Restorative Approaches to Bullying (2007)

Transcription

1 Restorative Approaches to Bullying (2007) unpublished report 2007

2

3 PAGE 3 Restorative Approaches to Bullying (2007) Restorative approaches are being increasingly used in schools and children s homes to develop safer, more harmonious environments, to encourage a greater sense of accountability amongst both staff and young people and to develop mutual respect and better relationships between everyone in the community. One of the main contributions a restorative approach can make in these contexts is to the issue of tackling bullying behaviour, and it can do this with both pro-active as well as reactive strategies. It is essential that the response to bullying models the very same values and skills encouraged in the young people to reduce the incidence of bullying and violence in the first place. Lack of congruence between prevention strategies and reactive strategies could aggravate the problem. Restorative values and skills The essence of a restorative approach is a commitment to making, maintaining and, when necessary, repairing relationships. The values that underpin this commitment include mutual respect, trust, openness, tolerance, empathy, celebration of diversity and being non-judgemental. These values need to inform the way in which people in a restorative environment interact on a daily basis. They will also inform certain key relational skills skills which the adults in a school or children s home would need to model - active listening; emotional literacy; impartiality; inclusive problem-solving and inter-personal conflict management, for example (Hopkins, 2004, Hopkins, 2009). Building a sense of community and involvement through Circles A restorative school or home is likely to be encouraging the involvement of young people in most aspects of community life. Regular circle meetings using go-rounds, games, pair and small group work can develop a sense of belonging and connectedness to others in the class, encourage everyone to share the responsibility for addressing each others needs create opportunities for active participation in decision-making and help to build self-esteem, communication and co-operation skills (Bliss et al., 1995, Bliss & Tetley, 1993, Kingston Friends Workshop Group, 1996, Mosley, 1993, Mosley, 1996, Mosley & Tew, 1999). Sharing circles can also help to develop an ethos of care (Noddings, 1992), encouraging an awareness of the impact of every individual s behaviour on everyone in the class, group or team. When things go wrong or problems arise this may mean both personal accountability and group problem-solving.

4 PAGE 4 Peer initiatives such as school councils, peer mentoring and peer mediation increase the involvement of young people (Cremin, 2000, Cremin, 2007, Hopkins, 2006). Ideally this empowerment of young people extends also into curriculum delivery, where there is an emphasis on students taking greater responsibility for their learning, and teachers take into consideration different learning styles and needs. Behaviour management The most critical and challenging area for adults to be modelling relationship skills is when conflicts, problems or challenges occur, especially if they find themselves being drawn into the conflict themselves. Traditional behaviour management systems can be counterproductive. Young people can often feel resentful when sanctions are imposed, especially if they do not feel that they have been treated fairly, or that their side has been ignored. Resentment can lead to a sense of alienation and disengagement from pro-social peer groups. Furthermore sanctions often fail to make the link between an act of wrongdoing and those affected by the act. By equating the word consequence with sanction young people are deprived of the lesson that the natural consequence of their deed is the impact on others. Indeed if they are taught that the consequence happens only if they are caught then the sensible lesson to learn is how to escape capture. Thus our traditional system of sanctions breeds self-centredness and deceit and a conspiracy of silence around wrongdoers, who may well threaten others who are tempted to report wrongdoing (Hopkins, 2004). Offering an alternative response - breaking the cycle of power over The risks of using sanctions has implications for how a school deals with bullying behaviour, but is also relevant to how it deals with misbehaviour per se. Wachtel and McCold (2002) have developed a model to explain how a restorative approach to behaviour management differs from other more widespread options. They posit two axes on their grid, with control, discipline and boundary-setting on the vertical axis, and care, support and nurture along the horizontal axis. Environments exercising high levels of control and discipline but with little attention to care, support and nurture they characterise as punitive, authoritarian and stigmatising. Environments exercising high levels of support and nurture but with few boundaries and little control they characterise as permissive, rescuing and protective. Dismissing environments low on both control and care as neglectful, indifferent and passive they turn to their middle way the restorative approach. In this window they make the case for an approach in that is high on boundary-setting and control but also high on support and nurture. info@transformingconflict.org

5 PAGE 5 Four Choices Window (adapted from T. Wachtel) Wachtel and McCold conclude that the punitive approach means doing things to people, the permissive approach means doing things for people, not doing anything at all is neglectful, whilst the restorative approach means doing things with people. In a restorative environment boundaries are negotiated collaboratively, and everyone is encouraged to take responsibility for the impact of their actions on each other, thus developing mutual concern and support. There is a risk that young people growing up in an authoritarian environment may be more ready to engage in such behaviours themselves and so it is important that adults offer alternative ways of dealing with conflicts and challenges. Someone engaging in bullying is operating from the to box seeking to use power and control to dominate someone with less power, and showing very little if any consideration for the target of their bullying. It is important that the response to this behaviour offers an alternative and models a different way of interacting. If bullying is responded to in an authoritarian punitive way we are not breaking the mould and offering alternative ways of being, and indeed we are simply reproducing the response of power over.

6 PAGE 6 Ignoring the behaviour would be responding from the not box. Neither the young person bullying nor the young person bullied would be supported with this kind of reaction. Making excuses for the person engaging in bullying would not be helpful either. This would be akin to operating from the for box not holding a young person to account for what they have done in the mistaken belief that because of their own problems they are unable to take responsibility for their actions. There is a correlation between people engaging in bullying and future involvement in offending and delinquent behaviour and we need to support such young people in facing up to the consequences of their actions on others whilst also trying to get to the bottom of why they have been engaging in this anti-social behaviour in the first place. If we subscribe to Marshall Rosenberg s (1999) maxim that violence (verbal, mental or physical) is the tragic expression of an unmet need then it is beholden on us to identify the unmet needs of the young person engaging in bullying, as well as the needs of the people whose needs have been violated by the bullying behaviour. In order to meet the needs of all those involved we need to offer a response that involves working WITH all those affected by what has happened. Responding restoratively to bullying incidents Despite the arguments raised above about the risks of traditional behaviour managements systems there are still those who argue that youngsters who bully should be dealt with harshly. It needs to be emphasised that punishment is an ineffective and positively harmful way of responding. It can be damaging for the young people who have been bullying and push them further away from the pro-social communities they need, and it can also make the environment less, not more, safe for those being bullied. Punishment makes a person resentful, not reflective (Braithwaite, 1989), and so people who bully are not made accountable, in the true sense of the word - they do not have to face up to the reality of just how many people have been affected, directly and indirectly, by their unacceptable behaviour. They are not given the chance to hear, first hand, about the pain, hurt, distress and anger they have caused, to those victimised, their parents, their own family, and the wider school community. Teachers wonder why victimised young people are frightened to report bullying it is because the perpetrators and their friends make life very unpleasant for these tell-tales - either immediately or later. Punishment does nothing to restore any of these relationships, and indeed makes them worse, so no wonder there is retaliation. info@transformingconflict.org

7 PAGE 7 Punitive responses do not help to answer any questions. All those affected, including the families of all involved, want to know Why me? or Why my child? Will it stop? What can we do to help? And possibly even Where did I go wrong? Punitive responses in general, and exclusionary responses in particular, have been shown to increase a young person's chance of becoming delinquent. 75% of young people appearing in court have been excluded at least once. We have a duty of care towards all young people to understand what is behind the bullying and to help young people who bully to learn more pro-social behaviours. Punishment does not provide the perpetrator with an opportunity to repair the harm, experience remorse, offer a genuine apology or make amends - in effect to make a fresh start. Some would argue that this is detrimental and that living with internalised shame can lead to psychological distress and further anti-social if not ultimately criminal behaviour. Young people need to be given a chance to discharge their shame, put things right and move on (Ahmed et al., 2001, Ahmed, 1999, Morrison, 2007). Locked within a compass of shame they are at risk to themselves and others (Nathanson, 1992). As already explained earlier punishment repeats the cycle of power and domination that breeds a bullying mentality. 'You made that person suffer so now we will make you suffer. It's OK for us to do it to you, but it s not OK for you to do it to someone else.' It does not offer an alternative way of doing things which can educate young people in a more effective parenting style in the future. There is widespread evidence, including a Home Office sponsored evaluation (PiE, 2005), that a restorative approach can address all of the issues raised above - something that knee- jerk punishments can never do. A unique opportunity is provided for all those affected to meet and for everyone to share their stories, their feelings and their ideas for moving forward. Questions such as those mentioned above can be answered and those who have bullied get an opportunity to hear exactly how much their behaviour has impacted not only on the direct victims but also everyone else present. This is a far more demanding experience than a temporary or even a permanent exclusion, and yet a potentially much more productive one since, if remorse is felt and expressed, all sides can feel better and move on. If those who have bullied then go on to suggest ways of making amends this in itself helps to restore relationships, respect, self esteem and confidence. The Home Office National Practice Guidelines for Restorative Justice ensure that a full risk assessment is made, with careful preparation, so that those victimised and their family,

8 PAGE 8 the wrongdoer and their family, and school representation, are only brought together if it is safe and everyone is willing. Flexible responses A restorative school will have a range of flexible strategies for dealing with conflict, misbehaviour and bullying. Not all incidents need to be dealt with by involving parents. Indeed sometimes this can aggravate a situation which could have been resolved at an earlier stage using an informal intervention involving only the students directly involved. The key is always individual preparation, an assessment of the most effective and appropriate strategy to suit the situation and a flexibility to adapt the approach in the light of what emerges. In some cases an alleged bullying incident turns out to be a case of inter-personal conflict in which both sides are accusing the other of bullying. In others the person doing the bullying may well have been bullied the day or the week before, perhaps by those whom they are victimising. Restoratively trained staff attest to the value of keeping in mind five key questions, which inform all restorative interventions, from the most informal, used in the moment, in one to one settings or amongst groups of young people in conflict: What s happened? What were you thinking as this happened and so how were you feeling? Who else has been affected by what has happened? What do you need now you move on? And so what needs to happen now so that the harm caused be repaired? The way in which these questions are framed can be adapted to suit the young people concerned and the situation what s up? what s the problem? what s going on? etc but whatever the words used it is critical that the questioner remains impartial, calm and non-judgemental, so that their tone of voice, their facial expression and other non-verbal signs do not threaten or stifle dialogue. info@transformingconflict.org

9 PAGE 9 All restorative meetings, except the most informal, follow essentially the same format. Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 Stage 5 acknowledgement of the courage to choose to try and resolve the problem together; explanation of the process and discussion about key ground rules restorative enquiry (again), inviting all sides to tell their stories, express their thoughts and their feelings when the situation occurred and now invitation to all involved to express their needs to feel better and move on problem solving how can all the needs expressed be met and the harm repaired drawing up a written or verbal contract and agreeing to review things in a day or so The framework for the restorative meeting described above is not predicated on their being an identified wrongdoer and is therefore flexible, even in such situations where on the surface there is an identified wrongdoer. In clear cut cases of bullying, with identified perpetrators who acknowledge their responsibility, Stage 3 focuses more on what can be done to repair the harm caused. Although some bullying does not need to involve parents or carers it is vital that in more serious cases they do take part not least because they themselves are likely to have been affected by what has happened, will need to share their stories and expect to be involved in finding a way forward. Traditionally, certainly in schools, staff have tended to deal with incidents in-house and then inform parents of decisions taken. A restorative approach is different in that it acknowledges the importance of the parents role, their own feelings and needs in the situation, and their investment in finding a way forward that ensures the safety and future well being of their own children. Positive results In schools where restorative approaches are being used to respond to misbehaviour in general and bullying in particular, staff are reporting very positive results. Deptford Green School in Lewisham, for example, has noted a reduction in bullying, a greater willingness to report incidents and a willingness to own up as well, since all bullying issues are responded to in a way that repairs harm, rather than by imposing a sanction. The school s anti-bullying policy used to have a clause about what to do if a perpetrator was unwilling to own up and engage in a restorative process

10 PAGE 10 but this clause has been removed as there is now always engagement. Young people have learnt to appreciate that they will have a chance to put things right if they are willing to admit what they have done. The culture of conspiracy and collusion is being gradually whittled away. As a result of this school s success in addressing bullying restoratively, and the success of other schools in the borough. Lewisham has now introduced a borough-wide anti-bullying policy based on restorative principles (Lewisham Borough Council, 2008) and the Anti-Bullying Alliance is endorsing a restorative approach as a way to both prevent and, when necessary, respond to bullying (Cowie & Jennifer, 2008). In care homes using this approach improvements in relationships between staff and young people have been noted, and a greater willingness by young people to support each other and discourage bullying amongst the group (Willmott, 2007). Conclusion Despite a growing number of schools and homes adopting restorative approaches to conflicts, misbehaviour and bullying, and reporting huge success, there is still a dearth of sound evidence to convince the sceptics of the efficacy and appropriacy of this approach. It is true that bullying exists in many forms and what is needed is an in-depth study of how the approach could be used in a variety of situations, what risk factors need to be considered and addressed and what minimum standards of training there need to be to ensure that no staff inadvertantly aggravate an already dangerous situation. Much evidence and good practice already exists and needs collating so that national practice standards specific to dealing with bullying in all its various forms can be drawn up. Dr Belinda Hopkins - July 2007 updated March 2010 info@transformingconflict.org

11

12 Transforming Conflict Mortimer Hill, Mortimer, Berkshire, RG7 3PW T E info@transformingconflict.org W