From: "whatever <firstname.lastname@example.org>"
To: S-ACC@yahoogroups.comSubject: Re: Accountability for Mental Health Budgets
Date: Sunday, June 4, 2017 9:17 PM
On Sat, 6/3/17, you wrote:
.. the system -- at the research and service delivery levels -- is primarily generally engaged in two (rationalized) aspects:
1) crisis management and social control - which is the system's high profile funding driver and appeal to the expertise of its clinical and licensed personnel as best able to analyse and manage problems related to the "mental disease" they are treating, and;
2) making the service delivery 'system' and its schedules, resources, and methods, serve the efficiency of the dominant academic clinical model instead of what actually works or creates measurable outcomes ..
20 years ago, when I explained the above to the local (Berkeley/Albany) mental health system, the Director pulled me aside in private and said he was "bigger and stronger" than me and that I should give up my argument, a.k.a. "get out of town."
I moved to Humboldt County where I reconstructed my advocacy; eventually I got an opportunity in the San Jose area and was able to move back. That being said, he served for 13 years until finally forced out, due to economic impropriety in the eyes of the City government.
We all who struggle deserve a more sensitive and responsible process for working matters through. I'm aware Abc you know that well and I much appreciate your presentation of the problem.
I wish you kindness. I wish all of us, notably those who are active, a "New Jim Crow" type of critique of oppression, one that will upgrade the lived experience of struggle.