Group
Yesterday, today and tomorrow I'll be at a training on risk assessment and harm reduction. So far it's more of a refresher, which is fine. What's not so fine are the other participants. Not all, but most of them are immature and ignorant as hell. I'd honestly thought that most people working in social services were done equating anal sex with homosexuality and homosexuality with HIV/AIDS. At the very least I thought that the field made it such that if you believed that you recognized that it was viewed as ignorant and uninformed and felt some level of shame about expressing it in public.
Clearly I was wrong.
This does remind me. I'm been meaning to make an entry on the personalities that I see emerge in pretty much every group, whether I'm a participant or a facilitator. Some are ok, others, not so much.
The know-it-all
This person (who in my experience is always a man, ALWAYS) thinks their job is co-facilitator. They are answering questions before the facilitator can answer (at least half the time they are wrong, too). They are monopolizing the conversation with their pseudo-intellectual bullshit. They are giving usually ill-informed "advice." They are just obnoxious as shit and think they know more than they do and want to share the ignorance.
The unintentional heckler
I'm still trying to learn how to navigate the UH. IME they speak to the facilitator as if they are having a one-on-one conversation with them. So they are doing minor cut-offs and interruptions. Basically they do that Active Listening stuff we tend to do in conversations "uh huh," "really?!," "no way!," "you don't say?!" and other general... noise. Like they don't seem to fully get that group dynamic is not the same as one-on-one conversations. They really have the best intentions and can be good participants: attentive, engaged, volunteer. But honestly the shit irks me to no end. lol I have a major UH in the current cycle I'm running. And my clients tend to over correct. So I fear if I explain to her that while I want her to participate I'd like her to stop that specific speech she'll shut down entirely. I plan to address the group as a whole about stuff related to group dynamic next week. Hopefully I'll find the words to make it ok and keep her engaged.
"This bores me"
This person was forced to attend the training/group. Perhaps by a supervisor. Maybe they were dragged by a friend. In any case, they are not there of their own accord. So everything the facilitator does is "boring" to them. I truly cannot stand people who do that heavy exasperated sigh. Cannot stand it. Partially cause wtf that's rude. And as someone who facilitates group myself I am keenly aware of how other participants are. Also the sighing is usually an attempt to collude others into expressing their boredom as well. And even if I am bored I'm still much more mad at how rude the person is than how boring the facilitator is. Keep that shit to yourself.
101 questions
This person is new to the field and asks a bajillion questions. That in and of itself is fine. But they tend to ask specific, off-topic (or only tangentially related), confidentially breaching (calling clients by full names and giving detailed info) questions. Save that shit for the break and ask the facilitator one-on-one. And leave out names. Damn.
Jokester
Self-explanatory. There's always a class clown, right? Usually also the "bored" one trynna make things lively.
The CASAC
So there's a certification in NYC called the Credential in Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Counseling . Pretty much every person in recovery that wants to enter the field gets that because it is specific, in decent enough demand and a good stepping stone. There are specific trainings they need for it and a certain amount of "hours" that some trainings can count for. So every training I attend has a lot of CASAC-ts (those in training to become CASACs). IME they tend to filter everything through the lens of substance abuse/use. Now maybe that's because they are addicts [to be clear not all CASACs are addicts, but all except maybe 1 I know is], maybe it's because of how they enter the field. Maybe it's something else I'm missing. In any case, no matter what we are talking about the training gets related back to substance us. Usually whichever substance they are in recovery from.
Clearly I was wrong.
This does remind me. I'm been meaning to make an entry on the personalities that I see emerge in pretty much every group, whether I'm a participant or a facilitator. Some are ok, others, not so much.
The know-it-all
This person (who in my experience is always a man, ALWAYS) thinks their job is co-facilitator. They are answering questions before the facilitator can answer (at least half the time they are wrong, too). They are monopolizing the conversation with their pseudo-intellectual bullshit. They are giving usually ill-informed "advice." They are just obnoxious as shit and think they know more than they do and want to share the ignorance.
The unintentional heckler
I'm still trying to learn how to navigate the UH. IME they speak to the facilitator as if they are having a one-on-one conversation with them. So they are doing minor cut-offs and interruptions. Basically they do that Active Listening stuff we tend to do in conversations "uh huh," "really?!," "no way!," "you don't say?!" and other general... noise. Like they don't seem to fully get that group dynamic is not the same as one-on-one conversations. They really have the best intentions and can be good participants: attentive, engaged, volunteer. But honestly the shit irks me to no end. lol I have a major UH in the current cycle I'm running. And my clients tend to over correct. So I fear if I explain to her that while I want her to participate I'd like her to stop that specific speech she'll shut down entirely. I plan to address the group as a whole about stuff related to group dynamic next week. Hopefully I'll find the words to make it ok and keep her engaged.
"This bores me"
This person was forced to attend the training/group. Perhaps by a supervisor. Maybe they were dragged by a friend. In any case, they are not there of their own accord. So everything the facilitator does is "boring" to them. I truly cannot stand people who do that heavy exasperated sigh. Cannot stand it. Partially cause wtf that's rude. And as someone who facilitates group myself I am keenly aware of how other participants are. Also the sighing is usually an attempt to collude others into expressing their boredom as well. And even if I am bored I'm still much more mad at how rude the person is than how boring the facilitator is. Keep that shit to yourself.
101 questions
This person is new to the field and asks a bajillion questions. That in and of itself is fine. But they tend to ask specific, off-topic (or only tangentially related), confidentially breaching (calling clients by full names and giving detailed info) questions. Save that shit for the break and ask the facilitator one-on-one. And leave out names. Damn.
Jokester
Self-explanatory. There's always a class clown, right? Usually also the "bored" one trynna make things lively.
The CASAC
So there's a certification in NYC called the Credential in Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Counseling . Pretty much every person in recovery that wants to enter the field gets that because it is specific, in decent enough demand and a good stepping stone. There are specific trainings they need for it and a certain amount of "hours" that some trainings can count for. So every training I attend has a lot of CASAC-ts (those in training to become CASACs). IME they tend to filter everything through the lens of substance abuse/use. Now maybe that's because they are addicts [to be clear not all CASACs are addicts, but all except maybe 1 I know is], maybe it's because of how they enter the field. Maybe it's something else I'm missing. In any case, no matter what we are talking about the training gets related back to substance us. Usually whichever substance they are in recovery from.