Thoughts on Advocacy, Nonprofits, and Academia

So, as I work on a project related to child sexual abuse among Anabaptists, especially Amish and Plain Mennonites, I’ve been thinking a lot about advocacy, nonprofits, and academia. I’ve realized that many people take a one-size-fits-all approach to advocacy, nonprofits, and academia. Rather than listening to those we are seeking to support, we tend to tell them what we think will work best. We might be well-intentioned, but we need to learn to listen and think differently about how we support others.

I served as a volunteer domestic violence and sexual assault advocate for more than 10 years, and it’s not easy. One of the hardest things? Remembering an advocate is there to empower the survivor – not tell them what to do or try to fix them in a way the advocate believes is best.

That is not easy…and it is not something that comes naturally. Most of us want to “help” survivors – but we try to help them by telling them what is best for them, which does not help survivors grow and thrive; it actually holds them back.

Advocates need to be trained – either formally or informally – in empowerment models and other best practices. Without that, they run the risk of causing trauma and harm, rather than providing support, for the survivors they work with.

Even with training, though, even the best of advocates may slip and cross boundaries or fail to empower those they are working with from time to time. That is where the nonprofit organizations come in.

Advocates should be reporting to someone who can provide the oversight, accountability, and training that all advocates need. If an organization does not hold its advocates accountable for ethical, empowering support to clients, chaos can ensue.

Even worse, if nonprofits begin to think their way is the only right way, if they not only look the other way when advocates slip, but encourage them to do so, they harm clients, ruin advocates, and make it more difficult for people to trust them – or any other similar organization.

I think the empowerment principle is universal, and advocates should always be supported – and guided – by some overarching group, even if it is not a recognized 501(c)3 organization, no matter who they are working with.

But each population that advocates work with is different…and advocates should always be listening to members of the group they work with to learn about their needs, wants, and values.

In my case, I started working with a group of former and non-compliant Amish and Mennonites to address child sexual abuse in both Amish and Mennonite communities. The start of that work was learning about the unique needs of Amish and Mennonite survivors.

Any organization working with Amish survivors should reach out to other noncompliant or current Amish; organizations working with Mennonite survivors should reach out to other former or current Mennonites.

The two are definitely not interchangeable, which 4 months of discussion on wording for one question that will be understood by both groups has taught me. Don’t know of anyone you can reach out to? The Misfit Amish and The Plain People’s Podcast are two of the groups I am working with.

You could email them and ask for recommendations. But ask both; one group cannot speak for the other. Is seeking information from each population you work with an ideal? Yes; but it is an ideal we should strive for in advocacy.

Organizations that want to be ethical can still cause harm if they don’t understand the unique needs of groups they work with. Organizations made up of untrained people from a group can still cause harm if they don’t understand empowerment, boundaries, and accountability. You need both.

What does this have to do with academia? A lot. The biggest thing is where advocates and organizations get information about how to work with survivors. If they are following best practices, at some point their information was tested through research…and that is where academics come in.

We have a responsibility, as academics, to gather ethical, inclusive research – not “whatever gets me tenure” research. It may be slow, difficult and frustrating, qualitative (but only if we are working w/ someone who understands qualitative research**), or all of the above.

Those things are all part of the research process and we should be willing to do research the right way, not the fast way.

**I have a whole other post about academics who do not stay in their lane or look down on certain types of research planned for another day.