PORTAL             HOME             NEXT          PREVIOUS

The Art of Hands
 

The Shindo Trust recognises that the way we feel about ourselves will have a profound effect of the outcome of a challenging situation. Clearly, those who have generally low levels of confidence and self esteem are poorly equipped to manage challenging situations. We know that people who are confident, relaxed and who move in a comfortable and assured manner seem not to attract violence.
 
It is for this reason that during the introductory parts of a Project 5 course, we look at personal centring principles by way of helping the participant to discover hidden strengths, confidence, and equilibrium.
 
 

The Art of Hands
 

The Shindo Trust has for long, concerned itself with the concept of using the hands as a communicative device, both by way of gesture (visual communication) and touch (tactile communication).  Of course this is not a new idea, however, by generally agreed definition, the term 'non-verbal communication' rarely gives much thought for the process of touch. This may be largely because our society is one of the least socially tactile on Earth.

 

Clearly we are all acutely aware of the role that hands play in non-verbal communication. One only has to look at a carer or support worker trying to calm an angry person to realise that the hands play a vital role in the communicative process.

 

Within the Project 5 system, the palm of the hand is the symbol of tactile communication.  The palm of the hand is representative of the real person, as distinct from one’s public facade (represented by the back of the hand).  When we display the palms and use them to comfort or guide we are revealing our inner selves and putting ourselves on the same level as the other person.  It is a way of 'opening up' and saying, “I am here for you, I want to help.”
 

Researchers have been slow to make the leap in recognising that it is these very same hand gestures that are employed when we intercept the advance of a potentially or actually violent person when he or she invades the tactile zone or when we ourselves are obliged to intervene in a situation.

 
 

The response delay
 

It is recognised that if a person physically attacks you spontaneously when he or she is inside the tactile zone, as measured by the length of an extended limb, you will be unable to defend yourself. This is because the minimum seven tenths of a second speed of response is totally inadequate to intercept such an assault.

 

On analysis the mechanics of peaceful and caring response are relatively simple. A threatened person can create the active hands position by raising them in front of the torso in a natural manner in the form of a communicative gesture. The adoption of this preparatory position enables one to respond in far less time than if the hands and arms were hanging down by the sides of the body.
 
 

Engaging the other person and creating the bridge
 

It is unreasonable to suppose that a person can be in a state of total readiness all the time and even having the hands positioned appropriately is still not enough to cope with spontaneous assault of this nature.

 

We therefore proposed an additional strategy for those times when the tactile zone has been penetrated and one perceives the threat of assault. That is, subject to assessment, to physically 'engage' the other person. We do not mean in a reactive, aversive way or in a way that says "I am frightened of you, I am going to push you away in case you intend to strike me" - rather, we mean in an almost imperceptible, caring, gentle manner. Many people actually do this without even realising it when they are talking to another person. For the most part it is of a transitory nature, a touch on the arm to emphasize a point for example.
 

How this engagement is effected will depend entirely upon the nature of the situation and one's assessment of it. The lightest brush of the back of the hand against the challenging person's hands or arms can be sufficient to enable one to respond successfully in the event of assault. Another way is to raise one's hands and engage those of the other person, more in the nature of a comforting or calming act, while the appropriate verbal response is effected. The act of engaging the other person in physical terms is called 'bridging' or 'creating the bridge,' The bridging process can be by way of simply resting the hands on the other person's hands or arms or gently holding the hands. If the other person initiates an assault the carer is able to feel the intent through a process of kinetic communication in the limb or limbs being engaged. Tactile bridging represents a physical metaphor for spiritual, mental, visual and verbal bridging between two people.
 

The 'bridging' process has become a regular feature of all Project 5 Peaceful Response courses. With minimal training most people can learn how to engage a challenging person who enters the tactile zone, in a calm, low key way and further, to detect the other person's intent immediately he or she initiates a movement. By virtue of this appreciation it is possible to stay with the person's hands or arms and guide them into a safe position without imparting a 'reactive' sense to the situation.

 

It is always important to remember that this process is always subject to assessment, and that tactile communication will be enhanced by the addition of visual and verbal communication too.
 
 

Bridging hands
 

The bridging hand principle becomes important if you are trapped or have, depending upon your assessment, opted to manage the situation rather than withdraw and call for assistance. This especially, when you cannot break out to the back of the assailant's arms because he or she is flailing wildly.
 

The 'bridging hands' principle is part of the guiding and holding process. Both however, are neither specifically guiding or holding by definition but rather a little of one and a little of the other.

 
 

Simple bridging described
 

For those who do not know how the bridging principle works, here is a description of a simple introductory bridging exercise.
 

Two people stand facing each other, close enough that they can each reach out and without leaning forward, touch the other.
 

The first person raises both hands into a natural position in front of the torso.
 

The second person, gently engages the other with soft open hands on the back of the wrists or forearms of the first person.
 

The first person then slowly but deliberately extends his or her hand towards the other's face. This is simulating an attempt to push, grab the hair or strike the other person. The movement should be effected slowly and with an inexorable sense that contact will be made.
 

The second person, rather than push the 'assault' away forcibly as if in a linear power struggle, simply pushes gently in a lateral manner across the front of the body thus directing the advancing hand to the side of the head. The second person does not have to push the advancing hand far away, just sufficiently to clear his or her head (see the foregoing illustrations ‘guiding hands’ and ‘soft enwrapping hands’).
 

The first person then extends his or her other hand while retracting the first. These movements should be effected slowly at first.
 

The second person will maintain contact with the others wrists or arms at all times, and with little practise will discover that little or no force need be used to redirect the advancing hands. It will be quickly realised that there is a distinctly circular sense and feel to this redirecting action. In a short time the first person will be able to make quite vigorous attempts to make contact, all to no avail because the mechanical principles involved in bridging are very sound.
 

 

 This simple exercise also demonstrates how a relatively small person can generate more power than a larger or stronger person. Space does not permit us to describe the use of body movement and the soft curved passive hand position, both of which enhance the whole procedure. The bridging hands principle affords a means of managing many violent situations in very peaceful terms indeed.
 
 

Manner of bridging
 

Bruising of a client's arms is normally the result of finger and thumb tip pressure.  However, in the 'bridging hands' procedure the balls of the fingers and thumbs are not used.  Rather, the entire surface of the palm side of the hands (including fingers and thumbs) are used.  This spreads pressure over a large area, and is more comfortable and responsive, provided of course that, subject to assessment, this strategy can be successfully employed.  In the basic bridging hand position, the thumb is use in unison with the fingers, not as an opposable digit, thus obviating the sense of grasping and introducing a higher sense of re-directional movement.
 
 

Tactile communication or physical intervention?
 

Now here lies the crux of the matter. If one accepts that touch is a valuable part of the communicative process, such as the handshake, and when a relationship has been established, then a comforting or calming pat of the arm or a therapeutic rub of the shoulders, then we are obliged to question what constitutes 'tactile communication' and what constitutes so called 'physical intervention'. It may not be enough to say that 'physical intervention' is any method of responding to a person's behaviour that involves some form of direct physical limitation or restriction of his or her movement or mobility.  The problem perhaps with any definition is that there is a large grey area between the one and the other.
 

Even the strategy of "holding" a person to prevent injury to him/herself or to others becomes riddled with problems especially when viewed from the 'bridging hands' perspective.  The question immediately arises, "Where does tactile communication end and physical intervention begin?"  There can be no hard and fast answer.  The transition between holding in the case of the handshake and holding as in the case of preventing someone from moving is on a continuum with no clear dividing line betwixt one quality and the other. This ultimately becomes a semantic game, hence our reluctance to use the term 'physical intervention' and the desire to use a definition that better describes our philosophy, namely ‘protective intervention’ which embraces not only the process of touch but also the process of visual and verbal communication – for any hands on process should not be effected without verbal communication too.
 
 

Manage or Withdraw?
 

In order to justify our evolving thought processes regarding a continuum of response we were obliged to perceive it first as sharing the two most fundamental options, those of manage and withdraw (the fight or flight response).  Withdraw equates with any strategy that enables a person to separate him or herself from an incident.  These include avoidance before the event and evasion during the event.  A carer has an absolute right to leave a dangerous situation and call for assistance if he or she feels unable to realise a satisfactory outcome.

 
The management aspect equates with dealing with the situation in order to neutralise it, lessen its effects or as a means of protecting oneself or others until withdrawal can become an option.
 
 

The continuum between visual and tactile communication
 

There is a continuum link between the visual and the tactile in the sense that gestures (visual communication) and tactile communication are different merely because of proximity.  It might be argued that visual communication becomes tactile at the moment one person touches the other.

 

Again, this is rather too simplistic.  When a person encroaches upon the intimate aspect of the personal zone of another person, the sense and effect is so remarkably close to tactile communication as to make little or no difference in its effects.  For simplistic example, if we place our palm directly in front of another person's face, even though we have not touched that person, he or she will automatically feel threatened and back off or move the head so as to re-establish the field of vision.
 
 

Tactile communication and physical intervention
 

If we said physical intervention was guiding another person or redirecting another person's force - then we would have to accept that there was a transition between tactile communication and physical intervention.

 

Such a transitional stage does not necessarily imply redirection - again, once learned, the 'bridging hands' principle pulls this into sharp focus.  The bridging hand principle avoids the necessity of getting into a power struggle with the potential or actual assailant.  The more skilled a person is in utilising the 'bridging hands' principle the less 'force' is applied.  Such 'force' if it is evident at all becomes very gentle and yielding.  Bridging hand strategies work very well in conjunction with evasive body movements.  In this way, a violent assault can often be managed not forcefully or reactively, but in very responsive and empathic terms.

 

Next