The Advocates’ Burden

The Advocates’ Burden: Bias, Emotion, and the Shadow of Vicarious Trauma

Advocacy for scam victims is noble and necessary, yet it is never neutral. Every advocate arrives with a personal history, formed by experiences of loss, betrayal, or trauma. These histories shape how they see victims, how they interpret recovery, and how they provide support. To understand advocacy fully, one must acknowledge that the work is never performed in a vacuum. It is always influenced by the inner life of the advocate, who brings biases, emotions, and unresolved wounds into the process.

The Influence of Personal Bias

Bias is unavoidable. It may come from an advocate’s upbringing, cultural background, or past relationships. Advocates may carry strong ideas about trust, responsibility, or resilience that color their approach to those in pain. Some may believe that victims should “move on” quickly because that is how they themselves coped with adversity. Others may emphasize justice and accountability because of their own encounters with injustice. These biases are not always harmful, but if left unexamined, they can distort how support is offered.

Victims are highly sensitive to judgment, and bias can easily slip into language. A phrase as simple as “you should have known” may reinforce shame, even if unintentional. Advocates who recognize their own biases can learn to adjust, ensuring that their personal views do not eclipse the needs of the victim. This process takes deliberate self-awareness, ongoing education, and often, uncomfortable honesty about one’s own assumptions.

Harmful Biases in Advocacy

• Blame Bias — The tendency to hold victims responsible for their own exploitation, even subtly. This reinforces shame and prevents them from seeking help. It arises from the false belief that awareness or intelligence alone could have prevented the scam.
• Rescue Bias — The impulse to “save” victims by imposing solutions rather than guiding them. While rooted in good intentions, it strips victims of agency and keeps them dependent on the advocate instead of building resilience.
• Projection Bias — Assuming that victims should recover in the same way or at the same pace as the advocate did. This ignores the individuality of trauma responses and risks invalidating the victim’s unique experience.
• Minimization Bias — Downplaying the severity of the victim’s suffering in order to make the situation seem more manageable. This prevents proper acknowledgment of pain, leaving victims feeling misunderstood and isolated.
• Over-Identification Bias — Merging too closely with the victim’s story, which blurs boundaries. This can lead to emotional exhaustion for the advocate and confusion for the victim about whose pain is being addressed.
• Confirmation Bias — Filtering the victim’s story through preconceived beliefs, such as assuming all scams follow identical patterns. This reduces openness to nuance and can cause advocates to miss important details.
• Cultural Bias — Imposing one’s own cultural values and assumptions on victims, especially regarding family roles, shame, or responsibility. This distorts understanding and risks alienating the very people who need support.
• Outcome Bias — Judging the quality of a victim’s decisions solely by the negative result. This overlooks the manipulative context of scams and deepens the sense of failure that victims already carry.
• Positivity Bias — Pushing victims toward premature optimism in order to avoid their pain. This denies the depth of trauma and blocks the grieving process required for real healing.
• Stigma Bias — Viewing scam victimization as a sign of weakness or gullibility. This bias fuels silence and prevents honest dialogue, both for victims and for advocates who may unconsciously adopt these societal judgments.

These biases matter because they shape every interaction between advocate and victim. Left unrecognized, they harm trust, reinforce trauma, and undermine recovery. Addressing them requires deliberate reflection, ongoing education, and open accountability among advocacy communities.

The Weight of Personal Emotion

Emotions are equally influential. Advocates are not immune to the sadness, anger, and frustration that come from witnessing harm. Many have lived through their own losses and betrayals, which means that supporting others often stirs painful memories. At times, these emotions create empathy and connection. At other times, they risk overwhelming the advocate, leaving them reactive instead of steady.

Anger at scammers is common. Advocates may project this anger outward in ways that distract from the victim’s immediate needs. Grief is another recurring emotion, especially when hearing stories that mirror one’s own. Without careful attention, advocates can carry emotional weight that becomes indistinguishable from the victim’s pain. The challenge lies in maintaining compassion without collapsing under the intensity of emotion that advocacy inevitably brings.

The Long Journey of Self-Work

It takes years for many advocates to work through their own challenges. At the SCARS Institute, this has been a shared reality over the last 11 years. Each of us entered the work carrying our own wounds. For some, the scars of victimization were fresh. For others, the burden was longer-standing but still influential. Time, reflection, and support were required before we could learn to separate our personal needs from the needs of those we serve.

This self-work is not optional. An advocate who has not confronted their own trauma risks projecting it onto victims. For example, someone who has never processed their own betrayal may unintentionally demand that victims respond in ways that match their own coping style. Others may over-identify with victims, losing the ability to offer balanced guidance. The journey of self-awareness allows advocates to step into their role with greater clarity, ensuring that their history informs empathy without dictating their practice.

The Presence of Vicarious Trauma

Even when personal wounds are resolved, advocacy brings a new risk: vicarious trauma. This occurs when repeated exposure to others’ pain begins to accumulate in the advocate’s mind and body. Listening to stories of betrayal, deception, and despair day after day can leave lasting impressions. Advocates may begin to dream about victims’ experiences, feel heightened suspicion in their own relationships, or struggle with anxiety and exhaustion.

The specter of vicarious trauma is always present in this field. Without careful monitoring, it can slowly undermine the very people dedicated to helping others. The symptoms often appear gradually—fatigue, irritability, loss of motivation—until they become overwhelming. Recognizing these early signs is essential. Advocates who ignore them risk burnout, withdrawal, or in some cases, retraumatization.

Monitoring and Countering the Impact

Countering vicarious trauma requires deliberate strategies. Regular supervision, peer support, and professional counseling can help advocates process the stories they carry. Setting boundaries is equally important. Advocates must learn when to step back, when to rest, and when to seek renewal outside the work. Practices such as mindfulness, exercise, and creative expression can restore balance, ensuring that the weight of advocacy does not become unbearable.

At SCARS, we encourage open conversation about these risks. Acknowledging the impact of vicarious trauma does not indicate weakness. It demonstrates professionalism and maturity. Advocates who care for their own well-being are better equipped to provide sustained, meaningful support to victims.

The Balance Between Humanity and Role

What emerges from all of this is a recognition that advocates are both professionals and human beings. They cannot separate their humanity from their role, nor should they attempt to. Victims often value authenticity, sensing when an advocate speaks from real experience. Yet this humanity must be balanced with discipline. The advocate’s personal story can inform connection but should never overshadow the victim’s journey.

The healthiest advocates learn to walk this line carefully. They acknowledge their own history without allowing it to dominate. They recognize their emotions without letting them control their responses. They monitor their exposure to trauma and take steps to remain steady. This balance ensures that advocacy remains sustainable and effective over the long term.

The Shared Responsibility of Growth

Every advocate carries responsibility not only for victims but also for themselves. Growth is ongoing. It involves continued education, reflection, and adjustment. The work of advocacy is demanding, and no one arrives fully prepared. It is shaped by trial, error, and the willingness to learn. Communities like the SCARS Institute exist to provide structure and support, ensuring that advocates are not left to navigate these challenges alone.

By admitting that bias, emotion, and trauma play roles in advocacy, we remove the illusion of perfection. Advocates are not flawless guides standing above victims. They are fellow travelers, shaped by pain yet committed to helping others walk through it. The strength of advocacy lies not in the absence of wounds but in the ability to transform them into sources of wisdom, resilience, and understanding.

Closing Reflection

Advocacy is both a privilege and a burden. It demands courage to confront one’s own biases, patience to manage personal emotions, and vigilance to guard against vicarious trauma. For many, this process takes years, unfolding slowly as they gain the insight needed to balance personal history with professional role. At SCARS, we recognize this truth because we have lived it. Each of us has had to work through our own challenges before becoming steady advocates for others.

The lesson is clear: advocacy begins with self-awareness. Without it, the advocate risks harming both themselves and the victims they intend to serve. With it, however, advocacy becomes sustainable, authentic, and profoundly meaningful. When advocates take responsibility for their own growth, they not only protect themselves from the weight of trauma but also ensure that their support for victims is grounded, compassionate, and enduring.

Just remember, there is always more to learn.

Glossary

• Advocacy — The act of supporting scam victims through guidance, education, and compassion, shaped by the advocate’s own history and perspective.
• Anger — A common emotional response in advocacy, often directed toward scammers, which can overwhelm and distract from victim needs if unmanaged.
• Bias — Preconceived attitudes or assumptions that shape how advocates view and respond to victims, sometimes reinforcing harm if left unexamined.
• Blame Bias — The belief that victims are responsible for their own exploitation, reinforcing shame and discouraging openness.
• Burnout — A state of exhaustion caused by prolonged emotional investment and overexposure to trauma narratives in advocacy.
• Compassion — The capacity to empathize with victims while maintaining stability and clarity, essential for effective support.
• Confirmation Bias — Filtering victim stories through preconceived beliefs, which can prevent advocates from hearing nuance or unique details.
• Cultural Bias — The imposition of one’s cultural values on victims, distorting understanding and potentially alienating them.
• Emotion — The influence of grief, anger, sadness, or frustration carried by advocates, which can connect or overwhelm depending on how it is managed.
• Minimization Bias — Downplaying the severity of a victim’s suffering to make it seem less overwhelming, leaving victims feeling invalidated.
• Outcome Bias — Judging a victim’s choices by their negative results rather than the manipulative context of scams.
• Over-Identification Bias — Becoming too enmeshed with a victim’s story, blurring boundaries and draining the advocate’s emotional resilience.
• Positivity Bias — Pressuring victims toward optimism too quickly, which denies their pain and blocks necessary grieving.
• Projection Bias — Assuming that victims should recover in the same way or timeframe as the advocate, ignoring individual differences.
• Rescue Bias — Trying to “save” victims by imposing solutions instead of fostering their independence and growth.
• Self-Awareness — The advocate’s capacity to recognize their own biases, emotions, and trauma, which is essential for balanced support.
• Stigma Bias — Viewing victimization as weakness or gullibility, reinforcing silence and discouraging honesty.
• Vicarious Trauma — The secondary trauma experienced by advocates who absorb the stories of victims, leading to anxiety, exhaustion, or retraumatization.