Failure to listen
My journey as a humanitarian worker took many unexpected turns. The major one was suffering sexual abuse from a colleague. A one night incident that disrupted my career to the point of ending it.
It has taken me a decade to label as trauma both this experience and the institutional betrayal I suffered when reporting. What has proven healing, together with time and therapy, has been writing about it and connecting with other survivors.
Learning and understanding new concepts has given me words and insight.
I started labelling inappropriate behaviour, and later sexual harassment, what in fact was sexual abuse. I didn’t want to accept I had been sexually abused... What did that make of me? It was easier to say that I had reported inappropriate behaviour and that my life as a humanitarian worker had exhausted me. But it was not true — at least not an honest truth. Unconsciously I had this notion that accepting I had been abused would mean I had done something wrong. Now I know this is part of the victim blaming mechanisms of society —Thanks Dr. Taylor! — Labelling my experience correctly does not define me. It defines what I went through. And, if I accept the following definition, then I was sexually abused.
“Sexual abuse: The actual or threatened physical intrusion of a sexual nature, whether by force or under unequal or coercive conditions. It should cover sexual assault (attempted rape, kissing / touching, forcing someone to perform oral sex / touching) as well as rape. Under UN regulations, all sexual activity with someone under the age of 18 is considered to be sexual abuse.” (Definition by the International Development Committee of the British Parliament)
I have been seeking closure and insisting that the aid sector should do better. For this purpose I have been both reading and writing — in consequence becoming an activist — and I have been giving feedback to the compliance office who investigated my case. I have learnt terms and concepts that helped me understand what I was going through, “institutional betrayal” in the past and “trauma-informed” now. Because words matter. A lot.
Lou Godbold, expert in trauma and survivor herself, used the term “survivor informed” replying to a tweet I was quoting, and I had an aha-moment discovering this eye opening concept. I realised that one basic level that constantly failed when I came forward with my complaint was that they never included the trauma perspective.
Officers and managers I encountered and talked to in relation with the sexual abuse I sufferd were not trained in Trauma-Informed Approach. According to the US health protection agency, they should have followed 6 guiding principles:
Safety.
Trustworthiness & transparency.
Peer support.
Collaboration & mutuality.
Empowerment & choice.
Cultural, historical & gender issues.
I did not feel safe in my interactions in the aftermath of reporting, dreading what would be the next insulting email or insensitive officer I would have to face. My levels of anxiety skyrocketed when seeing emails from the compliance office, and this had not to do with me being traumatised, it was a consequence of previous interactions with them.
The lack of transparency was a constant in the investigation that was held. Only after my insistence, and many unanswered emails, I managed to know who had been interviewed during the investigation of my case. Still I never received a clear explanation of the whole process. The constant line was “we assure you”, it seems that if they say “we assure you a comprehensive investigation has taken place” you have to accept and trust their word and that’s it. The explanations concerning their process were either vague, insufficient or incomplete and — important detail — never written.
I felt lonely, deprived of power and lacking support and choice.
All this said, I want to clarify that I saw a genuine interest and vocational people trying to do good and doing their best. Individual interactions were mostly kind and showing care, trying to do better.
Nevertheless, at the end, although my feedback did help them to improve procedures, my message explaining the essential failure of their system did not get through. It wasn’t so much that they didn’t believe me but that they didn’t listen to me.
