| ||||||||
|
||||||||
Sylvia wrote:
This would be a place to ask why Nader/Green links to TACI attended this event and asked ‘the question’. About 25 persons attended, plus media. The Bush guy sent a letter saying it was too low of a priority. After opening statements (and a fire alarm!), the Chair took written prepared questions. One of them sounded like it came from the clients, it concerned ‘involuntary outpatient commitment’ and forced treatment. I took notes on the answers to this one. Both representatives there BTW were members of the disability community. [Gore] Likes Olmstead/community based alternatives. ‘Least restrictive setting’. Broad interest in m.h. disability, noted Tipper’s role included her personal disclosure of ‘depression’. Gore ‘strong’ on dialogue with the disabilities community. Sometimes forced treatment is appropriate. But this is mainly a state rather than federal matter. Vote Gore for constructive dialogue. [Nader] It was difficult to put this in the platform. Can’t pass off IOC as merely a state issue. Forced medical treatment, as “drugging people in the community” is on the edge of encroaching on civil liberties. “No hard and fast conclusions.” Look again & again and “err on the side of civil liberties.” Concern of forced treatment is “proven risks to society.” Vote Nader .. I guess, because he’s more ‘sensitive’. Afterwards they had questions from the audience. I said I was a client activist and that we have a problem with Nader. I said the CA client community had come together this last year to defeat IOC in the legislature. Nader however has a joint website with TAC. I said this caused great distress among the client activists, it seemed to be like doing a joint website ‘with the KKK’. The Nader guy was very polite, admitted he didn’t know the website. I gave him a hardcopy. Obviously he was embarrassed. Talked to him afterwards. He wanted info. He admitted he was local and knows Medea well but Nader’s business not so much. I think I did what Sylvia suggested, which is to get them to look at this ugly business. Conversation was at the level of activists trying to get the facts. He knows Nader has a side of him that ‘does business’ with the corporations, I tried to explain the depth of this betrayal. I think Nader dealt with NAMI/TAC because they sweet-talked him/Sidney Wolfe and abandoned the ‘social activists’ rather foolishly. We should keep bringing this point up. Respectfully Andrew Phelps | ||||||||
 |