Research on Violence, Resistance, Safety and
Prevention
McGill Centre for Research on Children and Families
Catherine Richardson/Kinewesquao, Ph.D
University of Montreal
Centre for Response-Based Practice
December 2, 2015
My Background
-Metis with Dene, Cree &
Gwichin ancestry
-Raised on Coast Salish
territory, Vancouver Island
-A counsellor/family
therapist, anti-violence worker
-Professor Univ. de Montreal,
Social Work
-Mother of three teenagers
-Co-director Centre for Response-Based Practice & Network
of Spiritual Progressives, Quebec
Overview of Research Involvement
-CIHR Promoting Health Through Collaborative
Engagement with Youth in Canada: Overcoming,
Resisting & Preventing Structural Violence.
-mixed race Indigenous arts-based PAR youth group
in Montreal (with Dr. Elizabeth Fast)
-street-involved Trans/gender fluid arts-based PAR
youth group in Vancouver with RainCity Housing
-SSHRC Metis well-being after experiences of child
welfare in Canada (book in progress)
-Metis identity… The Relationship Between Cultural
Stories and the Sense of Self (book in progress)
-Member of RIV – Responses to Interpersonal Violence
Network
-Islands of Safety
I worked, for over a decade, with Metis Community
Services on Vancouver Island, 1995 - 2011
In 2011, 451,795 people identified as Métis in Canada. They represented
32.3% of the total Aboriginal population and 1.4% of the total Canadian
population.
4
-We begin with a shared analysis of
violence, resistance, responses &
accurate language and social context.
-”Just because people have problems
doesn’t mean there is something
wrong with them/us.” (A Wade)
History & Evolution of the RB Ideas
• Systemic thinking…. The problem is not situated
in the person, it is between people, in the social
world
• People appreciate fairness, justice and situating
their experience in context
• Feminist contributions, an analysis of power
imbalances
• Social justice
• Human agency as part of human dignity
Four Operations of Language
Work Together
To Benefit Perpetrators & the Status Quo
Conceal Violence
Blame,
Pathologize
Victim
Obscure
Responsibility
Conceal Resistance
The Four Operations of Language in Response-Based Practice
Reveal the Violence &
Oppression
Contest
Clarify
The Blaming of
Responsibility
Victims
Clarify Resistance
• Resistance is a response to, not an effect of . . .
• Interviewing methods for elucidating and honouring
individuals’ responses and resistance to violence and
oppression
• Distinction between responses and effects (stories of resistance
or stories of pathology/illness)
• Applies to social interaction in general, and to forms of
adversity other than violence
Response-Based Contextual Analysis
S. Bonnah, L. Coates, C. Richardson, A. Wade (2014)
Social
Material
Conditions
Responses
to Social
Responses
Situation
Interaction
Social
Responses
Offender
Actions
Victim
Responses
& Resistance
Making clear the war on women!
12
Understanding Victim Resistance
Those darn socks
Boot laces
Scrubbing the floor – leaving the corner undone
Account 1: Contrasting Accounts of Male to Female Violence
Sue and Tom had been dating for five weeks. One night they
had an argument on the way home from the pub. Tom
complained that Sue was cold and not interested in sex. Tom
stopped to urinate in the bushes and asked Sue to stop and wait.
He caught up to Sue at Sue's apartment. Tom wanted to come
in. He pushed the door open and forced his way in. Tom
pushed Sue hard against the wall, called her a nasty name, and
punched a hole in the wall inches from her face. Tom grabbed
Sue and punched her in the ribs, twice. Tom kicked her in the
ribs, then left the apartment.
Account 2: Contrasting Accounts of Male to Female Violence
Sue and Tom had been dating for five weeks. One night they had
an argument on the way home from the pub. Sue complained that
Tom was rude and drank too much. Tom complained that Sue was
cold and not interested in sex. When Tom stopped to urinate in the
bushes, Sue kept walking. Tom asked Sue to stop and wait, but she
refused. By the time Tom caught up to Sue, they were at Sue's
apartment. Sue told Tom he could go to his own place, but Tom
wanted to come in. Sue insisted that he go to his own place. He
pushed the door open and forced his way in. Sue told him to get
out. Tom pushed Sue hard against the wall, called her a nasty
name, and punched the wall inches from her face. Sue ducked
underneath his arm and ran for the phone in the living room. Tom
grabbed Sue and punched her in the ribs, twice. Sue rolled onto her
side, gasping for breath. Tom kicked her in the ribs, then left the
apartment. Sue found the phone and called her best friend.
Social Responses to Victims and Offenders
How family, friends, professionals, and larger society (media,
police, child protection, courts) respond when violence is
disclosed.
A majority of victims report receiving negative social responses
Examples: What does “positive” and “negative” mean?
Family, Friends, Police, Court, Child Protection
Marginalized, disadvantaged people are more likely to receive
negative social responses: LGBTQ, Aboriginal, Refugee,
Disabled
The quality of social responses may be the best single predictor of
the level of victim distress
Victims’ Responses to Social Responses
Victims respond physically (epigenetically, hormonally),
emotionally, mentally, socially, spiritually – to positive and
negative social responses
Victims who receive POSITIVE social responses:
- tend to recover more quickly and fully
- are more likely to work with authorities
- are more likely to report violence in future
Victims who receive NEGATIVE social responses:
- less likely to cooperate with authorities
- less likely to disclose violence again
- more likely to receive diagnosis of mental disorder
How to stop violence
• Provide positive social responses upon
disclosure, responses that….
– Stop the violence
– Make the person safe
– Let the person know they are valued and worthy
of care
– Show them that violence is not a viable social tool
The Islands of Safety Team
Cathy & Allan
Cheryle Henry
Family Therapists
The
19
Team Members
Jeff Smith
Music therapist
Audrey Chartrand
SW Grant writer
Erica Briggs
Researcher
Islands of Safety is….
-An orchestrated positive social response to
victims of violence
-An intervention for Metis & Urban
Aboriginal families referred to the Ministry
for reasons of violence
-An Indigenous systemic-family therapy,
feminist-informed, dignity-centered safety
planning process
-Committed to including dads, extended
family & mothers with a focus on maternal
Child Welfare & Legislation
• The model is used in accordance with the British
Columbia Child and Family Services Act, Section
15, Mediation, Traditional Dispute Resolution
• Fits with recent shifts to a Collaborative Practice
mandate
• Referrals come from the Ministry of Children and
Family Development child protection workers or
Aboriginal agencies
Consultation Process
• Phase One involved a process of community
consultations with mothers, fathers, social
workers, agency workers, advocates, family
group conference facilitators, administrators,
cultural teachers, elders
• Metis elder Maria Campbell shared Cree and
Metis teachings, that form the central theme,
layers of blankets representing “Islands of
Safety” , a metaphor depicting the creation of
safe spaces in a violent culture.
Dignity
• Focuses on what we already know, believe
think and do
• Allows maximize freedom in appointments,
topics of discussion
• Always asks permission, renegotiates each
time
• Makes the spirit of safety explicit
• Treats people as responsible, choice-makers,
acting with deliberation
24
Dignity involves….
•
•
•
•
•
•
Manners
Social protocols
Avoiding humiliation in all encounters
Repairing social harm & embarrassment
Daily acts of kindness & caring
A collective response to humiliation
Dignity Through Attending to Language
• Contesting the Colonial Code of Relations,
Decolonization
• Contesting the Parallel Objectifying Practices
• Reversing the Four Operations
• Awareness of embedded pre-suppositions & Avoiding
Advice-giving
• Talking about responses to acknowledge the activity,
action and agency of the individual and contest
accusations and diagnoses of passivity.
Structure - Four Stages
1. Agency referral
2. Preparation & pre - planning meeting
3. The “Islands of Safety” meeting - a one
day process (with similarities to FGC, but
with an accentuated attention to safety
where there has been violence)
4. Follow up meeting
Safety Criteria
• The perpetrator has demonstrated . ..
– that no immediate threat exists, as evidenced by
others and those who have been harmed
– a willingness to discuss the specific aspects of the
violent behaviour
– responsibility for the violent actions, acknowledged the
actions as wrong, apologized to those harmed & taken
steps to restore safety and recovery for the victim
– a desire to become accountable, via a counsellor or
third party
– a desire to participate in child safety planning and
contribute to child safety
The Safety Conference
The Safety Conference
Introduction to the Day
Round One
Round Two
Round Three
Round Four
Private Family Safety Planning Time
Closing the Meeting
Follow Up Meeting
• Held approximately three weeks after the
initial meeting
• Communication team attends, consisting of
the mother/non-offending parent, a facilitator,
the child protection worker
• Assess ongoing community supports to
ensure family safety
• Plan for closing the file
Interviewing For Accurate
Accounts
Identification
Responses &
Resistance to
Event
Possible Change
Social Responses
To Event & To
Family
Responses to
Social Responses
Event
Dignity
Dignity
Safety
Dignity
39
Islands of
Safety is an
orchestrated
positive
social
response to
violence & a
means to
restoring
dignity.
Thank you for listening!
UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL
wwww.responsebasedpractice.com
cathyresponds@gmail.com