Having served on the CRC board in the past and having volunteered as a trained mediator, I came to greatly appreciate the idea that members of a community can resolve our interpersonal conflicts in ways that promote non-violence, justice, reconciliation and a deepening of connection, without resorting to the sometimes scarring machinations of the legal system. The CRC existed to facilitate those experiences, through its mediation program, educational work with local youth, and its rich history of related efforts in the Richmond area and beyond.

As a mediator, I had the honor of witnessing some magical moments between family members or co-workers where the conversation transitioned from accusation and battling to understanding, compassion and hope for moving forward. As a board member, I had the honor of working with a driven and passionate group of volunteers and staff who believed in what the CRC was about and what it could do for the community.

While the principles and practices of mediating conflict are certainly still available to anyone who wants to pursue them, it’s sad to see that a place like the CRC can’t sustain itself right now.  My hope, of course, is that this is an ending that will lead to other beginnings down the road.

Many people have given life and breath to CRC’s mission over the years, and I’m so thankful for their work.  I’m especially thankful for the careful and surely painful work that the current board members have taken on in reaching the conclusion to lay the CRC down.  I hope that Richmond can find some way to honor what CRC did and stood for in the ways that we carry forward.

But then something curious and possibly amazing happened.

Someone, probably a White House aide who thinks a little differently than her or his colleagues, realized that there might be another way forward.  Someone suggested that maybe if the parties involved in this escalating conflict sat down together and talked in person, a better outcome could prevail.  And apparently that suggestion got whispered in the President’s ear, because Gates, arresting officer Cambridge Police Sgt. James Crowley and Obama are expected to sit down together this week.  Over a beer.

It may seem like a small thing, but it really does represent a total departure from the cultural norm related to how we resolve conflicts.  The idea of just sitting down to have a conversation instead of “lawyering up” is not the direction most of us take, and if you believe the evening news, we often go really far in the other direction of perpetrating further injustices on one another.  But here we have the President of the United States suggesting an in-person conversation, and we have the other men involved responding positively.  The lawyers are stepping back, the media circus is calming down, and there’s going to be a conversation.  Nice!

Of course, there are a lot of obstacles to overcome, and a lot of pressures that make this a less than ideal conversation scenario.  It probably would have been hard for either man to say “no thanks” to the President, and so both are somewhat compelled to participate.  The White House isn’t exactly the most neutral setting for any conversation, and talking through complex issues while slightly intoxicated is probably not ideal.  Both men have ratcheted up the stakes involved – for Gates, it’s about calling attention to racial profiling and for Crowley, it’s about defending the integrity of his and his fellow officers` actions – so neither can easily walk away from the conversation and just say “it’s all good now” without having hoards of special interest groups and supporters demanding further action.  (And yes, there are legitimate and serious issues around racial profiling and law enforcement practices that need to be addressed here.)

But regardless of the outcome, it’s heartening that a seed has been planted: there are other ways to resolve our conflicts.  And the seed is there at the highest levels of a governmental system that generally eschews considering the humanity and complexity of any given person involved in any given dispute.  Might we call that progress?

The forthcoming gathering at the White House may not follow its principles directly, but Restorative Justice is an approach to conflict resolution that tries to foster dialog between all of the parties involved in a wrong-doing – the victim, the offender, witnesses, family members and friends affected, etc.  It tries to build up “mutual responsibility” for addressing wrong-doing in our communities, instead of perpetuating the notion that when a crime or wrong has been committed, accountability and punishment are handed down by some externalized and detached authority.  And it’s working in communities all over.  Here in Richmond, the Conflict Resolution Center trains mediators to facilitate a similar kind of conversation that, while not strictly part of Restorative Justice practices, still encourages that kind of dialog and reconciliation.

What might these kinds of conflict resolution practices look like in your community?  Are there conflicts in your life where a facilitated, face-to-face conversation might have made all the difference in resolving them?

Here’s hoping that Crowley, Gates, and Obama make the best use of their time together, realizing that they may just be helping to model something transformative for, well, the rest of the world.

So, in keeping with my recent theme of unabashed plugs: if you have a conflict in your life that you want some help with, call the CRC. If you have a stressful situation with a co-worker in your office environment, call the CRC. If you’re considering or are already a part of some sort of legal action and want to find a better, perhaps more “humane” way to resolve that issue, call the CRC. If you know friends or colleagues or family members that could benefit from a neutral third party to listen and help move things forward, send them to the CRC. If you support the CRC’s mission and want to donate some funds, they’ll thank you warmly! And if you want to learn about how to be a part of the amazing things that CRC is doing (including being trained as a mediator), call the CRC OR come to their strategic planning session on February 18th.

I’m also taking a creative writing class from the folks at the Gotham Writers` Workshop. It’s been an interesting experience so far, and I’m grateful for some structure around my desire to do more creative writing – or, dare I say it, “be a writer” – but I’ll reserve for later my opinion of how well I learn in an online course environment – quite a contrast to face-to-face interaction. Anyone out there had any experiences with online education or training to share? What are *you* learning about these days?