The Safe & Together Model is premised on the idea that child serving systems are natural allies to adult domestic violence survivors. In the Season 2 kick-off episode, David & Ruth explore the Safe & Together Model's principle of partnering and the six steps of partnering practice. The episode includes an examination of the obstacles to partnering and six practical steps professionals can take to improve their work with survivors.
Read more about survivors protective capacities
Download our Ally Guide
FAQs about challenges working with survivors
Now available! Mapping the Perpetrator’s Pattern: A Practitioner’s Tool for Improving Assessment, Intervention, and Outcomes The web-based Perpetrator Pattern Mapping Tool is a virtual practice tool for improving assessment, intervention, and outcomes through a perpetrator pattern-based approach. The tool allows practitioners to apply the Model’s critical concepts and principles to their current case load in real
Check out David Mandel's new book "Stop Blaming Mothers and Ignoring Fathers: How to transform the way we keep children safe from domestic violence."
The Safe & Together Model is premised on the idea that child serving systems are natural allies to adult domestic violence survivors. In the Season 2 kick-off episode, David & Ruth explore the Safe & Together Model's principle of partnering and the six steps of partnering practice. The episode includes an examination of the obstacles to partnering and six practical steps professionals can take to improve their work with survivors.
Read more about survivors protective capacities
Download our Ally Guide
FAQs about challenges working with survivors
Now available! Mapping the Perpetrator’s Pattern: A Practitioner’s Tool for Improving Assessment, Intervention, and Outcomes The web-based Perpetrator Pattern Mapping Tool is a virtual practice tool for improving assessment, intervention, and outcomes through a perpetrator pattern-based approach. The tool allows practitioners to apply the Model’s critical concepts and principles to their current case load in real
Check out David Mandel's new book "Stop Blaming Mothers and Ignoring Fathers: How to transform the way we keep children safe from domestic violence."
Speaker 1: [00:00:15] And we're back and we're back. [00:00:16][1.3]
Speaker 2: [00:00:17] Hey, it's season two man, [00:00:18][1.3]
Speaker 1: [00:00:19] season two of partner with Survivor, and I'm David Mandel, executive director of the and the other institute. [00:00:23][4.6]
Speaker 2: [00:00:24] And I'm Ruth Stearns Mandel and I'm the e-learning and communications manager, and we have Tiberius, the dog between us. It's a Saturday morning. It's raining outside or children are asleep. My favorite time to do a podcast, [00:00:39][14.7]
Speaker 1: [00:00:40] and it's just a few days before the presidential inauguration in the United States, which can't come too soon. Yes, and unfortunately, it's a very fraught time here in the U.S. So if you're listening from abroad, please send us thoughts for peace and yes, peaceful transition and an easier rollout of the vaccine and and and [00:01:03][23.2]
Speaker 2: [00:01:04] and no mass violence, please. Yes, that would be a lovely yes, New Year's wish. [00:01:09][5.2]
Speaker 1: [00:01:10] And we will be we are exploring actually doing an episode on the connection between domestic violence and extremism. We're trying to get a guest and we're going to be doing that. So listen for that as we're going forward and tomorrow we're actually interviewing Jess Hill. [00:01:24][13.8]
Speaker 2: [00:01:24] Yes, she said about that. That's right. That's tomorrow night. [00:01:27][2.5]
Speaker 1: [00:01:28] And so we've got a great season coming up and we're going to be doing episodes with our safety institute staff. [00:01:34][6.2]
Speaker 2: [00:01:34] We're going to do a podcast, take over. [00:01:36][1.6]
Speaker 1: [00:01:36] We do a podcast, take over. Super fun. That's right. Looking at structural racism and and and safe and together. And we're super excited about that. So this is going to be a great season and and we thought we would kick off this season the same way we kicked off last season, which just the two of us, which is really how the show started. Yeah. And I love these, these shows. [00:01:59][22.3]
Speaker 2: [00:01:59] I do too. I do, too. I, you know, the vision for this podcast started small. I loved our conversations and. We really live and breathe our dedication and commitment to systems change and addressing family violence and intimate partner violence. And we talk all the time, [00:02:23][23.7]
Speaker 1: [00:02:24] all [00:02:24][0.0]
Speaker 2: [00:02:24] the time, and I found our conversation so edifying and and and fun. To be honest with you, this can be really tough work. This is really hard work and it's heart rending and there's so much frustration and so much pain and so much loss and so much anger. And so having the the ability to converse with other people or partner about these issues and still maintain our humanity, our love and even our joy that we get to try to to influence systems and workers for the better of humanity is really an important thing to have to keep our sanity. [00:03:12][48.0]
Speaker 1: [00:03:13] It is, and I have to say that the podcast, which was your idea, and I always really clear to say that I think people need to know that. And I love kind of acknowledging, well, you know, in general, I love acknowledging people in general. You are truly a man. [00:03:27][13.5]
Speaker 2: [00:03:27] You're truly a man who walks the walk of a valuing other people. And that definitely deeply includes valuing women's efforts. And that's important. [00:03:35][8.1]
Speaker 1: [00:03:36] I do understand people who don't like doing that because it it it brings me genuine pleasure to acknowledge other people. And yeah, it really means a lot. And I think for me, one of the one of the surprises when one of wonderful surprises of 2020 was hearing four people have a podcast has been used all over the world to do professional training. You know, I was talking to a regional administrator in Los Angeles for child protection, and she told her staff or listen to episode five because it will help you think about biases and. And I was just looking online, and the New Zealand Family Violence Clearinghouse posts our episodes. And, you know, so we're hearing people using it for training and supervision. [00:04:18][42.4]
Speaker 2: [00:04:19] And now I'm feeling bad about the time I use the F-word. [00:04:21][2.2]
Speaker 1: [00:04:22] No, I think it's okay. I think, you know, I think that's all right. I don't think people will forgive you. But I really it makes me happy and we heard from survivors and students, you know, and. And so one thing we want to just say this year and we're going to say it more, I think, is send us top us, ask us questions. [00:04:41][18.9]
Speaker 2: [00:04:42] And if you have people that you believe should be interviewed on this right? Survivors, professionals, right? You know, even even people that that don't seem to be landing right in that family violence, intimate partner, gender based violence, domestic violence, child protection area. There's there's so many issues that really do connect that people haven't created their own links to. That's deeply impactful to these families, right? [00:05:09][27.2]
Speaker 1: [00:05:09] For instance, I want to hear from from authors or writers or researchers activists who are working with just men in general in a way that's deviant form the father inclusive. You know, I think it's so important to make those linkages, and we want to do more around same sex, domestic violence and issues of institutional racism and indigenous people and domestic violence and. And so it's just we're just we're just telling, we're crowdsourcing. We're crowdsourcing, that's what we're doing right now. We're crowdsourcing and and you know, we we love that, you know, that almost every episode gets almost 400 downloads in the first 30 days, which puts us in the top half. This is bragging as just sort of like, [00:05:51][41.6]
Speaker 2: [00:05:51] no, I was really surprised how quickly it took off. We have over 30000 downloads, right? It's only been a year since we started the podcast, just a little over the year. We we started in January. I believe it was January, seventh or eighth with our first podcast episode to be recorded in Tucson, Arizona. That's right. Which was just before we left for for Australia and New Zealand, where we were when the pandemic fully ramped up. And then we came back here. That's right, which I feel a little bit like a sucker for. But you know, we had to come back to the United States and be with our family also. But leaving New Zealand for the United States was a little bit of a kick in the teeth. [00:06:29][37.9]
Speaker 1: [00:06:31] So anyway, we just a shout out to our friends in New Zealand, Australia and Canada, wherever else you're listening. [00:06:36][5.5]
Speaker 2: [00:06:37] So today's topic is one that we talk about the principles and concepts of quite a lot, but we're really going to concentrate on it in this episode [00:06:48][11.0]
Speaker 1: [00:06:49] and it's it's in the title of our podcast actually how appropriate it is for us to start this season with the episode by partnering. Yes, as it relates to the statement, the other model, I just it's amazing. We I just realized that that this is the title of the show and this is the concept we're talking about. [00:07:07][18.2]
Speaker 2: [00:07:07] So we're going to we're going to go through. The principles in partnering with survivors is a key principle of the safe and together model. Do you want to talk about it as a principle, as a foundational principle of the model? [00:07:21][13.2]
Speaker 1: [00:07:21] OK, do it. Yes, and we'll talk also about the six steps apart. We're going to [00:07:25][3.7]
Speaker 2: [00:07:25] talk a lot. We're talking about, Oh, don't worry about that. [00:07:27][1.9]
Speaker 1: [00:07:30] So the second principle of the model is is partnering with the survivor is. And we use the word non offending parent in the actual an actual writing is should be the default position of systems, you know, and. And so we and that really means that language is is sometimes even challenging people because default people like what does that mean? Default and for pre-made default means that's our starting point. That's our baseline, right? We should assume that if we want to keep kids safe, that our attitude going in should not be out of a serial should not see the survivor as a problem, should see the survivor that none if any parent who's usually the mother and we could talk about in other scenarios as our natural ally and our job is to partner with them. So the language is directed actually at the professional. And I think that's part of what I think is really valuable about the model because we always say, you know, fix systems, not survivors, right? And so we're focused on fixing systems and systems change and practitioner change and helping practitioners get better at their job. And and and so partnering language is directed at us, the professional about our behaviors and where we're supposed to do. And so one of the most basic questions I'll ask people is what did you do to partner with that domestic violence survivor? Mm hmm. And and oftentimes in the conversation, their first response is, well, she said this and she said that, right? No, no, no. That's not what I'm actually asking you. I want you to describe what you did to partner with her and what is that? What did that look like? Because if you can't get the practitioner to focus on what their behavior is, right, what often happens is you can't actually tell if they're they're telling you a story about themselves and their bad practice, or you're telling you about problems actually in the life of the survivor. Like, if, if, if we don't partner well with her and we set up a scenario where we're actually trying to interview her while his mother's in the other room and there's kids running around over the age of three and and we and then we ask her questions about the violence. And she she said, Well, there's nothing really bad. Nothing happened and we fight sometimes. And but no, that incident with didn't happen, and he wasn't violent to me on Friday. And and and we go back to officer and write down mom's in denial or mom with the violence. We're actually saying what we're actually reporting on is we failed to see the accurate conditions for her to disclose safely, right? Because she might be overheard by her, her mother in law. She may be trying to protect the kids from knowing things that they shouldn't know that she's already worked to protect them from. Right. And and so if we don't focus on our behavior, then we're going to misinterpret, misunderstand and not create the conditions that that make the survivor feel safe enough to disclose. Mm hmm. Talk to us about what's happened. Mm hmm. Tell us what she's already tried, what worked and what didn't work. And and that's why we talk about Under Under partnering. That partnering is about efficiency, effectiveness and being child centered, right? [00:10:55][205.3]
Speaker 2: [00:10:56] Well, that all sounds really lovely. David Mandel. But as prosaic practice exists in most systems, the the default position is adversarial. So, so how do people address that in their partnering when they've been trained in adversarial practices, which actually shut down survivors ability to be able to trust the system and that worker? [00:11:24][28.1]
Speaker 1: [00:11:25] You know, what's interesting is what we've seen, and I was hearing a story from from a colleague in Ontario the other day is that people are actually when they learn safe and together there's actually gave me this epiphany. They actually like, for some people, this is like a light bulb, and it gives them permission to do what they really wanted to do in the first place. You know, I can't tell you how many people and I was just talking with a group of social workers in Los Angeles, in the United States and were discussing the the value of partnering and the whole perpetrator pattern based approach. And and I was saying, you know what? This really lets those folks who came into child safety do their job around child safety. Mm hmm. But to do in a way that is more consistent with their values because they didn't get into the work to take kids away from victims of domestic violence, that wasn't their goal. Right? But under the old kind of failure to protect paradigm, they were trained in that the only way you can keep kids safe. And it was modeled for them and reinforced in lots of ways is by blaming the survivor and forcing her to do things. Mm hmm. And so one of the ways that that this works is it actually brings people back to a place that they wanted to be in in the first place, which is being an ally to that survivor and keep the kids using that allyship to keep the kids safe. So the story I heard from Ontario was that even in a case where the kids had been removed, older kids had been removed from this. This mom that the application of the model actually prevented the return, prevented the removal of some kids and maybe even the return of other ones. Mm hmm. And so it created a reset in this case. And we've heard them more than once that people take cases that they've seen. Oh, she's a repeat client. We've seen her a lot. You know, we know how this goes and has never worked. We actually have heard more than one stories of this attitude towards perpetrator pattern based approach and partnering him can really, truly even reset bad relationships between systems and survivors. Mm hmm. And this person was another story. They did a reset on this case, it's a different one. And when they reset the case and talked in a partnering language, the survivors started crying. Because because nobody had spoken to her that way. Right from the system. Well, it's just a pretty good crime. It's a it's a [00:13:54][149.6]
Speaker 2: [00:13:55] sad reality is what it is. You know, you go through, you go through these systems and life with people who who literally feel like they're they're crazy and blind and you're screaming. This is very dangerous and what's happening is killing my children and myself. And so it really does. All of a sudden, it's like, Whoa, OK, you're sane. You're seeing it when you hear that language, right? It really does make a deep impact on you, and it doesn't take much. Survivors are pretty desperate for for any professional who will listen to them. That's right. Right. It doesn't take much. We recognize it immediately. It's like a little signal and we're like, Oh, OK, you might be a safe person for me to engage with. [00:14:41][46.8]
Speaker 1: [00:14:42] And then I was impacted by Judith Lewis Herman's book Trauma and Recovery, which I read years ago. And it's an amazing book. You know, if you haven't read it and you're really interested and feel domestic violence or warrants against women or understanding the politics of of all that she, you know, she she looked at did the concept of shell-shocked in World War One labeling the diagnoses and you know, and how it was it was used against malingering was used against soldiers. Right. And so then carries that forward to conversations in the more recent times around rape and blaming victims and understanding trauma. And so it's it's a great book. But one of the the concepts was that survivors are driven by our kind of governed by this twin imperative or this tension of to keep it secret and to tell, right, like both those things are there and the image of always used is if we can be really good at building our half of a bridge to survivors, we have total control over how we built that bridge, our part of the world that's completely in our control, right? We don't get to decide if she feels safe enough or ready enough or is in a situation to step on to that bridge. Right. But for sure, if our side of the bridge is strong and solid and we're there present for somebody, more people are going to step on that bridge, step onto that bridge. Yeah, it's very basic in that way. It's very kind of. And so it's so keep your focus on your own practice. [00:16:09][87.0]
Speaker 2: [00:16:10] So let's talk about the first principle of partnering with survivors. Let's go through the six principles [00:16:15][4.8]
Speaker 1: [00:16:15] of the six death the [00:16:16][0.9]
Speaker 2: [00:16:16] six deaths, the six steps Are you [00:16:18][1.9]
Speaker 1: [00:16:18] going to refuse people with a OK, [00:16:19][1.1]
Speaker 2: [00:16:20] not principles with a book about it? We're taking steps, [00:16:22][2.2]
Speaker 1: [00:16:23] yes, [00:16:23][0.0]
Speaker 2: [00:16:23] but these are not baby steps. These are big [00:16:25][2.2]
Speaker 1: [00:16:26] step. These are big steps. Big boy steps. [00:16:28][2.2]
Speaker 2: [00:16:29] These are big personality. [00:16:29][0.5]
Speaker 1: [00:16:30] Big personal. Thank you. Oh OK. Big non gendered person stuff. Oh, they're [00:16:35][4.6]
Speaker 2: [00:16:35] huge steps, not gender. All right. Non gender. [00:16:37][1.9]
Speaker 1: [00:16:37] My gender non-binary steps forward. [00:16:39][1.8]
Speaker 2: [00:16:39] Correct? All right. So are you ready? I'm ready. OK, so numero uno. [00:16:45][5.4]
Speaker 1: [00:16:45] The first one is to we refer to as affirm or affirming. And this is where these things are steps in, we've laid it on a linear way, but they're never linear in real life, right? So it's it's these things happened repeated, but [00:17:00][14.3]
Speaker 2: [00:17:00] you're doing it over and over. [00:17:01][0.9]
Speaker 1: [00:17:01] Yeah, right, exactly. So but affirming is where you communicate to the survivor that that she is not responsible for her partner's choices and behaviors. Yes, that she is not responsible for the impact his behavior is having on her or the system, or that's just the system, the system or the children of the person in the family. Right. You affirm that his violence is a parenting choice. Yes. And I think that's one of the most important concerns we try affirming as bringing it to focus that survivor because of gender bias issues. You know that. Survivors who are women usually feel very responsible for what's happening to the kids, right? Who often feel our experience are being reinforced by family, friends, professionals suddenly, not subtly right. [00:17:56][54.7]
Speaker 2: [00:17:57] Which which, by the way, creates a wall of insanity where people feel like they can't disclose and they can't be safe because everybody around them is affirming the bad behaviors, the criminal behaviors of their perpetrator, allowing them to happen. I really want that to be clear [00:18:14][17.4]
Speaker 1: [00:18:15] and affirming and also affirming through invisibility. You know, I think Kathy Humphries, a good friend and colleague, talks about apps and presence, you know, and the invisibility of the perpetrator and how if we don't recognize that even when we're talking with that victim, the perpetrators role is very active. [00:18:34][18.8]
Speaker 2: [00:18:35] The whole reason we're here, the whole reason we're here is because of that perpetrator. [00:18:38][3.0]
Speaker 1: [00:18:39] And I can't tell you how many times when I was doing a lot of case consultations, the cases would come to child welfare because of of male partners violence. But all the casework would be about moms depression, [00:18:51][11.8]
Speaker 2: [00:18:51] right or addiction, [00:18:52][0.6]
Speaker 1: [00:18:52] addiction issues and [00:18:54][1.2]
Speaker 2: [00:18:54] or trauma. [00:18:55][0.2]
Speaker 1: [00:18:55] And they're really literally might not be any discussion with him. Any meeting with him and the people would come and say, Well, we're supporting the mom by offering her services for her addiction, her mental health, [00:19:06][10.4]
Speaker 2: [00:19:06] which need to be offered in in reality, right? [00:19:09][2.8]
Speaker 1: [00:19:09] But we also know that if you simple affirmation of his responsibility, his choice is trying to intervene with him. That's actually an intervention with her right through this affirmation is an intervention, and we talked about partnering. It's again, behavioral. Mm hmm. And so one of the behaviors is is is by affirming to her that her partner's behavior as a parenting choice that you, as a professional, see the harm it's doing to her and the children, that you're going to do your best to hold them accountable and intervene with him. You going to try to partner with her that that's your position, ality affirming your position, ality, that's an intervention. I think sometimes people miss that because they think that, oh, we've got to get of services and and the service providers to take care of it. [00:19:53][43.1]
Speaker 2: [00:19:53] So it's so basic because what the professional doesn't understand is that for years, perhaps all this person's life, everybody around this person has affirmed that the behaviors of the perpetrator are normal or at least acceptable, or should [00:20:11][18.3]
Speaker 1: [00:20:11] be excused or should [00:20:12][0.7]
Speaker 2: [00:20:12] be excused. Those things or are part of a paradigm of belief about family values. Right. [00:20:19][6.7]
Speaker 1: [00:20:19] There are other things more important. [00:20:20][0.6]
Speaker 2: [00:20:21] There are other things that are more important and that's what's happening. And so a professional affirming to a survivor gives that. Exact thing they're all professionals complain about to that survivor. A view of the situation, which is real, where the danger is real, where the impact is real. And so if the professionals complaining that the victim doesn't understand this, they don't understand that this she doesn't understand because everybody around her is excusing it. And if it's OK, that's right. Sometimes including professionals, mental health professionals, judges, right? OK, let police. Let's just be [00:21:01][40.1]
Speaker 1: [00:21:01] clear. Right. And this is where the where the tendency to individual pathology models of understanding what's going on in families or in systems or in cultures or communities really fails survivors because you just said, you know, grooming happens on a cultural level and an individual level, you know, grooming happens an individual level when the perpetrator says, Well, my last girlfriend was crazy, and that's why there was a restraining order against married violence intervention order against me. That's part of the grooming process. Yes, love songs sort of say the jealousy. Oh, that's that's part of the group. That's well, they'll [00:21:35][34.4]
Speaker 2: [00:21:35] still focus on the sordid, but they won't focus on the police officer who responded to an incidents and dismissed it. And the deep impact that that has on a victim and a family, nobody is acknowledging that [00:21:49][13.8]
Speaker 1: [00:21:50] that's right, and nobody's [00:21:51][0.7]
Speaker 2: [00:21:51] blaming that police officer for his or her poor responses that are dangerous, [00:21:55][4.1]
Speaker 1: [00:21:56] criminal minded [00:21:56][0.4]
Speaker 2: [00:21:57] or the system behind [00:21:57][0.8]
Speaker 1: [00:21:58] it works emboldens the perpetrator because I remember. [00:22:01][2.9]
Speaker 2: [00:22:02] And it breaks reality, right? [00:22:03][1.4]
Speaker 1: [00:22:04] It breaks reality because I can do this with impunity. That's right. And I remember our client I worked with who said, Look, I got arrested and then my charges got dismissed and I thought, I get it. No problem. I mean, he's actually said that. And and so, so the role of social workers or caseworkers or any professional, you know, is to make it clear that your position ality around this behavior is is what I just described, particularly around that the perpetrators behavior is a parenting choice, right? And again, the example it was, it was. A bunch of moms who are referred by child protection to a domestic violence group with the idea that they need to be fixed. Right. You know, the best version of that need support and but their sense of they need to be fixed. So all the women that came to the group were angry when they were told when they were asked why they were there and, you know, angry, sad, purely blame shame. And then the facilitator who had some exposure saved the others. And now we want to go around the room, ask each one of you to talk about your partner's parenting and what the report back was. Their level of engagement went up right. Their participation, their mood shifted because somebody was inviting them to share something about, like you said, their reality. Something important about their experience that wasn't about this is what I'm doing wrong. This is about what my partner is doing wrong and I had permission to talk about it. [00:23:26][82.4]
Speaker 2: [00:23:26] Yeah, it's funny because once you open that up, I bet they got a range of of of of expressions. That is, well, this is this is one thing that he does. That's really good. But this is really destructive, right? You know, victims are actually quite fair in their assessments of their partners. Oftentimes, we can see the value of our partner and there are good things that they do. But nobody has a firm for us that the things that they do that are destructive and violent should not exist and held that perpetrator accountable. But what are some of the impediments to affirming for professionals? Well, I think [00:24:01][34.8]
Speaker 1: [00:24:02] there's a bunch that professionals have to work through that they may have gender bias all around. You know that if you're if you're there, you like it, if you're there, it's not that serious, you know, so all this stuff around violence and abuse and gender and you know and you know, people will look at and say, Oh, you're a trauma survivor, so you're making bad choices and then people don't necessarily go out actively looking to blame blame. It's like always blaring in a big with a big sign. Yeah. It's often coded in other things that sound good, you know? Well, look, she has a trauma history and we're trauma informed and we really need to be empathetic to her childhood. She can't make better choices, and she's making because he's a trauma survivor without realizing that that. [00:24:53][51.2]
Speaker 2: [00:24:55] Perspective puts the pressure on her, right? I'm going to add one more to your list of impediments for affirming that I've noticed by working with particularly away DV survivors, right? The system itself, OK, the system itself has a specific way of doing things. So we'll take Family Court, for example. Family Court has a very narrow view of child well-being and doesn't allow domestic violence evidence often to be submitted into evidence during proceedings custody proceedings. Hmm. If the IF the Family Court has mandated a survivor to do something, either because the perpetrators manipulating the system effectively and the judge is colluding with that or falling for that depends the system depends. The person depends how this goes down. Then say, for example, it mandates that the survivor go and get urines. Even though there's no evidence of alcoholism or addiction. Right. This is a mandate that's been placed on a victim for no reason alone, which is actually a harassment tactic, a way for that person to get exhausted. Now you have a lawyer trying to exist within the family court system and navigate this. Say that survivor becomes exhausted or angry at this mandate. Right? And resists it. Right now, the lawyer and everybody around her gets angry at her for resisting, [00:26:20][85.5]
Speaker 1: [00:26:22] not just firing, not [00:26:22][0.8]
Speaker 2: [00:26:23] just following through, but resisting this and affirming is broken right instead of the lawyer looking at her and saying, You are correct. Right? This is an unfair mandate. Nobody should have to deal with this. But in order for us to exist in the system and do what we need to do, we may need to comply until I can find a way to change this mandate. But many people who are in the system who are locked in the system thinking cannot see the injustice of those mandates, and so use them to pressurize victims and survivors and get angry at them when victims and survivors don't comply with unjust mandates. [00:27:09][46.1]
Speaker 1: [00:27:09] And I think you're you're trying affirming back to the fourth step, which is a validation of more about that. But one of the pieces of validation can be simply. Validating the unfairness of the situation, right, validating it's unfair that you have to do this, and I've seen the power of that just to say it's unfair, I'm sorry. [00:27:29][19.7]
Speaker 2: [00:27:30] Right? So you may be a worker should be better. So you may be a worker that feels frustrated, incompetent or angry at the way that the system is treating your client. You have to maintain that ability to affirm the reality that it's always the perpetrator who's responsible, even if the system is pressurizing you into some action, which is making its life very hard for an event. [00:27:56][26.2]
Speaker 1: [00:27:57] And even when the system is responding fairly, the entire situation may be unfair. It's fear the survivor, even when it's appropriate and the right choice for safety, has to go into refuge or shelter. It is. It's unfair that the kids have to leave their own home studies is [00:28:13][15.9]
Speaker 2: [00:28:13] or their [00:28:13][0.2]
Speaker 1: [00:28:13] school. I think there's something really basic about acknowledging that unfairness, right? Or the system's failure to hold the perpetrator accountable, right? All those things. And so validation. That's one part of validation, which is the fourth step in the in the in the process. And I think when you go back to barriers and where. Challenges your question about challenges for four professionals, some of them may be about racism, some of them may not understand the cultural background and the choices you made. And that's not just about affirming, but that's about the broader process of partnering, because I think its people will not understand why something is valuable to somebody or why they want to be someplace or be on country, or why they're connected. I remember early on people would misinterpret in the US. Black folks have a history of sending kids to their aunties. Yeah, to the aunties or to the into the country for the summer to get them out of cities or keep them connected to family. And there'd be this when there's this extended family model, which there is, you know, in lots of cultures like it is indigenous cultures right around the world that mainstream culture and practice and attitudes may say, Oh, that's that person's disconnect, or they're not well attached to their kids or they're not parenting. [00:29:34][81.0]
Speaker 2: [00:29:35] Oh, I wanted, I wanted aunty. So bad. Yeah, right? Somebody sent me to my auntie. [00:29:38][3.8]
Speaker 1: [00:29:39] Please send little [00:29:40][0.6]
Speaker 2: [00:29:40] five year old Ruthie center there. [00:29:41][1.6]
Speaker 1: [00:29:42] So. So I think that's another barrier, and we could talk more about barriers. So. So the second step, and for those of you joining us mid-show, we never do this. But we try to remember to say, you know, we're talking about partnering with survivors because the show is called partner with support and [00:29:56][14.3]
Speaker 2: [00:29:58] an amazing confluence. Yes. OK, so so we did step number one and barriers to stop number one. Let's go step number two. [00:30:04][6.5]
Speaker 1: [00:30:05] The number two is is really, you know, hopefully people see the connection. Step number two is asking, we refer to asking and we try to create these little, you know, things people remember, you know, affirm, ask, assess, validate and asking is about asking the survivor about the perpetrators pattern of behavior. [00:30:24][19.3]
Speaker 2: [00:30:25] Right? [00:30:25][0.0]
Speaker 1: [00:30:26] And obviously, these things support each other because if if you if you identify domestic violence but you spend all the time talking to her about her choices, right, then you're not affirming. You're not. Well, you're [00:30:39][12.9]
Speaker 2: [00:30:39] just making the perpetrator invisible, [00:30:41][1.2]
Speaker 1: [00:30:41] really. So by asking her about his pattern of behavior, you're one reinforcing idea that you're concerned with his behavior, that you want to understand which she knows about it. You want to listen to her story. You live and listen to her understanding and learn from her. Right? What does he do? What does that look like? It could be things like, Well, if you decide to go back to work tomorrow, how would he act right? You know, when you reach out to family and friends, how does he he act in those circumstances? I mean, there's so many different things you can do when you're looking at this idea of coercive control and actions he's taking to harm the kids. Mm hmm. But you ask about these things and what you're doing as a professional is you're you're validating, right? You are affirming. You're learning about the pattern, which will help you with with safety planning. Yes. And and in learning about the pattern, you also get to contextualize. The survivors decision making and her choices, and that's so important because I think one of the ways that that we fail is professionals. And you're really good about talking about we disconnect our look at the survivor from how the systems are responding, right? But we also disconnect them, obviously from the perpetrators pattern. Right. And it's been my overwhelming experience over the years that when I don't understand the survivors choices and they don't make sense to me, that usually means I don't understand something about the perpetrators pattern of behavior, right? Or about her socio economic cultural situation. You know, and I'm thinking about an example. Well, this is really about culture, really and barriers, actually. So this is a little tangential. It's actually back to where you were talking before, but working with a same sex couple and it was the perpetrator was an older woman. Mm hmm. And the survivor was a younger woman who would just come out to herself, who was just coming out to her family and friends and. There was this view of what can't she go to be with her parents? They're supportive. Right. And what's wrong with her, and she won't leave her partner. And when we dug deeper, it turns out that her parents were deeply homophobic. Yeah, and they were going to force her to choose [00:33:09][147.3]
Speaker 2: [00:33:09] between them [00:33:10][0.4]
Speaker 1: [00:33:10] and them and her sexual identity. And and and so people were. Here's an example of around how people's misperceptions about like, no, she's she's not doing what she's wanted to protect. The kid was really about her claiming her sexual identity and trying to be. She has a right to both be who she is and be safe. Right, right. But sometimes professionals don't grasp those things. And so when we decontextualized survivors from the perpetrator's pattern or from the cultural context or the system's response to. We're we're more likely to blame them. Work harder, I mean, again, remember this is about efficiency and effectiveness that the U.S. professionals should understand that partnering serves you right as much as it serves the survivor [00:33:54][43.8]
Speaker 2: [00:33:55] right and getting that context and that history through asking increases professional efficiency, which decreases liability and cost FOIA. And so, you know, I think about this story in Australia. And this this has to do, you know, to me, barriers to asking actually has to do more with the system. People are not trained to ask. They're not trained to get patterns. And in fact, a lot of mandates come down that you create the sense of urgency that people have to be moved through the system quickly and efficiently. And in this way, which then increases danger for for children and for and for adult victims of domestic violence. And I think about the case in Australia of the the two beautiful children and their mother, who who committed suicide after these children had told the Family Court over and over again that their father was a threat and and was harassing them. And he had other family. He had other children that he had done this to as well. And she had escaped and she was again a younger woman with an older man. I believe she was a foreigner, so she came from out of the country with no family. Again, a very vulnerable situation. And unfortunately, neither the Family Court nor law enforcement listened to it, and he killed those two children, he murdered them, he shot them and then eventually their mother committed suicide because she had warned so many people. Right? And so that to me, a lot of times, it's not the professional who is the impediment to asking. It's the system, right? And the system mandates certain behavior, certain behaviors that are an impediment to asking and actually ascertaining the exact thing right? That the system claims to want to do right, which is create safety. [00:35:57][122.3]
Speaker 1: [00:35:58] And I think people who are listening think about every time you're asked to focus just on incidents of violence right versus wider patterns. Or think about the value to a survivor of asking her, Well, what do you know about how he's treated his last partner? Right? By asking her to think about his behavior outside the relationship and saying, You want to hear about that right again, you're reinforcing that it's not about a dysfunctional relationship. This is not about her and him. This is about him, right? And his violence, his violence. Every time you look at his, his use of violence against others in public, if everywhere you kind of. Yes, exactly. To get go together. Because if if there was a case we're working on where the guy was was involved with a gang and and he was a tracker and he was involved with with sort of hunting people down that that what's that like for that survivor if you don't understand that? Yeah, or you don't understand his pattern of lying to her or her family and friends. And I remember a guy I worked with who was actually trying to change, and he said, my my, my parents and my wife don't have a good relationship. I said, why? He said, because every time I get abusive to her, I'd go back to them and lie to them about what happened and paint this horrible story about her. Mm hmm. And so there's so many things that when you look at a survivor that looks like it's a that can easily we can make it in a in a deficit mentality and an individualized mentality in a non system way, in a non patterned way, we can make it about her as an individual. And and yeah, and I think it's really this important thing to say that when you ask about. About his pattern of behavior to her, to the kids, to others, to past partners, the year you're building the building blocks in the relationship with her, but also in your mind about this isn't about her behavior. This isn't about the relationship. This is about somebody who's choosing violence and maybe choosing in multiple settings and as in trapping somebody in as controlling different aspects. And so what I may be seeing in her maybe a natural, healthy or normal response to an unhealthy situation that the perpetrators creating and is being reinforced by systems that aren't responding well. [00:38:07][129.5]
Speaker 2: [00:38:08] Or family members, family members or mental health professionals or religious leaders? Really, I want to bring the ecosystem to stop looking at survivors decontextualized from their cultural and social networks. That's right. So impediments to asking besides the one I mentioned, which is the system itself, right? [00:38:25][17.1]
Speaker 1: [00:38:26] Impediments to asking is is forms and systems that that the don't want you to focus, don't ask you focus on physical abuse and physical violence or incidents or arrests definitions that are like, Well, look for this one incident or look for that or checklist, then it don't like don't include wider patterns or, you know, or systems that are time crunched where where you know, I've had people do this amazing job in cases in their supervisor, team leader comes that says, you spent too much time on this case, right? [00:38:55][28.5]
Speaker 2: [00:38:56] You create too much safety [00:38:57][0.8]
Speaker 1: [00:38:58] value on, you know, where people's fears about talking about violence. You know, I think we have to acknowledge that that professionals aren't always supported in their professional training or supervision to increase our confidence and skill level, asking those questions about what does that look like? Mm-Hmm. The systems often allow us to to to do a kind of a laundry list cursory kind of view, which is this family has a history of domestic violence, mental health and substance abuse. And kind of and instead of being like, No, we want to hear about the specifics and what was that threat, right? What was that? What I mean? Talking about sex abuse, talking about humiliation, talking about control, talking about the details. We often shy away. [00:39:44][45.8]
Speaker 2: [00:39:45] Yeah, yeah. And you know, I'm going to I'm going to I'm going to say, you know, one of the things that professionals that I think is is an impediment and emotional impediment inside of everybody. I feel it inside of me, too. I constantly have to check myself around my own biases, even though I'm a survivor, even though I'm incredibly empathetic and do have some tools. And that is is that when you encounter a person who's had a lot of violence and abuse and perhaps the system has abused them for many years, you're going to you're going to become at. With a lot of information, a lot of story, a lot of background information, a lot of a lot of high energy. Help me, help me help me. That can be super overwhelming for people. People can push it away. People can judge it as hysteria, right? And you really have to be a well-grounded person who can take a deep breath and be able to listen to all the information and ascertain what are the pertinent pieces, while still affirming the reality of the survivor and directing them right and directing them and directing their energy and and bringing them back to center, bringing them back to center. And this I've experienced with survivors because they're so triangulated by the system, right? They want to relitigate everything. That's right. And I'm like, I can't take everything. I completely believe you. Let's let's focus on this. Tell me about this. [00:41:18][92.9]
Speaker 1: [00:41:18] I think this is where we say, you need to say so. Professionals need really good support and supervision in teams to really support them working in a lot of these situations because it can be overwhelming and can be difficult. And we have to we have to admit that that's OK to acknowledge without blaming the survivor because I think sometimes people feel overwhelmed and then they they become reactive. They shut down. Blame the survivor for not doing acts or making it too hard or being too difficult to work with [00:41:43][25.2]
Speaker 2: [00:41:44] and the frustration of dealing between systems that don't communicate with each other. So you may be a wonderful advocate who's working within a certain context, and the Family Court may be bludgeoning your survivor. You can't do anything about it, right? You're totally, you know, hamstrung, right? OK, valid, right? But you have to learn how to navigate that, that the alarm and anger and frustration of the survivor who's being abused by another sector and not shut down and not push her out and not stop listening [00:42:19][34.9]
Speaker 1: [00:42:20] and seeking to understand that. I think the other barrier before we move on to assessing is just that. I think we have to acknowledge that many cultures we operate in devalue women's voices, right? So we're suspicious. We we we think that that can't be true, especially we've met the perpetrator and they present, well, you know, and that they don't fit our stereotypes of what a perpetrator looks like, which could be based racist in nature. They could be the classic classist nature. You know that we may devalue her, her experience we make. The stories may seem too far fetched when a lot of times domestic violence is that extreme and that particular in that horrific. Yeah. And then particularly also we have to layer in intersectionality around devaluing the experience of black and brown women and survivors and indigenous people. That just that those are the barriers there is is on both sides. People may have biases. And also, there may be bigger issues of trust of the system to disclose. And we talk about partnering and barriers from a kid who grew up in foster care. Regardless of my background, I may have a deep distrust of the system in this way. Right, right. And so if that's the case, then it's really that may be really hard for us to write. Well, I think [00:43:47][87.3]
Speaker 2: [00:43:48] and I think that I think the solution to that is acknowledging right. And it may take more than more than one or two or three times, right, but just to acknowledge to the survivor and affirm to them that, you know, the hurt that they've experienced, the alarm and danger they've experienced through incompetence or even through act of collusion is real and that, you know? You know, I'm incredibly sorry that that happened, right? And I don't want to I don't want to see that happen again. And so I want I want to partner with you the best I can, and I may not be able to do everything. I'm limited in these ways. I can't address what's happening in the family court system, but at least I can create solid documentation about your strengths and the perpetrators pattern of behavior that may be somewhere along the line in the judicial system. A judge is forced to look at it. Somebody may pick it up. Maybe somebody may pick it up. Yeah. [00:44:44][56.9]
Speaker 1: [00:44:45] All right. So the third step is really about assessing survivors protective capacity. And remember, a lot of our work happens in the context of child welfare and systems that really are trying to understand are the kids safe in a home? And and so we are really clear that that assessing of survivor's protective capacity is so important and and people are often missing. So many strength survivors are bringing to to their kids need and we have a whole framework around, right? You know, is she providing how is she providing physical safety, emotional safety, helping heal from the trauma? And a big one is stability and nurturance, because that's often overlooked, particularly looking at women survivors. Because again, gender bias is like, Well, we just expect that for moms. And she may be working her her butt off to like, make sure the kids are fed and get off to school and they're involved in activities and they're doing all these things. So she's working double, triple or quadruple, [00:45:43][57.6]
Speaker 2: [00:45:44] being threatened and being [00:45:45][0.8]
Speaker 1: [00:45:45] threatened hard to compensate for what's going on to give the kids as much normalcy as possible. And and we often go kids are medically up to date tech, and that's it. And so it's so important to really dove deep into those protective efforts, those strengths as a parent particular as it relates to what she's doing in those areas, way to the kids in the right. [00:46:06][20.5]
Speaker 2: [00:46:06] Because if you just look at at school attendance as a measure, right, and you expect that mom's the one that's going to do that. You don't see that she was beaten the night before, right? And he was an impediment to the children's safety and well-being and being able to get to school because she's the person who gets them to school. He gets up in the morning and leaves and she is, you know, traumatized, perhaps deeply injured, maybe has a head injury. She still gets those kids to school. That's right. That's that is [00:46:35][29.3]
Speaker 1: [00:46:36] heroic. That's heroic. And this is where the very basic concept that any you mutual eyes or you lump parents together, you know, the parents allow the kids to be exposed domestic moms any time that kind of language is used thinking and we don't try to differentiate. And that's a laziness that isn't isn't really acceptable, right? In domestic violence, if we're in practice and if you look at, for instance, data that shows about when kids have been physically injured in the context of domestic violence and need medical care, and they looked at one study that said 100 percent of the time it was the survivor who took the kids to the doctor or the hospital. So if you wrote down well, the parents didn't take the kids to the medical care or the parents took the kids the medical care afterwards. Or there was a delay in getting the kids right, and the parents didn't immediately respond. You would miss that. Often it was almost always is the perpetrator creating the harm to the kid? Right? The perpetrator interfering with a kid being taken right, the mother being in a panic and being afraid about worried about their kid's safety and health and what's going on and strategizing for their how to get their kid medical care and knowing [00:47:41][64.9]
Speaker 2: [00:47:41] that she could be blamed by [00:47:42][0.9]
Speaker 1: [00:47:42] she'd be blaming the system and trying to navigate how to appease him enough to get the kid to the doctor. You know what I need to do? And then she picks up and reads that you go and say, Well, you guys delayed again. The kid to the to the E.R. told us that this kid was injured six hours earlier and that they could have died if they didn't get there in time. And so we're holding you both accountable. Imagine being hit with that as as survivor. And and just the how it's demoralizing and and shaming, you know, making what you did is a strength and visible and making the perpetrator's responsibility for interfere and causing the harm invisible. And it just I mean, these are the things that just to me, it's insulting. It's insulting, even as I'm talking about, it makes me so angry because it's actually controllable. This is right. I'm like, I'm like, We're better than this as professionals, right? And we can do this right. We got this, we got this. We can do this right, right? And if we slow down and we think about what we're trying to accomplish and we think about what domestic violence if practices. And so it's so important to really ask. I'm sorry to assess her strengths because the process of you exploring those things with the assumption you've been safety planning, you've been trying to keep your kids safe. And what I would always tell people is go into that home, assuming she's been actively trying to keep her kids safe. That should be your doorway assumption. Mm-Hmm. Does it matter how many times you've been called? There doesn't matter how many instances mean how many domestic violence relationships. [00:49:16][93.5]
Speaker 2: [00:49:17] And that's very hard for professionals. That is super [00:49:20][2.8]
Speaker 1: [00:49:20] hard being a professional. I think it's super hard for human beings because I think there's a police in Western culture. There's a sense of personal responsibility. And, you know, and there [00:49:29][8.6]
Speaker 2: [00:49:29] should be a check yourself before you wreck yourself, function on any, on any, you know, information gathering before other people are [00:49:36][7.7]
Speaker 1: [00:49:37] professional. Why we should all be on the right exactly a little flashing sign up saying check yourself. Exactly. It's just like just remember that she was safety. Planning part of your job is to figure out what those things were. Right? That doesn't mean that it all work and doesn't mean the perpetrator didn't undermine them. Doesn't mean that she's perfectly safety planning. But the assumption that she was is so critically important. And so, you know, so again, think about these as all as they're reinforcing this idea that of a perpetrator powered response from partner, each step of these things or behaviors that can engage in [00:50:09][31.9]
Speaker 2: [00:50:09] how do you? But how do you get around the system focus? So, you know, for example, you know, right now during COVID as we know that child abuse not reporting, but injuries have increased visits to the E.R. and the hospital with serious and severe injury. And the mandates that are coming down from from governmental agencies to try to increase child safety, which is really focused on removals. How is a worker? Do you navigate that? That is a huge pressure, which which really puts your job on the line. So if you're coming to a repeat call, you know, and you have a supervisor who's not supportive. [00:50:58][49.0]
Speaker 1: [00:51:00] I think I think remembering that as part of partnering that honesty and directness with the survivor is really important and and that partnering can mean saying to survivor look, based on his pattern of behavior, I'm really worried for your safety and safety. That's right. Right. And. These are behaviors that he's engaged in that are really concerning. He's showing no sign of changing. There's no indication he's not going to do it again, right? And we really recognize how hard you've been working to navigate this situation. And these are the things we feel like you've been doing right. And every time you. Workers report back to me that they use this, they really what they report back is almost that they see that mom's shoulders go down and even their their attorneys, if they've got a lawyer, the kind of being disarmed being kind of brought on board by saying, Look, I see how hard you work and let me let me describe to you, and this is the validation part we were talking about in a minute. Let me describe two things we think you're doing, right? Mm-Hmm. And and this is the part that workers often struggle with that you can do that and then say, and despite those efforts, we think you're still in danger. Right. And these are the tools we have, right? And some of them you might not like, right? But but let's work together. See if we can come up [00:52:15][75.3]
Speaker 2: [00:52:15] with a plan [00:52:16][0.3]
Speaker 1: [00:52:16] that feels good and well under those circumstances. What I can say is that we've had some survivors say, Look, I completely actually agree with you taking the kids into care right now because I think he is dangerous to them, and this will free me up to maneuver and take care of some things [00:52:32][15.6]
Speaker 2: [00:52:33] to get to get back to us. [00:52:34][1.3]
Speaker 1: [00:52:34] The decision to bring the care isn't because she's a bad mom, but because he's so dangerous, right? So I think you can keep that focus, that deep focus on safety and keep as an option. Removal of kids bring them to foster care kin placement, which is in place because it is better if you can do it safely. And there's a whole thing about partnering, and I don't want to get into this really about partnering or on kin placement because the thing that gets me so mad is when kids are taken from a victim and placed with their dads, which control the access and and that's a part of his parents [00:53:07][32.9]
Speaker 2: [00:53:08] happens so [00:53:08][0.8]
Speaker 1: [00:53:09] much. But so anyway, but I think so. I think you can support workers and saying, Look, this is the safety of their moms, always about safety and improved outcomes for kids, right? So that doesn't doesn't negate that safety focus. And if kids are in danger and we've done our best to partner with the survivor and we've tried to intervene with the perpetrator, then taking those kids into care for a period of time may be the best decision that can be made. [00:53:32][22.6]
Speaker 2: [00:53:32] Right. It's it's it's such a difficult place to get to because one of the things that's not really taken into consideration is the isolation that's created by the perpetrator to remove family members and support from that victim, leaving them vulnerable to not having skin care so their children only have the system to to engage with. And that that's a real thing. Yeah. You know, [00:54:02][30.2]
Speaker 1: [00:54:03] so the last I mean, it's just kind of name the last three things validate collaboratively plan document, name those three things and sort of talk about each one of them a little bit. Then we can kind of see where we are, you know, validate to me is is is we're social workers. I think one of the should be one of your favorite parts of the job. And I think this is we're not trained necessarily to do this or not. Some people do it naturally. And it can get put into building rapport. And it could be. We talk about being strength based, but sometimes strength based practice is really cursory. Mm hmm. It's really not. It's really not really deeply done. And to me, this is this foundation is is is really about saying, I see you and I see what you've done. It's not saying you're a good mom or I know you love your kids. [00:54:56][52.5]
Speaker 2: [00:54:56] I know you've done this. [00:54:57][0.7]
Speaker 1: [00:54:57] I've been listening to you. I've been watching you. And you're really good at this. You really worked hard or see how hard you've been working to keep the kid safe in the context of the violence. And I think that's really, you know, really, really important to be able to say that to a survivor and name the specific things that I always related back hearing somebody talk. It's a colleague of mine, David Adams, who was talking about parenting and and and working with men around around violence and and becoming better parents. And he was talking about good parenting. And he said good parenting involves acknowledging kid's strengths and things. They did right and did well and right. And and he says and in specifics, and I always carry that with me because I think when you think about validation, good validation should be super specific to this person, right? And what they did their behavior and I know I've used it over and over again with survivors I use it with with social workers. In practice, I use it when I do consultations. OK, that's Tiberius versus ears. That's the joy of his podcast Floppy Ears, and we love doing this podcast with him sitting between us. And you get noises, you get noises and usually once or twice during the podcast, you will get up to resettle himself. [00:56:13][75.4]
Speaker 2: [00:56:15] Everyone has nails, which [00:56:16][1.1]
Speaker 1: [00:56:16] is what he's doing right now. So if he, you know, if we're validating people, whether it's your guy as a team leader, as a social worker in their practice or survivor, you know, it's the same practice. You know, when I do it with social workers, I say, let me start by telling. What I think you did right in this case. [00:56:35][19.0]
Speaker 2: [00:56:36] Right. [00:56:36][0.0]
Speaker 1: [00:56:37] You know, and the really good practice. Now let's explore the harder areas where there may need to be some work. Right? And so that's the same thing I do with social workers when I'm doing consultations, when we're doing this with with survivors, start with the good stuff. Before you move into sort of the difficult areas of the challenging areas, be really clear about what what that person's done right and how hard they worked. And when it's done genuinely and with with connection and affection. It can be very profound. I mean, I've been sitting in a coffee shop with survivors and I've said, you know, talked about how hard they work to keep their kids safe and they'll start crying. Yeah, it's sometimes it's that simple. Yeah, yeah. So validation is, is the is the that fourth step and then. Collaboratively planning, you can see how these things set you up, because now you can discuss what do we need to do? What can I do for you? What do you need to do? What do you have control over? What will work? What will make things better? Mm-Hmm. And then talk through based on the perpetrators pattern, how we might interfere with those plans. And so collaborative planning. Draws on the earlier work after assessing her protective capacity is asking about the perpetrators pattern. And it sets you up to do that collaborative planning really well with that person. And so. So there's a connection between all these six steps, right? Disconnected. And so when you get to that collaborative planning that hopefully that some trust, there's some sense of she's she's she's with you, right? And that you know, that you that you have a way of really engaging with this person about what what the choices are and what needs to happen. [00:58:13][96.2]
Speaker 2: [00:58:14] That's that's perfect. And I think we've run through the the gamut of partnering. No, there's one more. There's one more, OK, we're missing one more documentation documentation, OK? [00:58:25][10.5]
Speaker 1: [00:58:25] And and and in a system where so much is dependent, what's written down and the phrase that a lot of people from, if you didn't write down, it didn't happen, right? Law enforcement, child protection courts, attorneys, they're all about written documents. And and and this is really kind of critical, you know, for all this that I can't tell you how many times that I would have a lovely conversation with a professional about a case. And then I would look at their documentation, and it looked like there were two different cases, right? It was in a deficit language. There was nothing. They were using [00:59:02][37.5]
Speaker 2: [00:59:03] the system language. [00:59:03][0.5]
Speaker 1: [00:59:04] They used, the system, language they've been trained in and code words and, you know, and and diagnoses, diagnoses and these. And so all those other steps that I was just talking about need to be reflected in the documentation. [00:59:16][12.6]
Speaker 2: [00:59:17] Right. And it's amazing. You know, the mapping tool even used by mental health professionals, addiction professionals, survivors themselves is a power [00:59:29][12.4]
Speaker 1: [00:59:30] which encompasses a lot of this stuff. [00:59:31][1.2]
Speaker 2: [00:59:32] It encompasses a lot of this stuff is a powerful way to kind of keep you on task with these partnering principles because it's embedded in that documentation tool and because it creates that record, which then is submitted in as official documentation about that survivor, you know, and the hope is, is that even if you're a call center worker? Mm-Hmm. Hotline worker, a sexual violence worker, a mental health professional, a religious leader, a victim, a survivor. Right. If that documentation is created and then verified by a professional, the hope is, is this that that works its way into the system and creates accountability? It's a way to look back and say, we told you that these people were in danger. You didn't do the right thing system. This is your problem. You are liable, right? [01:00:25][53.8]
Speaker 1: [01:00:26] And I think, you know, you have to impediments earlier barriers. I think in the US that there's an A.. For good reason that that domestic violence centers and shelters don't do a lot of documentation because what they're doing is trying to protect survivors from being [01:00:40][14.6]
Speaker 2: [01:00:40] abused by the system [01:00:41][0.7]
Speaker 1: [01:00:42] because by system totally makes sense. But what it also has done is put survivors and their advocates at a disadvantage with professionals who are so focused on documentation. Right? Need the documentation, right? And so Dr. Luis Cepeda, who is one of our certified trainers and is in Texas, she was working in dependency court and she worked out how to do limited releases that protected the rest of the information they were focused on, on survivor strengths and found they're very effective, for instance. So people are being great creative when they're trying to get into this documentation piece, right? I think we really need and sometimes will give homework assignments for women's workers to give to survivors where the survivor herself lists her strengths as a parent and a coach through it. Then she hands the documentation to the professionals. But I think it's I think we really need to really look at this because I think systems are not set up to document survivors strengths, and we need those people who advocate for women's workers really need to think about, am I doing a good job bringing survivors strengths into into the systems view? And I think, you know, in the US over and over again, I've heard advocates say, well, I've been trained to identify her needs and case, manage her, you know, an advocate for getting her needs met, which is great. But when a system like child welfare depends on getting information about her strengths. And those things can actually insulate her from the negative effects of the system, right? You know, we have to really get better. Right? [01:02:11][89.0]
Speaker 2: [01:02:11] Right. I'm sorry. You don't get to call her failure to protect you. Don't get to say that she's a danger to the children. If the documentation exists right of her strengths in her attempts to protect those children against the worst inclinations of professionals [01:02:25][13.9]
Speaker 1: [01:02:26] and the system itself. And she may have anxiety and she may have depression. [01:02:29][3.0]
Speaker 2: [01:02:30] She may have an addiction. [01:02:31][0.6]
Speaker 1: [01:02:31] But wouldn't it be wonderful if it's said despite those anxiety issues or this depression or addiction issues? Here's the 10 things she's done the last five weeks to keep her kids safe and keep them on track with school, right? [01:02:41][9.6]
Speaker 2: [01:02:41] Right. And this anxiety and. It came about because directly because of the domestic violence, therefore the domestic violence perpetrator does not get to use this as a way to take away those children. [01:02:53][11.3]
Speaker 1: [01:02:53] So this is this is really how the documentation kind of feeds back and connects to other pieces. So. So these are the six steps of the partnering and and and we have lots of other tools. You know, I but we haven't talked about the actual practice of pivoting, which is a three step process. We are about to launch in the next few months, a new online course and partnering. So the context for this conversation right now, I've been doing a lot of teaching. [01:03:18][25.1]
Speaker 2: [01:03:19] And then we're going to have come on why the Big Kahuna, which won the Big Kahuna a few? [01:03:24][5.5]
Speaker 1: [01:03:25] Because we got the document. [01:03:26][1.2]
Speaker 2: [01:03:26] Take the mapping tool in virtual mapping. [01:03:28][1.6]
Speaker 1: [01:03:28] Typekit virtual virtual mapping tool is coming where you will be electronic version of that. We're actually launching this year a suite of tools with Luke and Ryan Hart around course control that will help. Professional's partner with survivors around a conversation on coercive control, right? So the show is called partnering with Survivors for the safety of the Model. We did all of the partnering language in the in the in the yes, in the second principle, you know, and then it builds on the critical components. And I actually have a belief in some days. I think it's it's totally naive and then sometimes to think, wow, this is actually happening, which is that that system's child centered systems, child welfare should be can be one of the biggest allies to domestic violence. Yes, right? Because their shared interest in the violence stopping in the kids situation being better [01:04:20][52.2]
Speaker 2: [01:04:21] and because of the the very fact that, you know, such a high percentage of child deaths have domestic violence involvement. That's that's just a really critical mission critical [01:04:32][11.2]
Speaker 1: [01:04:33] center for child centered agencies, [01:04:34][1.2]
Speaker 2: [01:04:34] right? I have that. I have that hope and dream as well, right? And I always remember the wise words of the very captain in Scooby Doo Zombie Island. I know, I know, you know, and I was going to say kids and I do this all the time and and the why is very captain says she don't turn on a dime. And that's real. So we got to keep chipping away. [01:04:58][23.5]
Speaker 1: [01:04:58] So on that note, this is part of the survivor. I'm David Mandel, executive director of the Safety Other Institute, [01:05:04][5.8]
Speaker 2: [01:05:05] and I'm resistence Mandel and I'm the eLearning and communications manager. [01:05:08][3.1]
Speaker 1: [01:05:09] And if you like this show, please share on your with other people. Subscribe to it on your favorite podcast platform. Please, please, please write us with ideas. A comment on the show comment in the boxes on the on your on your platform. Review it. Suggest guests for us topics. Really, we want we want this year to be the year more communication with with our listeners. We do. And and for those of you who want to learn more, you can go to save it together. [01:05:38][28.8]
Speaker 2: [01:05:38] Intercom or Academy Dot Save and Together Institute dot com for our trainings, which have free trainings, collection of free trainings, free information, free resources and I've created a coupon code for our listeners. Partnered All Lowercase so that you can receive 15 percent off any training. All right. All right. I think we're out. [01:05:38][0.0]
[3821.8]