Could Brāv have helped the Alleged Easter Shooter Steve Stephens?

In a Facebook post called the “Easter day slaughter,” alleged murderer, Steve Stephens, claims to have killed 12 people and that he “won’t stop” until his mother and another woman call him. Brav-Logo

He posted a Facebook Live feed where he appeared to be chatting with another expressing how everyone ignored him and dismissed him, despite having a “lot of built in anger and frustration.”

The ability to express your concerns with others with a dedicated third party whose sole goal is to remain neutral and help you reach a solution that assists everyone’s needs sounds exactly like what could have benefited Stephens.

Choose to be Brāv

Copyright (c) Brāv

Have your Conflicts Managed with Albert Square Mediation!

Albert Square Mediation

Albert Square Mediation Limited (ASM) is one of the many joining us to provide online conflict management here at Brāv. ASM provides a unique range of high quality, cost-effective and time-saving services and their experts work on the basis that no problem is too big or too small have considerable experience of dispute resolution.

Services include:

 

Brav-Logo

VAtechjustice

Join the Veterans Affairs & Brāv 3/11 at Hilton Chicago!

“It’s one thing to have to go fight for your country; it’s another to have to come home and fight your country.”Brav-Logo
On March 11-17 we’ll be hosting a hackathon (both virtual and on-site) to create solutions for veterans and those who support them. We’re calling all techies, legal experts, activists, veterans, and those who want to do their part to join us.
(Teams can also compete for $10,000 in prizes!)

For more, click here.

60% – 80% of Family Law Litigants are Self-Represented.

“It is now estimated that about 60% – 80% of family law litigants are self-represented. Many of these families cannot afford representationBrav-Logo. The
court system can be a difficult, lengthy and unpredictable process. It often increases the intensity of conflict between family members, leaving them financially and emotionally exhausted. For low income families, access to justice is even more challenging.”  – FMR Centre

Victims Hope for not only Punishment for Aggressors…but for them to Change

A series of experiments conducted by researchers affiliated with Princeton University has revealed that punishment is only satisfying to victims if the offenders change their attitude as a result of the punishment.

Friederike Funk, a Princeton psychology graduate student and one of the researchers stated that, “revenge is only ‘sweet’ if the person reacts with a change in attitude, if the person understands that what they did was wrong. It is not the act itself that makes punishment satisfying. Brav-Logo

The findings offer insights into a wide range of situations—from casual encounters to the sentencing of a criminal. And the research advances efforts in psychology and philosophy to understand the social motives of punishment and the communicative aspects of punishment.

The research was highlighted in an article titled “Get the Message: Punishment Is Satisfying if the Transgressor Responds to Its Communicative Intent,” which was published online this month by the journal Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. The authors are Funk; Victoria McGeer, a research scholar at Princeton’s University Center for Human Values and a fellow in philosophy at Australian National University; and Mario Gollwitzer, a professor of methodology and social psychology at Philipps-University Marburg in Germany who was a visiting professor at Princeton in 2012.

In one of the experiments, participants recruited from among Princeton undergraduates were matched with what they were told was a human partner to solve a series of anagrams. The participants were asked to individually solve as many anagrams as they could in two minutes. For each, they would be paid 10 cents.

The participant’s partner—actually a computer programmed to complete the exercise—always solved one fewer anagram than the participant. But when asked how the pair should split their earnings, the computer partner always wanted to keep the entire payment for itself. The human participants generally recommended roughly an even split. The final averaged payment was therefore always unfair.

Most participants were then given the chance to punish their partner for their selfish act by reducing the partner’s earnings. The participants who decided to do so then received one of three reactions:

  • no feedback;
  • a message from their computer partner acknowledging the punishment, reading “Hey, you reduced my bonus! OK—I was greedy … but I don’t see what was wrong with that … In situations like this I always try to get as much as I can”; or
  • a message both acknowledging the punishment and a change in moral attitude, reading “Hey you reduced my bonus! OK—I was greedy … and now see what’s wrong with that … I shouldn’t be such a jerk in situations like this!”

“We found that punishment was only satisfying if the transgressor changed his attitude as a result of punishment. In addition, only if such a change occurred, participants would agree that everybody got what they deserve,” Funk said. “It doesn’t make a difference if you punish and there is no feedback or if you punish and the transgressor clearly recognizes he is punished but doesn’t change. Both are equally as unsatisfying as if people didn’t have the possibility to punish in the first place.”

The research represents the first part of Funk’s work for her dissertation, which focuses on why people have the desire to punish and what they hope to achieve through punishment. Among the questions still to be answered: When is change perceived to be authentic?

While the research focused on a minor social transgression—unfairly splitting a nominal sum of money—it has implications for more serious situations.

The research highlights the need for changes in the criminal-justice system, because punishment often doesn’t bring about the moral change victims seek in offenders, said Tyler Okimoto, a senior lecturer in management in the business school at the University of Queensland in Australia whose research topics include conflict management and justice restoration.

“Reconciling the discrepancies in what people seek to achieve through punishment and what our sanctioning practices actually achieve is critical to improving the legitimacy of our justice system,” said Okimoto, who wasn’t involved in the research. “This research should raise red flags for legal policymakers. These findings suggest our sanctioning practices might be adapted to better suit the concerns of the public.”

More information: psp.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/04/30/0146167214533130.abstract 

Why You Should Support Brāv

WHY NOT????????????????????????

 

 

Just kidding. From chatting with various people, many agree that they wish they had this resource while growing up. Having those who understand your plight to help manage your daily problems sounds quite helpful…Brav-Logo

 

So that’s why you should support us.

 

Besides,

 

Why not?