ACSB Grievance Learning, Repair & Accountability Process  

Section I: Preamble / Statement of Intent

As a community, we are creating a Learning, Repair & Accountability Process that strives to support our practitioners, students, clients and community-at-large as we all tend to the healing and wellness of the individuals, communities and cultures in our midst. We have rooted this Accountability Process in the community-building philosophies and practices of restorative and transformative justice while also, when necessary, taking guidance from the adjudication model, enabling us to create effective and immediate containers of safety. We acknowledge that the intimate and vulnerable nature of Sexological Bodywork® (SB) and Somatic Sex Education (SSE) requires that we – the practitioners in these fields – conduct ourselves with great attention to our integrity, developing our capacity for self-observation and accountability as we shape ourselves around our commitment to structures of community/supervisory support and transparency of practice.

In creating this Learning, Repair & Accountability Process we acknowledge a number of things that guide us, inspire us, and humble us:

1. This is an emergent, co-creative process, not a finalized form; but it serves as a strong beginning, one that is capable of holding all of us well, as we create intelligent pathways and refine practices through challenging and inspiring community processes

2. We strive to move away from the current carceral model when attending to potential and perceived harm within our community; in its place we embrace, among other methods and processes, the Restorative/Transformative Justice model of care, repair, and learning/evolving

3. We strive to create systems of care, repair and learning that reflect our values as a community; that we are stronger together, more ethical and effective when we support and listen to each other, with positive regard and respect, refusing to ‘other’ or cancel, shame or blame anyone, for any reason, at any time 

4. Sexological Bodywork® and Somatic Sex Education are evolving professions; we imagine many of us will cross a boundary as we continue to refine and define the parameters of our work, and, because we are all fallible, and in this fallibility, capable of causing great harm even unintentionally, we strive to create an Learning, Repair & Accountability Process that, when necessary, can act with compassionate decisiveness, to create boundaries of safety against further harm within which repair and learning can take place 

5. As a community of care and service we subscribe to the belief that harm does not happen in a vacuum; that harm is made possible by gaps and tears in the community fabric. Therefore, we do not subscribe to the belief that there are bad people and good people; when harm is done we recognize that it wounds all involved, including the harmer and the community. Therefore, we strive to create systems of care and repair that encourage 360º accountability while attending to the necessary healing when a violation has occurred

6. This process is offered to create safety – as well as the opportunity for growth and learning – for our clients and students and well as our practitioners and our community at large

7. Additionally, this Learning, Repair & Accountability Process is created in hopes that this structure supports the continued branding and development of Sexological Bodywork® and Somatic Sex Education within the larger healing profession worldwide; evidence of our commitment to ethical, evidenced-based work within a structure of responsibility and accountability for our practitioners and students

8. This Learning, Repair & Accountability Process is organic and growing; as we learn with each other and continue to define and refine our processes, the Grievance Council will receive complaints on a case by case basis. We will address grievances with the intention of healing and community deepening - of repair and learning and evolving for the profession as a whole as we continue to learn and grow.

Section II: Grievance Council Membership & Responsibilities 

The ACSB Grievance Council (Grievance Council) will comprise 6 -12 members total.

Participation on the Grievance Council is voluntary. Further, to participate on the Grievance Council one must be a trained facilitator (by an Ethics Committee-approved restorative justice facilitation or mediation training program, including in-house mentorship through participation in Grievance Council, and/or participation as witnesses in active grievance processes). Prior to the training, each Grievance Council member must be approved in a majority vote by the standing members of the Ethics Board.

In order to be considered for membership on the Grievance Council, interested persons will be required to be sponsored or recommended by a current or past member of the Grievance Council or Ethics Committee. All applicants will be interviewed by the Ethics Committee. If you are currently either a Complainant or a Practitioner Under Review (PUR) in an active grievance, you are not eligible to be a member of the Grievance Council until that process has been completed.

All members of the Grievance Council agree to participate under strict confidentiality. This means that any information received by a Facilitating Grievance Council, relating to the active grievance they are facilitating, is never to be shared or referred to with any persons beyond the Grievance Council and the Ethics Committee Chairpersons. This includes members of the ACSB Executive and General Board and the Ethics Committee at large.  Any breach of confidentiality will result in immediate termination of the member’s participation in the Grievance Council and may be subject to further action including a restorative justice process to address the possible harm this breach of confidentiality may have caused.

When a complaint is received by the Grievance Council Chair, and it is determined that the Preliminary Grievance Statement reflects a breach of the current ACSB Code of Conduct & Ethics, the formal process of inquiry and learning begins. A single member, or members, of the Grievance Council are selected to facilitate the process to its conclusion (please refer to the section ‘Establishing the Grievance Council for details about how members are chosen to facilitate cases). It is expected that the Facilitating Grievance Council (FGC) will remain in the Facilitating Grievance Council role through the conclusion of the case. However, if a situation arises that precludes their continued facilitation, ideally the Facilitating Grievance Council will select their replacement and brief the new Facilitating Grievance Council for a smooth transition. However, if that is not possible, the Grievance Council Chair will organize a replacement. The Grievance Council will extend every possible care to ensure that those harmed – the complainant(s) – will b held in a container of continued care through any such transition.

Members of the Grievance Council serve for two years. If a situation arises such that an Facilitating Grievance Council is facilitating a process that extends beyond the Facilitating Grievance Council’s term, this will be handled on a case by case basis. In this circumstance it is permissible for the Facilitating Grievance Council to choose to remain on the Grievance Council beyond the two-year term, in order to see the process to its conclusion. Equally, it is permissible that an Facilitating Grievance Council choose to step down at the termination of their two year service, in which case it will be their responsibility to brief the newly appointed Facilitating Grievance Council.

As the ACSB body responsible for facilitating the repair and healing of breaches in our profession, the integrity of the individual members of the Grievance Council is paramount as is the integrity of the Grievance Council itself. Every attempt and consideration has been made to hold the Grievance Council to the highest standards. In keeping with this, if a Preliminary Grievance Statement is submitted against a currently standing member of the Grievance Council, that individual will be asked to temporarily suspend their role in the Grievance Council (in this situation, a Grievance Council member who is named in - or submits - a Preliminary Grievance Statement, may chose to shift their volunteer service to an ACSB Committee). Upon completion of the process, pending majority agreement of the Ethics Committee and the Grievance Council, the individual may immediately resume their role on the Grievance Council. However, if a Preliminary Grievance Statement is submitted against a currently standing member of any other Board position, it is possible that the individual might remain in their position and continue their responsibilities and projects while the Learning, Repair & Accountability Process proceeds. There may be exceptions to this, depending on the nature of the statement of harm, the role of the Practitioner Under Review/board member and other factors.   

The Grievance Council strives for its membership to accurately represent the diversity within the ACSB membership at large, including gender/non-binary reprepresentation, diversity of ability, BIPOC representation, cultural diversity, global teaching staff representation, diversity regarding length of time in the SB/SSE fields and representation from the global student body of Sexological Bodywork® and Somatic Sex Education.

Structural & Operational Details Regarding the Grievance Council 

• When the Grievance Council Chair receives a Preliminary Grievance Statement, and the Practitioner Under Review and Complainant(s) are identified, the case will be brought to the Grievance Council at large. Individual Grievance Council members will declare any and all existing relationships with persons involved as well as any circumstances that may interfere with their capacity to proceed in-keeping with the responsibilities bestowed upon the Grievance Council at large and specifically, the role and obligations of the Facilitating Grievance Council. This includes any conflicts of interest.

• Conflicts of Interest Within a Transformative Justice model:We define ‘conflict of interest’ as a relational power dynamic existing between members of the Grievance Council and Practitioner Under Review and/or Complainants that could impede the process. These relationships may include (but are not limited to) employment relationships, practitioner/client relationships, intimate/sexual relationships and personal biases held by one party in relation to another. The evaluation of a possible conflict of interest must include the perceived equanimity of the Facilitating Grievance Councils. In other words, it might be possible that a Grievance Council member believes they can act without bias and in an equitable manner yet if they are known to have a relationship with the Practitioner Under Review or the Complainants, this may appear to be a bias in the process at large; one that would negatively affect the perceived safety and integrity of not only this specific case but the Grievance Process as a whole. In the event of a conflict of interest the member(s) of the Grievance Council will be asked to step back from direct participation in the specific process and will recuse themselves from participation in all aspects of the process. This member of the Grievance Council may be invited to participate in non-decision-making aspects of the process including sitting in Affinity Circles, as members of an Affinity Pod or as a source of information in the Discovery Circles process.However, regarding conflicts of interest, it is important to bear in mind that it is a fundamental tenet of Transformative Justice that the healing and repair processes be handled by the community and within the community. Community often involves a spectrum of familiarity from vague acquaintanceship to daily intimacy. It is not expected that the Facilitating Grievance Councils have no prior knowledge or first-hand experience with either the Practitioner Under Review or the Complainant. It is simply expected and required that the Facilitating Grievance Councils be able to bring themselves with equanimity and open-mindedness to the situation of harm in question. Having said this, it is a specific situation of unquestioned exclusion if a Grievance Council member is in a monetary relationship or an active sexually intimate relationship with either the Practitioner Under Review or the Complainant.

• If a grievance is brought against either a current instructor from an Sexological Bodywork® and Somatic Sex Education certifying institution, or the owner of an independent business employing multiple individuals and working primarily in a group setting, the Grievance Council will (make every attempt to) support the institution or business to handle this case themselves, following their own codes of conduct and ethics. If this is not possible, the Grievance Council will then make every effort to invite an instructor/employee from that institution/business, or a partnered institution, to serve as a witness to the process and/or as an affinity circle member.

• Each Grievance Council member serves for a two year term with the exception of the student Grievance Council member, who serves for one. The Grievance Council will accept new member candidates yearly and conduct reviews/interviews semi-annually.

• The Ethics Committee will either hire an outside Restorative/Transformative or mediation trainer or provide an in-house certified trainer, to provide ongoing R/TJ and mediation facilitation training.

• When a complaint is submitted it is received by the Ethics Chair and the Grievance Council Chair, who will determine whether the Preliminary Grievance Statement represents a potential violation of the ACSB Code of Conduct & Ethics. If the Preliminary Grievance Statement does fall within the purview of the ACSB Learning, Repair & Accountability Process, the Ethics and Grievance Chairs will then bring the case to the Grievance Council at large to determine which Grievance Council member(s) are most appropriate to step in as Facilitating Grievance Councils. There will be every attempt to rotate the role of Facilitating Grievance Council throughout each Grievance Council member’s two year term. This rotation is designed to allow the Facilitating Grievance Council to follow through with complaints in process while also being able to receive new complaints in a timely manner. The Facilitating Grievance Council will be with the complaint until it is complete (unless circumstances arise which preclude this) and will be empowered to make decisions and report back to the Grievance Council and the ACSB board.

• On a rotating basis, members of the Grievance Council will serve as the Grievance Council Chair, and will receive Preliminary Grievance Statements. 

  Submitting a Preliminary Grievance Statement:

  If you feel you have experienced or witnessed harm (that constitutes a violation of the ACSB Code of Conduct and Ethics), we invite you to submit a Preliminary Grievance Statement (PGS). We honor your subjective experience and, after receiving your Preliminary Grievance Statement, we will gather the necessary information which will lead us to the next steps in the process.

  By utilizing the form in the form linked above your Preliminary Grievance Statement will be submitted to the Grievance Council and will first be received by the Grievance Council Chair. You will receive an email confirmation and you will be contacted within 10-14 business days to acknowledge the next steps.

  *Please notify us if your language preference is anything other than English.

  Your Preliminary Grievance Statement will include:

  1. Your name 

  2. Contact information; including both an email and a phone number

  3. The name of the peer, practitioner, or instructor who is the subject of your grievance (who becomes the Practitioner Under Review or PUR in this situation) 

  4. The specific details of the event(s) warranting your complaint

  • Is this an acute and on-going situation of harm requiring our immediate attention? Note: if you (or someone else) are presently experiencing physical harm and your/their physical safety is currently in jeopardy please call 911. This Learning, Repair & Accountability Process is not for acute, life threatening situations. 

  • Cite specific codes you believe were violated [see -  https://sexologicalbodyworkers.org/ethics ]

  • Please include date(s) and locations of event(s)

  • How you were personally impacted by this(these) event(s)

  • What processes have already happened to address your experience of harm (be specific and provide dates)

  1. What would you like to happen next?

  2. Upon submitting your Preliminary Grievance Statement you will receive an email confirmation that your statement has been received by our system

  3. Someone from the Grievance Council will be in touch with you within 10 business days to gather more information and define next steps.

  
  Once we have received a Preliminary Grievance Statement, the Grievance Council will review the information provided by the Complainant (and others, if applicable). We will respond to the Complainant within ten business days. If the Preliminary Grievance Statement shows a possible breach of the ACSB Code of Conduct & Ethics, we will offer to have an informal conversation with the Complainant to gather initial relevant details. This conversation may be facilitated by the Grievance Chair or another member of the Grievance Council to be determined by the Grievance Council in a majority vote. All information gathered in this informal conversation will be brought back to the Grievance Council at large, for a determination concerning next steps to be offered to the Complainant.

  If, after preliminary informal information gathering has occurred, the Grievance Council determines that a potential breach of the ACSB Code of Conduct & Ethics has occurred, an email will be sent to the Practitioner Under Review and an informal initial orienting conversation will take place. This initial email will also include the name of the Complainant (unless rare circumstances warrant anonymity of Complainant), a link to the description of the Learning, Repair & Accountability Process and options the ACSB is able to offer in these instances. This correspondence must include three specific dates/times for the Discovery Conversations, with an invitation for the Practitioner Under Review to offer alternative dates/times if none of these are suitable. Care is taken here to remind the Practitioner Under Review that they are a valuable member of the community and that this is an opportunity for all of us to learn and grow. 

  Possible next steps include (but are not limited to).

  • Discovery Conversations – the opportunity to speak with two or more members of the Grievance Council (including the Facilitating Grievance Councils), in an informal conversation setting, to describe what occurred, how the Complainant was impacted, and what they might need to feel repair has occurred. These Discovery Conversations happen with both the Complainant and the Practitioner Under Review separately. They are iterative – not necessarily limited to one session. Depending on the information gathered after the first round of conversations, the Grievance Council may feel a second round is required. This occurs before any further steps or processes are decided, and all information gathered is brought back to the Grievance Council to determine, as a group by majority vote, what is offered as next-steps to the Complainant and Practitioner Under Review.

  • Pathway 1: An Informal Adjustment/Warning

  • Pathway 2: A Restorative/Transformative Justice Process (R/TJ) – R/TJ Transpires in a series of circles (Affinity Circles and Learning Circles) with a goal of listening, learning and (ideally) repair as each individual – as well as the community-at-large – is invited to take responsibility for their role(s), behavior, impact, healing and learning. All participation in the Restorative/Transformative Justice process is voluntary. Neither the Complainant or the Practitioner Under Review are required to participate and can step out at any point in the process, even if they preliminarily agree to participate.

  • Pathway 3: An Arbitration Process – if the Practitioner Under Review refuses to participate in an R/TJ process OR if the complaint constitutes an immediate safety issue, acute danger, and/or a legal issue, the Grievance Council may proceed with Arbitration on behalf of the ACSB membership community and the profession at large. In the most severe circumstances the ACSB, under ‘Duty To Warn’, may submit a formal report to legal authorities and/or support the Complainant to do so. Arbitration will conclude with a Report of Findings & Recommendations, to be approved by majority vote of the Grievance Council as a whole.

  
  

  The ACSB Learning, Repair & Accountability Process Phases & Pathways
  

  Phase I: Discovery Conversation

  Every process begins with Discovery Conversations: The Grievance Council will gather information (from the Complainant, the Practitioner Under Review and other relevant sources) to hear the nature of the events/alleged violations and offer choice and voice to both parties as to what might come next (RJ or Arbitration). Discovery Conversations are a required first step before either an RJ or Arbitration Process.

  At no point will these processes include legal Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDA) of any kind. Should either party insist on the implementation of an NDA the Grievance Council will consider this to be a statement of non-cooperation and will proceed accordingly. All Grievance Council members are bound to a clear and compulsory confidentiality agreement.

  • Discovery Conversations are designed to create a non-threatening, generative environment of curiosity and care to ensure the Complainant, the Grievance Council and the Practitioner Under Review have the opportunity to explore the information provided by all parties and together determine next steps. Discovery Conversations are a welcome environment within which the Practitioner Under Review can learn of the information and grievance within the Complainant’s statement, and provide the Grievance Council with information and an account of the event/events from their perspective. Some important specifics concerning Discovery Conversations

    • They are held in the spirit of curiosity and learning, not of adjudication and punishment, ‘right’ and ‘wrong’, ‘bad’ or ‘good’ 

    • If the Discovery Conversation reveals that the complaint involves specific violations of the ACSB Code of Conduct and Ethics, and therefore warrants the involvement of the Grievance Council, we will notify all participants of the nature of the complaint/violations and invite both the Complainant and the Practitioner Under Review to participate in further exploration, education and repair

    • Unless the information received by the Complainant describes a situation of imminent, or continued, threat or harm (which may or may not include a clear violation of the law), the Grievance Council will not take any action against the Practitioner Under Review before they have invited the Practitioner Under Review into an Discovery Conversation

  • At the conclusion of the Discovery Conversations with both parties the Grievance Council will return to each party to offer the next possible steps

  Pathway 1: An Informal Adjustment/Warning

  Upon receiving a complaint and gathering of initial information from the Complainant, the Grievance Council may choose to simply offer an Informal Adjustment/Warning to the named Practitioner Under Review. The Grievance Council would choose this option if a formal complaint has not been filed but the Grievance Council feels the information gathered warrants action of some kind. In this instance, and unless information of a more severe nature comes to light, there will be no formal process. The Grievance Council Chair (or other appointed Grievance Council member) will reach out to the practitioner named to have a conversation that will include the information the Grievance Council received regarding the practitioner and that may include suggestions for further learning. 

  Pathway 2: A Restorative/Transformative Justice Process (R/TJ)

  It is at this time that Facilitating Grievance Council members are chosen by a majority vote of the Grievance Council at large.

  Phase I: Discovery Conversation (see above)

  Phase II: Affinity Circles

  Affinity Circles can be both a stand-alone process and/or they can be a preparation process for a Learning Circle. One of the purposes of Affinity Circles is to provide the opportunity for the Complainant and the Practitioner Under Review to do the internal work of healing to the point where it is possible they could sit together in a Learning Circle. Affinity Circles offer a chance for community witness and support, to create structures of empowerment and affinity between and among community members, and to potentially attend to the impact created by the event(s) that generated the formal grievance. It is not expected, but is possible, that participating in an Affinity Circle will feel like completion and sufficient repair for the Grievance. Some important specifics concerning Affinity Circles:

  • in order to participate in an Affinity Circle we ask that both the Complainant and the Practitioner Under Review include at least two support people from their communities 

  • all participants (including the facilitating members of the Grievance Council) will have equal opportunity to speak to the event(s) that prompted the grievance, the impact, and the desired steps to repair 

  • an Affinity Circle for the Complainant does not include the Practitioner Under Review (and an Affinity Circle for the Practitioner Under Review does not include the Complainant)
    

  Phase III: Affinity Group Learning Circles

  The recommendation to proceed to a Learning Circle will only be offered if both the Complainant and the Practitioner Under Review have met with their respective affinity space and arrived at a point where they can meet the other party without reciminations i.e. are able to hear the other’s point of view.  If it seems safe and potentially powerful for the continued healing and resolution of both parties, the Grievance Council will recommend a Learning Circle where the Complainant, along with their support people, and the Practitioner Under Review, along with their support people, can sit together to work through the past events that caused the harm.  No one will ever be required to participate in this process and should never feel pushed into it for any reason.  The opportunity for healing in a Learning Circle is strong, but only when all parties involved feel ready to participate. Learning Circles are designed to provide a community environment within which the Complainant can be heard and witnessed by the Practitioner Under Review as well as all other participating individuals. The intended outcome of this process is that awareness, understanding and compassion be cultivated on the part of all participants, with appropriate steps to repair and learn. Some important specifics concerning Learning Circles:

  • all participation in Learning Circles (as with all R/T J processes) must be voluntary 

  • the Grievance Council will only facilitate a joint Learning Circle if both the Complainant and the Practitioner Under Review have participated in separate Affinity Circle processes to a point where they can meet without reciminations i.e. are able to hear the other’s point of view
    

  Phase IV: Joint Learning Circles with

  Joint Learning Circles only take place if the Practitioner Under Review acknowledges that they might have done what the Complainant is accusing them of. If the Practitioner Under Review is certain they did NOT do what the Complainant is suggesting the Grievance Council will not facilitate a Learning Circle, and depending on the results of the Discovery Conversations and Affinity Circles, may choose to engage in Arbitration instead (Pathway 3, below). 

  • Learning Circles are designed to facilitate listening, learning and repair between two (or more) parties, at least one of whom feels negatively impacted by the other’s behavior

  • In a successful Learning Circle, learning occurs for all participants, not merely for the one whose conduct is in question 

  • A successful Learning Circle is one which strengthens and evolves the community as a whole as well as the participating individuals and groups

  • In a Learning Circle, the community itself is also under review. The Grievance Council will take great care to investigate and inquire into the places where the Sexological Bodywork® and Somatic Sex Education communities can be strengthened for the benefit of clients, students, practitioners alike

  Pathway 3: Arbitration Pathway

  If an Arbitration Pathway is selected, the process will be facilitated to conclusion by the Grievance Council at large and may also involve members of the Executive and General Board.

  Arbitration may occur for if: 

  The grievance constitutes an immediate safety issue, acute danger, and/or a legal issue, and/or the Practitioner Under Review refuses to participate in a restorative/transformative justice process, the Grievance Council may proceed with Arbitration on behalf of the ACSB membership community, students and clients. In the most severe circumstances the ACSB, under ‘Duty To Warn’, may submit a formal report to legal authorities and/or support the Complainant to do so 

  • The Practitioner Under Review withdraws their cooperation in the ongoing Learning, Repair & Accountability Process

  If a complaint is received that instigates in-house Arbitration, and/or an external criminal proceeding (carried out through the legal system, not within the ACSB), the ACSB may temporarily suspend a Practitioner Under Review’s membership in the ACSB pending the outcome of the investigation; the ACSB would take this step if it feels there is an active safety issue for either the complainant and/or others and it will take action to mitigate further harm; if a membership is temporarily suspended the ACSB asks that the member refrain from practicing Sexological Bodywork® and Somatic Sex Education until this investigation is complete; upon completion of the investigation and/or Arbitration, depending on the outcome, the Practitioner Under Review’s certification will be restored 

  Phase I: Discovery Conversation (see above)

  Phase II: Grievance Council Review & Findings

  • The Grievance Council at large will review the information gathered to date from all processes to determine whether there has been a violation of the ACSB Code of Conduct & Ethics, and provide recommendations (constituting a series of action steps) to the ACSB Board for review. These action steps can include but are not limited to requiring that the Practitioner Under Review engage in continuing education, on-going training and supervision, and/or cessation of practice for a period of time while continued learning takes place. In the most severe cases the ACSB may take action in further actions in the form of either formal sanction/reprimand, censure, and/or (temporary or permanent) termination of ACSB membership 

  • Formal Sanction/Reprimand will include a written statement that is made public on the ACSB website and happens alongside an RJ/Repair/Mediation process with clear steps – within a Report of Findings – for the Practitioner Under Review to reinstate themselves, but their membership stays intact. This action requires a majority vote of the Executive Board

  • Censure may be taken after an unsuccessful attempt at RJ/mediation and would also go alongside (temporary or permanent) termination of membership. Censure is a public action made on the ACSB website that will remain in place in perpetuity, until such time as the Practitioner Under Review shows willingness to take the recommended steps for learning and repair offered in the Report of Findings submitted by the Grievance Council at the conclusion of either an Accountability or Arbitration Process. This action requires a majority vote of the Executive Board