Tools For Change Critical Reflection
In the chapter “Suffering and Structural Violence” by Paul Farmer, Farmer addresses the importance of recognizing the systemic and structural issues that cause suffering. He does this by pointing out
“While certain kinds of suffering are readily observable..structural violence all too often defeats those who would describe it” (31).
He emphasizes the importance of researching the greater meaning or causes behind these systemic and structural issues in order to find the actual cause of this suffering. He states that most people who try to understand human suffering rarely every address its root causes such as structural issues which causes them to fail to find the root cause of suffering.
“But the experience of suffering is not effectively conveyed by statistics or graphs. In fact, the suffering of the worlds intrudes only rarely into the consciousness of the affluent, even when our affluence may be shown to have a direct relation to their suffering. This is true even when spectacular human rights violations are at issue, and it is even more true when the topic at hand is the everyday violation of social and economic rights” (31).
The structural issues that I identified in my community context worksheet was the difference in access to a quality education among white and latino families living in Marin County. Farmers view on structural issues and suffering do correlate greatly when it comes to the differences between whites and latinos education levels throughout Marin county. The latino students do not have lower education levels due to the fact that they are latino, but because they do not have access to the same resources as the white students do and this is because of the difference in poverty rates between the two students families. All of the families that I work with at my community service partner come from latino families living is a low income area of Marin county. This means that all of the students that I work with do not have access to the same resources compared to the upper class white students living in Marin county which accounts for 80% of the countys population. Farmer states that
“Today, the world’s poor are the chief victims of structural violence- a violence that has thus far defined the analysis of many who seek to understand the nature and distribution of extreme suffering” (50).
Acéphie and ChouChou’s stories serve to illustrate structural injustice and violence by demonstrating Farmers theory that the suffering of both of these people is related to a much deeper reason than race, gender, or age. Farmer demonstrates this by saying that
“Clearly, no single axis can fully define increased risk for human suffering. Efforts to attribute explanatory efficacy to one variable lead to immodest claims of causality, for wealth and power have often protected individual women, gays, and economic minorities from the suffering and adverse outcomes associated with assaults on dignity” (49).
Each person’s suffering was real and caused by different reasons. It was not only caused by their genders, but also because of their poverty level and location. He chose to tell stories instead of relating all of his information as data so that the reader can realize that these kinds on events and injustices are happening everyday. In Acéphie’s story, in order to get her and her family out of a life of poverty, she had to suffer by sleeping with a married man of power and wealth who was in the military. Her suffering did not end their though, because she later contracted AIDS from him and died a slow painful death because of it all while trying to raise her newborn child. Acéphie’s story serves as a good example of suffering amongst the poor because it demonstrates Acéphie’s desperate need to provide for her family and get out of a life of poverty. She had to do something that she did not want to do, which caused her to suffer, in order to provide for herself and her family. At my community service partner, most of the children there have parents who are undocumented. They live in constant fear that their parents will be deported and that they will be face with the choice of staying in this country by themselves or moving back to a country that they’ve never even been to. A white child from Marin county would never have to suffer living in fear that something like this may happen because they know it never will. Farmer states that
“Any distinguishing characteristic, whether social or biological, can serve as a pretext for discrimination and thus as a cause of suffering. Refugee or immigrant status is one that readily comes to mind, when thinking of the poor and powerless.”
It is important for you as a reader to “bear witness” to stories like these so that you can truly grasp the reality and realness of it all. Stories like the one Farmer told can be disturbing and unimaginable to some, but it is important to be told about them for you to truly understand suffering and its correlation to structural injustices. To most, the stories of Acéphie and ChouChou are unimaginable, but events like that happen everyday around the world.
In “Accompaniment as Policy” Farmer explains
“ To accompany someone is to go somewhere with him or her, to break bread together, to be present on a journey with a beginning and an end. . . .There’s an element of mystery, of openness, in accompaniment: I’ll go with you and support you on your journey wherever it leads” (1)
This concept of accompaniment serves as an explanation for the roles and relationships between the students and my community service partner and me. As the tutor, it is my responsibility to support my student and help them throughout school. My role does not stop there though, as it must extend to any help the student may need such as personal help as well. In order to break the endless correlation between suffering and social injustices, it is important to support those experiencing these social injustices in every aspect and not just where they obviously need help. Help can not be given for one single aspect, but in all possible contributions possible. Farmer emphasizes this by stating
“Clearly, no single axis can fully define increased risk for human suffering. Efforts to attribute explanatory efficacy to one variable lead to immodest claims of causality, for wealth and power have often protected individual women, gays, and economic minorities from the suffering and adverse outcomes associated with assaults on dignity” (49).
