Restorative System

From Translate NVC
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Other languages:
English • ‎français
Linking to this document
Recognised Roles

Restorative Practices Proposal at TCCP (Trainer Candidate Community Path)[edit | edit source]

The participants at the September 2012 TCCP gathering co-created a proposal (see below) for how interpersonal tension and conflict can be transformed in our community. The purpose of this proposal is to create a framework that supports safety, continuity, co-creation, and choice in our ever-expanding TCCP community.

The proposal for restorative practices is that during the first day of each TCCP gathering a menu of possible practices for dealing with conflict is presented.  The group then collectively refines the menu using a co-creative process. The "revised" menu can then be posted on a flip chart for the duration of that TCCP gathering, and/or can be printed on a handout for each participant.  During the time share together, participants are encouraged to utilize practices off the "revised" menu for our mutual benefit.

An initial proposed menu is listed below, but it is intended to be an organic living document that can be expanded and adjusted at any time.

Restorative Practices Menu[edit | edit source]

The following is a living document of practices to be selected from when someone is experiencing interpersonal tension or conflict at a TCCP gathering. We affectionately refer to it as a “menu.” The order of these practices is from least to most human resources required.

Self-Empathy: A person experiencing tension or conflict may practice self connection as a method of transforming pain they are experiencing. To support this practice, a self-connection process handout may be made available at each gathering.

Empathic Presence: A person may invite any other member of the community to offer them empathic presence for the purpose of self connection, in a space removed from the larger group.

1-on-1 Conversation: If both people are willing and confident in their ability to resolve the conflict with each other directly, they may do so in a space removed from the larger group.

Supported 1-on-1 Conversation: This is the same as a 1-on-1 Conversation, but in the presence of third person. This third person contributes their presence as needed to support reconciliation, from silent witnessing to active mediation. Either of the two persons involved, or a third person, may invite such a conversation.

Group Process: When a person experiencing or impacted by a conflict sees it as necessary for multiple members of the community to be present to address the conflict, they may initiate a group process, such as a Restorative Circle, a talking circle, or a facilitated group dialogue. Participation in such a process is voluntary for all involved.

Facilitation:  During a facilitated dialogue or any group process, the group can designate two people to facilitate and "hold" the circle while tracking Needs of the group along with individual needs.  If at any time the facilitators have a sense they are no longer at a place where they can hold the circle, another person can be identified as holding the circle.  For example, if the facilitators become triggered or are in need of empathy and support, then a new person can be the facilitator to track the Groups' Needs.  Facilitators may check in with the group to see if there is any objection to continuing the current dialogue or to switching to another strategy or offering on the menu. 

Restorative Circle: One group process option is a Restorative Circle, involving facilitated Pre-Circles, Circle, and Post-Circle. See materials on Restorative Circles for more information on this practice.

Emergent Requests: Someone experiencing pain/disconnect may also simply notify the group of their needs and make an in-the-moment request for any specific form of support.

REQUEST: Are you willing to consent to the above proposal, to be (re-)presented and agreed to at the start of each TCCP gathering and further refined over time, for use within the TCCP community? If not, do you have any positive additions or specific counter proposals?