for aid causing harm on the scene: competition and distrust between international agencies do not set a good example.
Maybe there are more situations, but these come to my mind right now. I expect a mediator could be most useful in the 2nd and 3rd situations I mentioned. In the last one it is clearly in the interest of the international organizations to find an agreement. In the second situation good solutions to a conflict benefit the local and the organization alike.
And let’s not forget Dale’s reality check: mediators working in this scene will probably be have to be hardened individuals willing to work in swiftly changing and chaotic circumstances and willing to deal with existential issues.
— Kees
To speak from a community mdiaetor perspective – our agency’s mission is to provide conflict resolution services to our community regardless of ability to pay. We do charge on a sliding scale based on income, but our fees are significantly lower than someone in a private practice because we are largely grant subsidized. I have heard, many times, that people feel that providing mediation services for a small fee or free devalues our profession.That’s difficult for me to hear. I hope that every time myself, a member or my staff, or one of our volunteers represents our agency (and our field) in the community it demonstrates how valuable all of our services are. I believe that providing low cost-services serves a portion of the population that, if we didn’t exist, would go without mediation rather than hire a private mdiaetor. This is both for community mediations and mediations in small claims court. Thinking of our client base, I do not see our agency seeing a lot of clients that might otherwise go to a private mdiaetor. There are other highly skilled professions (medicine, law, etc.) where its professionals provide low cost or pro-bono services without devaluing the profession. Why are we different? I know that I definitely sometimes feel devalued by my communities (legal / mediation) by the fact that I’m a community mdiaetor.Abigail, to answer your question, I imagine that we use volunteers for the reason that many non-profits use volunteers (Meals on Wheels, public libraries, etc.). We’re a tiny non-profit doing a lot of work. We would not be able to provide the services that we provide if all of our work was done by salaried staff. At the same time we provide mentoring and training to new mdiaetors as well as a place of gathering, community, mentoring and reflection to experienced mdiaetors.In looking at the article, it looks like the writer went to the NAFCM website to do a little research on community mediation, and that’s where the authors got the NAFCM info. I feel that this harkens back to, a little, the evaluative / facilitative discussion. It depends on what you’re looking for and consumer education could be much better. What would people think of the article if it mentioned many different types of mediation services – talking to a private practice mdiaetor about a personal injury mediation, another about a divorce mediation, and another about mediating corporate contracts in addition to the info about community mediation?
Here is a link to an interesting and thought provoking set thread of comments onthis topic.
http://www.linkedin.com/groupAnswers?viewQuestionAndAnswers=&gid=935617&discussionID=13041249&sik=1265462055727&trk=ug_qa_q&goback=%2Ehom%2Eana_935617_1265462055727_3_1
Victoria, as usual, you provide ilnaluabve insights and sound wisdom. I’m always glad when you take time to comment. Thanks for your stout defense of community mediation programs.Let me say that my own roots are in community mediation. For many years I have volunteered with community mediation programs, served on their boards of directors, and provided pro bono services through them. This is a part of the mediation community I know well, and if in any way I devalued the work that community mediation programs do and all that they achieve, I am truly sorry. The community mediation programs I have served with provide services, thanks to funding and grants, to the poor, the disenfranchised to those without resources and access to the corridors of power. That’s good work, noble work, and we should be grateful to those who serve social justice in that way. I salute your program, Victoria, and others like it that care passionately about the neighborhoods they serve.However, here’s the problem that I see and I don’t lay it at the doorstep of community mediators by any means, although I think that everyone in our field needs to consider their own contributions.First, courts and other institutions all too often expect community mediation programs to provide services for free. Here in Massachusetts, community mediation programs receive a pittance from the courts to provide services built on the shoulders of unpaid volunteers. These small sums of money are supposed to cover administrative costs, paying wages for grossly underpaid case coordinators and program directors. Even though mediation programs provide valuable service to the courts, particularly in high-caseload areas like small claims, the court shamefully underpays them. In fact, there’s an administrative rule here in Massachusetts that no fee can be charged for small claims mediation services.As far as I know, no other professional service provider in the Massachusetts courts not the parenting coordinators, not the guardians ad litem are denied compensation in the way that volunteer mediators are. When the courts a few months ago in Massachusetts told mediation programs that they would not be getting any more money because of the budget shortfall, did the community mediation programs around the commonwealth go out on strike? Nope. Most of them continued to provide services. Houston, we have a problem.I’m not saying either that we should abandon the use of volunteers. You’re right of course that we depend upon them in many sectors from services for elders to homeless shelters. But our profession does this differently from every other profession. In other professions, like medicine or law, there are clear career paths, and people get paid for what they do. They provide pro bono services in their spare time, to give back to their communities. For those professions, pro bono is the noble contribution, not the expected, usual way of doing things. In mediation, we do exactly the opposite.There’s also a problem with public perception. I have met too many people who think of mediators as simply volunteers, not as professionals in their own right. Articles like this one, in USA Today, simply contribute to the misconception. Victoria, I agree, we do need more effort on public education more information, greater awareness, for everyone.
Hi Tom,
I once worked in criminal law, so I understand the very traumatic nature of the work of first responders. Also, my daughter (majoring in anthropology in college) is writing a paper on a topic that seems related to your subject. Namely, she’s examining the need for cross cultural training for first responders.
One thing about your post (by way of discussion and not criticism, because your topic and your thoughts are quite valuable!!) is that it seems to me that the idea of just explaining to people the process and what they need to do seems very intellectual, or left brained. As Americans, I think we tend to think in a left brained, analytical, kind of way. Not all cultures do. My first thought, and in a caricature kind of way, is that it’s not going to do any good for a mediator (figuratively speaking) to go shout through a bullhorn at a crowd with the admonition that they need to be good. For one thing, reliance on verbal instruction, analytical thinking, may itself simply be not culturally appropriate. Some people, for instance, might benefit from a storytelling context and using metaphors that you and I have no knowledge of, or others by learning from Tribal Elders. So no matter what you undertake, you’ve got to make sure it is presented through a means that is palatable to that culture and communicated through some method that can be understood.
Secondly, even if it were culturally appropriate, in dire circumstances the ones most needy will will still be at the mercy of those who have power. For example, no matter what you say about the need for order, the lawless gang has no motive to heed your plea and may still exclude the starving, weakened child from the food line.
For these reasons (both related to futility of talking, at least at the outset), I speculate that the first priority will always be to establish order through whatever mechanism is available. After order has been established, then there is an opportunity for education about the things you speak of.
I haven’t really kept up with specific events in Haiti for example, but I heard of one relief organization that used military assistance to get its aid delivered to local churches, and then the local churches used their own mechanisms, already in place, to arrange deeper delivery to the actual people in need. In other words, make use of the local, indigenous system as soon as possible. But this does not mean I think there is no role for mediators, for cross-cultural experts. I think it would be extremely important, beneficial for mediators to train first responders in cross cultural literacy to start with.
This brings me back full circle to my daughter’s senior thesis. She explained to me, as an example of why she advocates cross cultural awareness training for first responders, a particular clash she is aware of. Namely, among certain peoples there is a belief that the spirit lingers around a body for several days after death; they believe that integrity of the body is very important at this time for the spiritual transition from life to the afterlife. Violation of the body during the time of mourning, these people believe, negatively impacts the ability of the soul to move on to the afterlife. Imagine then, the impact it has on these people when law enforcement (or whoever) insists that the the body of their loved one be autopsied? So we have a clash: autopsy or no autopsy. First responders need not only to be aware of, but to be able to mediate resolution between the differing value and belief systems that lead to those clashes of culture. I use this as just one way of illustrating the reason for my view that First Responders can almost not-have-too-much training or sensitivity in cross cultural conflict.
I guess what I’m advocating is that the mediation team may need to be a First Responder as well, but not as First Responders to the general population. Rather, they need to be there to support the First Responders themselves. Mediators with cross cultural literacy could, in advance of a disaster, train First Responders in cross cultural sensitivity, how to mediate cross cultural differences, and how to mediate in a challenging cross cultural setting among competing interests. During a disaster, mediators could give counsel, support, and coaching to the First Responders as they themselves respond to conditions that can be, as one commentator already alluded, almost unimaginably stressful.
And after the initial crisis has passed and the First Responders have moved on, mediators can be agents of peace in conflict areas through counseling with and training of the of tribal elders — a term which I use in a metaphorical sense to indicate whomever has power to influence others in a culture — to bring to those elders a greater awareness of all the tools involved in conflict transformation. Armed with new awareness, the Elders themselves can, in turn, translate those tools into their own culture and use them in their own ways to influence the way conflict is managed in their own society.
These points you make are exactly what was discusssed at our workshop In DC at the MBB meeting. We should keep this discussion going, and yopur daughter’s work would be very helpful. Can you send it to me?
Good post, Diane I remember a scene in one of the lyeawr dramas some years back where teams from two firms were at the table trying to sell their services to a client. One team consisted of a group of frail-looking elderly men and urged a negotiation strategy. The handsome young chest-popping hero team looked askance at them and promised NO COMPROMISE! Of course, they got the job.What I’ve always emphasized is that the process needs to make sense in terms of achieving goals. If you decide it’s in your best interest to trade one good for another, that’s part of negotiating to get what you need. It isn’t the starting assumption that you have to give up anything. The popular idea of compromise and sometimes of negotiating is that you are sacrificing an ideal for something less giving in, giving up, surrendering, weakness all those associations seem unshakable. I sure don’t see a way of undoing that completely except with one set of clients at a time.My best John
Alexandria,
I want to thank you and praise you for your insightful comments. I am from a very high context culture. As a professional cross culture mediator from the United States, I primarily work in the Middle east and in tribal cultures as a direct result of what you point out. It is one thing to be intellectually knowledgable about culture–it is absolutely another to be able to assimilate. Example: I am a trainer for cross cultural ADR (with a view to recruit). Those entering the program are already court certified mediators with most having done about 1,000 mediations. About 1/3 are not able to apply what they learn. These are highly educated, experienced mediators. They can “tell” you all about cultural mediation techniques. They are not able to apply them.
Thank you again for your excellent comments.