government is incapable of compassion. it falls to us, folks!

i'm sure they would love to round up anyone who dares 'show feelings of an almost human nature' too publicly or acts in any way unusual even if they cannot possibly be posing a threat to others. (as is the case 99% of the time).

 as for the 'danger to self' schtick - well, it isn't the role of the state to be saving people from themselves. that properly falls to the grassroots and further repression has no valid role in this. the problem being, people have been taught to thwart their own inclinations toward direct compassion in favor of leaving it to the 'professionals'.

government lacks the capacity for genuine compassion. its primary function is social control, and all its institutions - including health and 'mental health' care - reflect this function to at least some extent.

perhaps if state repression itself were to end (including the typical response to so-called 'mental health' issues) along with all the interpersonal abuse and violence in the world, you would see the occurrence of so-called 'mental illnesses' virtually disappear. the DSM would quickly be reduced to the size of a supermarket circular and the profession of psychiatry would go the way of the dodo bird.

these human phenomenon do not occur in a social vacuum, much as the medical profession would love to convince us they do. this isn't a medical issue or a 'personal defect' we are talking about here. and the system's reaction is predicated on irrational fear, which is unlikely to result in a fair, just, reasonable or'helpful' outcome.

 people are terrified of madness, insanity, 'mental illness' (call it what you will) and the human tendency has always been to ruthlessly crush what is frightening. and this is a very personal fear as everyone has the capacity within them to experience these things.

 it isn't bad genes or a 'chemical imbalance' or any of these things. it is HUMAN, and universal. no one gets off the hook. and this is why this particular prejudice is so pervasive (and widely accepted).

people believe they are acting with compassion when they really only want to subvert and crush what is frightening to them at a very personal level. the entire system which has been constructed toward this end reflects this in its presumptions, deception, coercion and violence directed toward vulnerable people. we need to be able to do better. otherwise we are all barbarians.

if by 'care'...

If by 'care' you mean imprisonment w/o trial or charge, forced administration of addictive, body and brain-damaging drugs, intensive and invasive monitoring/policing in one's own home, poverty, social isolation, being the target of rampant discrimination and seriously damaged physical health as a result of all of the above, then I would have to say the level of 'mental health care' available is already much more than adequate.

If this is the best we as a society can offer to the frightened, angry, grieving, despairing people in our midst, then we ought to be hanging our heads in shame.

Distressed human beings deserve to be loved, supported and nurtured on their own terms, not caged, brutalized, endlessly policed and told by everyone else what 'their own best interests' are. They need to have their basic rights strengthened and vigorously defended, not stolen away using a medical pretext that is of dubious merit at best.

I am acting on the assumption that participants in this discussion are people with only the best of intentions. Just don't allow your good intentions to provide governments with a back-door route to depriving us of even more of our liberties than they already are.

i write this in the context of last weeks' incidents in Ottawa and Quebec. the 'mental health' advocates feel (as i said, all with the best of intentions) they can offer a kinder, gentler, more progressive alternative to draconian, scurrilous anti-terrorism laws. but given the already oppressive and highly controlling nature of the 'mental health' system, advocating for its fortification opens up the possibility of a whole other kind of police state.

this is a hydra we are dealing with, folks. (the hydra being a mythical serpent with multiple heads - and when you cut off one of its heads it sprouts two more to replace it.) 

there are multiple avenues to control and repression at the government's disposal as a result of these two incidents. we need to approach this whole discussion with prudence and vigilance, keeping the strengthening and defense of everyone's basic rights at the forefront of our consciousness.

accusations, not diagnoses...

psychiatric labels are accusations. let's make no bones about it. they cannot be considered to be something as benevolent as 'diagnoses'.

and invariably, accusations bring punishment.

a diagnosis is merely a tentative impression offered by a clinician following careful and thorough study that typically involves an extensive interview, a physical examination, a trip to a lab for the study of blood, urine, etc. and sometimes other procedures.

then - and only then - will a responsible physician offer up an idea of what is happening. and the final decision on any response belongs to the patient.

psychiatry turns this responsible clinical behavior on its head. a psychiatric label is established and assigned through an interrogation consisting of the most convoluted, asinine, self-incriminating questions one could possibly imagine. the outcome of this grilling almost inevitably results in a pejorative label and a prescription for some chemical 'nostrum'.

and god/dess help you should you try thinking for yourself by disagreeing with the shrink. in psychiatry's circular, fascistic 'reasoning' this is seen as the person 'lacking insight' into their 'illness' and proof positive they are undeserving of freedom - and let's just skip the judicial process and oversight, thank you very much.

where i live, any physician can strip you of your physical liberty - and all of your civil rights - for up to 72 hours with the stroke of a pen. add the signature of a psychiatrist to another piece of paper and someone can be shitcanned for much longer periods - up to three months at a time, with an infinite number of renewals - with only limited recourse for challenging these decisions. thus the punishment begins.

this doesn't end with discharge from an institution. in Ontario, a little legislative nasty called a community treatment order (CTO) can keep you legally bound to the whims of the 'mental health' oligarchy for years.

in Ontario two hospital stays (voluntary or otherwise) over a three-year period or a cumulative stay for thirty days or longer is sufficient to bring about this highly restrictive form of psychiatric parole. violating the terms of such an order can result in arrest and detention - again without charge or trial. more punishment, merely for being alive, human and in distress.

the physical and social consequences of psychiatrization are legion. the drugs prescribed by shrinks cause a host of unpleasant and sometimes deadly adverse effects including diabetes, cardiac problems, obesity, crippling movement disorders indicative of neurological damage and an encephalitis-like condition called neuroleptic malignant syndrome which can be fatal. they can cause or contribute to the very behaviors and ideas they are purported to help prevent, such as violent or suicidal impulses. other 'treatments' such as electroconvulsive 'therapy' (ECT) can result in permanent brain damage and devastating memory loss.

psychiatric drugs 'work' by blunting painful feelings and the sense of fear, hopelessness and desperation that often accompanies them. as such they may provide a distressed human being with a temporary illusion of self-control and stability. plus, they undoubtedly quiet (and immobilize) 'bothersome' individuals, making them easier to manage.

but the underlying cause of the distress cannot be touched by these chemicals. any attempt to stop the drugs, and the issues come bounding to the fore once again, often with redoubled ferocity from the 'rebound' effect of withdrawing from these addictive substances.

the social consequences? many psychiatrized people find themselves facing a life sentence of poverty, isolation, discrimination, abuse and compromised physical health resulting in premature death. this is society's failing, not that of psychiatrized persons. but once labeled, people make convenient scapegoats. i mean, who listens to 'crazy' people?

using the word 'stigma' is an insult. this is a made-up word which essentially blames the innocent for the discrimination and bigotry they face. it is predicated on 'oh, if only these poor 'mentally ill' souls would comply with the experts, life would be so much sweeter for everyone' kind of thinking. this official mindset only guarantees the victimization and oppression will continue endlessly.

the medical model itself lies at the root of all this. in embracing a theory (it certainly isn't fact) that essentially pathologizes every aspect of our humanity that fails to fit within a limited societal mold, we are essentially allowing others to define our lives, our feelings and perceptions, our humanity and our ability to interact meaningfully with the world, all in accordance with their own agenda.

the medical model illustrates psychiatry's profound disconnect from the social construct we have made for ourselves and its often devastating effect on peoples' minds and hearts. it is without proven scientific or clinical basis.

yet the state grants powers to this specialty far beyond those afforded to any other medical specialty or helping profession, based on ludicrous but horrifying presumptions about how distressed human beings will act rather than anything they have actually done.

psychiatrists can draw on state resources such as law enforcement or the courts in order to enforce their agenda. and they remain the only medical specialty authorized to imprison people without charge or trial, or deprive people of their decision-making rights. more punishment.

the whole discourse on human distress has been hijacked and unacceptably constrained by the medical model as it originates from a group of people wearing white coats and with the letters 'MD' appended after their names. on this basis alone most people are extremely loath to dispute it. but these are human beings as well - fallible, subject to the allure of power and ego, and with a very well-defined agenda.

unfortunately, people view a medical response - even when imposed through deception and violence - as the only 'compassionate' option. nothing could be further from the truth. there is nothing compassionate about this level of power and control being directed at the innocent.

we need to take back the right to define our lives, our experiences and our humanity on our own terms. we need to end the silencing and invalidation imposed upon us by the medicalizing of our experiences. we need to find our voices and use them to call out and confront this oppressive nonsense whenever and wherever it manifests. we need to assert our own abilities (along with our failings) rather than letting the doctors tell us what we can or cannot do. these are our lives and we need to take them back!

Our dreams – and lives – cannot fit into ballot boxes!

The ballot box is the mechanism used to force us to surrender our power - to hand over our inherent, inalienable decision-making rights to the politicians and the powerful individuals who in turn dictate their actions. Then when these individuals inevitably make bad, stupid, self-serving decisions 'on our behalf' people whine about how if only we would elect the right folks' all would be well.

Sorry, but it doesn't work that way. It can't work that way.

A little wild card known as the human ego makes it impossible. Requiring that people become dependent on third parties to make all the decisions that affect their lives cannot possibly work. In the end someone inevitably gets the short end of the stick.

Some peoples' needs - or even their very lives - will invariably be seen as 'expendable' under such circumstances. This is inherent to the system and it cannot be stopped or prevented. The only chance we have would be to abandon this third-person process of decision-making and take back our inherent right as sovereign persons to do this for ourselves.

At the same time society needs to decentralize and people need to re-discover how to work co-operatively in our common interest. This is in fact how people lived once upon a time. But this pyramidal, ego-based restructuring of human societies that has been forced upon us has brought us to the edge of the abyss. 

Whether or not we can overcome this remains to be seen - but the only hope for our survival lies in making an honest, sustained effort to do just that.

what does the medical model of 'mental illness' accomplish?

1. it silences people - when someone's feelings, opinions or perspectives can be attributed to a disease process, people no longer feel any obligation to listen, much less attempt to understand. with time this will cause a person to lose all trust in their own perceptions and the evidence of their own senses.

2. it is used to rationalize brutal human rights abuses including imprisonment without trial or charge, and forced ingestion of highly addictive, health-destroying chemical substances along with barbaric physical tortures such as 'seclusion' (solitary confinement) or electroconvulsive 'therapy', among others.

3. it can (and often does) lead to a life sentence of poverty, isolation, prejudice, revolving-door repeat imprisonments, and generally compromised physical health leading often to a premature demise.

4. it leads to being designated by definition as a second-class citizen, the object of scorn and irrational and unjustifiable fear along with condescension and other assaults on mind and spirit that no 'anti-stigma' initiative can ever hope to overcome.

let's be explicitly clear about some things here:

these human issues (and i will be the first to affirm they are very real and often angonizingly painful) are not medical in origin - their roots are social and political. only approaches based on this reality have any hope of succeeding.

these human issues do not result from some form of individual sickness or personal defect - they are systemic in origin and pervasive in their occurrence. in this world which is so brutal to the human spirit, no one gets away completely clean (although some people are better at concealing what is happening to them).

everyone has the capacity for madness (for lack of a better term) within themselves. the only variable is exactly what will trigger it. what seems completely inconsequential for one person might prove to be completely devastating for someone else. this does not mean such people have some form of 'biological predisposition' to 'mental illness'. everyone has their own trigger. what exactly this might be is as unique and individual to each of us as our fingerprints. while there are some commonalities no two people will be affected in the same way by a specific event or set of circumstances.

psychiatric labels are not medical ' diagnoses' - they are accusations for which society has spelled out a clear policy of brutal punishments for whenever they manifest. the medical model is merely a smokescreen couched in false compassion used for obfuscating this uncomfortable truth. and most people are guilty of helping to maintain this brutal reality. this has to stop - NOW.

'Apathy', eh?

when used in the context of electoral politics, the word 'apathy' becomes just another code word for 'let's blame the victims'. what it really means is people are voting - only with their feet rather than a ballot. under the circumstances it is as clear a signal as can possibly be given that we need a radically different way of doing politics and conducting our affairs as communities and society as a whole. and those who use emotional blackmail or other forms of psychological violence against those making this choice are part of the problem, not the solution.

support the 'middle class', do you?

let me tell you who you are supporting.

these are the gentrifiers. the economic colonizers. the social cleansers. the cop-callers.

they are the reason there is a de facto curfew in select parts of the city where actually sitting down in a coffee shop is impossible after 11 PM because apparently it is now unacceptable for a homeless person to grab a few precious moments of warmth on a desperately cold night.

they are the reason that other food and beverage establishments in these same neighborhoods are forced to operate under restrictions that will not be found in most other parts of the city or province, simply because they are affordable places where poor people congregate and socialize. 

they are the reason why homeless people are relentlessly persecuted by law enforcement for the 'crime' of trying to catch some desperately needed sleep anytime and anywhere they can. they are the reason why homeless women in particular face a much greater risk of violence including sexual assault, and why such crimes go largely unreported and unresolved.

they are the reason why agencies that serve vulnerable people are forced to operate under a cloud. they are the reason why emergency shelter beds are being lost at a time when the need for them has never been greater. they are the reason why the development of any social/supportive housing in some areas has become the focus of major struggles sometimes years in duration.

these are the people (and policies/practices) you are supporting when you 'defend the middle class'.

abolish *all* classes!

AN OPEN LETTER TO HUMANITY...

i'm finding it impossible to say what i so desperately need to say. it always comes out sounding so terribly wrong.

people tell me not to 'isolate, but in telling me 'not' to do something they are implying there's a choice. for me that choice has long since fled.

i'm sorry to those i have offended or hurt in my horribly misguided attempts to express and make sense of the contents of my own failed and broken heart.

clearly there is no love to be found in this world for me. this is no one's fault but my own.

i was always taught not to 'invite myself'; that if people want me around they will act of their own volition to make that happen. i happen to agree with this principle regardless of what anyone else says - i simply do not have the right to impose myself.

the only invitation that is valid is one freely given without need for prompting or solicitation on my part. the silence of my phone and of the voices of others i encounter face to face is testament to my own abject failure to make myself 'wanted' or seen as a desirable member of any community.

others have already made this plain to me, usually without having to say so, and even while claiming strongly to the contrary. i do not find fault with how others feel. that is their right.

i just wish a little more honesty could have been forthcoming before it was too late. whether people were acting out of fear, or from some kind of misguided desire to spare my feelings, i was thus denied an opportunity to know what issues of concern might of existed while there was still time to address and perhaps fix them.

well, there's nothing for it now, it would seem. unlocked barns, stolen horses and all that. best to just get on with whatever time still remains to me.


i wish you all good luck and godspeed in the pursuit of your own lives and dreams as we set off on our diverging paths through the world.

Addressing Emotional/Mental Well-being in Activist Communities

How can we try to promote emotional/mental

well-being in the context of activist communities

and political actions? More questions than answers…

Preamble

“Ideas are bulletproof.” ~ ~ ‘V’ For Vendetta

Over the course of my own city’s manifestation of the global Occupy Movement that was born on NYC’s Wall Street in September (and which found its original inspiration in the ‘Arab Spring’ uprisings that began in Tunisia and Egypt in January and February this year) many of my own ideas of how to respond to certain... aspects of the human condition have been put to the test to a degree I’ve never experienced before.

The experience has been in turn frustrating, fascinating, has posed serious ethical dilemmas and has left me on at least two occasions severely triggered as certain aspects of my own experiences with life suddenly lunged to the fore.

It has generally been the state’s practice to respond to extreme mental or emotional states by simply removing the person from public view to a locked place as rapidly as possible, utilizing coercive and at times outright violent measures to accomplish this. The end result is generally an already angry, frightened, traumatized human being being made even more so.

One would think that progressive individuals and communities would have devoted much thought as to how to better respond to and support people in our midst who are experiencing these painful, frightening extremes of emotion or mental perception, or the ravages of drug use.

Sad to say, the tendency even among many activists has been to rely on conventional means that generally involve leaving it to the ‘professionals’ to address such issues, despite their complete, abject failure to do so in the past with any real compassion or respect for the individual. In my experience there is little real care or healing to be found through such measures. And I have to wonder at times how many of my peers truly understand just how oppressive this system can be.

Another matter of concern for activists is the involvement of law enforcement in this whole quandary, and how even some people who have openly condemned police brutality in the past (especially toward vulnerable or marginalized persons) will sometimes leap to this recourse when faced with someone who is too visibly manifesting some inner turmoil or speaking too passionately of some personal vision that is not shared by their peers, and thus appearing disruptive.

I admit that I too am uncomfortable with some of these manifestations, in part born of my own uncertainty of how to respond to specific situations without potentially making matters worse. But does this sentiment warrant steering someone into the arms of those who offer only the likelihood of further traumatization or even outright violence? To my mind, absolutely not.

The G-20 in Toronto, and the broader anti-globalization movement

There have been opportunities to explore some of these issues, many of them in the context of psychiatric survivor activism or in the aftermath of large anti-globalization demonstrations where exposure (directly or indirectly) to state violence has become virtually a given for many participants. The predominantly youthful organizers whose passion initially fueled the anti-globalization movement have offered some incredibly heads-up, innovative thinking on these issues.

At times in the aftermath of Quebec City (where intense actions against the Free Trade Area of the Americas occurred in April of 2001) what I was hearing sounded almost too good to be true, with the suggestions for creating safe, quiet spaces away from the danger areas where people could regroup emotionally, or seek supports and resources of their own choosing. Along with this came the idea for creating local and regional peer networks where individuals and communities could support one another directly in healing from the emotional wounds associated with exposure to violence.

The June 2010 meeting of the G-20 was an environment where protesters were exposed to a degree of state force that few of us had previously experienced, or for that matter truly expected to encounter in the streets of Toronto, although I’d had my own forebodings as the official propaganda machine revved itself into a frenzy during May and June last year.

Fortunately the organizers had thought ahead by organizing non-coercive trauma support. The need for this became more and more apparent as the weekend progressed, peoples’ homes were raided at gunpoint in the dead of night and still others were viciously beaten, rounded up en masse then detained under deplorable conditions for extended periods frequently without ever being criminally charged (including one occasion where several hundred people were forced to stand in the street for hours in a cold, torrential thunderstorm before most were released).

My own first contact with the folks offering emotional support came after a scary incident in the small hours of Sunday, June 27 when a group of about 100 people (myself among them) was ‘kettled’ by hundreds of riot cops while doing jail solidarity outside the detention facility on Eastern Ave.

Shortly after this I spoke by cellphone with one of the people who was volunteering their time as a trauma counselor - a kindly young woman whose chief initial concern was ensuring that I be able to get somewhere safe where our conversation might continue. We had a second, longer talk after I biked home, after which I felt relaxed enough to sleep.

It was simply hearing that gentle voice of reassurance after being frightened out of my wits just moments earlier that made an immediate difference. I never actually met this young woman or even knew where she was, but this is of little importance.

Would the professional system of ‘care’ that our society is so reliant on offer this kind of no-strings-attached support as a matter of course for those who wish for it in a moment of crisis? Sad to say that with the exception of a small number of individuals who work within the system, I would have to say this is unlikely unless one has the means to explore options not covered by OHIP or other public health schemes.

June 29, 2010, Christie Pits Park, Toronto: A call-out for healers from all disciplines had been made by the network that had organized the protests, to which about thirty people of various trainings and backgrounds responded. Most of these people were experienced with various approaches to counseling, some came from religious or spiritual backgrounds. None were medical professionals. That evening these folks joined about 200 protesters who had gathered in the park.

This meeting was my first exposure to the art of Reiki – a gentle healing practice that involves working with subtle physical and emotional energies, generally through the laying on of hands. I found the experience to be wonderfully soothing and reassuring. The person who worked with me expressed amazement at how readily I took to it despite it being a first-time experience.

It was, in truth, the approach made out of kindness and genuine caring that made all the difference. Subsequent to this experience, a number of other people (some being folks I had known for some time, others were complete strangers) quietly approached to offer their own words of reassurance and guidance.

Never was there so much as a hint of coercion or the ‘my way or the highway (or locked ward)’ attitude that is typical of our society’s more conventional approaches to mental or emotional turmoil.

June 30, 2010, Friends House, Toronto: The second gathering in as many nights aimed at supporting the healing process for activists, this one hosted by the Quakers. Aside from a few people who had been present the previous night this was primarily a different group of individuals.

I found myself feeling increased turmoil that evening and was almost unable to remain. A young man wearing a Steelworkers jacket followed me into the corridor as I attempted to leave and we spent about half an hour talking quietly one-to-one before I felt comfortable enough to rejoin the group.

The structure of this meeting (following initial introductions) was a number of small groups where people could speak freely of their feelings to their peers. There were several familiar faces in the group I joined, the environment felt safe and words came easily. No one sat in judgment and folks waited to offer advice until it was specifically requested.

This was the kind of joining together that could be quickly and easily arranged by a peer support network – all it would require is someone with some facilitation experience to structure and kick-start the thing, after which it could become largely self-directing.

This is the kind of ‘no experience necessary’ approach that would empower people to control the circumstances and pace of their own healing, without ‘professional’ meddling. The only spirit required here is one of simple friendship and willingness to open one’s self to personal and other peoples’ experiences rather than relying on hierarchical control.

Mid-July 2010, 519 Church St. Community Centre, Toronto: Someone I know had a friend visiting from Vermont, a hypnotherapist who had offered to do a free workshop for G-20 protesters. Using a mix of soft music and relaxation-inducing techniques, this man spent two hours gently walking participants through a series of exercises intended to increase peoples’ ability to cope by teaching approaches that would defuse potentially triggering emotional and mental processes before they could take hold. Following the workshop many of us went to a nearby park to continue talking after buying food and beer to share among ourselves.

The main drawback here is that such empowering, voluntary, non-invasive approaches are prohibitively expensive to access ordinarily and are not covered by health insurance. It is a sad statement about our society that only conventional, medically-based, often coercive and potentially damaging ‘mental health’ resources receive such coverage.

I’ve spoken here primarily of the positive aspects (and there were many) of the coming-together of individuals and communities in the aftermath of the G-20.

Most of the shortfalls involved the disorganized nature of the resources offered (it was mainly individuals or communities based primarily in Toronto operating autonomously without any co-ordination) and the whole effort basically fizzled after several weeks. It would have been good to see gatherings or workshops like I’ve described happen at weekly intervals for at least two or three months, along with the establishment of a strong, reliable peer support network that people could tap into essentially as needed.

These are potential ideas that folks could consider for similar circumstances in the future. For myself, I felt the process was incomplete and that sustaining it for a longer period would have made a world of difference to many people. Unfortunately I never had the opportunity to completely recover from what I experienced during the G-20, which I might have if the resources available in that early summer had continued for a longer time.

Occupy Toronto

There are a whole slew of new dynamics at play here, and unlike with the G-20 the police were among the least of most people’s worries as they acted with an unprecedented degree of restraint throughout.

The global Occupy Movement started on September 17 this year as a protest against increasing economic disparity and injustice, and was originally based near New York City’s infamous Wall Street which functions as the heart of that city’s (and essentially the entire USA’s) financial infrastructure.

As the fall progressed, Occupy encampments and actions began in literally thousands of communities large and small as the phenomena swept around the globe.

Unlike the large but generally short-lived convergences of the anti-globalization movement, these were in a sense experimental longer-term gatherings of a whole new generation of politically engaged (but largely inexperienced) organizers and supporters. It seemed inevitable that problems would arise.

In Toronto the camp was established on October 15, when upward of 5,000 people marched from the heart of the financial district to the grounds of St. James Cathedral, where we would remain for the next thirty-eight days.

This park is literally home to some of the most impoverished people in the city, who must daily struggle to exist within a few minutes’ walk of Canada’s main financial hub. The related issues of addiction, poor health and emotional/mental turmoils are rife in this part of town – as, we were to quickly learn, were many of the prejudices and misconceptions surrounding such issues.

The first sign of what was to come was when one of the legal observers intercepted me as I was leaving the park on the second evening with an urgent request to assist in a situation where a sizable group of campers was trying to coerce a local homeless man into the arms of the cops with the intent of having him detained under the Mental Health Act. (The guy eventually left the park safely following a brief conversation with a police officer).

Over the next few days several similar requests were made by people who knew me (and the kind of activism that I’m passionate about). Needless to say I was soon getting quite frustrated and angry over this kind of behavior. To put it bluntly, this was no way to wage a revolution!

The third day in, one of the organizers approached me with a request that I participate in a committee that would try to respond to some of these issues. Not long after one of the ‘breakout’ groups from the noon general assembly put forward the proposal to create a ‘health and wellness’ committee that would try to offer support to troubled community members without involving the police, along with addressing other broader health-related issues in camp.

There had been some positive steps taken almost immediately upon our arrival when a women’s safe space was established, and a second one for people trying to recover from addictions similar to the ‘free zone’ space that has been available at Pride celebrations in recent years. This spot was also home to twice-weekly Twelve Step meetings facilitated by someone in camp. An area was also designated in the southeast corner of the park where folks could go to quietly meditate.

Around the same time I met an activist nurse who would quickly prove to be one of my strongest allies in that park as well as a trusted friend and confidant. She had also been working on addressing the same dilemmas in her own way almost since our arrival. The team that eventually came together was a pretty decent group of people overall, but still predominantly health professionals including nurses, social workers, some students and two people with ‘MD’s attached to their names (although one isn’t actually practicing medicine at this time).

The first couple of meetings I attended went well and I felt generally accepted by the rest of the group despite feeling way out of my league. I began getting the sense that my role with the team (and this was by my own choosing) would be as more of an advocate/political rabble-rouser. A number of workshop ideas related to these issues and others were floated around in the group.

I felt things begin to turn sour on the afternoon of November 12. A joint committee meeting I sat in on that afternoon proved to be profoundly upsetting. Listening to the discussion and the kind of decisions being contemplated involving specific individuals (none of whom were present while they were being discussed) made me feel uneasy to the point where after a half hour or so I could no longer remain in the meeting. For me it was like getting into a time machine and rocketing back thirty-five years smack into the middle of one of the... harsher periods in my own life.

I explained my unease to one of the other team members who followed me out of the meeting and he promised to relay my concerns. Fortunately I also had the opportunity to properly debrief a bit later that day.

Meanwhile, the dilemma of police entering the park to remove troubled or merely disruptive people (sometimes at the request of other ‘protesters’ - there has been a number of persons unknown who keep calling the cops at almost any pretext, with no accountability possible) continued.

For me this came to a head later in the week when I found myself participating in a discussion with two others that was so troubling I could literally hardly believe the reality of the situation I’d found myself in. I did at one point say that I could no longer participate in the discussion and walked away briefly. While we did between us arrive at a compromise proposal to make to the individual in question, the situation unfortunately did end with the arrival of the police.

Aside from the very clear risk of violence emotionally or mentally vulnerable people face at the hands of law enforcement, that park is an extremely public environment with hundreds of people milling around on any given day, and the media was almost constantly present. Confidentiality was virtually impossible in this environment especially once the cops became involved. Aside from the traumatizing factor, such public takedowns represented an incredibly shaming experience for the person affected.

To be honest, I was becoming seriously disenchanted with the whole thing by this time. A set of notes forwarded from a second inter-committee meeting (which I did not attend) almost seemed to suggest the camp might even evolve into some kind of gigantic public entry point to the mainstream ‘mental health’ system. I figured by this time that I had outlived my usefulness.

The analysis around these issues had proved to be much less developed in the nascent Occupy Movement than what had been explored and accomplished by anti-globalization activists during the previous decade. This movement could yet prove to be the unlikeliest but strongest allies to the psychiatric survivor community in terms of their ballsy, innovative ideas around the development of supportive peer networks and communities and non-oppressive approaches to crisis intervention.

On the other hand, Occupy has a long way yet to go. Many of the inexperienced people who become involved (and I can’t deny that I love their passion for life and justice) brought their own personal baggage and prejudices with them and there appeared a certain... defensiveness when any effort was made to resolve some of these attitudes.

Some people even felt they had a right to take it upon themselves to arbitrarily ‘evict’ people from the park who were suspected of involvement with street drugs. In one case a situation almost turned into a brawl when a man objected strenuously to being treated this way and a bunch of others immediately leaped into the altercation. A couple of nights later a gentle soul was traumatized when the makeshift tent she dwelt in was similarly ripped down and the contents removed.

While the issue of drugs was admittedly a heat-score that could have provided the cops with the perfect opportunity to raid us, this is hardly the approach to use. The vigilante attitudes shown by some ‘occupiers’ was simply unacceptable. What was wrong with simply trying to talk with people and find out what was going on in their lives that induced them to use? Or try to quietly direct them to one of the Twelve Step groups that was happening in camp? Or to simply suggest that if someone really felt the need, to simply be discreet about it by either remaining in their tents or leaving the site to ‘fix’?

The reality was that we were preciously short of resources outside conventional parameters that could be drawn on. While a basically decent support team had been created, it operated primarily along mainstream lines based on the Mental Health Act and similar oppressive laws.

This is a time where it is vital that the work of truly re-inventing the wheel be stepped up. The wisdom of allies in the psychiatric survivor and anti-globalization communities who have already been exploring these ideas needs to be drawn upon and incorporated.

The people involved are among the most terribly exploited and damaged members of the ‘99%’ and abandonment or continued oppression of these folks (in this case by many of the very people attempting to struggle for change in this and related areas) is unconscionable.

These individuals and their personal situations lie directly at the root of why this movement formed in the first place. We need to remember this always and think seriously about what we are doing when any such person is being steered into the state’s hands.

~ ~ ~

Footnote: The camp in St. James Cathedral park was cleared on November 23 in a large but unusually passive police operation that began before daylight and continued throughout much of the day. There was no overt violence from the cops. A total of eleven people were briefly arrested on minor charges such as trespass. A tentative deal had been struck a week earlier to accommodate homeless people from outside Toronto who had come to join the occupation, but the city later reneged on it. St James Cathedral itself withdrew its tenuous support for the occupation once the court had ruled against our application for an injunction to block the eviction. An evening General Assembly did take place on November 23 but the numbers in attendance and any decisions made are unknown to me (I’ve been off-site nursing a severe cold). The whereabouts and well-being of the homeless folks who joined us (including those who essentially lived in the park before our arrival) is also unknown to me at this time.

'Occupied Toronto' Day 3 - live from the encampment

The encampment shortly after sunrise

Been here since seven this morning and I'm seriously bagged. But it's been worth it despite a fair amount of physical, mental and emotional intensity.

I arrived in the park about 7 AM to take part in a rumored protest in the financial district. Walked through the area with a friend to discover only a very small group in front of the bank at Bay and King - with a million cops and reps frem what appeared to be every media outlet in the country lying in wait. Sorry guys...  :p~

Today was punctuated by a series of interesting if at times taxing personal conversations. Following an incident the previous night that almost saw a 'disturbed' visitor deliberately steered into the arms of the police (in the apparent hope they would drag him off to the local psych. ward) a committee was struck to address how to respond to people experiencing crisis - Yrs. Truly was invited to participate.

The camp has already taken the positive steps of creating safe space for women and people trying to recover from addictions - I'm thinking maybe something similar in the form of a quiet, safe space where someone can relax, talk with someone, listen to music, meditate, what have you. Troubled or traumatized people also  need to be safe from the 'helpers' and the cops who generally do much more harm than good...

I'm hoping to introduce not only ideas from the Survivor community but also some of the great work that has come out of the anti-globalization movement. The notes from the first meeting that I was given to review did contain a fair bit of conventional thinking but I appended my own comments... I hope they will be taken seriously.

Getting ready to march to Ryerson

On other things - a clear, positive evolution in the daily protest marches is becoming apparent and much more quickly than I'd hoped for. In the wake of an incident at the start of the occupation on Saturday (mentioned in an earlier blog post) The first Nations people who have joined us have stepped into a powerful role as leaders and guides, leading both of today's marches - the large group that went to Ryerson at noon, and the even bigger march back to the park that was led by six women with drums.  Likewise for a smaller but more adventurous foray into the financial district itself that took place in the late afternoon... more about that below.

This was by far the most exciting development to date and confirmed my hope this burgeoning movement would begin to develop the understanding and respect it would need to sustain itself over the long haul.

First Nations women lead the march back to the encampment

Four-thirty PM - the second march of the afternoon departs the park. I followed on my bike about twenty minutes later to find a spirited group of about two hundred blocking the intersection at Bay and King Streets. Incredibly the cops have remained totally chill, simply closing off the street while we chanted, sang and used the 'human mic' to decide where to go next.

Later, at Bay and King...

The group next went north and east, marching over to Yonge St. and up to Dundas, where people sat on the road, bringing traffic to a standstill for nearly an hour. At one point a large number 99 (representing the 99 per cent) that was visible from the air was formed by people in the intersection; the news choppers hovering nearby apparently picked this up and broadcast it! Hundreds of curious onlookers gathered on the road to ask what was happening and chat with protesters and cops alike,

Dundas and Yonge

The only downside for me was this damned insistence by people on singing 'Oh, Canada'. We really need to start teaching these new folk some good protest songs! Their energy is amazing but this continues to be a pain in the ass.

Plans are in the works for further demonstrations tomorrow, including a demand the TTC restore Wheel-Trans service to the encampment (apparently they are refusing to pick up/deliver people to this site, making it impossible for some people with physical disabilities to join us).  As well, apparently a student walkout is being called for Friday afternoon.

Stay tuned - this thing is starting to go places in a serious way.

Graeme
Blogging from the media tent in St. James Cathedral park, Toronto