California Dreamin': A Short Story

In the early seventies California was a place of radical political views, fashion fads, new age healing techniques, "designer" diets and non-conformist lifestyles.  In my view, Los Angeles was the hub of all this extremism.  It was also a company town; Hollywood held out the promise of dreams-come-true, and for a time, I too fell under its spell and believed my marriage could be saved by a fresh start in a new location. 

My husband Bill and I had recently reconciled after a year of separation and had moved here from New York City.  We were living temporarily with my sister and brother‑in‑law after the birth of our son.  Bill was a journeyman carpenter and cabinet maker so in exchange for our room and board, he agreed to build floor to ceiling oak bookcases and cabinets in my brother-in-law’s den.  The house was located in an upwardly mobile, middle class housing development in the Agoura Hills.

The housing development sat in a bowl of sun‑scorched hills, brown and dry, except for a few brief weeks following the rainy season when they turned verdant. It looked like it might have been used as the movie set for E.T.  Kids, like the ones in the movie, raced their bikes through winding streets and cul‑de‑sacs leading to dirt trails that climbed into the hills where rattlesnakes and coyotes roamed.

During the week Bill worked for a contractor building a house in the exclusive horse community of Calabasas, a few miles away. Sometimes, on a Sunday when the crew was off, he would take me to see the progress they were making. The guard at the gate to this private enclave knew Bill and he would let us drive through. It gave me a glimpse of a way of life that reflected it's wealth in the thoroughbreds grazing in the acres of fenced in yard, rather than by the Porsche in the driveway beside a manicured lawn.

With a new baby and a limited budget, our favorite pastime was taking long rides exploring the surrounding hills and canyons. We often went along the twisting Topanga Canyon road, which cut through the hills from the valley to the coast. We would find a spot to park the car and hike up into the hills feeling like we were leaving civilization behind. I still remember the profound solitude and stillness which magnified the sounds of chirping birds, buzzing insects, and the occasional rustle of a small animal in the underbrush.  Heat would envelop me like a heavy overcoat; it felt luxurious rather than oppressive.

The houses here were hidden from view by the thick foliage of eucalyptus, wisteria, honeysuckle and scrub pine. The only access to them was by steep driveways that disappeared under a dark canopy of trees. The air smelled wet and menthol‑clean.  I could understand why the remoteness that characterized canyon living in L.A. attracted an odd assortment of residents: nudists, celebrities, covens of witches, EST enthusiasts and even lunatics. 

On one such trek we stumbled upon the abandoned movie ranch where years earlier Charles Manson and his "family" had lived for a time plotting their Helter Skelter conspiracy. It frightened me to think about the horror of what they had done and how the isolation of the canyons had made it easy for them to melt away from public scrutiny.

Later that same summer, when I returned to work part time as a nurse at a valley hospital, I discovered one of my co‑workers was a former member of that infamous family. Barbara Hoyt had lived at the ranch, but had not participated in the murderous sprees. Charlie's girls had tried, unsuccessfully, to kill her with an overdose of LSD to prevent her from testifying at the trials which came later.  Where else but in Los Angeles could you find a former member of the Manson family, dressed in a white nurse's uniform, standing next to you drawing up a shot of Demerol for a patient!

Ironically, I was soon to face my own day in court when I filed for a divorce and put an end to my dream of saving my marriage.

Mental Illness and the Homeless Part II: Is Stigma Still With Us?

(Article published in Street Speech by the Columbus Coalition for the Homeless) 

Robert was a homeless man who hung out across from the old Big Bear on High Street in Clintonville.  Local residents, however, called him “the dancer.”  He gyrated to his own beat, like someone listening with headphones to music no one else could hears, except Robert had no headphones.  He usually seemed happy, why else would he dance?  But there were other times when something, who knew what, spooked him and he became agitated- shouting and gesturing wildly.  Pedestrians tended to give him a wide berth.  He was well known to the police.  Mostly they left him alone, but if they received enough   complaints they would pick him up and take him to Netcare for a psychiatric evaluation.  Usually he was back on the street dancing at his spot within 24-48 hours.  

What are most people’s reactions to seeing someone like Robert? Are they afraid and try to avoid getting near him? Do they feel sympathy and want to help him? The answer, we said in Part I of this series, was not an easy one since the issues involved are complex. We began to try and understand the situation by taking a brief historical look at society’s treatment of mental illness right here in America. We saw that except for a brief period of time in the early 19th century when “the moral treatment” approach was in vogue, the attitude of most of society was one of “out of sight, out of mind.” Thus asylums, as they were called then, were generally located way out in the country away from populous city centers. The objective was to limit the disturbing behaviors, not restore the patient to a productive life in the community. Patients were routinely confined to these institutions, many times for life. They were buried in grave yards on the grounds with only a number instead of a name- the ultimate indignity.

Following the closure of these large state-run psychiatric hospitals, patients were discharged into the community without adequate resources in place to care for them. Unfortunately, many of us saw both the mentally ill and the indigent as “throw away” populations.

How have things changed- or have they?

People tend to fear what they do not understand, and in the case of mental illness in particular, our superstitions and ignorance have led to many beliefs that influenced our perceptions of the mentally ill and in turn, our behavior toward them. Let’s look at just a few of those beliefs and see if any of them are still with us and contribute to the stigma many people still have toward the mentally ill.

Early History

Ancient civilizations in Babylonia, Assyria, Egypt, and the Mediterranean-Near East attributed mental illness to some supernatural force, generally a displeased deity or demonic possession. Demons or "foul spirits" were believed to attach themselves to individuals and make them "mad." The word mad became an early synonym for psychosis. The insane were treated through magical rituals, prayer and exorcism. In Greek and Roman cultures mental illness was thought to be the result of an imbalance in the 4 essential fluids in the body: blood, phlegm, bile, and black bile. Treatments consisted of emetics, laxatives, bloodletting with leeches and cupping to return balance. Even at present in some regions of the world, illnesses, both mental and physical, are thought to be caused by malevolent or misguided spirits, and healers base their practice on removing those entities from the patient. Almost every religion has its 'exorcists' who drive out the bad spirits.

Middle Ages

During this period mental illness was viewed with fear. Affected persons were thought to be influenced and controlled by the moon, thus the term lunatic emerged to describe them. Treatment was influenced by the belief that the mentally ill were evil, witches or heretics. They were therefore excluded from society and confined to institutions where harsh treatment was the norm. They were treated as criminals and punished for their behaviors.

18th and 19th Century

Physicians began to ascribe both moral and physical causes to mental illness. The hospital records for 1876 at the Athens Lunatic Asylum in Athens, Ohio list the leading physical causes of insanity among the male patients as masturbation, intemperance (excessive drinking) or drunkenness. The leading physical causes of insanity among female patients as "puerperal condition" (any condition that affects a mother from the period of the birth of her child until the uterus returns to normal), "change of life," and "menstrual derangements." Other physical causes listed in the record included epilepsy, bathing while overheated, fording a cold creek while menstruating, overwork and the strain of bearing too many children. Moral causes were thought to stem from bad character and included jealousy, religious excitement, disappointment in love, unmarried life, and financial troubles. Family members could have a loved one committed for something as simple as punishment for stealing or disruptive behavior. Even today many people still believe that some forms of mental illness, like depression and anxiety disorders, for example, are attributed to a weak character and can be overcome by sheer will power and determination.

Modern Views

In the first half of the twentieth century, psychiatry was advanced by the discovery of medications that helped to alleviate depression, mania, and psychosis. As often occurs in the history of medicine, physicians stumbled upon solutions before they understood the mechanisms that made the treatment work. Later studies began to reveal that certain patients responded to medications that increased certain neurotransmitters in the brain. Drugs that increased the levels of the neurotransmitters norepinephrine and serotonin seemed to help depressed patients. Similarly, medications that blocked the transmission of dopamine, another neurotransmitter, provided relief for patients suffering from hallucinations and paranoia. These insights have led to the present emphasis on the biochemistry of the human brain and its role in mental illness.

Today we also know that genetics play a big role in the development of psychiatric disorders. Research, for example, has revealed there is a specific gene associated with bipolar disorder (also known as manic-depressive disorder). Similarly, research done on identical twins has provided strong support for a genetic component in the development of schizophrenia.

Current attitudes

Opinions are shaped in large measure by what we read in newspapers, what we hear on the radio, and what we see on television and in the movies. Images of mental illness in the mass media are rarely accurate however. Movie characters like Norman Bates in Psycho or Dr. Hannibal Lecter in The Silence of the Lambs perpetuated myths about mental illness and people’s fears about those suffering from them.

News stories about psychotic-gunman-on-the-rampage also compound the negative stereotypes of the mentally ill and lead to the misconception that people with mental illnesses are violent and have limited potential for positive participation in society.

In actuality, studies have shown that only a minuscule percentage of the violence in American society can be attributed to people who have mental illnesses. In contrast, drug abuse is strongly linked to violence.

These kinds of depictions do not tell the whole story. Hollywood and the news media need to tone down their bias and not just focus on the negative. There is good news out there to report too. Patients do get better with medication and people with mental illness can go on to lead full, productive lives.

As more and more celebrities and public figures reveal their own experiences with psychiatric illness and drug abuse, perhaps the public’s attitude will change. Recent examples include Brooke Shields, journalist Mike Wallace, and Tipper Gore speaking out about their battles with depression and Patty Duke and Jane Pauley sharing their struggles with bipolar disorder.

Studies show that stigma is the greatest barrier to seeking treatment for mental and addictive disorders. No one wants to be the butt of a joke, called “wacko” or “psycho “ or have others avoid them or whisper about them behind their back. Stigma is something that both the homeless and the mentally ill in our community have in common.

Yet even as the medicine and therapy for mental health disorders have made remarkable progress, the ancient social stigma of psychological illness remains largely intact. Families are loath to talk about it and, in movies and the media, stereotypes about the mentally ill still reign.

This was made abundantly clear to a group of nursing students who recently ran an education group for psychiatric patients and their families on the topic of stigma. The patients talked openly about the fear, rejection and misunderstanding they encountered from both family members and employers regarding their mental illness.

Why do we have empathy for someone with a debilitating physical illness, but not a mental one? Despite our modern understanding of a biomedical view of the causes for mental illness, Americans are apparently no more tolerant of the mentally ill than they were a decade ago.

A study at the University of Pennsylvania (Social Science and Medicine, 2008) conducted by sociology professor Jason Schnitker) reveals that in the case of schizophrenia, genetic findings do nothing to assuage people’s fears of violence associated with this disorder. However, when applied to depression the condition seems more real and less blameworthy.

The study went on further to state that, “While the stigma surrounding mental illness has not diminished, the culture surrounding it has become more treatment focused with medications now a mainstay of popular media, but at the same time aren’t associated with increased tolerance levels.”

The study goes on to explore tolerance in terms of social distancing: unwillingness to live next door to a mentally ill person, have a group home for the mentally ill in the neighborhood, socialize or work closely with such a person or have a mentally ill person marry into the family. In all these areas Americans remain basically intolerant. It appears that the “out of sight, out of mind” attitude of generations ago still prevails.

One cannot help but wonder if our continued lack of tolerance accounts for our unwillingness to provide the community services needed to treat those suffering from mental illness. Is this why so many of them are homeless and left to live on the streets, like Robert?

Mental Illness and the Homeless Part I: A History of Treatment in America

(Article published in Street Speech by the Columbus Coalition for the Homeless) 

According to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 20 to 25% of the homeless population in the United States suffers from some form of severe mental illness. But since more than half of all homeless people are without any heath care insurance, most would not have been able to be diagnosed, and even of those who were diagnosed, many of them deny the diagnosis. Thus, we should amend the statistic to say that the amount of homeless that are mentally ill is unknown, but the number might reach as much as half.

Why you might ask are so many homeless also mentally ill? Isn’t this inhumane of society to let this segment of the population remain “out there” untreated and unprotected? The answer is not an easy one since the issues involved in the problem are complex. To begin to try and understand the situation we need to take a brief historical look at society’s view of mental illness in America.

In the mid-1800’s, and in some places, the early 1900’s, mentally ill men and women of all ages used to be confined either to prisons, where conditions were often abysmal, or poorhouses (tax-supported residential institutions where indigent people were sent. During these years in America the aim was not to provide treatment or even basic care for the mentally ill, but simply to remove them from society- an “out of sight, out of mind” mentality.

In prison patients were often treated like animals. They were shackled to the wall in dark, cramped cells with no heat or bathrooms. Little thought was given to whether they were adequately fed or clothed. Cells were rarely if ever cleaned so inmates were forced to live in their own waste.

The alternatives to prison for some mentally ill were poorhouses. Every county in Ohio established one or more poorhouses during the 19th century. Some were clean and had plenty of food. Others were filthy places where people often went hungry. It all depended on where you lived, and who was on the county board. In the 1920s, the federal government sent volunteers to examine more than 2,000 poorhouses around the country. A report concluded that conditions were shameful.

Activists for the mentally ill lobbied for more humane treatment and in the early nineteenth century. This led to the creation of a progressive environment which fostered the establishment of many public "lunatic asylums" throughout the country. These asylums (meaning a retreat or place of refuge or protection) gradually replaced cruder methods of coping with the mentally ill.

“The Ridges,” a mental hospital in Athens, Ohio, is an example of such a place. It operated from 1874 until 1993. It was called the Athens Lunatic Asylum, then renamed Athens Asylum for the Insane. Later it became the Athens State Hospital. It is representative of a style of mental hospital common at this time known as “Kirkbrides” (named after Dr. Thomas Story Kirkbride, an influential advocate of an asylum system) built on large plots of isolated land where patients took care of the land. Many Kirkbrides like the Athens State Hospital featured self- sustaining apple orchards, gardens, and dairy farms. Positive behavior was rewarded, and patients were expected to exercise self-control.

This new “moral treatment” approach was marked by a well-ordered daily routine in which patients followed a therapeutic regiment of work and leisure activities. It was believed crucial to place patients in a more natural environment away from the pollutants and hectic energy of urban centers. Abundant fresh air and natural light not only contributed to a healthy environment, but also served to promote a more cheerful atmosphere.

Patients were also encouraged to take part in recreations, games, and entertainments which would also engage their minds, make their stay more pleasant, and perhaps help foster and maintain social skills. The patients with the most self-control participated in recreational activities like boating, painting, dances, and picnics. Church services were also offered in the asylum chapel building. Most of the nurses who worked at the hospital also lived there in order to provide better 24 hour care for the patients.

Columbus too had a similar Kirkbride asylum completed in 1877 after the first hospital, called the Lunatic Asylum of Ohio, burned to the ground in 1868. The building was similar in appearance to the Athens State Hospital Kirkbride, although it was significantly larger. The institution closed in the late 1980s. Unfortunately, attempts at preservation of the historic structure failed and the Kirkbride was razed in 1991. The Ohio Department of Public Safety and Department of Transportation now call the former asylum grounds home.

The failure of the moral treatment method to produce permanent cures and eventual overcrowding (patient records show an increase from the original 200 hundred patients to nearly 2000 patients by the early 1900’s) led to the demise of this treatment approach.

In the early to mid-1900’s a new generation of asylum superintendents began advocating different forms of new and "better" treatments for patients. These included water treatments (consisted of patients being thrust into ice cold water for extended periods of time or wrapped and restrained by sheets that had been soaked in the ice water), shock therapy (also known as electroconvulsive therapy or ECT, used to induce a seizure in a patient for therapeutic effect), and the infamous lobotomy.

Around 1950, people from the medical field began to speak out against Dr. Freeman’s lobotomies, suggesting that there was no evidence to prove the procedure actually worked, and in some cases, resulted in death. The lobotomy was finally declared barbaric, and a new wave of psychotropic drugs, like Thorazine, replaced it. Although the heavy drugs administered in hospitals at this time weren’t perfect, they were far more humane than electric shock or radical brain surgery.

Psychiatric hospitals, as they were now called, gradually became notorious for poor living conditions, lack of hygiene, overcrowding, and ill-treatment and abuse of patients. Custodial care once again superseded humane treatment. Controlling a patient’s behavior by the administration of medication and the use of behavior modification techniques, like the use of restraints and seclusion rooms, were the norm. The 1975 movie, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, depicts this era graphically.

I saw this first hand during my student nursing days when I did my psychiatric nursing rotation on the back ward of a state hospital. Drugged patients paced listlessly or lay on their beds staring off into space. Time was measured by the burning of cigarettes, and days were organized around the dispensing of scheduled medications and mealtimes. The lack of stimulation and activity was, I thought, like being in prison. The locked doors were another striking similarity. The objective was to limit the disturbing behaviors, not restore the patient to a productive life in the community.

It was not until the 1960’s that humane treatments began reappearing in psychiatric hospitals when class action lawsuits, patient advocacy groups and government agencies helped expose the poor conditions and treatment in state hospitals.

Around the same time, sociologists and others argued that long term hospitalization maintained or created dependency, passivity, exclusion and disability, causing people to become "institutionalized." There was an argument that community services would be cheaper. Anti-psychotic drugs made it possible to begin discharging large numbers of patients back into the community. Deinstitutionalization is the name given to the policy of moving severely mentally ill people out of large state institutions and then closing part or all of those institutions. It began in 1955 and escalated in the 60’s and early 70’s.

The 1980’s were the final days of the Ridges, as well as many other state mental hospitals all over America. The final patients left in 1993 (the buildings and grounds have been taken over by the Ohio University). However, because of inadequate housing and follow-up care, many of these patients became homeless or went to prison. We have come full circle.

The magnitude of deinstitutionalization of the severely mentally ill qualifies it as one of the largest social experiments in American history. Many consider it to be a major contributing factor to the current mental illness crisis. The most striking evidence of this crisis was the dramatic appearance of large numbers of obviously mentally ill people on city streets, people who were dirty, who wore torn or inappropriate clothing, who hallucinated and talked to themselves or shouted to others, and who in general acted in a strange or bizarre way. In many places, huge ghettos of discharged patients were created in areas of low-cost housing, proprietary homes, or deteriorating neighborhoods. It has been said that instead of "community psychiatry," reforms established a "psychiatric community."

The majority of those who would have been under continuous care in long-stay psychiatric hospitals are often paranoid and delusional to the point that they refuse help and do not believe they need it, which makes it difficult to treat them in the community. Community services were often uncoordinated and unable to meet complex needs and existing patients were often discharged without sufficient preparation or support.

This has led to two new syndromes: "falling between the cracks" and the "revolving door," the former indicating a total lack of follow-up and aftercare for discharged patients, and the latter their continued readmissions, usually due to noncompliance with treatment. Thus deinstitutionalization is part of a process sometimes called transinstutionalization- the transfer of institutional populations from hospitals to jails, nursing homes, and shelters.

Our society as a whole still grapples with the dilemma of what to do with its mentally ill members. Both long-term hospitalization and community mental health services have, in large measure, been a failure. This population remains vulnerable and at risk.

Reflections of a Middle-Aged Woman

Yes, according to Gail Sheehy, the 60’s are the new middle age.  That aside, what I want to reflect on here is what happened to that wide-eyed, twenty-something young woman I used to be who protested the war in Vietnam and marched for civil rights and actually believed that people could change the world for the better? When did I stop believing the world was full of promise and hope?  Did I want to become this cynical? No, I did not! But here I am just the same.

I believe in God.  I clutch onto that belief with a death grip because it is the only path I see that still leads to wonder.  Without wonder life is boring, riddled with anxieties and fears and disappointments.  “All is futile,” Solomon tells us, “a chasing after the wind.”  Remember back to childhood when everything was new?   “Look,” my grandson cried out excitedly when he was three from his car seat looking out the window, “a red car!”  A few seconds later, “Look,”  just as excitedly, “a cow! “  That phase passes all too quickly.  We become jaded.  But there is still wonder in the world, you just have to look harder for it.  My husband and I just returned from a trip to the Cotswold’s in England.  I felt a sense of wonder driving along one-tract country roads past bucolic scenes of green rolling hills dotted with sheep grazing.  It was like a slice of heaven.   “To see a world in a grain of sand, a heaven in a wildflower” William Blake says. 

Back in my “normal” life after our all too brief idyllic vacation, I was assaulted with the news of the world- and none of it good of course.  Good news doesn’t sell so we rarely hear about it.  In the weeks after we returned a violent freak storm hit shutting down power to thousands in our city in the middle of one of the worst heat waves, gas prices reached another all-time high, new information on the Penn State child molestation case against Sandusky had come to light, Iran was making threats again, the national debt was still climbing and our politicians were still running smear campaigns against each other.  

I know it’s an election year, but does that mean all other problems go on hold while we focus on hidden bank accounts and birth certificates?  When did American politics sink to this appalling level?  When did candidate debates revolve around character assassination instead of their respective plans for running the country?  That’s what I want to hear.  I could care less about the rest of it.  Since when did a candidate’s morals mean so much to us anyway?  Was there ever a bigger womanizer than JFK?  Yet he’s a national icon.  The Kennedys are our version of American royalty.  Even the campaign ads are an insult to our intelligence.  Here’s a my hypothetical example of the childish depths our leaders have sunk to:  A candidate is making a speech at a rally and says something like, “I hate American’s who lie and cheat and think they are above the law.  If I’m elected I will change that!”  The opposition then runs an ad that plays only a small portion of that speech taken out of context, like “I hate Americans.” The ad then goes on to say, “Why would you elect a President who feels this way about his fellow Americans?”  There’s more and more of this trickery going on, truth is now so elusive in politics that it is virtually nonexistent.  

Here’s what really bugs me – why does anyone believe that a politian of any ilk who is running for office, whether Republican or Democrat, presidential candidate, congressman or senator, speaks the truth?  Is there even one naïve person out there over the age of ten who really believes that?  And if not, why in hell aren’t we protesting the lies and deceptions coming from both sides?  We are more concerned with loyalty to a particular party or ideology than demanding changes be made in the entire system

Isn’t that what this president campaigned on- hope and change?  Why do I look around and still see business as usual in Washington?  “Let’s pass the healthcare bill and then read it,” our speaker of the house tells us.

The U.S. Supreme Court, by the admission of several members, failed to read the law before ruling on it. Give me a break! This is NOT about liberalism versus capitalism. It’s about blatant corruption on every level. Our system of government is broken! It has been for a long time. When are we going to wake up and do something about it? Even in the unlikely event that someone with character is elected to office, once they get to Washington D.C. they get swept up in the graft and greed and the buying and selling of favors. It’s like a modern day Babylon. It needs to be taken down and rebuilt from the bottom up. And therein lies the root cause of my cynicism. I don’t believe people in general in our society today care enough to do anything about it. They are more concerned with making their own life more comfortable. They are too busy to be concerned with what’s going on somewhere else. They would rather just turn on the news and delude themselves that the media is actually telling them the truth. Does anyone really believe in the fairy tale of “fair and balanced” news reporting anymore? People today are like those sheep we saw in the Cotswold’s, following whomever says what they want to hear, ignoring the obvious evidence that we as a country are sliding further and further into ruin.

If only I could believe again in the power of a protest march.  But alas, I do not.  So I hold out for wonder.  I believe it is there if we but have eyes to see it. And it keeps me going when I do.

Women of the Street

(Article published in Street Speech by the Columbus Coalition for the Homeless) 

If you drive at night around the Hilltop area of Columbus or East Broad or East Main you will see them- women who are working the streets.  Human trafficking is second only to drug trafficking in America.  National statistics on prostitution are alarming:  96% of women who become prostitutes begin as youthful runaways.  33% enter prostitution before the age of 15, and 62 % before the age of 18 (many, some right here in Columbus, have histories of being sold by their parents to support a drug habit).  82% are physically assaulted, 68% have been raped while working, and 27% by multiple assailants.  83% of women have been threatened with a weapon.  75% of women who work as prostitutes will attempt suicide.  The average life expectancy of a women engaged in prostitution is age 34 and almost all the women who work in this trade are addicted to drugs and alcohol.  In Columbus, Ohio approximately 1,200 women year face solicitation charges, while the johns remain in the shadows. 

Most communities are not prepared to address the complex needs of these women, including chemical dependency, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), traumatic brain injuries from frequent beatings, homelessness, estrangement from families, loss of children taken into custody by social services, and a lack of education and vocational training.  However, women here in Columbus charged with prostitution are receiving a unique opportunity to address their plethora of needs through an innovative docket court run by a very special judge. 

Judge Paul Herbert of Franklin County Municipal Court, after years of listening to the stories of the women who appeared before him in court, became convinced that their stories were not stories about choice, but of survival.  He says, “I used to be one of those people who said it [prostitution] was a victimless crime- that’s not true.”  Most, he found, had a history of childhood abuse and poverty.  Young girls run away from home to escape, but once on the street they often fall victim to “dope boys” (the term that has replaced “pimp) who exploit them, drawing them into the violent world of human trafficking, addiction, and dehumanization.  These women are typically arrested repeatedly.  They clog the courts, overflow the jails and cost the taxpayer a considerable sum.  Thus in August of 2009 Judge Herbert decided to try a different approach to the problem.  He joined with other groups like Doma International, which seeks to break the orphan cycle by empowering women to care for themselves and their children around the world, and Amethyst, a local residential program for women and their children transitioning out of homelessness, substance abuse and domestic violence.  He put together a community support team with training and experience working with trauma victims and chemical dependency and created an innovative alternative approach to help women caught up in this cycle.  Now women who face solicitation charges in a Columbus, Ohio courtroom are offered a choice between jail time (between 30 days to six months), or the opportunity to enter the Changing Actions to Habits Program (CATCH),  a voluntary two-year program. 

The CATCH program provides a chance for recovery.  The majority are referred to Amethyst Inc. because it is a long-term treatment program, there is no quick fix to the multiplicity of issues these woman must address, not the least of which is not having any concept of any other kind of life.  Nanon Morrison, Development Director at Amethyst said, “Our program is unique because women are usually in it for an average of two to three years, or longer.  Besides getting substance abuse treatment, the women receive treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and take parenting classes. ” The CATCH program also requires the women to wear an ankle bracelet with a GPS so authorities know where they are at all times.  They must agree to be drug tested on a regular basis, have curfews, and must comply with stay away zones (areas of the city they must avoid).  Participants must also appear each Thursday in court to report their progress. 

Judge Herbert explains the goals of the program this way: “I’m not minimizing the fact that they have committed a crime, in fact, I’m pretty tough when I need to be to separate them from whatever is causing them to backslide or relapse.  I’ll put them in jail-  I have no qualms about that.  What I am attempting to do here, what this experiment is trying to do, is to build up the personal accountability of the individual, yet also exact restorative justice in the process so the end result is a more self-sufficient citizen who is giving back to the community.”

For women who complete the program successfully, most have their conviction dismissed and expunged.   The Ohio legislature appears to be getting in line with this new enlightened approach too since the House just passed a bill increasing penalties for those profiting from human trafficking, while also increasing help for the victims.  A fund has been established from money seized from convicted drug trafficking offenders to help pay for services for the victims.

I had the opportunity to attend CATCH court recently to see firsthand how it works.  It meets every Thursday from 1:30-3:30 at 375 North High Street, courtroom 12C, and is open to the public (all women- men need advance approval to attend).  All of the women in the CATCH program the day I was there shared their stories with everyone in the courtroom. Some had positive accomplishments to report; one woman talked about making contact with estranged family members and her attempts at reconciliation with them (her mother and son were there in court for the first time that day).  Another woman talked about how she was finally on the verge of obtaining her GED.  Others shared personal insights they had gained about their life choices and their struggle to heal from their painful pasts.  Sometimes Judge Herbert asked a question or made a comment; always each woman’s summary of her progress included how many days she had been clean.  This was followed by a rousing round of applause from everyone in the courtroom.  I was struck by the willingness of these women to be so transparent about themselves and their lives in a public forum.  I could sense real love and support coming from the women for each other and the compassion of this judge, who remembered each woman’s name and story, was heartwarming.  At some point in the proceedings the bailiff began to bring in a few prisoners in shackles.  A newly arrested woman was given the opportunity to consider participating in CATCH and to hear directly from the other women in the program about it.  She was willing to give it a try and was returned to jail to complete the process.  Another woman, who had completed six months in the program, had recently been re-arrested after returning to the streets.  Judge Herbert remembered her and told her how sorry he was that she had relapsed. He told her how much potential he saw in her and how afraid he was for her chances of survival on the streets. As if to emphasize his point, he told her about a recent murder of a young woman who had gotten into a car with a man and was later found dead.  It was a chilling account but his concern for the prisoner felt genuine.  The other women chimed in offering encouragement, but also confronting her directly, as only they could, about her denial and her self-pity.

This program has been paying off in more ways than one.  Besides being cost effective, Herbert believes its real value is in saving lost souls.  He says, “Right now we know that 60% who have entered our program are continuing in their recovery.  People say, compare that to the success rate you had before.  That’s pretty difficult, but probably there was little to no success rate- only a death rate, how long are they going to live.”

I was told that it is not uncommon for women to turn down a time-served sentence in favor of Judge Herbert’s 2-year program of recovery.  I can see why given the success stories I heard.  As Judge Herbert once said in an interview, “We want women in our program to know they are important and special.”  He certainly conveyed that to the women he interacted with in court the day I was there.  One woman in the program expressed it this way, “CATCH court is like my own personal church every week.  It uplifts me.  It makes me feel like I’m not alone.  Just having a judge proud of me…I can’t say enough good things about the CATCH court program.”  Having observed it first hand, neither can I.

For more information about programs that support and work with the CATCH program go to:

 http://www.domaconnection.org/

www.amethyst-inc.org/

Retirement

5-22-2012

I retired from teaching on 3-17-2012 (our 23^rd wedding anniversary).  To my surprise I discovered that retirement is not what I thought it would be.  It is sort of similar to anticipating a special vacation.  But when you get to actually go on it the reality does not live up to your expectations.  Here’s what I mean.  Travel is exhausting, I always get sick at some point, I miss whoever I have left behind and living out of a suitcase gets old real quick.  I feel the same way about my retirement, when it finally came, it was not all I had built it up to be in my mind. 

The last couple of years at Columbus State I actually marked off the quarters like a prison sentence in my Day Planner.  I was holding on- just waiting for my time there to be over.  I especially hated the early mornings in winter on clinical days or when I had an eight o’clock lecture.  I would have to leave the house for work in the cold or rain when it was barely light out.  I hated the dysfunctional nursing department and how codependent my co-workers were.   And then there were the rude and disrespectful students.  Not all of them course, but even just a few were enough to ruin it for me for the quarter.  I hated that nothing worked on campus- the audio/visual equipment in the lecture hall, the toilets in the bathroom, the elevator in Union Hall- I could go on, but you get the picture.  Working at Columbus State was an exercise in dealing with constant frustration.   After ten years I was even sick of doing my same lectures.  I was ready for a change!  

Ok, so I am now officially retired.  What does it feel like, what does it look like?  At first it just felt like I was on a break between quarters.  Every quarter runs 15 weeks, followed by a break of anywhere from one to three weeks in duration.  So it felt like just another break at first.  Then I began to feel at loose ends.  It’s like being on a permanent vacation- and not in a good way!

I feel as though I have lost my identity.   For thirty something years I was a nurse, then an administrator and finally a college professor.  Now what am I?  In addition, when my son married and became a parent himself, my relationship with him also changed drastically.  I no longer had my maternal role to augment my professional persona.  In some ways, the ending of my maternal responsibilities made my professional identity even more important.  With it now gone too I am at a loss to define myself.  That feels uncomfortable. 

So, while I am struggling to come to terms with all this, I am simultaneously grappling with a bunch of legal, healthcare and financial affairs that I need to get in order.  Much of it I don’t entirely understand and that makes me feel vulnerable.  When I was an administrator I earned a hefty salary and had a great benefits package.  I didn’t worry about expenses and a budget.  When I changed careers and went into teaching I took a huge salary cut.  But even then, it was a livable wage and it was dependable.  Now my income is in flux and I’m not confident it is sufficient.  So there is anxiety.  But more than that, for the first time since my early twenties, I am not depending on myself- my own earning power- to support myself.   I’m looking to the government and to my pensions and my IRA’s to do that and in this present financial climate, that is less than a sure bet.  If money was not an issue, I would still have the identity crisis to deal with, but as it is I also have financial worries to contend with.

 

The other disconcerting thing about this retirement is what happens to time.  Suddenly all the days blur together.  I never know what day it is and weekends are the same as Mondays!  It’s all very strange.  I’m slowly putting together a schedule of sorts – who knew how crucial schedules were to one’s sense of stability?  So now three mornings a week (Mon-Wed-Fri) Chris and I go to our fitness center and take an aerobics class, followed by a swim in the pool and/or soak in the hot tub.  Tuesdays I have my yoga class and Thursdays is my Celebrate Recovery group.  I am currently taking an online writing course but it ends in a couple of weeks.  We have joined a home group that meets twice a month and of course there is church on Sundays.  This still leaves a lot of empty time, but it’s a start.

What about our business, In Awe Shop?  Well that is a puzzle too.  Maybe it’s the ambivalence that I have felt about it from the start; maybe it’s an unconscious desire to avoid facing the reality that we don’t really know how to move ahead with it.  One thing I do know is that the situation with the business is stressful!  When I was teaching I did not have to focus solely on this, now I do.

So here I am sending out resumes again- something I last did in 2002!  I need to get an online teaching job to offset the cost of our supplemental health insurance and to make up some of the difference from the reduction in my social security (it got cut by $600 a month).  Nothing like a little financial pressure to lighten the mood!  This is not the carefree escape from the working grind I was expecting.  I hope when I next add to this, I am feeling more positive about things.

   

5-23-2012

I remember some years ago I read a book called Sacred Marriage by Gary Thomas.  In it he said, “What if marriage was not meant to make us happy, but holy?”  What if there is something similar here with retirement?  What if retirement was not meant to make me happy but was meant instead to grow my faith?  What if God wants to use it to change me?  Now this has given me something to think about.  How might this play out?

The first thing that comes to mind is something our pastor said recently about change.  He said change is good.  Otherwise we would stay as we are.  Transformation involves change.  He doesn’t call us to safe, familiar paths.  He calls us into the unknown.  Obedience and risk always go together.  Maybe I need to begin seeing this new phase in my life in this way. 

The second thing I am reminded of is the removal of distractions in my life.  John Eldredge says that the god of this age is busyness.  With so much to keep me occupied, finding time for God in my life has always been a challenge.  I remember when I first lost my job in Little Rock how panicked I was.  But then I came to love that time of quiet and solitude I had with Him alone each day.  I began to unwind and revel in the absence of the stress and pressure in my life.  I was able to do my student teaching practicum at UAMS without the conflict of my job at the state hospital and I found myself again.  I knew I had made the right decision in leaving my career in administration and switching to teaching.  I knew (as in really trusting) God would provide for us financially, and he did even with that six months of unemployment.  I got just enough per diem work with Eli Lilly and Co. doing workshops, coupled with Chris’ job at Sears, to pay our bills.  It became a special time of blessing in my life that I still treasure the memory of.  I think this just might be a similar season. 

So in this slowed down time what do I think God might be trying to show me?  I think one thing might be to find my identity in him, rather than in a role or a title.  I think God might be showing me that what I do is not as important as who I am.  Who did God create me to be?  “In quietness and confidence is your strength” (Is. 30:15).

5-24-2012

Came across another great quote that seems to apply to what I am dealing with and continues the theme of change.  It's from Wayne Jacobsen’s, The Deepest Freedom:  “I wanted him to change my circumstances so I would never have to feel insecure or afraid.  He wants to change me so no circumstance would ever make me afraid again.”

Capitalism

Capitalism is the only politico-economic system based on the doctrine of individual rights. Advocates of it say that in allowing each individual to act unhampered by government regulations, capitalism causes wealth to be created in the most efficient manner possible which ultimately raises the standard of living, increases economic opportunities, and makes available an ever growing supply of products for everyone. Thus, under capitalism, the individual's pursuit of his own economic self-interest simultaneously benefits the economic self-interests of all others. In other words, as the rich become richer, the poor become richer- at least in theory.

Proponents of this system understandably hold to the belief that capitalism is not a system which exploits a large portion of society for the sake of a small minority of wealthy capitalists (economic elitism). In fact, they maintain that capitalism is the complete embodiment of social justice. In a social or political context justice means that every person gets no more, and no less, than what he gains through voluntary association with other men. A capitalist society is a just society because all individuals are considered equal under the law. Capitalism recognizes that it is just for a man to keep what he has earned and that it is unjust for a man, or group of men, to have the right to what other people have earned. Since all people must live independently under capitalism, all of the material values that a person acquires must be earned. Thus, the expression of social justice under capitalism is that what a man earns is directly proportional to what he produces, with no antitrust laws or progressive income taxes stifling his achievement. All other forms of government, such as the welfare state, institutionalize injustice by legally expropriating the property of some men and giving it to others.

Many people have trouble accepting that capitalism is a just system because of the existence of economic inequality. For example, it is observed that famous celebrities and sports stars receive very large incomes for work that is perceived as trivial, and that many hard working people make incomes which pale in comparison from jobs that are perceived to be of greater benefit to society. A capitalist would reply that each of them deserves what they earn, and what they earn is the result of how much wealth each of them creates Since each man has the right to the product of his labor, it is completely just for the disparity in incomes to exist, and the only injustice to occur would be for the government to take money from the celebrity or athlete and give it to those who supposedly deserve it on the basis of their "need."

What are we to make of this? On the surface it seems reasonable. But is it just? Under capitalism, as it is currently practiced in America, selfishness on the part of the capitalist will always tend toward debt-oriented labor and economic practices making it morally wrong. The best way to understand this is to compare capitalism to communism. Communism failed, in part, because the state owned the means of production. What this really amounted to was that individuals highly placed in the Communist party actually controlled the means of production, and these individuals tended strongly toward corruption. Dissociated from his own self-interest, and dominated by the corrupt and bureaucratic apparatus of the Communist party, the average individual found himself politically powerless and poorly motivated economically, unable to enjoy the fruits of his own labor. In addition to being corrupt, the size and inertia of the state bureaucracy made for inefficiency of administration. And exacerbating all of this, a number of pathological personalities, such as Stalin and Khrushchev, rose to the top of the power structure and acted against the common good. Now let’s look at how our current version of capitalism and free enterprise mirrors this.

Ironically, capitalism has tendencies to many of the same problems as communism, though the failures are superficially different. The large corporation, which is perhaps the ultimate expression of successful capitalism, is the locus of many of the problems. Corresponding to the privileged elite of the Communist party is the privileged corporate elite. Just as the privileged elite of the Communist party rendered the political system useless for the average individual by promoting political corruption, the privileged elite of corporate capitalism has also rendered the political system useless for the average individual by promoting political corruption. Moreover, under corporate capitalism, the individual is wrongly motivated (through fear of loss of employment rather than the desire to build equity), and is unable to enjoy the fruits of his own labor, since most of the value of that labor is appropriated by the corporation in profits for a few while paying disproportionately much lower wages to its workers. Just looking at our current economic meltdown is proof enough of this. We certainly have pathological personalities at the top of the corporate power structure (along with their political cronies bought and paid for by “campaign donations”) exacerbating the situation. After extensive congressional investigations did anyone responsible go to jail? In the end who suffered the consequences for the corrupt practices of Wall Street – the CEO’s or the workers who lost their jobs and the taxpayers who footed the bill for the bailouts?

That the political and economic outcomes have been so similar under both communism and corporate capitalism should hardly be surprising, given that the underlying problem is the same in both cases: too great a concentration of ownership and control in too few hands. From the perspective of morality the problems of the two systems are also the same: neither system allows the average individual to enjoy most of the fruits of his own labor and both exploit the individual shamelessly.

Is there a better system? Stay tuned for future posts. Meantime, share your thoughts.