Pathway details in the ACSB Grievance Learning, Repair & Accountability Process  

Discovery Conversations

In each of the 3 possible Pathways, Phase 1 consists of Discovery Conversations. The Grievance Council will gather information (from the Complainant, the Practitioner Under Review and any 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 may be sufficient in themselves. They are are also a required first step if the process moves to Pathway 1 (informal adjustment/warning), Pathway 2 (Transformative Justice process) or Pathway 3 (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 the PUR and Complainant

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

The Arbitration Pathway process will be facilitated to conclusion by the Grievance Council at large and may also involve members of the General / Executive Board.

Arbitration may occur if: 

• The Practitioner Under Review or Complainant refuses to participate in a Restorative /Transformative Justice process

• The Practitioner Under Review withdraws their cooperation during an ongoing Learning, Repair & Accountability Process

• The grievance constitutes an immediate safety issue, acute danger, and/or a legal issue. 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

If a complaint is received that instigates the Arbitration pathway, 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 membership will be restored.

Phase I: Discovery Conversation (as described 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 

• Supervision may be recommended for the PUR in conjunction wih the Facilitating Grievance Council members they are liaising with. Goals would be discussed with the PUR which could demonstrate a return to good standing

• 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