Global Integrity--12

Integrity for Global Citizenship

Moral wholeness for a whole world

Integrity is central to our identity and responsibility
as global citizens.

Integrity is moral wholeness—living consistently in moral wholeness. Its opposite is corruption, the distortion, perversion, and deterioration of moral goodness, resulting in the exploitation of people. Global integrity is moral wholeness at all levels in our world—from the individual to the institutional to the international. Global integrity is requisite for “building the future we want—being the people we need.” It is not easy, it is not always black and white, and it can be risky. These entries explore the many facets of integrity with a view towards the global efforts to promote sustainable development and wellbeing.

*****

Excerpt: 

Gyeongju Action Plan
"Education for Global Citizenship: Achieving the SDGs Together”

United Nations Department of Public Information/NGO Conference
Gyeongju, Republic of Korea 30 May – 1 June 2016

“In addition to literacy and numeracy, education must advance the cause of global citizenship which: promotes integrated development of the whole person emotionally, ethically, intellectually, physically, socially, and spiritually; imbued with an understanding of our roles, rights and responsibilities for the common good in service to humanity and the advancement of a culture of peace, non-violence, freedom, justice, and equality…“empowers learners to assume active roles to face and resolve global challenges and to become proactive contributors to a more peaceful, tolerant, inclusive, and secure world”[UNESCO 2014, reference in Applications below]; nurtures a sense of solidarity and empathy in order to end poverty, protect the planet, ensure human rights, and foster prosperous and fulfilling lives for all….We commit to…An education that teaches conflict resolution, a deep appreciation for diversity, ethical reasoning, gender equality, human rights and responsibilities, interdependence, multilingual and multicultural competence, social justice, sustainable development, and values.”

Global citizenship refers to our common humanity—our shared sense of identity and belonging as humans. It also refers to our shared sense of responsibility and rights as humans. Fundamental to global citizenship education is “the integrated development of the whole person” including “ethical reasoning…social justice...and values"(as the above quote states). 

Integrity is a core part of one’s identity and involvements as global citizens. We believe that integrity is both a character quality and a way of living that must be more explicitly emphasized in education for global citizenship (including “ethics” and “values” is not enough although it is certainly on the right track). Integrity is central to our identity and responsibility as global citizens. Global citizens are people of integrity.

You can watch a three minute overview-wrap up of the UN DPI/NGO conference here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5uppOnfdE0

Applications

--See also Global Citizenship Education: Preparing Learners for the Challenges of the 21st Century (UNESCO, 2014).

Loving Truth and Peace--5

I'd  love to...know what to do 

I'd love to change the world

But I don't know what to do

So I'll leave it up to you.

Ten Years After

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjpNqfKUtfw

Member Care and the Hippocratic Oath, Part 3

Some Ideas for Responsible Practice:

Respect, Relate, Reproduce

*****

Diego Reivera, The Flower Carrier, 1935

*****

Non hay tan dulce cosa

como la fidelidad

nin miel tan sabrosa

como la buena amistad.

Tem Tob, 14th century, Spain

*

Translation:

Good, faithful friends are sweeter than anything.

*

“To consider dear to me, as my parents,

him who taught me this art;

To live in common with him and, if necessary,

to share my goods with him;

To look upon his children as my own brothers,

to teach them this art.”
*

This second section of the Oath, quoted above, might not seem too applicable for us in the member care field. The type of close teacher-student relationship described here is not exactly the same today as it was 2400 years ago in Greece. But let’s look into it more closely. I would like to suggest that we extract three broad principles from this section that are relevant for member care practitioners.
*

Applications
1. Respecting Senior Colleagues.
We show respect to (and “consider dear”) the senior practitioners in our field. For me, this applies to people whose proven character and proven contributions are sustained over time. It especially applies to those aged 70+ who were working in the pre-member care field in the 1970s and even 1960s. We show respect by listening carefully to their input and honouring them in our gatherings.
*
Personally I so enjoy learning more about our roots as a field and the efforts of those who trail blazed so long ago. Often these folks were not even aware that they were blazing anything but rather thought that they were just doing their job. These folks in their steadfastness and depth inspire me: Stringham, Lindquist, Foyle, Narramore the Grossmans and surely many more! As Tolkien says of Aragorn, a “senior (Ranger) practitioner” in the Lord of the Rings, “the old that is strong does not wither, deep roots are not reached by the frost.”
*
The Oath indicates that the teachers and the students have a close personal and working relationship. They may even “live in common”. I likewise want to encourage member care workers and senior practitioners to connect closely together for personal and professional learning. Would it ever be possible for practitioners and senior practitioners to “live in common” in some sense? Now that is quite an idea! Perhaps the closest thing that I am aware of is sharing a room together at a conference for a week, or working on a field-based project for a few weeks, or working on staff together as part of a course or school for a few months. And maybe there are additional types of relationships that we can creatively consider. Why not?
*
The Oath also mentions providing practical support for teachers/senior practitioners as needed. The labourer is worthy of her/his wages. Note that there is no clear requirement for remuneration in the Oath, and perhaps this is not mentioned so that senior practitioners would not be tempted to exploit underlings for money. Perhaps the default arrangement as much as possible was pro bono instruction. Paul the Apostle gets into this point in 2 Corinthians 11 regarding his status as a senior (apostolic) practitioner. He reminds the Corinthians (as he did the Thessalonians and other churches, e.g., I Thes. 2:9) that he served them freely and was not a financial burden to them even though he could have honourably and ethically asked them to help meet his needs. Bottom line: keep our financial relationships clear, and don’t exploit anyone who needs our services or whose services (such as training) that we ourselves need.
*
2. Relating Closely with Colleagues.
Our relationships with the family members of teachers/senior practitioners is the next broad principle. Apparently priority was to be given to children (sons) of the medical teachers. There seems to be a sense of duty to look after the teacher’s children as well as a strategic sense that the children will be in a good place to continue the medical profession, having watched and learned from their parent who is a physician.
*
How to apply this? Well, I like the idea of getting to know the families of senior colleagues and also the families of a few close colleagues. Many family members and others can benefit beyond the dyadic teacher-student relationship. And maybe we will be seeing second or even third biological generations of member care practitioners. Again I say, why not? But consider these caveats: let’s avoid any type of nepotism or favouritism in the member care community. And let’s not confuse professional roles and responsibilities with personal preferences and gain that produce conflicts of interest, not to mention envy and resentment.
*
3. Reproducing Knowledge/Skills.
We provide services but we also try to multiply our services reesponsibly. In fact, as member care practitioners we try to multiply ourselves—our competencies as well as our character. Training in many contexts can thus also involve "imparting our own lives" (I Thes. 2: 8). This is a special privlege and responsibility to be taken very seriously. It also requires accountability. “Let not many of you become teachers knowing that as such you shall receive a stricter judgement” (James 3:1).

*
One additional application is to mention that it is especially challenging to offer instruction well in light of the diversity of the member care world and mission/aid settings. One example among many: how to intervene in a “troubled” family/team setting in which the parent/team leader is seen as being rigid and authoritarian by some members and as exercising firm, caring authority by others? These types of sitautions certainly "stretch" our own experiential and practice boundaries. Good member care practice often requires going beyond the familiar (or with reference to the Oath, we go beyond the family of our senior teachers) in order to embrace the diverse. We have to cross sectors and disciplines, genders and generations, in addition to crossing cultures. Have a look at the material from the World Federation of Mental Health, prepared for World Mental Health Day 2007: Mental Health in a Changing World: The Impact of Culture and Diversity

http://wfmh.org/COVERS/2007WMHDAY.jpg
*
Final Thought
An important part of our member care practice involves responsibly: a) respecting other practitioners, b) relating to other practitioners, and c) reproducing other practitioners. Can we really read all of these responsibilities into the second section of the Hippocratic Oath? Well, yes, in a general way. Without overstepping our interpretive bounds, we can build upon our Greek predecessors. We can use this part of the Oath as a further springboard to help us consider how we want to practice responsibly.
*
Reflection and Discussion
1. Is there a senior colleague with whom you regularly relate? Do you have any special type of agreed-upon relationship?
*
2. Are there member care workers who look to you as being something like a senior colleague, and consult with you for help?
*
3. Who are your closest colleagues? How close are you to their family members?
*
4. What are the pros and cons of member care workers who link personal and professional relationships together?
*
5. In what ways are you reproducing your knowledge and skills within your sphere of influence? What thoughts do you have about training (i.e. responsible multiplication) in light of the diversity of caregivers/settings?

Member Care and Organisational Health

Signs of Organisational Health

I am back at Ards Friary, Donegal Ireland. In my mind. In my heart. I come here often. Thinking about healthy organisations. Thinking especially about healthy faith-based organisations. Orwell has been so helpful. But what are the positive examples? How did the Franciscan monks for example, such as here at Ards Friary, maintain a healthy organisational life--and a healthy community?

How rewarding it is to work in an organisation, a community, a team, a network, with these features:

1. Mutual respect among staff
2. Fair pay/compensation
3. Opportunities to make contributions
4. Opportunities for advancement and personal growth
5. Sense of purpose and meaning
6. Management with competence and integrity
7. Safeguards to protect individuals (staff and customers) from injustice
8. Responsibility for actions: owning mistakes, not blaming others or covering up
9. Honesty in communication and public disclosures: not slanting the truth or exagerating
10. Accountability for personal/work life: seeking out feedback and ways to improve, not ignoring or pretending
*

Reflection and Discussion
1. How would you add to or adjust the above list?
2. What are the three core characteristics in an organisation that would make you want to be part of it and really contribute?

Member Care and Human Rights--3

How is member care (MC) related to human rights (HR)?
http://www.un.org/av/photo/subjects/30.htm

*****

Human rights and human responsibilities

are two halves of member care "good practice".
*****

Mission/aid sending groups have a responsibility to manage and support their staff well. They also have a right to make sure that their staff are providing quality services This responsibility can be assessed through things like performance reviews and mutual feedback tools. All the above assertions are part of good practice.
*
Furthermore, mission and/aid staff have a responsibility to provide quality services to/through their sending groups. They also have the right to expect/receive good supportive/managerial services from their sending groups. These two previous asertions are also a core part of good practice.

Note: An example of the responsibility of sending groups in particular is embodied in the seven general principles found in the Code of Good Practice (2003) developed by People In Aid. http://www.peopleinaid.org/

*****

The sending group’s responsibility for the good practice of member care is analogous to the nation-state’s responsibility for the good practice of human rights. When senders/states consistently do not recognise or even deny the basic rights of their staff/citizens, then their very legitimacy in the eyes of their respective communities—the mission/aid community and the international community—will be seriously questioned. In the worst cases, senders and states would be viewed as "illegitimite or even failed entities" and "poor-practice pariahs". Fortunately, this last point is extreme and thus the exception within the mission/aid community. However, more moderate forms of poor practice do in fact flourish in many settings.
*
Consider these thoughts from David Little (Harvard University), in the Foreword of John Nurser’s book, For All People and All Nations: Christian Churches and Human Rights (2005).
*
“…the Human Rights Commission [1945] went on to bring into being the Universal Declaration [1948] and thereby to make way for and inspire a whole array of subsequent human rights documents on civil, political, economic, social, cultural, racial, gender, minority, environmental, and other issues, that today set international standards for what is expected of nation-states, both within and outside their borders. Although these standards are not universally enforced around the world, they are more and more taken to comprise the basic international requirements of political legitimacy. It is simply the case now that states found systematically and grossly to these violate standards are regarded as pariahs.” (x).
*
Reflection and Discussion
**Getting a good balance between our respective rights and responsibilities as senders/staff is very important. Why this is true? Give examples in your own sending agency or experience.

** What happens when there is a breakdown in the recognition of these mutual rights and responsibilities, by both senders and staff? (e.g., low morale, poor performance, attrition, and concern from colleagues who are part of other sending groups).

**Comment on these folk adages, with regards to MC and HR: Give some people an inch and they think they are rulers. The golden rule is that the person with the most gold, rules.

Member Care and Ethics

During the months of April and May, we will be looking at the important area of ethics in member care. One of the main sources that we will use is from the July 2006 article in EMQ, "Upgrading Member Care."

*****

Ethics involves a mindset (a way of thinking through issues) in light of recognized guidelines which promote responsible care and good practice. Such guidelines deal with areas like confidentiality, skill competencies, continuing growth, accountability, sensitivity to human diversity, and organizational responsibility for staff care.

*****

"Member care is a broad field with a wide range of practitioners. As this field continues to grow, it is important to offer guidelines to further clarify and shape good practice. Any guidelines must carefully consider the fact of the field’s international diversity, and blend together the best interests of both service receivers and service providers. They also need to be applicable to member care workers (MCWs) with different types of training and experience."

*****

Is this relevant for me? For sure! Here are three examples.

Example One. Competence.

An experienced consultant makes recommendations to a humanitarian service organization based in Asia. The consultant is addressing the care of their emergency staff working in a mass disaster area, rampant with cholera and malaria. The consultant is vaguely familiar with that cultural context and the organization itself. To what extent does the consultant need to inform the agency about limitations in his/her background? When is it OK to “stretch” beyond one’s areas of training and experience? What if no one else is readily available to offer advice? So is the consultant acting competently?

Example Two. Confidentiality.

A compassionate leader informally exchanges a few emails with a man in their organization who has marital struggles. The man tells the leader that he and his wife have frequent fights that can be overheard by African neighbors. Later, the leader prays with his own wife about the other couple's struggles. Is it OK for one’s spouse to know such things? Is the disclosure of “significant problems” protected information? Would asking the leader to not share be “secretive”? So what type of confidentiality is appropriate?

Example Three. Responsibility.

A reputable sending organization shortens a family's field preparation from three months to one month. The reason is so that the husband, a medical doctor, can cover a crucial and vacant position in a refugee hospital in the Middle East. To what extent does making such “adjustments” simply reflect the realities of mission/aid work? What if “lives”, or a large funding grant, are at stake? So to what extent is the organization acting responsibly towards the family and the refugee patients?

*****

Reflection and Discussion

• Recall a situation in member care where ethical practice was not adequately understood.
• How can a person further develop a "mindset" for ethical practice?
• What is the difference between ethical guidelines for good practice and personal morality?