Cohousing-L Mailing List: NVC & Sociocracy [was Screening prospective members for sexual abuse in their background

[Sharon Villines (sharon]

> On Mar 3, 2022, at 4:19 PM, Maggie McGovern via Cohousing-L <cohousing-l [at] 
> cohousing.org> wrote:
> 
> I believe some cohousing communities are sitting ducks for predators, abuse 
> and bullies. I lived in cohousing for over two years and bought my unit 
> before realizing the danger. I have since researched this and violations in 
> community and Ive found it isn’t that unusual. Basically there are often a 
> lot of compassionate, well intended people and sometimes there are not good 
> boundaries. 

This conversation began with concerns about vetting members during the 
formation and construction phases. Can you determine in advance whether a 
person will be danger to the community, and if so, what is the best way to do 
it.

I was proposing that the best, and probably the only way, is through 
interaction and  building personal relationships. Being unrealistically 
compassionate and well-intended is certainly something to be cautious of. 
Cohousing in and of itself will  not cure all our personal and social ills. 
"Love is not enough." Unless we apply the same cautions that we apply in our 
personal lives and develop skills at problem solving and knowing when to call 
in a professional, we will just repeat the same patterns. The solution is 
developing people skills and striving for understanding, not blame or 
correction or punishment (“fines”).

I watched a video last week from a sociocratic school about a fight between two 
teens. The teacher did a round with all the students who were present, the 2 
fighting and the 6 or so bystanders, using the NVC process to analyze the 
event. It was a very productive, action-oriented melding of NVC analysis and 
the use of rounds and consent in sociocratic governance:

(1) The students did a round first to describe what actually happened without 
interpretation, assumptions, or judgements. When they had reached consensus on 
a factual description of what happened,  they moved on to 

(2) clarifying and expressing their feelings about what happened both during 
and after the event. This provided a clearer understanding of the event as part 
of a collective experience. It wasn’t just 2 people, it was the whole class of 
8 people. And it was the school.

(3) For the NVC stage of expressing and clarifying their needs, they did a 
round analyzing the “essence" of what happened, why people felt and acted as 
they did. As usual, this “essence” included events and feelings that had not 
been presented earlier. Some predated the event and some had nothing to do with 
the people actually present. “What is this really about?"

(4) The final round calling for "specific requests,” focused on behaviors that 
would have better resolved or prevented the physical fight and would build a 
foundation for moving forward more harmoniously. Students’ requests of 
themselves, of others, and of the organization and governance of the school.

In the end there was understanding all around of what had happened. Everyone 
grew from the experience. Those two boys will probably fight again but others 
will be able to step up and help resolve their feelings much faster. When 
appropriate, the school may make changes in its processes.

The melding of NVC and sociocracy in Step 3 was particularly insightful. By 
focusing on analyzing the “essence,” not just the “needs,” of the people, it 
asked the question what is really going on here? It placed the conflict in its 
social context which was particularly useful in the context of the the 
classroom and the larger context of the school. It analyzed the social context 
and the policies of the organization, not just individual needs.

The opportunity of cohousing is that this kind of people understanding will be 
developed and encouraged.

But it means everyone has to go into cohousing expecting to spend the time to 
understand each other, not to develop a process for being sure everyone is 
perfect or free of any possible “pathologies” before they can join a developing 
group. 

Sharon
----
Sharon Villines
Takoma Village Cohousing, Washington DC
http://www.takomavillage.org

For extra credit:
One of my current preoccupations is alerting the world to the problem of using 
initialisms. Whether it is my specific brain disfunction or a factor of the 
complexity of the worlds I live in, they drive me nuts. When I googled “NVC 
process” to be sure I had the steps right, I found myself wondering what 
letters I had mixed up as I tried to understand the following:

> The NVC is designed to take the paperwork processing pressure from individual 
> U.S. embassies and consulates and ensure that only complete applications are 
> sent to them. After USCIS sends your petition to the NVC, the NVC creates a 
> case in its system and assigns you a case number.
> 
> What are the 12 steps of NVC?
> 
>       • Step 1: Submit a Petition.
>       • Step 2: Begin the National Visa Center (NVC) Processing.
>       • Step 3: Pay Fees.
>       • Step 4: Complete Affidavit of Support.
>       • Step 5: Collect Financial Evidence and other Supporting Documents.
>       • Step 6: Complete Online Visa Application (DS-260)
>       • Step 7: Collect Civil Documents.
>       • Step 8: Scan Collected Documents.
>