Initiating MCW’s “Community Conversations” about Race and Racism

From the 8/7/2020 newsletter

Racial Injustice & Inequities Perspective 

Initiating MCW’s “Community Conversations” about Race and Racism 

David J. Cipriano, PhD Co-Chair Elect, MCW Diversity and Inclusion Action Committee 

Dr. Cipriano was on the team that launched MCW’s “Community Conversations.” In this essay, he shares the process of that launch and a bit of what the facilitators and note-takers learned …

In early June, soon after the killing of George Floyd and the unstoppable social movement that ensued to end racial injustice, MCW was preparing to address how these issues were impacting our institution. President Raymond committed himself to leading MCW to become an anti-racist institution. The Office of Diversity and Inclusion (ODI) together with the Diversity and Inclusion Action Committee (DIAC) developed Guiding Principles for combatting racism and also laid the groundwork for groups of individuals to get together to have these difficult conversations. These groups, eventually called “Community Conversations” developed out of a close partnership between Dr. Greer Jordan and ODI, the Kern Institute, DIAC, and the Center for the Advancement of Women in Science and Medicine (AWSM). 

Laying the Groundwork 

A rapid mobilization was required to train facilitators, schedule sessions, publicize the initiative and assemble the groups. Dr. Adina Kalet of the Kern Institute and I worked on developing training materials for the facilitators and began to recruit people for this role. Our team also included M. Paula Phillips from AWSM, Charlie Ann Rykwalder of DIAC, and Marina Thao, events specialist for the College. Within a week, we had 160 people signed up to participate. We had also recruited twenty-seven people, made up of faculty and staff, to be facilitators and note takers. We held two training sessions which turned into more of a time for self-reflection and gut check than skills-building sessions. 

Preparing the Facilitators and Note-Takers 

The purpose of the groups was to answer two key questions. The facilitators grappled with these questions, knowing that we needed to be clear on them before we could facilitate groups of our colleagues in a discussion. 

• The first question was, “What does it mean to be an anti-racist organization?” We shared definitions we had found in our reading and self-education. We grappled with the basics: What is the difference between systemic racism and structural racism? Some of us were unclear on the meaning of the term “anti-racist.” 

• The second question, “Where does structural racism exist at MCW?” led to an array of responses amongst the facilitators. I suppose we reflected the MCW community in general in our reactions: “Nowhere! We’re are an organization made up of well-intentioned people who adhere to laws and rules against discrimination” to “Everywhere! We are not aggressively recruiting and hiring people of color. We are not including black-owned businesses in our vendor lists. Our students of color are still getting poor performance evaluations for such subjective, and therefore open-to-bias issues as ‘attitude.’” Over and over, this humble group of facilitators, the great majority of whom were white, expressed concern over their unpreparedness for this task. 

And, what was to be our function as facilitators, to listen or to teach? Most of us are educators by profession or nature. After much discussion, we made the deliberate decision to listen and not teach. We decided to facilitate and not impose our beliefs or values on the group. After all, the purpose of the groups is to gather information to help our inclusion leaders understand where the enterprise is at on these issues, what the concerns are and what the needs are; all in the service of developing next steps. Dr. Jordan was adamant that the objective was not to change people and not to MAKE people learn anything about race and racism. 

We had to consider the language we were using – are we talking about antiBlack racism or racism that affects all people of color and marginalized groups? We were directed to assume good intentions. Even if we heard something difficult or challenging, people are still learning just like we are. They may be asking an honest question without meaning to hurt anyone. We may hear things that don’t align with our beliefs or with the institution’s goal of becoming an anti-racist organization. Implicit bias is the culprit here – it allows people with good intentions to occasionally operate from automatic, or unconscious stereotypes that they hold. 

What we Experienced and Noticed 

So, at times we bit our tongues. But really, all of our participants appeared to be there with the genuine motivation to listen, learn and figure out ways to contribute. 

 As the sessions occurred, the facilitators and note-takers began sharing their experiences in group emails. These became very valuable to all of us as we realized that this endeavor was having an impact on us as well as on the participants. Some of these emails were long, and were filled with heartfelt reactions, questions, and concerns. I believe we all read each and every one of these emails, judging by the number of responses which ranged from “Thanks for sharing,” to “Me, too!” 

We also shared major themes and questions that emerged: 

• Most participants want to be educated on the issues. 
• Why is it necessary to spend so much time educating white people about racism? 
• Do people in the majority culture stay stuck in intellectualizing and defining these issues? 
• Should one of the objectives simply be to learn to tolerate the discomfort of these conversations? 

We wondered why there were separate groups for African Americans to share their feelings. We lamented the fact that there was little diversity in our groups. Some felt that whites need to hear from Blacks about their experiences so that they can learn in a truly impactful way. Others thought that it is not the job of Black people to teach white people about racism. “They can learn about it themselves,” and, “they can consider their own race and all the baggage that it comes with.” These steps take self-reflection, and maybe that is what these groups will trigger. 

We really meant it when we told our participants that we were learning right along with them. We are all on our own journey of confronting our privilege in this unfair and biased system. We came away feeling troubled, nervous, and exalted – all at the same time. 

Next Steps 

When it came time to deal with the fact that over 200 more people from MCW had put themselves on a waiting list for our Community Conversations, every one of our facilitators and note-takers signed up to go another round. We are currently finishing up and waiting for next steps from the institution. We are eager to continue to learn and grow. 

David J. Cipriano, MS PhD is an Associate Professor in the MCW Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Medicine, the Director of Student and Resident Behavioral Health, and the Co-Chair Elect, Diversity and Inclusion Action Committee. He is a Faculty Member of the Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Institute for the Transformation of Medical Education.