r-kv-r-y literary journal
non-fiction winter 2006
non-fiction winter 2006
Shame by Any Other Name: Lessons for Restorative Justice from the Principles,
Traditions and Practices of Alcoholics Anonymous 1
by Victoria Pynchon
5 Pepp. Disp. Resol. L.J. 299, *
Copyright (c) 2005 Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal
And the eyes of both were opened, and they knew they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves
together and made themselves aprons. . . . And the Lord God called unto Adam, and said unto
him, Where art thou? And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden and I was afraid, because I
was naked and I hid myself. Genesis, 3:7-10 (King James).
There was a guy with something like multiple sclerosis. A perpetual spasm forced him to perch
sideways on his wheelchair and peer down along his nose at his knotted fingers. This condition
had descended on him suddenly. He got no visitors. His wife was divorcing him. He was only
thirty-three, but it was hard to guess what he told about himself because he really couldn't talk
anymore, beyond clamping his lips repeatedly around his protruding tongue while groaning. No
more pretending for him! He was completely and openly a mess. Meanwhile the rest of us go
on trying to fool each other. Denis Johnson, Jesus' Son (1992).
Our marriage is a commercial for how normal we are when we're anything but. Lester
Burnham, AMERICAN BEAUTY, (DreamWorks Pictures 1999).
You can't save your face and your ass at the same time. Alcoholics Anonymous Aphorism
[*300]
I.INTRODUCTION
Shame. We all know it in one form or another: tripping over absolutely nothing at the local mall,
emerging from the restroom trailing a white flag of toilet paper, laughing last and loudest in a
room suddenly gone silent, waving happily toward a friend only to realize we are beckoning to a
complete stranger.
These are mild forms of shame - embarrassment if you will. 3 Yet the feeling of sudden
exposure makes us flush red in the face, temporarily lose coherence, and engage in an elaborate
public pantomime in a futile attempt to regain our dignity. We look to see who is watching, pull
the toilet paper quickly from our shoe and stretch our arms as if yawning rather than mistakenly
greeting a stranger. We tell an off-color joke and no one laughs. As a result, we flush red and
our hands become damp. Staring with mortification at the floor, we sheepishly mumble, "My
friends thought it was funny." Any little fig leaf will do. Like Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden,
we find ourselves naked, hear the voice of another and are suddenly afraid.
Because the painful experience of shame is believed to deter anti-social and criminal conduct, it
has long been a staple of our criminal justice system. Its purpose has been to accomplish moral
education about the wrongfulness of the crime and to prevent its occurrence through social and
self-disapproval. 4 The concept of "reintegrative shaming" was first introduced by restorative
justice theoretician John Braithwaite as a means of distinguishing between shame that
stigmatizes criminal offenders (and thus increases crime) from shame that condemns
wrongdoing but forgives and respects the offender, thus hopefully reducing recidivism and
decreasing crime. 5 [*301]
In criminal ADR or "restorative justice" circles, the beneficial effects of "reintegrative" shame are
meant to be accomplished by a "restorative justice conference" or "victim-offender mediation"
[hereinafter "VOMS"]. 6 These VOMs bring together victims and their loved ones; offenders and
their friends and family; and, caring members of the community for the purpose of discussing
the consequences of the crime and what can be done to set it right. 7 Guided by a restorative
justice mediator, the parties are meant to engage in a process of respectful dialogue, resulting in
the expression of accountability, remorse and apology by the offender; and, forgiveness by the
victim leading to the participants' entry into a restitution agreement. 8
Restorative justice theorists and practitioners assert that censuring the offender's criminal
behavior and its deleterious effect on the victim without stigmatizing him will engender empathy
for the victim and accountability in the offender, thus reducing recidivism. 9 Whether
participation in a single VOM can accomplish such far-reaching goals has been the subject of
much debate in restorative justice circles. 10 This paper suggests that a thorough
understanding of the origins and effects of shame by restorative justice theorists and
practitioners - together with shame-reducing VOM practices and post-offender shame-reduction
"recovery" programs - are absolutely necessary if restorative justice is to achieve its
rehabilitative goals.
II. A SHORT PRIMER ON SHAME, GUILT AND MORAL EDUCATION
A. The Origins and Effects of Shame.
The word shame is derived from the Indo-European skem which means "to hide." 11 Shame
makes us want to hide - from ourselves, our God and our peers - making shame an existentially
isolating state of mind. 12 Feeling shame makes [*302] a person "dejection-based, passive, or
helpless," causing the "ashamed person [to focus] more on devaluing or condemning his entire
self" than upon his behavior. 13 He sees himself "as fundamentally flawed, feels self-conscious
about the visibility of his actions, fears scorn, and thus avoids or hides from others." 14
The shamed individual wants "to undo aspects of the self" whereas the guilt-ridden one wishes
to undo aspects of his behavior. 15 It is therefore not surprising that guilt tends to motivate
restitution, confession, and apology, whereas shame tends to result in avoidance or anger. 16
The psycho-biology of the constellation of emotions we call "shame" is innate. 17
It produces a sudden loss of muscle tone in the neck and upper body; increases skin
temperature on the face, frequently resulting in a blush and causes a brief period of
incoordination and apparent disorganization. No matter what behavior is in progress when
shame affect is triggered, it will be made momentarily impossible. Shame interrupts, halts, takes
over, inconveniences, trips up, makes incompetent anything that had previously been interesting
or enjoyable. 18
A state of cognitive shame follows this initial cluster of feelings. 19 After the painful jolt of
shame, we begin to search our "life scripts" for some way to integrate the shameful experience
with our prior experiences, to make sense of the pain and disorientation caused by the sudden
upset of a positive emotional state. 20 [*303]
Because our earliest experiences of helplessness relate to our size, strength and intelligence,
only anger and its explosive cousin, rage, allow us to prove to ourselves and others that we are
powerful instead of weak, competent rather than stupid, large rather than small. 21 Thus do
many shame-suffused individuals respond to chronic shame in an attack mode, particularly those
who feel "endangered" by the depths to which their self-esteem has been reduced. 22 Such
individuals experience shame as a threat to their physical well-being and lack the ability to trust
and rely upon others. 23
Shame thus serves as a barrier to one's capacity to achieve empathy and develop conscience.
B. Guilt, Shame and Moral Development
1. Distinguishing Guilt from Shame
The distinction between guilt and shame in moral development is not a trifling matter of purely
semantic interest. 24 Guilt arouses emotional discomfort in response to our transgressions
against others. 25 By age two, children develop the ability to empathize with the feelings of
another and by age three to evaluate their own conduct against objective behavioral standards.
26 As soon as we are able to experience shame and guilt, we instinctively attempt to regulate
our emotional state by engaging in spontaneous acts of confession and reparation. 27 It is guilt,
therefore, not shame, that discourages us from engaging in wrongdoing. 28 [*304]
The primary differences between guilt and shame in regard to the development of empathic
responsiveness to others and accountability for our own wrongful actions are shown by the
following chart, drawn from the pioneering work of psychologist Helen B. Lewis: 29
[TABLE OMITTED]
[*305]
2. Rebuilding the "Interpersonal Bridge"
Shame not only affects an individual's sense of his own value, it "acts as a powerful modulator of
interpersonal relatedness and . . . ruptures the dynamic attachment bond between individuals."
30 When an individual has broken this bond, he wishes to recapture the relationship as it
existed before it turned problematic. 31 Toddlers shamed by their mothers, for instance,
naturally initiate appeals to repair the momentary break in the emotional bond resulting from the
shame-inducing behavior. 32 This process is called self-righting. 33 It is natural and universal.
34 The shamed toddler reflexively looks up at and reaches toward his mother. 35 Even a
preverbal child will spontaneously express this need to be held in an attempt to reaffirm both
self and the ruptured relationship, to feel restored and secure. 36
A healthy and responsive mother accepts and assuages the child's painful feelings of shame,
enabling the toddler to return to a normal emotional state, one in which love and trust are
ascendant. 37 If the caregiver is "sensitive, responsive, and emotionally approachable," especially
if she uses soothing sounds, gaze and touch, mother and child are "psychobiologically
reattuned," the "interpersonal bridge" is rebuilt, the "attachment bond" is reconnected, and the
experience of shame is regulated to a tolerable emotional state. 38
This series of events between child and care-giver has been termed the "positive socialization of
shame." 39 It permits the infant to "develop an internal representation of himself as effective, of
his interactions as reparable, and of his [*306] caregiver as reliable." 40 If a mother repeatedly
fails to participate in this interactive reparative stage, the child begins to believe that his
emotional needs are unacceptable and shameful. 41 Chronic empathic failure leaves the child
stuck for long periods of time in a state of withdrawal. 42 The effect of post-shame withdrawal
also includes negative cognitive-emotional patterns that color all subsequent subjective
experience. 43 The child concludes that he is helpless and the future hopeless. 44 He comes to
believe that he is deeply flawed and that all of his experiences arise from his deficiencies. 45
Importantly, when shame goes unacknowledged, "it is almost impossible to mend the bond." 46
The natural resulting inclination to hide one's misdeeds "creates further shame, which creates a
further sense of isolation." 47 Thus, while shame in the absence of a consistently repaired
interpersonal bridge creates pathology, repair teaches emotional self-regulation, creates "secure
attachments" and leads to the development of empathy and conscience. 48
Traditions and Practices of Alcoholics Anonymous 1
by Victoria Pynchon
5 Pepp. Disp. Resol. L.J. 299, *
Copyright (c) 2005 Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal
And the eyes of both were opened, and they knew they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves
together and made themselves aprons. . . . And the Lord God called unto Adam, and said unto
him, Where art thou? And he said, I heard thy voice in the garden and I was afraid, because I
was naked and I hid myself. Genesis, 3:7-10 (King James).
There was a guy with something like multiple sclerosis. A perpetual spasm forced him to perch
sideways on his wheelchair and peer down along his nose at his knotted fingers. This condition
had descended on him suddenly. He got no visitors. His wife was divorcing him. He was only
thirty-three, but it was hard to guess what he told about himself because he really couldn't talk
anymore, beyond clamping his lips repeatedly around his protruding tongue while groaning. No
more pretending for him! He was completely and openly a mess. Meanwhile the rest of us go
on trying to fool each other. Denis Johnson, Jesus' Son (1992).
Our marriage is a commercial for how normal we are when we're anything but. Lester
Burnham, AMERICAN BEAUTY, (DreamWorks Pictures 1999).
You can't save your face and your ass at the same time. Alcoholics Anonymous Aphorism
[*300]
I.INTRODUCTION
Shame. We all know it in one form or another: tripping over absolutely nothing at the local mall,
emerging from the restroom trailing a white flag of toilet paper, laughing last and loudest in a
room suddenly gone silent, waving happily toward a friend only to realize we are beckoning to a
complete stranger.
These are mild forms of shame - embarrassment if you will. 3 Yet the feeling of sudden
exposure makes us flush red in the face, temporarily lose coherence, and engage in an elaborate
public pantomime in a futile attempt to regain our dignity. We look to see who is watching, pull
the toilet paper quickly from our shoe and stretch our arms as if yawning rather than mistakenly
greeting a stranger. We tell an off-color joke and no one laughs. As a result, we flush red and
our hands become damp. Staring with mortification at the floor, we sheepishly mumble, "My
friends thought it was funny." Any little fig leaf will do. Like Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden,
we find ourselves naked, hear the voice of another and are suddenly afraid.
Because the painful experience of shame is believed to deter anti-social and criminal conduct, it
has long been a staple of our criminal justice system. Its purpose has been to accomplish moral
education about the wrongfulness of the crime and to prevent its occurrence through social and
self-disapproval. 4 The concept of "reintegrative shaming" was first introduced by restorative
justice theoretician John Braithwaite as a means of distinguishing between shame that
stigmatizes criminal offenders (and thus increases crime) from shame that condemns
wrongdoing but forgives and respects the offender, thus hopefully reducing recidivism and
decreasing crime. 5 [*301]
In criminal ADR or "restorative justice" circles, the beneficial effects of "reintegrative" shame are
meant to be accomplished by a "restorative justice conference" or "victim-offender mediation"
[hereinafter "VOMS"]. 6 These VOMs bring together victims and their loved ones; offenders and
their friends and family; and, caring members of the community for the purpose of discussing
the consequences of the crime and what can be done to set it right. 7 Guided by a restorative
justice mediator, the parties are meant to engage in a process of respectful dialogue, resulting in
the expression of accountability, remorse and apology by the offender; and, forgiveness by the
victim leading to the participants' entry into a restitution agreement. 8
Restorative justice theorists and practitioners assert that censuring the offender's criminal
behavior and its deleterious effect on the victim without stigmatizing him will engender empathy
for the victim and accountability in the offender, thus reducing recidivism. 9 Whether
participation in a single VOM can accomplish such far-reaching goals has been the subject of
much debate in restorative justice circles. 10 This paper suggests that a thorough
understanding of the origins and effects of shame by restorative justice theorists and
practitioners - together with shame-reducing VOM practices and post-offender shame-reduction
"recovery" programs - are absolutely necessary if restorative justice is to achieve its
rehabilitative goals.
II. A SHORT PRIMER ON SHAME, GUILT AND MORAL EDUCATION
A. The Origins and Effects of Shame.
The word shame is derived from the Indo-European skem which means "to hide." 11 Shame
makes us want to hide - from ourselves, our God and our peers - making shame an existentially
isolating state of mind. 12 Feeling shame makes [*302] a person "dejection-based, passive, or
helpless," causing the "ashamed person [to focus] more on devaluing or condemning his entire
self" than upon his behavior. 13 He sees himself "as fundamentally flawed, feels self-conscious
about the visibility of his actions, fears scorn, and thus avoids or hides from others." 14
The shamed individual wants "to undo aspects of the self" whereas the guilt-ridden one wishes
to undo aspects of his behavior. 15 It is therefore not surprising that guilt tends to motivate
restitution, confession, and apology, whereas shame tends to result in avoidance or anger. 16
The psycho-biology of the constellation of emotions we call "shame" is innate. 17
It produces a sudden loss of muscle tone in the neck and upper body; increases skin
temperature on the face, frequently resulting in a blush and causes a brief period of
incoordination and apparent disorganization. No matter what behavior is in progress when
shame affect is triggered, it will be made momentarily impossible. Shame interrupts, halts, takes
over, inconveniences, trips up, makes incompetent anything that had previously been interesting
or enjoyable. 18
A state of cognitive shame follows this initial cluster of feelings. 19 After the painful jolt of
shame, we begin to search our "life scripts" for some way to integrate the shameful experience
with our prior experiences, to make sense of the pain and disorientation caused by the sudden
upset of a positive emotional state. 20 [*303]
Because our earliest experiences of helplessness relate to our size, strength and intelligence,
only anger and its explosive cousin, rage, allow us to prove to ourselves and others that we are
powerful instead of weak, competent rather than stupid, large rather than small. 21 Thus do
many shame-suffused individuals respond to chronic shame in an attack mode, particularly those
who feel "endangered" by the depths to which their self-esteem has been reduced. 22 Such
individuals experience shame as a threat to their physical well-being and lack the ability to trust
and rely upon others. 23
Shame thus serves as a barrier to one's capacity to achieve empathy and develop conscience.
B. Guilt, Shame and Moral Development
1. Distinguishing Guilt from Shame
The distinction between guilt and shame in moral development is not a trifling matter of purely
semantic interest. 24 Guilt arouses emotional discomfort in response to our transgressions
against others. 25 By age two, children develop the ability to empathize with the feelings of
another and by age three to evaluate their own conduct against objective behavioral standards.
26 As soon as we are able to experience shame and guilt, we instinctively attempt to regulate
our emotional state by engaging in spontaneous acts of confession and reparation. 27 It is guilt,
therefore, not shame, that discourages us from engaging in wrongdoing. 28 [*304]
The primary differences between guilt and shame in regard to the development of empathic
responsiveness to others and accountability for our own wrongful actions are shown by the
following chart, drawn from the pioneering work of psychologist Helen B. Lewis: 29
[TABLE OMITTED]
[*305]
2. Rebuilding the "Interpersonal Bridge"
Shame not only affects an individual's sense of his own value, it "acts as a powerful modulator of
interpersonal relatedness and . . . ruptures the dynamic attachment bond between individuals."
30 When an individual has broken this bond, he wishes to recapture the relationship as it
existed before it turned problematic. 31 Toddlers shamed by their mothers, for instance,
naturally initiate appeals to repair the momentary break in the emotional bond resulting from the
shame-inducing behavior. 32 This process is called self-righting. 33 It is natural and universal.
34 The shamed toddler reflexively looks up at and reaches toward his mother. 35 Even a
preverbal child will spontaneously express this need to be held in an attempt to reaffirm both
self and the ruptured relationship, to feel restored and secure. 36
A healthy and responsive mother accepts and assuages the child's painful feelings of shame,
enabling the toddler to return to a normal emotional state, one in which love and trust are
ascendant. 37 If the caregiver is "sensitive, responsive, and emotionally approachable," especially
if she uses soothing sounds, gaze and touch, mother and child are "psychobiologically
reattuned," the "interpersonal bridge" is rebuilt, the "attachment bond" is reconnected, and the
experience of shame is regulated to a tolerable emotional state. 38
This series of events between child and care-giver has been termed the "positive socialization of
shame." 39 It permits the infant to "develop an internal representation of himself as effective, of
his interactions as reparable, and of his [*306] caregiver as reliable." 40 If a mother repeatedly
fails to participate in this interactive reparative stage, the child begins to believe that his
emotional needs are unacceptable and shameful. 41 Chronic empathic failure leaves the child
stuck for long periods of time in a state of withdrawal. 42 The effect of post-shame withdrawal
also includes negative cognitive-emotional patterns that color all subsequent subjective
experience. 43 The child concludes that he is helpless and the future hopeless. 44 He comes to
believe that he is deeply flawed and that all of his experiences arise from his deficiencies. 45
Importantly, when shame goes unacknowledged, "it is almost impossible to mend the bond." 46
The natural resulting inclination to hide one's misdeeds "creates further shame, which creates a
further sense of isolation." 47 Thus, while shame in the absence of a consistently repaired
interpersonal bridge creates pathology, repair teaches emotional self-regulation, creates "secure
attachments" and leads to the development of empathy and conscience. 48
| NEXT PAGE |
