Survivor engagement: Experience with an advocacy-based model in Washington, D.C.

INTRODUCTION: As an IRCT member organization supporting survivors of torture, the Torture Abolition and Survivor Support Coalition (TASSC) International places survivor engagement at the core of their work, aiming to provide safe and inclusive spaces for survivors to speak out and take meaningful action to prevent torture. This article describes TASSC's model for engaging survivors in advocacy and presents evidence on the personal impacts such engagement can have. METHOD: Each year from 2016-2019, TASSC administered a simple survey with questions for survivors to complete after their annual "Advocacy Day" in Washington D.C. Quantitative and qualitative data was collected to inform internal service provision and the design of future events. RESULTS: Across the four years a total of 140 survivors and compatriot human rights advocates participated in the annual Advocacy Day, and a majority completed the surveys. In their survey responses, survivors agreed they had many positive thoughts and feelings after advocacy. Their reported positive experiences included a sense of being listened to and heard by an understanding and responsive audience, the power of feeling part of a group that was speaking out on behalf of themselves and others, and a sense of motivation and hopefulness for the future. DISCUSSION: Although undertaken primarily to inform internal processes, TASSC's surveys with survivors who engaged in advocacy shed light on the potential value of well-designed advocacy experiences. Consistent with past research, survivors reported strong motivations around and compelling benefits from participating, despite the challenges that the deeply personal nature of their engagement could present. This feedback suggests TASSC has a strong model that could be replicated elsewhere, but it would be beneficial to further investigate the experiences of survivors engaging in advocacy in other country settings.

Torture survivors who engage in advocacy in the U.S.: Review, characteristics and policy implications.

INTRODUCTION: Despite facing many challenges, some survivors of torture seeking asylum in the U.S. have courageously engaged in advocacy efforts to bring attention to human rights issues relevant to their own personal experiences. This study sought to add to our understanding of the characteristics of survivors who engage in advocacy in comparison with those who do not. METHOD: We analyzed demographic, social, and psychological quantitative data collected from survivors (n=730) connected to a support agency that regularly facilitates advocacy events using between-groups t-tests and regression analyses. Based on theory, clinical insights, and past research around survivor advocacy we predicted that participation in advocacy would be associated with and predicted by factors indicating lower levels of trauma-related symptoms and higher social power and stability. RESULTS: We found no significant difference in clinical symptoms or most demographic or social characteristics between advocacy participants (n=75) and non-participants. However, advocacy participants had spent significantly more time in the U.S. and were less likely to have had employment authorization at time of service intake, and were more likely to be male, compared to non-participants. Without controlling for other demographic factors, higher spirituality and not having been detained at entry to the U.S. also predicted advocacy participation. DISCUSSION: Our findings suggest that, despite some patterns of difference indicating greater stability and access to power (e.g., being male, having more time in the U.S., more daytime availability, a strong sense of spirituality, and less experience of detention in the U.S.), survivor-advocates are diverse and not consistently differentiated from non-advocates by specific characteristics. Thus, we find no evidence to support using psychological or demographic indicators as a "screening" criterion for selecting advocacy candidates. We contend that it is important to adopt a gender-inclusive approach in providing wider opportunities that help more survivors overcome potential (racial, socio-economic, mental health, etc.) barriers to engagement, and to pay close attention to who is being left out of advocacy opportunities.