5.2.4 Autonomy

If you have read this far I am sure that you will have twigged that I’m big into autonomy and that I also believe that a causative factor in fostering dependency is Pillars lack of recognition (often, in fairness, without realising it) of the strengths – sometimes hidden – within our Focus Group, assuming that families who seek our support will always be dependent. 

All our life contains opportunities for self-expression, and autonomy hugely fosters self-expression and thereafter self-efficacy – i.e. the belief that we can do this for ourselves.

In creative self-expression, we honour our uniqueness and specialness, identity, individual strengths and ultimately our autonomy – that is, our ability and willingness to create our own world.

I have strong views on how very hurt, abandoned, dependent and marginalised people help each other, and thereby help themselves. I say that because I believe that when I help someone else I also help myself.  (I have felt this many times in my life).

The reason that I have strong views is that I have been in the privileged position to see it happening first-hand.  And I also believe that the first thing that we community workers who are committed to creativity need to do is be courageous and reflective at the same time in our criticism of what is happening that isn’t working – and then believe in a vision or model that honours autonomy, self-efficacy and  the innate resourcefulness of ordinary people.

Speaking for myself, I know that if I believe in something I find it very difficult to let it go – critics would say that I just don’t know when to stop!

But I have so much evidence in the value of autonomy in respect of our Focus Group that I find it easy to believe in it and argue strongly for it.

Also, like many fellow practitioners, I know loads of examples of practice which are not helpful because they are developed within the paradigm of the deliverer rather than the intended recipient.   (One-way knowledge flow again).

In considering creativity in autonomy, I believe that it is wrong to assume that all problems can be eradicated.  Our big test, autonomy-wise, is, as the songwriter Si Kahn said, ‘It’s not what you are born with; it’s what you do with what you’ve got’ [1].

In doing this we trust emergence and other root foundations mentioned in our Chapter on the Universal Theory of Change – and the great uncertainty-paradox is that while we don’t know exactly where we are headed, we trust that the collective decision making will result in life-affirming outcomes.

Many individuals who have suffered a lot and who are struggling with addiction can be a little hard to pin down so to speak. I discussed already how this could be avoidance of responsibility for setting well-defined goals, and/or clearly describing courses of action that they have undertaken etc. because of lack of confidence.

But instead of, or in addition to lack of confidence it could also be because people who are creative may need some assistance in translating their ideas into practical work.

Yet their ideas are often far better than ideas that come from the Pillars in a top down way, mostly developed in academia or the public service.

I am generally lukewarm in my enthusiasm for top-down ideas (that lead to programmes) because I experience them being of limited use to families and individuals in our Focus Group [2]. My lukewarm-ness is not because they cost a lot of money, it’s because they do very little to foster autonomy.

While, in general, I strongly disagree with the commercialisation of alleviation of human suffering, I actually am very well-disposed towards paying for programmes that work. 

The principal issue that I have is placing the power to enable change for the better in a community in an academic institution rather than among people most affected.

It is always good in circumstances like this to check who is gaining most!

[1], Also recorded by one of my favourite singers, Dick Gaughan, on his lovely album Outlaws and Dreamers

[2]. I need to say here that there are many programmes that originate in academia that do have the best interests of very hurt families at heart, and are very practical, useful, user-friendly and helpful.  It is up to community workers to be very discerning in respect of what to pick and choose, and speak up if a programme that is pushed on them by an external, more influential or powerful source doesn’t work.

As an organisation, I believe that placing ourselves for the people and by the people is a very creative thing to do – and is attractive to the people who matter most.

The alternative tends to take the real decision making away from ordinary people and into the Pillars – who (as I have said already – often unwittingly) may perpetuate aloofness, distance, vagueness, ambiguity and ultimately dependency. 

Autonomy in decision making is like growing and then eating our own home grown produce – firstly it is (probably) a lot more nourishing but also has that feel-good factor that is almost impossible to describe.

The rewards are more involvement, higher motivation as success breeds success, and (while certainly slower) will almost always result in better longer term outcomes.

I believe that growing our own is particularly important in respect of our spirit.

(I explore spirituality in the Chapter on Organisational Matters in more depth).

We may be materially very poor but our spirit can be enriched by encouragement and affirmation.  When our spirit gets poor it’s time to worry [1].  One way to nourish our spirit is to surround ourselves with beauty.

We have already discussed how symmetry is so important in human endeavour – and also how we tend to associate beauty with symmetry.  So symmetry, (as evidenced in two-way knowledge flow) facilitates beauty and elegance in relationships.

For the people – by the people enhances the possibilities that relationships will be symmetrical all round and the two way knowledge flow that we desire will prevail.

[1]. I quote this from a conversation that I had with Fr. Pat Hogan, Parish Priest in Moyross, Limerick, and former Chaplain in Limerick Prison (and very entertaining conversationalist) who also worked in Kolkata, India, and who has a deep knowledge of all matters to do with imprisonment and disadvantage.

Authenticity is a very important factor in creativity, and, I believe, autonomy.

When it is safe for us to be creative, (i.e. we’ll be taken seriously, won’t be derided, dismissed or subtly side-lined) it is much more likely that we will portray something of our real, authentic self. The reason that this is so important is that it is a big step forward for us to choose to be authentic even when we struggle.

For example, sometimes we men may view trusting intuition, being sensitive, and going with our feelings, (all factors that enhance creativity) as being okay for women but a bit outside our comfort zone.

So creativity both needs and fosters courage – and vice versa.

In respect of crime prevention, I have mentioned elsewhere that it seems to be an infinite problem – that is, it will never be solved – it just has to be contained as best we can.

But including highly motivated people, encouraging authenticity and allowing them to be creative changes all that.

Because if I am affected by something deeply then mere containment is not enough. I want to go beyond that to resolution – however unlikely that might seem to the Pillars dominated system..

Autonomy, in its best state, gives us the wonderful feeling of we have done it ourselves and as such is a significant factor in facilitating creativity.  And because, as everyone knows, success breeds success, such facilitation has a multiplier effect. 

We feel free to stay true to who we are and because we see it working we want more of it – even if sometimes it isn’t favoured by mainstream forces that have so much power and influence in society.

We gain the confidence to embrace our abilities, instinct and decision-making even if they are not immediately recognised by others.

The fruit salad (as distinct from a smoothie) that I mentioned already attributed to Dr. Dan Siegel could apply, in respect of creativity and autonomy, as much to a well-functioning team as well as the brain!