Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2009 22:00:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: Andrew Phelps <math_mad@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Client Discussions] Re: SURVEY
To: ClientDiscussions@yahoogroups.com
Stu:
On Sat, 3/14/09, you wrote:
I have no affiliation with the Network of Care.
You misread me, I think. It's the system that has that affiliation. That's the rationalization of the behavioral logic which we must challenge and overcome. The question is how to do that, what will nurture our resistance and what will help us overcome theirs.
I think that it is a very good idea to design our own tool with the problem in mind as I have seen this problem for over 17 years.
"Design our own tool" here is still the logic of social work. Ultimately the phenomenon involves a conflict and our folks will get hurt fighting it out, and so will the system folks. This tool will have its uses, but it won't get "to the bottom" of what the problem is about.
Ultimately we are measured by our ability to make the behavior management process more in line with what's right. Martin Luther King, Jr. addressed this very problem in 1967 in his
speech to the APA, where he called for "creative maladjustment" promotion and a change in the nature of 'behavioral science'.I have been writing about this problem on client lists for months now, yet in all this I have not seen anything being done to rectify the problem.
This is a matter of what I'd call "labor competence." There's a lot buzzing about this, and there's a need to bring the work into focus. You're right it's a "hot item." Still it behooves us to take responsibility here in the wisest way possible. Why do you think I've been arguing M.L. King, Jr. so much, of late? Mine is one voice. There are others. The "labor competence" issue has to do with nurturing the resistance in a broadly positive way, in the flavor of "freedom" and "dignity" as King has it.
Others also have important things to say. Including Vvv who seeks to get these conversations going.
So, I created the survey and purchased a post office box for 6 months, in an attempt to validate the problem so I could get help with addressing it. I tried to get the CNMHC to take the task on, but was told they were too busy. I felt that it was important to get this going as soon as possible because of my awareness of it currently occurring here in Sacramento in our consumer run and directed organization.
The "survey" approach has value, no doubt. I am personally averse to surveys, but others generally won't be. My concern is that broader aspects of how this struggle will develop need to be taken up. CNMHC, like you say, hasn't yet risen to the occasion.
Although I am on the Board of Directors of the organization Disability Rights CA (DRC), this has nothing to do with them. They have only offered to analyze the data and present the problem to the Department of Mental Health if it is substantiated. I do not know of any other group or I surely would welcome turning it over, as I believe this needs to be done by a group of people.
Our movement took form with "patients rights" and "self-help." However neither of those stalwart starting points engages the matter of 'dignity'. And the issue of "client/survivor" people working for the system draws in the issue of dignity.
Andrew
who's interested in "labor competence"