Best Practices for Ethical Recording of Lived Experience Experts

Applying the 6 Pillars of the Survivor Equity and Inclusion Framework

Author: Dr. Shobana Powell, DSW, LCSW; Editor: Cristian Eduardo, Survivor Leader & Human Trafficking Consultant

In the field of gender-based violence and human trafficking, organizations and service providers often ask survivors and lived experience experts, “Can we record this training/interview/speech so we can share it later with others?” However, they often fail to consider the safety risks and intellectual property rights that come with recording survivors’ work. This results in re-exploitation of lived experience experts, with their recordings being utilized without trauma-informed safety planning and equitable compensation.

It is not that recording in and of itself is harmful, but rather that recording must be done ethically, from a trauma-informed, healing centered, economic justice, and anti-oppressive lens. Ethical recording focuses on power dynamics, safety planning, and intellectual property rights.

Unethical recording takes from survivors; ethical recording partners with them.

Harms of Unethical Recording

Unethical recording can result in long-term emotional, financial, and sometimes physical harm. Safety risks not only include the potential of recordings being viewed by those who have caused harm to survivors, but also long-term impacts with respect to court cases, immigration status, custody, education, and employment. Survivors also have to consider if it feels safe and comfortable for their loved ones and/or community to potentially see their recorded work.

Recording can also be especially triggering for those whose lived experience intersects with child sexual abuse material (CSAM), cybersexual abuse, or online exploitation, or for those in which their exploitation included photography, video recording and illegal distribution of sexual/intimate material. Without thoughtful planning, recording can be re-exploitive and re-traumatizing for survivors. With ethical structures in place, it can be equitable and for some survivors, it may even be healing.

The SEI Framework

The Survivor Equity and Inclusion Framework is a set of national best practices developed for how organizations can replace lived experience expert re-exploitation with Survivor Equity and Inclusion (Powell, 2021). The SEI Framework can be utilized to address ethical best practices for recording audio and/or visual materials.

The SEI Framework is about breaking the status quo that lived experience is about sharing the details of one’s trauma; it is about recognizing the expertise that people with lived experience bring to the table. It centers the prevention of the re-exploitation of people with lived experience, the prevention of vicarious trauma, the fostering of vicarious resilience, and the creation of a healthy, sustainable work environment for individuals who are historically marginalized and oppressed.

Best Practices for Ethical Recording

The six (6) pillars of the Survivor Equity and Inclusion Framework can serve as a guide for what to consider with respect to ethical recording: 1) preparation, 2) compensation, 3) safety planning, 4) support, 5) respecting expertise and 6) sharing power.

1. Preparation: Lived experience experts should be informed in advance of any potential recording so they can allow adequate time to assess if they feel safe and comfortable with recording and if so, to prepare for the project with recording in mind.

Informed consent means that the organization shares as much information as possible before recording, including but limited to: the method of recording, the platform being utilized, whether the recording will be audio and/or visual, who can access the recording and for how long, where the recording will be housed and for how long, if/how edits can be made before and/or after making the video accessible to the public, and if/how the video can be removed if needed.

It is essential to consider power dynamics with all aspects of partnering with lived experience experts, including recording. It is recommended that organizations do not ask current clients to share their stories, due to the power differential between a current service provider and a client.

2. Compensation: Recording is an intellectual property rights issue, as it is often a method for organizations to be able to utilize survivor and/or service provider voices without compensation. Many organizational leaders have stated that they record survivors in order to not have to pay them again (personal communication, 2023). However, organizations must also recognize the harm and economic injustice embedded in recording survivors without equitable compensation. Lived experience experts often make a living from training and technical assistance and recording their work means they will not be compensated for offering that content in the future.

Although funding may be limited, taking from survivors cannot be the solution. Instead, organizations should consider equitable compensation including, but not limited to: compensating survivors for ongoing live trainings, royalties for recorded materials based on number of views, compensation based on how long the materials will be available online. Ultimately, organizations should compensate survivors with their intellectual property rights in mind. Financial freedom and economic justice should start within our organizations. We should be setting the standard we wish to see for survivors.

3. Safety Planning: Thoughtful safety planning must consider short and long-term impact, especially with respect to both internal triggering and external exposure. Because many survivors have experienced exploitation through video, recording can be triggering and potentially retraumatizing.

In addition to the risk of triggering, there is also the risk of external exposure, meaning the safety concerns related to potential viewing by others, such as individuals who have caused harm, employers, colleagues, teachers, peers, community members, loved ones, and more. Recordings can potentially disclose someone’s lived experience as well as other personal information such as location, medical concerns, mental health needs, immigration status, sexuality, gender identity, or gender expression- all of which can result in psychological and/or physical safety concerns. Recording poses additional external exposure risk compared to non-recorded materials, as there is less control over who may view the materials and how long they will be available.

Due to digital permanency, there is also a risk of use and/or misuse of recordings. For example, years after recording a video, a survivor may see clips from that video being played at a conference, training, fundraiser, etc. without their informed consent. Such potential uses or misuses of recordings should be considered in safety planning.

Safety planning should also include developing a process for the removal of materials in case of an emergency. Both parties, the lived experience expert and the organization, can decide under which circumstances materials must be removed. If removal is not possible or there are limitations to what can be removed, this should also be discussed in advance.

Before using any recorded materials that includes testimony, pictures, voices, or video of people with lived experience, contact the individual to ask for permission. When asking permission, consider power dynamics in the relationship as well as compensation (see above). If you are unable to make contact with the individual, consider whether it is ethical to move forward.

In order to protect all parties, provide clear expectations and limitations, and address these intersections of safety considerations and intellectual property rights, trauma-informed contracts should be co-created with compensated lived experience experts.

It is important to also note that trauma-informed safety planning means each plan is individualized with the survivor centered as the expert on their own safety. For example, a policy such as offering to blur faces or distort voices does not suffice as adequate safety planning, as those options may not be safe for every survivor.

4. Support: As recording may be triggering, trauma-informed supports should be in place to check in with the lived experience expert before, during, and after the recording. This includes ongoing check-ins if the video is being utilized long term. Support also includes ongoing communication, such as communicating if there are any changes or if the materials are being shared on a new platform or newsletter.

The support structure should be co-created with the lived experience expert in order to design a process that feels safe and comfortable for them.

5 & 6. Respecting Expertise & Sharing Power: Respecting survivor expertise means their input is valued in the process of designing each project, including if and how recording may be involved. It also means valuing survivors beyond the details of their trauma story and instead for the ideas and skills they bring as a human being and colleague. Sharing decision-making power with survivors means survivors co-create the methods and means of recording.

What this looks like in practicality is that organizations work with lived experience experts on each project to determine whether recording is necessary- and they compensate those experts for their time. If it is determined that recording is necessary for that project, the organization should then consider additional time and compensation for the preparation and production of the audiovisual materials as well as the usage of the materials.

Recommendations

Ethical recording requires thoughtful planning and collaboration with lived experience experts. It also requires creativity and flexibility that centers what is safest for those involved. Remember:

• Do not assume that all people with lived experience are comfortable with recording audio and/or visual material
• Budget for equitable compensation: For example, consider that a one-time in-person or virtual training that is not recorded is not the same as recording and reusing that training multiple times.
• It is okay to say no: For consultants and people with lived experience, it is ok to say no. If an organization does not value and prioritize your safety and intellectual property concerns, they do not deserve your time and expertise.

Resources

• Finding Lived Experience Experts: We recommend that you partner with lived experience experts as you design your next project that may (or may not) involve recording. If you are seeking a lived experience expert, check out The Network for a list of international independent consultants.
• Protecting Intellectual Property: For lived experience experts looking to protect their intellectual property, check out MiCreate, a network for entrepreneurs who have experienced human trafficking to connect to free legal services, business and financial mentorship, and a survivor community.
• Accessing Economic Empowerment Support: For lived experience experts looking for support in their entrepreneurship journey, check out You Are More Than Inc, a survivor-led nonprofit that directly invests in BIPOC and LGBTQIA survivor-led small businesses.