First I would like to give a shout out to Nico! Not sure if you're going to read this, but thanks for coming and talk to us!
Second, I would like to say I am mildly upset that we ran out of time today! I am sure I'm not the only one who wanted to talk about their agencies mission statement. So! I want everyone to put a direct link to their mission statement (if possible) in their comment. Summarize your opinion and what you would change in a paragraph or less.
http://www.jobpathnyc.org/about-us/our-mission/
Unlike most who spoke today, I really like Jobpath's mission statement. It really encapsulates the attitude and work we do. We aren't charity driven; we don't really provide "needs". Our organization isn't really changing any systematic deficiencies, social attitudes definitely. Of course nothing is perfect, I have some minor changes in mind. I would change the last line in the first section to read: to facilitate each person as they lead a full and active life. The change shows the individuals active role in the process. In the second part of the statement, I would change "We believe that" to "We demand that". I would also change all the "should"s to "must"s. I would change "Everyone can play a role in community life" to "Everyone has the opportunity to play a role in community life" to emphasize that it is a personal choice that is completely up to the individual. Finally I would change "join the work force" to "provide for themselves".
In class, we did not get the opportunity to discuss the article on the Peace Corps. There were particular quotes from that piece that had me absolutely seething! Particularly, "Those countries are still poor. We were the ones who were enriched and sometimes I think that we reminded these people--as if they needed such a thing--that they were left out.", "Volunteers whose impact as volunteers may have been negligible but who throughout the course of their careers...went on to apply the lessons the hosting communities imparted unto them in settings where their impact has been more substantial.", and the worst, "Founding Director Sargent Shiver once recalled receiving a letter from a volunteer in East Africa that read 'People die here for want of so little.' and thinking to himself: 'How many Americans have the painful privilege of learning that lesson?"
I'm not sure y'all took it the way that I did, but to me these quotes all say the same thing: lets give privileged people from America money to observe and learn from the hardships of other people (under the guise of helping), so they can come back and make America better. I find this completely disgusting. Did anybody have a different take of the above quotes, and are there any different ones that spoke to you?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
19 comments:
I completely agree with your take on the Peace Corps piece, Sydney. I was absolutely disgusted that this has been a program that has been guised as a "helpful" and "peace seeking" movement. To label it as a movement at all seems silly to me. The only real movement happening is these "peace corp" volunteers coming to countries in need and observing the hardships.
I found this the other day and it immediately brought to mind the social issues we have been discussing in class. http://www.lifebuzz.com/social-issue-ads/
I feel the photos with the "like" thumbs resonate most with this idea of feeling like charity is making a difference when it is only scraping the surface of greater social issues. In the case of the Peace Corps, volunteers are giving society a facade of social justice seeking but are taking, in my opinion, a glorified two-year long vacation. As you can probably tell, I feel very strongly about this issue.
As for my agency, I would add a collaboration of services between all Vera off-shoots after a defendant has been released without bail. Many defendants are in need of services upon release and I believe a collaboration between services that came from the same "mother" would not be a difficult feat. I would also add a question/point to the point system about mental health and whether or not they are receiving services. http://www.nycja.org
Dear All,
Last seminar was very intense and interesting. Especially, it demonstrated how much many of us learned about our agencies. It also showed what we have to find out about them in order to completely realize their mission. Analyzing mission statement is very important. Thanks Sydney for that idea to discuss that in the blog.
I do like the statement of my Program. Especially, I LOVE the fact that people who are working with me in the Program are really interested in realizing these goals that are identified in the mission statement of the Substance Use and Mental Health Program at Vera Institute of Justice. Here is the link: http://www.vera.org/centers/substance-use-and-mental-health-program
My agency is a little bit different from many that we have discussed. Basically, it is not trying to help anyone who has issues with substance abuse or mental disorders. It conducts applied research to help public officials and community organizations develop empirically driven responses to the substance use and mental health needs of people involved in justice systems. This agency works with statistics and data that it gathers in New York, DC, and San Francisco. International experience is also taken into consideration.
This agency is not an advocate for people who suffer from drug abuse or schizophrenia, it analyzes their experience and proposes solutions. That is what research is really about. It is a mathematics. Gathering data and making conclusions based on this data. However, coming back to articles from last week, there is a question. Should we rely only on numbers? How accurate are these results? How important is the personal experience of incarcerated people? Employees try to research cultural difference of incarcerated people with substance use and mental health issues in order to make some projects capable to meet their needs. However, it seems to me like more of their programs are actually oriented on a one-size-fits-all approach. How many differences people with mental issues might have? I guess, everyone is suffering from his/her own problems. It is just too hard to understand needs of one individual with mental health issues. What if that number is greater than a million?
The agency statement is also missing the most important research in my view. What factors make people with mental health and substance use issues to commit crime at the first place?That is probably something to think of.
I love Sydney's idea that everyone share and comment on their agency's mission statement. Very cool. I can't wait to read about each of them.
In terms of discussing the role and place of the Peace Corps and those who volunteer for the Peace Corps, is there a way to critically analyze the institution without demonizing it or those who participate in it? I think the totalizing language, the speaking in absolutes is troubling. How do we know what motivates those who volunteer for the Peace Corps or what they are actually doing on the ground? This is not to say we shouldn't discuss how the "Western savior complex" figures into the reproduction of global inequality, but we also need to consider the individual urge to "help" a positive, no? I hope we can continue to take up this issue, to discuss it, because it's soooooo important, and so relevant to how we as individuals can best participate in advancing transformative movements for social change.
I'd like to share with you three links that I BEG you to click on:
The first is Paul Farmer (very short video, like one minute) on college students and working for social change. The focus here is on engagement with HIV/AIDS but it also talks to engagement with social justice more broadly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0C_1I5Ibr0
The second link is to the mission statement of Partners In Health, Farmer's organization. Can you see in the language and the message a way in which the mission moves AWAY FROM the "Western savior complex" of engagement to something else? http://www.pih.org/pages/our-mission
And finally, I want to share with you a link to the NGO Code of Conduct developed by medical anthropologist James Pfeiffer and colleagues. In what ways does this code of conduct try to address the limitations and problems that have plagued the role of NGOs in under-resourced countries that Farmer delineated in the article we read? Again, this code of conduct relates to health-related organizations, but it could also apply to most any organization. http://ngocodeofconduct.org/
I do hope you will visit these links. I promise you they are worth taking a look at. Thanks!!
Hi Sydney, great prompt! The mission of the Pathways from Prison to Postsecondary Education Project is to increase educational attainment and employment opportunities for incarcerated and formerly incarcerated individuals by supporting an expansion of educational opportunities in prison, seamless entry into higher education post-incarceration, and reentry services that promote individual success in the community. Through partnerships between colleges, prison and parole officials, and community and business leaders, we aim to transform lives, strengthen families and communities, and spur national replication and long-term public investment by building an evidence-based case that education is a cost-effective strategy to alleviate poverty, reduce recidivism, and create a more equitable and just society.
So I don’t think I would change anything in particular about the mission statement of the Pathways Project but I would like to add that the work Pathways does is reactive rather than proactive, in that it is responding to a need created by structural inequities that already existed. Providing education for incarcerated populations is a government responsibility and these populations happen to rank the lowest in educational attainment. This makes me wonder: if high-quality education had been provided in the first place, then surely we would not need to implement projects (like Pathways) to mediate the provision of education during and after incarceration.
Those are definitely some thought-provoking pictures Lauren. The one about the likes, seems to me like some form of emotional charity; the picture of a sad, malnourished child moves us to feel sympathy or pity, albeit for just a moment, and we’re prompted to respond in the most immediately accessible way possible and that is to “like” it. Sadly, I think that’s one of the ways that social media can hurt the social justice movement, it only affords a fleeting view of human misery and we do not allow ourselves to take a moment to ponder the futility of our “likes”.
With regards to the Peace Corps article, I found myself wondering about the community service I have done over the course of my life and thinking that all my efforts did not exact any real social change yet the counselors and educators surrounding me always motivated me to sign up for such activities. By virtue of my participation, am I then indulging in voyeuristic glimpses at the lives of the underprivileged before walking away feeling good that I did my small bit of charity? I think it would be hasty to dismiss the motivations of the Peace Corps as repulsive. I don’t believe that volunteers from privileged communities are consciously exploitative when they sign up to volunteer their time and energy, but that is not to say that the whole enterprise might be misguided; in that, I think there is a lack of awareness among these do-gooders that they’re not really helping in any meaningful sense. So to what extent do well-meaning intentions figure? Do they help achieve better outcomes? I think the way aid programs like the Peace Corps are currently structured preclude actively advocating for change or anything too “radical”. Going back to the Hilfiker reading, it is easier to run a marathon or spend the afternoon pouring soup than effect systemic change. Should aid agencies and non-profits change the way volunteers are involved in the process by insisting on education to supplement their experiences?
I completely see what Professor Waterston is talking about! So far in the semester we have pointed out the faults and the inefficiencies of the organizations and movements we have studied. Yes, they may not be solving all of the systematic or structural problems, but they are solving some. I actually regret the demonizing and harsh tone of my original post. Yes, those quotes are pointing out real issues with the organization, but I think that I went too far in implying that the intentions were inherently exploitative.
I believe that most of the people who join the Peace Corps have good intentions and do want to make a difference. To be completely honest, demoralizing volunteers and organizations such as the Peace Corps is really hypocritical. How really different is what we are doing? We are getting paid to be educated about the ills of society and provide support to organizations that many see as "band-aids". From what I have seen, we haven't done anything to fix the systematic problems ourselves. We may have ideas on how we might eventual fix it, but at the moment I have really only heard criticisms of programs who are at least trying to help others.
While we criticize the lack of long-term, systematic solutions, we are overlooking the individual good all of these organizations have done. Yes, soup kitchens do not permanently solve hunger, but they will today save a portion of individuals from dying of starvation tonight and that is important.
To quote my high school Interact Club shirt:
"Act as if what you do makes a difference. It does!"
It may only help one person, but that is better than nothing. We shouldn't discourage small, individualistic acts by demeaning and demoralizing altruistic efforts.
In regards to Marina's Comment. I am really interesting in your organization. A huge problem in all research is how generalizable are results to a specific individual. Unfortunately, I think it is a question that will never be answered. I think you're right though, instead of counting the numbers and trying to establish a formula for who will commit a crime, their time would be better spent trying to establish what factors should be present to best prevent criminal behavior. Maybe instead of merely studying people with mental health issues who have committed crimes, they should also study those who do not display aggressive or criminal behavior in order to find what experiences differ in the two groups.
Gina really hit something, it is obvious that the prison population is incredible educated. There is no way that smart people are arrested and lose all their intellect while in prison, so the logical explanation is that mostly it is uneducated people who commit crimes. The hypothesis would be if the "public" education system worked better in the first place there would be a lower rate of crime.
I do think the education system needs to change, but even if magically the education system got fixed over night, it may lower the crime rate, but pathways would still be needed to provide education for those who already committed crimes. I don't think it is up to pathways as it is now to fix the education system to prevent crimes now, that is up to the government and NGOs specifically geared to increasing education. I think Pathways is a proactive organization geared towards reducing recidivism.
Hi Sydney, it is indeed a tricky situation to think about! Professors Reitz and Waterston pointed out in class, the inherent contradiction of these charity movements and aid agencies; they’re band aids to social ills but yet they do nothing to “cure” what afflicts society in the first place. It’s sort of a Catch-22. How do we reconcile the impulse to “do good” with the fact that these small-scale acts do not contribute much to addressing systemic causes?
Indeed I can see Pathways as proactively reducing recidivism, but they're also "reacting" to the large-scale need for education. As you mention, it is the government's responsibility to provide this basic need that all citizens are entitled do, and interestingly, in the 1990's the government actually withdrew federal funding for Pell Grants for inmates, which exacerbated the need for education.
But I think the problem stems from even before that. The fact that inmates need an education makes a huge implication on why they are inmates in the first place. If all children and adolescents received better education from the start either there would be less inmates (the hope) or the criminals would at least already be educated (less likely). I think the real solution in the long run would be increasing education to "at risk" youth (really all youth in my opinion). The hope is that if that happens the number of crimes would decrease and less people would be newly incarcerated, but even if/when that happens those already incarcerated will need to be educated.
It's a shame that the government doesn't take enough responsibility of education for prison inmates and upsetting that there are systems in place to hinder their higher education.
You're echoing my sentiments Sydney! I think it is near impossible to make a case AGAINST education for at-risk youths and children in general. Not only does an education provide knowledge and skills for employment but anchors an individual in a community of adults/guardians that hopefully deters him/her from delinquency. Isn't it crazy that NYC's annual cost to house an inmate is nearly as much as it costs to pay for four years of tuition at an Ivy League university? And that's post-secondary education. Like you say, the more crucial years are even before that.
As i read both Sydney and Gina's comments I sat nodding my head and YES'ING like a crazy person. I completely agree. It mortifies me who much our educations system fails marginalized populations. It's really sad that sooooo many children/youth fall through the cracks and are made to feel so inadequate and so unworthy. It just perpetuates their marginalized status. & it's really sad that it's a lose lose situation because we know that we can't cut off food kitchens and other charities but it's just a band aid. We're giving them fish instead of teaching them how to find sources of water where they can fish from...
This is what I would fix in CASES' I would rephrase the mission to reflect the skills/tools/resources (which are personal meaning professionalism/public speaking/other things of the sort) that I feel the department I work in gives them. We dont just set them up on interviews. We do mock interviews, train them, help them sort out their thoughts before hand. This is invaluable support.
This week's blog is so intense!!!
I was glad Professor Waterston mentioned what she did about the Peace Corps. I am not going to lie, I have gone to meet and greet sponsored by the Peace Corps. In this blog there have been A LOT of extremes and absolutes. We don't know why everyone does volunteer. I for one have seen what its like living somewhere that doesn't have hot water to even cook with. Personally, I just love being with people who appreciate things. It is eye-opening how selfish we can be. I guess some people join to "feel good about themselves" or to feel they have "contributed". Isn't that true of most of us? Donating blood? Volunteering at a soup kitchen during holidays? What about all the other days of the year? Feeling good is a great feeling.
ANYWAYS... I will be interning at FedCap and the mission statement is
"To create opportunities for people with barriers to move toward economic independence as valued and contributing members of society."...
I had a problem with "valued", how do we know if we are valued"?. The statement is broad but otherwise straight-forward. I would just change the word then I would be content.
The Peace corps... I won't feed into my usual discourse first because most of the time I speak in absolutes and second because what I have to say would be repeating whats been said. So here's Paul Farmer being the man "It is based on solidarity, rather than charity alone". That's from his mission statement. I think the word SOLIDARITY is essential and wholly indicative. Solidarity is so so so so so important to me, it might be my favorite word in the English dictionary, and certainly is in the Spanish dictionary (solidaridad is tattooed on my left arm).
What is your attitude when you walk into your internship? Are you going to help this group of marginalized people-- endlessly victimized by the oppressive system? Or are you going to do what you have to do to change the balance of inequality in this world?
I maintain that efforts at achieving "justice" are only as good as their intentions. Going to the Peace Corps because you want to help the impoverished "others"in Africa and it'll look way good on your resume is bad, it destroys communities, families, lives. If you go in thinking you are harder, better, faster, stronger (kanye quote inevitable there guys) then you will likely leave thinking that only stronger and you will probable develop a charitable industrial complex (like Peter Buffet writes).
I would argue we are not those people who have given peace corps a bad rap (not that I believe that Peace Corps is the best organization if you just change your attitude-- I don't endorse Peace Corps any way but that's another topic). Interact is not doing bad things, people at soup kitchens are not bad, working at these agencies that we believe are not doing enough is not bad.
Solidarid.
my favorite quotation comes from an Australian Aborignal woman speaking in response to mission workers she says:
"If you have come to help me you are wasting your time. But if you have come because our liberation is bound up with mine, then come let's walk together..."
Solidarid means there is no space between you and I, it means that the distinction of rich and poor, incarcerated or free, black or white are all just things a system forces on us that serve only to destroy unity and create others. It creates young educated Americans going to the "third world where poor people live" so that they can "help". Suburban families take trips into the city and "help" at the soup kitchen. There are inevitably people at these VERA organization we work at who are "helping".
But us, we're walking with our clients in solidarity towards mutual liberation.
Nice back and forth, everyone! I appreciate those of you who have commented multiple times -- it really does help advance the conversation. I don't need to generate more reading by rehearsing all the good stuff here. But I can say that I am in favor of ANYTHING that connects us, even if it is just at the level of exposure. I see the great danger being how easy inequality makes it to live more and more isolated from one another (neighborhoods, nations). I agree that we can't mistake exposure (to each other's lives/problems) for solutions but when we see how others live we make connections that make it harder for us to live life in silos.
Last Friday I met with my mentor at Safe Horizons' Immigration Law Project and she explained to me what I would be doing throughout my fellowship. Luckily, I will be meeting clients and writing their affidavit for court in which they explain their story and their case. An excerpt of the mission statement is:
Both our Domestic Violence Law Project (DVLP) and Immigration Law Project (ILP) services provide free legal information and advice to domestic violence victims with family and immigration law-related matters. Additionally, we provide direct legal representation to low-income and indigent domestic violence victims in family and supreme court proceedings, and immigration matters throughout New York City.
While I did discuss in class that solving small, individual cases does not solve the overall problem of the entire immigration system, I do think the immigrant community is very lucky to have legal services provided at a low or free cost. Without this type of help that some may call charity, we'd fall into the mistake of neglecting a community that needs help NOW. We ought to be careful in getting so caught up in "changing" the system that we forget that meanwhile, the poor is still benefiting from the charity of rich countries. That U.S Foreign policy has screwed a bunch of countries around the world? Definitely. That we must change the system and policies? Most definitely. But we must remember that meanwhile, the poor, the unfortunate, the exploited must be given what we can, even if it's a minimum and even if it's a result of charity which only purpose is selfish satisfaction and personal "gratification".
Last week’s discussion was really insightful, given all the information that we were able to come up with. Unfortunately, we run out of time and were unable to all bring up our perspectives. Here, I came up with few questions just to help us see the role of humanitarian agency from a different point of view.
How does an agency remain active when it is unable to meet its initial objectives?
How does an agency with a positive mission statement turn out to become an oppressive force to their clients?
Are these organizations always welcomed in the areas that they operate?
How do one nations foreign policy affect INGO’s from achieving their mission abroad?
I am also concerned to find out, what are most of our agencies entitlement to their funding organizations?
To answer a dew of them, I think the problem with most of international non-governmental organization (INGO’s) that engage in humanitarian mission abroad is that off neo-colonialism. These agencies are not exploitative in their nature. The current state of international affairs does not allow these agencies to pursue their mission as intended in their mission statement. In regards to INGO’s abroad, how are they seen by the people that they serve? Are they always welcome? Do they always abide with the local culture of that particular nation when affecting change? I think this is what we do not know about most INGO’s, like the Peace Corps, that operates abroad. In International relations, maintaining the status quo is an essential element for imperial forces, when analyzing power from a realist point of view. Now the question is, would stability in developing nations affect the present status quo? If yes, then why bother to help these nations who might turn against us?
Another element to consider is that of neo-colonialism. In our modern time, we are dealing more with an indirect form of imperialism. This new form operates in a swift and clean fashion. Instead of having boots in the ground to ensure that the interest of the imperial power is being served, now we have humanitarian agency that operates in developing nations, ensuring that the interest of the imperial power is being served properly. (For more info. see, Snowden with the NSA or Kwame Nkrumah, Neo-colonialism, The Last Stage of Imperialism.)
Bekah I love this quote:
"If you have come to help me you are wasting your time. But if you have come because our liberation is bound up with mine, then come let's walk together..." fabulous back and forth everyone.
There two books that I think give useful insight into this issue of cross cultural "help." Behind the Beautiful Forevers chronicles life in Mumbai and exposes NGO's that profess to be "helping" and are actually profiting off of the poverty.
The Spirit Catches Me and I Fall Down is an incredible portrayal of the Hmong living in Fresno CA and the charged interaction between this community and the child welfare and criminal justice system.
As advocates of justice it's crucial that we are conscious of our own cultural bias as we navigate new worlds.
It was really inspiring to hear from Nico last class.
Sydney, thank you for bringing up the idea of sharing the organization's’ mission statement in the blog.
This is my second week interning at Center for Employment Opportunities (CEO) and our mission statement reads as follow:
(http://ceoworks.org/about/what-we-do/mission-vision/)
“The Center for Employment Opportunities (CEO) is dedicated to providing immediate, effective and comprehensive employment services to men and women with recent criminal convictions. Our highly structured and tightly supervised programs help participants regain the skills and confidence needed for successful transitions to stable, productive lives.”
I love what the organization does and I believe the work we do is changing the lives of most of our clients. As far as I know, CEO provides employment services only to individuals on parole or probation. I don’t know if the organization doesn't want to integrate the word “parole” and “probation” in the personal statement, perhaps as a way to prevent participants from feeling stigmatized, but I believe that the word “recent criminal conviction” is too broad and can lead to misunderstanding. For instance, would individuals who came out of prison two years ago, and are still unemployed be able to participate in the program? I believe the organization should specify the type of individual we work with. As an organization, it is important we convey the right information to the public.
A treat for those of you who check back: Gina sent me an editorial from the NYT about money and politics: http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/09/11/opinion/an-amendment-to-cut-political-cash.html?referrer=&_r=0
Kevin, you didn't comment on your organizations mission statement! I like your take on INGO's and your references to neo-colonialism. I think it is a huge issue that is constantly over looked by the general population. I know, personally, if I didn't have conversations in past philosophy and anthropology classes, would not know the colonialistic principles and actions that continue to exist in many organizations that aim to "help" foreign countries.
Professor Rose, Behind the Beautiful Forevers was a fantastic book! It made me cry so much! It is also a perfect example of what can go wrong in a non-profit or "charitable" movement. But. I also think Danyeli is right that charity, whether it solves all problems or not, still does great things.
Kevin you make a great point about how aid might be perceived by the very people it's directed at. How intrusive and imposing do INGO's come across to the populations they seek to help? And certainly imperialism might even disguise itself as humanitarian missions. All this really reminds me of what Bekah was passionately discussing in class: that people from the communities that are targeted for aid themselves are often conspicuously left out of the process of dialogue and accept interventions without a say in the process.
With regards to the links Professor Waterston included, the mission of Partners in Health and the overall language of the NGO Code of Conduct is indicative of partnerships rather than hierarchical relationships. The language in the Code of Conduct (“support, strengthen and supplement rather than supplant”) suggests that local representatives are stakeholders too.
Post a Comment