Statement from Jo Anne Brown
on the proposed
Confederation of UK Support Groups
is not disputed that a similar idea for an umbrella organisation
for support groups emerged at the same time last year.
The Support Group Network was put into being more than
8 months ago and now has 20 groups in 8 countries as members.
All members have the freedom to bring any ideas to the
Network and have all opportunities to get as involved as
they wish in areas that are of interest to them. Regrettably,
the offer to join the Network has been rejected by DAWN.
creating a second organisation with similar goals could
dilute the collective voice of targets, especially in the
UK, and effectively remove the raison d'etre. Although
a steering group is under consideration to be set up to
discuss any such aims and objectives that a Confederation
may have, there could be few potential differences between
what a second organisation could offer over and above the
Networks published aims, except for the stated DAWN directive
that it would include UK groups only.
am personally disappointed about what appears to be the ‘politicisation’ of
fighting the good fight and feel that targets of bullying
should be supported and represented with a united and inclusive
front in order to be effective. Discussions to find a mutual
resolution between the two have so far been unproductive,
in fact plans to create a Confederation appear fixed regardless,
and so making my attendance at any meeting irrelevant.
Furthermore, the London Support Group is not in any position
to resource any effort in a Confederation, unless a clear
case of added benefit over and above the Network could
be established, of which the LSG is a member.
such a clear determination to forge ahead with a second
organisation, the following key questions need to be answered
at the meeting on the 24th April 2004, if the Confederation
is to be understood by support groups and targets in the
do the supporters of a Confederation feel there is a
need to create a second organisation when the umbrella
of the Network is already in existence?
the Confederation is to be different from the Network,
why is dual membership not being considered by DAWN?
it is suggested by its supporters that the Confederation
is to be the same or similar to the Network, why is there
a need for this second organisation?
to the UK, the Network has 70% of known support groups
as members. If a second organisation is created, who
will it claim to speak on behalf of? Furthermore, can
you make an assurance that it will speak on behalf of
all targets? How will the confederation represent UK
support groups if a large majority of support groups
choose not to, or are not able to, duplicate the effort
and resources needed to be members of both? And if groups
don't join both, how can it truly be a 'Confederation'
of UK support groups?
than set up a second organisation, would it be more appropriate
for a focus group specific to UK campaigning be set up
within the Network, so that all support groups may be
involved in the most resource efficient way? Are there
specific reasons why the supporters of a confederation
feel they could not work from within the Network effectively
to the same ends?
statement was issued on 21st April 2004 to the management
committee of DAWN, all internet forums where UK targets
may be members, members of the Support Group Network and
the London Support Group. It is hoped that by issuing this
statement in advance of the meeting, a constructive discussion
will produce an outcome that will benefit all targets of
workplace bullying and their support groups.
response to this statement will be published here.
of 29/7/04 there is no published outcome of the meeting,
any direct response to the issues raised in this