my de-escalation workshop

[Flea]

Since so many of you helped me out with resources for this, I wanted to check back in.

We had it last night and it went very well. Not only was I able to impart a lot of useful information that was new to many of us, but the conversation took some very useful and creative tangents. These allowed us to something I hadn't intended for last night's meeting - tweaking some existing procedures to make us more effective as a team.

Faaaantastic.

So again, many thanks to all of you for your contributions. My group will be much stronger for it, as will our larger community.

 

[Jenny_in_Chico]

What the heck? I thought you were going to give us some deep insight into how to de-escalate confrontations! I feel cheated.

I guess I'll just have to stick with my time-honored strategy of screaming and pulling out fistfuls of my own hair.

 

[Flea]

Sorry Jenny, it's privileged information reserved strictly for us Cool Cats. You'll just have to join my group and serve on the Board.

:whip1:

 

[Flea]

Seriously though, if anyone's interested I can post my notes. Just PM me.

 

[Draven]

Please by all means post them, I'll even post some of mine & we can compare in the thread. Be interesting if we can get everyone to do them?

 

[Jenny_in_Chico]

I'd like to see them too. For reasons which will be obvious to Flea.

 

[Deaf Smith]

I attended the Jack Bauer 'de-escalation' workshop here. We found that if you strike first without warning it de-escalates quite well.

But on the serious side you need the book, Verbal Judo. Amazon has it and it's a good one. In fact google 'de-escalation workshop' and you will find many.

Deaf

 

[Flea]

Deaf, thanks for the book recommendation. It's on my list. Right now I'm reading Tongue Fu. Also good stuff.

As for my workshop, it was geared to a mental health perspective. I chair the board of a support group, and every so often someone will come in manic, belligerent, or even suicidal. It's rare that we need to intervene, but we've had enough of these moments over the years that I felt it was time for us to get educated.

The main thrust of de-escalation from that perspective is constructive listening. People get upset because they feel they're being dismissed (when it comes to mental health issues that's often true.) So we came up with our own criteria for when we feel de-escalation is called for.

At that point we coax the person out into the hall (away from the group, of course) and simply listen. No judgment, no rationalizing. If they're delusional, no arguing with their perceptions. That just puts them on the defensive, and it's rude anyway. Silence is a useful tool because it allows the person to feel they can complete their thoughts without being cut off.

If things hit the fan regardless of our best efforts, I printed off a list of pre-violence indicators (thanks, Bill and Brian!) Protect yourself, I said, get outta Dodge, but obviously don't hit back. And then we went over some of the calming signals and body language. And when reasonable, allow the person to save face.

Finally, self-care. Positive self-talk, breathe, and know your own limitations. I made it clear that if a de-escalator isn't up to it on a given night, it's far better to sit that one out. That's why we're creating a team of 8, and counting. And de-briefing afterwards, preferably within a few minutes of the incident while everything is still fresh.

The cool thing about the meeting (aside from the fact that I was there! :ultracool) is that we went off on some very creative tangents. We now have the policy that we'll carry cell phones at the meetings, we'll always have two people managing every incident, and we defined a clear goal for our de-escalation efforts. Our primary goal is the overall safety of the group at large, with the safety of the person in crisis running a very close second. This is likely to evolve over time as we get more experience with this.

So far in the group's 10-year history we've only had to call 911 once, when someone had a seizure. We've had a few other dicey moments and we've handled most of them very well. The other night made us all much more confident looking ahead. We really do have a fantastic bunch of people, most of whom I'm very proud to call my friends. It's a point of pride for me to keep this meeting a place of safety, healing, and empowerment for all of us.

 

[jks9199]

Deaf, thanks for the book recommendation. It's on my list. Right now I'm reading Tongue Fu. Also good stuff.

As for my workshop, it was geared to a mental health perspective. I chair the board of a support group, and every so often someone will come in manic, belligerent, or even suicidal. It's rare that we need to intervene, but we've had enough of these moments over the years that I felt it was time for us to get educated.

The main thrust of de-escalation from that perspective is constructive listening. People get upset because they feel they're being dismissed (when it comes to mental health issues that's often true.) So we came up with our own criteria for when we feel de-escalation is called for.

At that point we coax the person out into the hall (away from the group, of course) and simply listen. No judgment, no rationalizing. If they're delusional, no arguing with their perceptions. That just puts them on the defensive, and it's rude anyway. Silence is a useful tool because it allows the person to feel they can complete their thoughts without being cut off.

If things hit the fan regardless of our best efforts, I printed off a list of pre-violence indicators (thanks, Bill and Brian!) Protect yourself, I said, get outta Dodge, but obviously don't hit back. And then we went over some of the calming signals and body language. And when reasonable, allow the person to save face.

Finally, self-care. Positive self-talk, breathe, and know your own limitations. I made it clear that if a de-escalator isn't up to it on a given night, it's far better to sit that one out. That's why we're creating a team of 8, and counting. And de-briefing afterwards, preferably within a few minutes of the incident while everything is still fresh.

The cool thing about the meeting (aside from the fact that I was there! :ultracool) is that we went off on some very creative tangents. We now have the policy that we'll carry cell phones at the meetings, we'll always have two people managing every incident, and we defined a clear goal for our de-escalation efforts. Our primary goal is the overall safety of the group at large, with the safety of the person in crisis running a very close second. This is likely to evolve over time as we get more experience with this.

So far in the group's 10-year history we've only had to call 911 once, when someone had a seizure. We've had a few other dicey moments and we've handled most of them very well. The other night made us all much more confident looking ahead. We really do have a fantastic bunch of people, most of whom I'm very proud to call my friends. It's a point of pride for me to keep this meeting a place of safety, healing, and empowerment for all of us.

Some very good ideas there, about always having two and keeping cell phones available. I presume you've got the equivalent of our Mobile Crisis team on speed dial... I do think you may have oversimplified when you say that feeling dismissed is the cause of people being upset; it's just much more complex than that in my experience. Perhaps it's true in the more limited setting you're describing -- but it's dangerous to oversimplify things.

But I disagree with the "don't hit back." If a person has become violent -- your goal is, of course, to get out of danger and let cops or other pros handle it. But that doesn't mean just get pounded on.

It's also important to review and refresh yourselves on these skills; the story I told above involved two experienced cops. We both missed cues. And it's important to realize that there comes a time to recognize that de-escalation isn't working or isn't going to happen -- and you need to be ready and have a plan to act on at that point.

 

[Drac]

But I disagree with the "don't hit back." If a person has become violent -- your goal is, of course, to get out of danger and let cops or other pros handle it. But that doesn't mean just get pounded on.

I am not a big fan of Verbal-Judo or Tounge-Fu...I have seen too many people so wrapped up in using them and playing the peace maker that they get punched because they let their guard down..

 

[Flea]

I presume you've got the equivalent of our Mobile Crisis team on speed dial...

Great idea! hadn't thought of that. We were just going to call 911 and request a CIT.

I do think you may have oversimplified when you say that feeling dismissed is the cause of people being upset; it's just much more complex than that in my experience. Perhaps it's true in the more limited setting you're describing -- but it's dangerous to oversimplify things.

Quite so. I presented it that way to my group because we all know first-hand about the chemistry issues. There was no introduction needed on that one. But I thank you for the reminder. What else would you have included?

But I disagree with the "don't hit back." If a person has become violent -- your goal is, of course, to get out of danger and let cops or other pros handle it. But that doesn't mean just get pounded on.

It's much more complicated than that in this setting. Above all, someone hitting back wouldn't have the same legal protections that a LEO would. The liability factor would be phenomenal of course. To my knowledge I'm the only one with any MA training, and only a year at that. Some of our members have other somatic health issues we might not know about that would be aggravated by a strike. And some come from traumatic backgrounds. If it were a question of "hit back or be pulverized," then yes I'd consider it. But I wouldn't be happy with that option at all. I'd even give serious consideration to my definition of "pulverized."

It's also important to review and refresh yourselves on these skills; the story I told above involved two experienced cops. We both missed cues.

We're hard-wiring it into our bylaws to have this meeting every six months. And I know what you mean about missing cues; we've had a couple incidents in the past month alone where we missed both warning signs and opportunities. Practice, practice, practice.

And it's important to realize that there comes a time to recognize that de-escalation isn't working or isn't going to happen -- and you need to be ready and have a plan to act on at that point.

We tread a fine line with that - we have to make a big deal of the fact that we aren't professionals. There's a lot of historical context on that not worth exploring here. But if we're not doctors or therapists, we can't be cops or bouncers either. We simply resort to ending the meeting early if we have to isolate the person in crisis, and call 911.

I really appreciate all your feedback on this. Have you done CIT work yourself?

 

[Deaf Smith]

I am not a big fan of Verbal-Judo or Tounge-Fu...I have seen too many people so wrapped up in using them and playing the peace maker that they get punched because they let their guard down..

That's where the Jack Bauer method comes in.....

Deaf

 

[jks9199]

Great idea! hadn't thought of that. We were just going to call 911 and request a CIT.

Quite so. I presented it that way to my group because we all know first-hand about the chemistry issues. There was no introduction needed on that one. But I thank you for the reminder. What else would you have included?

Sure... put me on the spot!

While you're dealing with a limited scope of people, they're still people. Traffic, the chaos of life... even simple pain can all pile up until a simple minor issues pulls the pin. For example, a few months back, I'd hurt my back somehow... By the end of several days -- I snapped over something minor. The truth is you don't need to know the reason a person is escalating; you simply have to deal with the situation.

It's much more complicated than that in this setting. Above all, someone hitting back wouldn't have the same legal protections that a LEO would. The liability factor would be phenomenal of course. To my knowledge I'm the only one with any MA training, and only a year at that. Some of our members have other somatic health issues we might not know about that would be aggravated by a strike. And some come from traumatic backgrounds. If it were a question of "hit back or be pulverized," then yes I'd consider it. But I wouldn't be happy with that option at all. I'd even give serious consideration to my definition of "pulverized."

Please note that I didn't say strike them or even restrain them; I simply said that you don't need to become a punching bag. Either physically, verbally, or emotionally. Of course you have to work within the rules and framework -- but that doesn't mean simply letting someone wail away on you, figuratively or literally.

We're hard-wiring it into our bylaws to have this meeting every six months. And I know what you mean about missing cues; we've had a couple incidents in the past month alone where we missed both warning signs and opportunities. Practice, practice, practice.

We tread a fine line with that - we have to make a big deal of the fact that we aren't professionals. There's a lot of historical context on that not worth exploring here. But if we're not doctors or therapists, we can't be cops or bouncers either. We simply resort to ending the meeting early if we have to isolate the person in crisis, and call 911.

I really appreciate all your feedback on this. Have you done CIT work yourself?

In a few different settings -- but not as such. Remember, I'm a working cop. We don't typically get called into any situation until it's already escalated...

 

[Touch Of Death]

Some very good ideas there, about always having two and keeping cell phones available. I presume you've got the equivalent of our Mobile Crisis team on speed dial... I do think you may have oversimplified when you say that feeling dismissed is the cause of people being upset; it's just much more complex than that in my experience. Perhaps it's true in the more limited setting you're describing -- but it's dangerous to oversimplify things.

But I disagree with the "don't hit back." If a person has become violent -- your goal is, of course, to get out of danger and let cops or other pros handle it. But that doesn't mean just get pounded on.

It's also important to review and refresh yourselves on these skills; the story I told above involved two experienced cops. We both missed cues. And it's important to realize that there comes a time to recognize that de-escalation isn't working or isn't going to happen -- and you need to be ready and have a plan to act on at that point.

The higher your skill level the less striking you would need to do. Controling them would seem like a better rought.
Sean

 

[Flea]

The higher your skill level the less striking you would need to do. Controling them would seem like a better rought.
Sean

Thanks, ToD.

Rather than any kind of physical confrontation, the focus of this thread is the direct opposite with de-escalation. I'd much prefer to keep it focused on that.

Thank you.

 

[Touch Of Death]

Thanks, ToD.

Rather than any kind of physical confrontation, the focus of this thread is the direct opposite with de-escalation. I'd much prefer to keep it focused on that.

Thank you.

I meant controling there attitude. LOL

 

[AlanE]

LOVED your outcome and notes Flea! Thank you!

Help them save face if possible - awesome. They're people with problems. Embarassing has become such a fancy that many have forgotten the concept of dignity. Like you said, many have a past of abuse or hightened fears.

Them being listened to and not discounted - also great!

I picked up Verbal Judo ~2 years ago to gain more knowledge with a disabled loved one who was easily aroused. But people using Verbal Judo have been punched during use of the techniques? OK. If used in PLACE of respectful, alert approaches (e.g. cleverly trying to be a manipulator where it's clearly for a selfish reason), yes, I can imagine a misplaced approach worsening a situation. If a person rushes to take control, caring more for absolute safety than to help someone, you'll see it backfire. It would not be a fault of a technique, but obvious lack of personal observation and caring. The right technique flows after the right intent.

Plus, talkative members of groups against violence tend to have exceedingly threatening tongues which tend to escalate conflicts. They tend to get punched everytime. :shrug: ?

 

[Bruno@MT]

It depends on the emotional state of the person in need of de-escalation, but I found that if the aggression is not targeted to you, (i.e. someone is really upset about something other than you) just listening can be a huge de-escalator. It would be good always to be in pairs imo.
That way you are not alone, you have someone to help or call 911 if you are suddenly assaulted, and you can 'tag team' the conversation if needed.

The higher your skill level the less striking you would need to do. Controling them would seem like a better rought.
Sean

Unfortunately, and I know this for a fact, controlling someone with mental issues is not a cakewalk. If they go physical, they can often be much stronger than an average or even really fit person. Grappling with someone like that would be a fatal mistake if you've never grappled before without people who out-muscle you.