| ||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Kathi Stringer wrote: This new ruling means that Pt’s Rights have NO VALUE to block patient mistreatment. The abusers have been found to be over and above the LAW of Pt’s Rights.Yup. Well I still think Patients Rights has some value, but I think you have most painfully uncovered the ‘fly in the ointment’ of our movement. ‘Patients Rights’ is a defensive strategy, when the real problem is that the paradigm of mental health service delivery is wrong. Your judge seems to have noted that it wasn’t his place to assess the paradigm itself (which BTW is what ‘justifies’ the doctor lying). In that, he is aligned with the dominant thought of our movement, which has generally held that the ‘medical model’ is a private concern. IMHO the issue of ‘trauma of treatment’ has been scandalously neglected by our movement. They have chosen a separatist politics based on ‘Patients Rights’ rather than an integrated politics based on a ‘labor union’ model of struggle and negotiation over ‘trauma of treatment’. I want to thank Pat Risser and all the other client activists who have recognized the importance of your issue, Kathi. FWIW I can see no other way thru this but for us to reorganize the clients movement so that it truly will focus on ‘trauma of treatment’. Psychologically speaking, the client leadership is dissociating the importance of ‘trauma of treatment’. For us the task is to find a way to stand our ground against the terrible intimidation we are facing, and thus to find ourselves. Kathi, you are welcome to write me if you wish. Respectfully Andrew Phelps | ||||||||
 |