In the second part of our interview with David W. Oaks, of MindFreedom International, we return to Oaks’ discussion on mental health care in Oregon, including an indictment of Governor Ted Kulongoski's purse-string policies.
David W. Oaks: “I am saddened that for the entire length of Governor Ted Kulongoski's terms of seven years so far, he has requested zero -- 0 -- in his budget for the statewide voice of mental health consumers and psychiatric survivors. While the governor may be a kind man in general, because of his negligence his office has been heartless when it comes to our constituency. And before anyone tells me about cutbacks, the budget for the voice of statewide mental health clients was not cut back, it was zeroed out.
“Most U.S. states have something, some crumb, some program to hear the voice of mental health clients, such as funding for a conference, office of consumer affairs, consumer council, etc. Oregon is one of the few with zero resources for that statewide voice. So while Governor Kulongoski found half a billion dollars in a troubled economy to break the ground on brand new huge psychiatric institutions, some of the few being built any more in the whole world.... this same governor was unable to find even one dime in his budget for that voice, for seven years. And this is despite repeated requests year after year from his own mental health agency, and after he met face-to-face with mental health consumer representatives.
“In Oregon, I feel the office of Governor Kulongoski itself has been the number one obstacle to deep change in mental health care, for his entire term. His legacy may be enormous concrete institutions, with nothing -- absolutely nothing -- to amplify the voice of the mental health clients. This summer, even as a lame duck governor, he should make sure his proposed budget remedies this outrage.
“Sanism”
Portland Mental Health Examiner: You're a Harvard graduate, prominent speaker, and Utne reader called you one of the "Visionaries" of 2009. Do you still experience discrimination because of your diagnosis?
David W. Oaks: “I've been out of the closet so long, I'm not sure I would recognize much of the discrimination. I have a physical disability (fused spine) and I actually get more reactions for that, than I do when I disclose my psychiatric survivor experience.
“However, when I further disclose that some of my diagnoses (bipolar and schizophrenia) are a subset of what is called 'psychosis,' then I do feel a surprising amount of prejudice, and a request even from friends and relatives that I ought to be silent about this. Since more and more people are open about their diagnoses of depression, PTSD and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, one would think prejudice is lessening. However, I defy anyone to tell a new next door neighbor, potential romantic partner or possible employer that he or she is a diagnosed ‘psychotic.’ Thankfully I have great neighbors, a wonderful wife Debra, and a great employer -- MindFreedom!
“So while I feel having a psychiatric label today may bring less discrimination, I think a certain category of those labels -- specifically those called ‘psychotic’ -- still mean I experience discrimination in a variety of ways. I sense this discrimination when dealing with the media, elected officials, foundations, and even mental health agencies.
“Even many activists in our field have never heard of ‘sanism.’”
Part 3: Do psych treatments amount to "torture"?
Comments