From Ellen
This blog seems to be expanding from survival stories to feminist grannies and now to psychologists and torture. I am sure there is a thread here and I hope those of you following along will bear with me as I allow myself to be moved by the events around me which I actually believe is the essence of blowing on embers. Here's the latest.
I am an infrequent attendee at The American Psychological Association (APA), but yesterday I went to the rally led by a group of active APA members protesting APA's current policy on psychologists' participation in interrogation and torture. Having known about this from a distance I had been concerned, but not involved. Listening to the details close up has made it imperative for me to take action. If you would like to know more about these details please go to: www.ethicalapa.com.
On Sunday morning at 10 A.M. the APA Council will vote on whether or not to support a moratorium on psychologists participating in torture and interrogations of prisoners held in illegal settings.
Many APA members, me included, are withdrawing our dues from APA as we protest its actions. I encourage other AFTA members who are also APA members to consider doing the same. I had thought that my liability insurance was dependent on my APA membership. This is in fact not the case. Also it will be very helpful for anyone concerned to contact APA Council members expressing your dismay. To find their names go to: www.apa.org/governance.
There are more than 150,000 psychologists who are members of APA. These psychologists and any other psychologists and mental health professionals who do not speak out against this policy are complicit in its effects.
From Jack Saul
Director International Trauma Studies Program Mailman School of Health, Columbia University
I want to thank Ellen for her note on the American Psychological Association's moratorium on participation of psychologists in torture and abusive interrogation. Below is an oped piece written by my colleague, Steve Reisner, who has been one of the key spokespersons opposing the APA's position.What I find most disturbing about this issue is that since the American Psychiatric Association and the American Medical Association came out against participation of doctors in interrogations on ethical grounds,the US government turned to the APA to support psychologists to stand in as the "medical personnel" on site to insure that the practices are safe and effective. In essence, the APA in its stance has created the legal basis for the military to continue to carry out such practices, which according to international law would be defined as torture. There is also a piece in Vanity Affair on how psychologists developed some of the current practiceshttp://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/07/torture200707As a psychologist running a torture treatment program, I felt it was imperative to stop paying dues to the APA.
OPED SUBMISSION-RE: PSYCHOLOGISTS AND U.S. TORTURE.CONTACT:Steven Reisner
office: 212-633-8391Cell: 646-415-1413SReisner@psychoanalysis.netBrad OlsonCell: (773) 308-6461b-olson@northwestern.ed
Psychologists’ Tortured Ethics by Steven Reisner and Brad Olson
Steven Reisner, Ph.D. is Senior Faculty at the International Trauma Studies Program, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University and Clinical Assistant Professor, Department of Psychiatry, New York University Medical School. Brad Olson, Ph.D. is Assistant Research Professor, Northwestern University, and President of the APA's Divisions for Social Justice. Both are founding members of the Coalition for an Ethical APA.
The American Psychological Association (APA) is in crisis. In 2005, the APA authored an ethics report that not only allowed but encouraged psychologists to participate in US interrogations of suspected terrorists. This week, Vanity Fair revealed what psychologists were doing at CIA Black Sites, at Guantánamo, and other national security facilities: they were committing torture.The APA and the nation were warned as early as 2004 that detainees were being tortured and that military and intelligence psychologists and other medical professionals were suspected of developing the techniques of abuse and overseeing their application. The APA leadership could have followed their colleagues in the American Medical Association and the American Psychiatric Association, who convened special sessions to decry abuses and prohibit their membership from any direct participation in, supervision of, or assessment of prisoners for, coercive or abusive interrogations. But instead, the APA took a decidedly different tack than its fellow healing professions. When the APA leadership formed a Task Force to investigate the charges of psychologist-assisted abusive interrogations, they turned to military and intelligence psychologists to assess the allegations and to write the ethical guidelines for participation in those interrogations.We now know that six of the nine voting members of the Task Force were involved directly or indirectly in military or CIA interrogation strategies and practices; four were in the chain of command of the very military and intelligence services responsible for instituting and supervising these abusive CIA and DoD interrogation strategies at Guantánamo, in Iraq, and at CIA ‘Black Sites.’
The result was that the APA Ethics Code was turned on its head. The Task Force positioned a secondary ethical principle, “responsibility to society,” above what has been the first principle of every healing profession for millennia: “Do no harm.” And in a move that should have been unthinkable after Nuremberg, the APA affirmed that psychologists “have an ethical responsibility to be informed of, familiar with, and follow the most recent applicable regulations and rules” and may do so, even when these conflict with ethical principles or basic human rights.This week, Vanity Fair provided evidence that in fact psychologists had turned torture techniques developed to train our soldiers to resist torture, into the “standard operating procedures” of abusive military and CIA interrogations. In other words, to be “familiar with, and follow the most recent applicable regulations and rules” at Guantánamo, or Iraq, was to practice legal, but abusive interrogation techniques. The APA Task Force rendered such abuse within bounds of APA ethics. As Vanity Fair reports, “Psychologists weren't merely complicit in America's aggressive new interrogation regime. Psychologists, working in secrecy, had actually designed the tactics and trained interrogators in them while on contract to the C.I.A.”
The APA must immediately revise its ethics code and restore to its proper preeminence the psychologist’s obligation to “do no harm.” The Association would do well to take a page directly from the United Nations’ Principles of Medical Ethics which, in response to reports of health personnel facilitating torture, declared that it is against “medical ethics for health personnel…to apply their knowledge and skills in order to assist in the interrogation of prisoners and detainees in a manner that may adversely affect the physical or mental health or condition of such prisoners or detainees…”The APA must now rescind the infamous ethical clause, cited in the PENS Report, which protects psychologists who follow law and military regulation even when these conflict with their ethical responsibilities. In its place we must add a new ethical standard guaranteeing that psychologists uphold basic human rights even when law, orders, regulations, or research protocols condone or encourage their violation.Further, the APA leadership must hold itself to account. It makes no difference if they consciously knew that they were putting the foxes in charge of the hen house, or if they did so in an act of brazen disregard of the facts. Either way, the APA leadership has clearly contributed to what has become the greatest scandal in the history of the American Psychological Association.The APA has an enormous task ahead if we are to repair the damage we have done to our profession and to the field of psychology. If we do not act swiftly and comprehensively to restore our good name, American psychology is in danger of joining the disgraced healers of South Africa, Chile, Nazi Germany, and the Soviet Union, where law led health professionals astray and only their adherence to the ethics of the healing profession brought them back.
Saturday, August 18, 2007
Sunday, August 12, 2007
Feminist Grannies 3
From Kaethe:
Some additions to a definition of a feminist grandmother.
A feminist grandmother encourages and promotes positive support for the family from a variety of people and places and helps create an atmosphere of inclusivity.
A feminist grandmother welcomes her children getting help, especially in situations where she cannot provide it but wishes she could.
and more.
From Chris:
I think of this time in my life and my relationships more philosophically than intellectually. I am grateful for the opportunity to be in the lives of these beings and for all of us to have a new opportunity to grow together and benefit from each others knowledge and wisdom. We can all learn from each other. The constellation of relationships are dynamic with unexpected lovely outcomes. At this point, 8 years into this new role as grandmother I am traveling in a trusting, unplanned way, valuing the advancing of time, reflecting some on the past and seeing the young ones move into the stages I have already passed through. I know they are the very best parents for their own children. I don't have the component of care giving for my grandchildren and therefore I don't resonate with the first statement of how I might support the work/life balance of my adult children.
My grandchildren are such a gift to me. I often imagine what it would have been like to have had a loving grandparent. (I did not). And feel so fortunate to have the luxury of time, resources, health to be able to make them a priority in my life.
So readers how would you define a feminist grandmother?
Some additions to a definition of a feminist grandmother.
A feminist grandmother encourages and promotes positive support for the family from a variety of people and places and helps create an atmosphere of inclusivity.
A feminist grandmother welcomes her children getting help, especially in situations where she cannot provide it but wishes she could.
and more.
From Chris:
I think of this time in my life and my relationships more philosophically than intellectually. I am grateful for the opportunity to be in the lives of these beings and for all of us to have a new opportunity to grow together and benefit from each others knowledge and wisdom. We can all learn from each other. The constellation of relationships are dynamic with unexpected lovely outcomes. At this point, 8 years into this new role as grandmother I am traveling in a trusting, unplanned way, valuing the advancing of time, reflecting some on the past and seeing the young ones move into the stages I have already passed through. I know they are the very best parents for their own children. I don't have the component of care giving for my grandchildren and therefore I don't resonate with the first statement of how I might support the work/life balance of my adult children.
My grandchildren are such a gift to me. I often imagine what it would have been like to have had a loving grandparent. (I did not). And feel so fortunate to have the luxury of time, resources, health to be able to make them a priority in my life.
So readers how would you define a feminist grandmother?
Monday, August 06, 2007
Feminist Granny Stories
Susan wrote:
What a lovely description of a family working together. I, too, am a feminist grannie. My mom both criticized my working and didn't help. "No grandchild of mine should be in day-care". So, I decided to do things very differently. When my daughter and her husband had baby # 1, I offered one day a week. It has become "Tuesdays with Nonna" and now with baby # 2 I have added a second day. They need a Nanny for other days, and have been very thoughtful to find young women who truly enrich the children's lives. I admire their ability to also take time for each other, something ,as a couple’s therapist, I know is so important.
I love these days and when I arrive and hear Jane screech "Nonna", that is true joy. My son-in-law's mom died of ovarian cancer when the first grandchild was three months old. She and I were good friends and I always feel that I am doing this for both of us...she would have been another great feminist grannie. I especially like your description of the shift from elders having the knowledge.
Often my husband (me too but much less often), my daughter’s step-father, makes a dinner for my daughter's family and he even delivers it!...and he is always buying things at the market that he knows they like. The six of us (grandparents, parents and children) went to a CUBS game together yesterday...what a riot to hear my granddaughter belt out "Take me out to the ball game"
Marian wrote:
The idea of the feminist grandmother is interesting. I don't know that I was ever much of a feminist with respect to a sense of my own ability to be right about very many things. The word feminist has, for some reason, suggested to me persons of great self-esteem. . So, I did a little bit of reading about feminism and the word feminist. In the case of the grandmother negotiating with the parents for care of a grandchild to reach the goals of rich and healthy lives, the word feminist suggests an intertwining of maternal love and commitment with issues of social justice.I would say that my first recollection as a grandmother was of being completely in love with that small person and knowing in my heart that I would do everything in my power to never ever let him down. Here is something that I wrote in my journal just after Emerson was born.
02/99, a boy emerges just before the tulips under the mountain.
I hold your face over the poppy's face
Your face orange your eyes filled with poppy
I hold you lightly under the wide sky
My own pattern as care-giver to my grandchildren is such that I feel like I am able to support my daughter Suzanne's future by helping her schedule work and personal time. With Emerson, my other daughter’s son, since he is in school with many options for care away from home, I feel like my support is to be me, showing up one afternoon a week. I am not in the habit of telling my children that I think my ideas are better than theirs. That would be an unpleasant care-giver situation. If I am asked not to give the children, say chocolate, or let them watch television, I can manage that. I have even been able to correct my own behavior when I realize that I am not modeling well. For instance, I buckle-up, which I had hitherto enjoyed seeing as an evil government plot impinging on my personal freedom. If I have a doubt about how to manage behaviors of one kind or another, I always like to discuss it with the parents as soon as possible. Sometimes this can be a more difficult negotiation than the dates and times. I want to be sure that my concern is not heard as a complaint or criticism. I am convinced that by giving unsolicited advice or taking responsibility out of some personal feelings of guilt, I limit my children's freedom to develop their own strengths and self confidence. I enjoy the 'team-work' aspect of working out problems; relationship, scheduling, financial, with my own children.I am willing to give lots of advice to my grandchildren though, and that's part of the fun....you know the best way to keep from getting the sand in your eyes or how the tree trunk is rough and the grass is soft.It's somewhat sad to contemplate the situation of a grandmother who is forced to take care of a grandchild by misfortune at the cost of her own health and well-being.
Calling that scenario to mind gives rise to all manner of unhappy narratives. I'm not sure what the current view of grandmother as caregiver is. When I was growing up, I know that there was a caricature of the grandmother as a permissive spoiler, who kept secrets from your mom and fed you too much candy. My own grandmother took care of the children while my mother and her sister went to work. We all lived in my grandmother's house while the men were away at war. I'm not certain that any of these women thought they had a choice about their roles. My mother-in-law raised one grandchild because the father and mother were not capable, financially or emotionally. Her motives were complicated and probably not connected to feminism as I understand your use of that word.So, thanks for giving me the opportunity to contemplate the idea of being a feminist grandmother. As you describe her she seems a worthy standard and certainly worth researching our evolution.
What a lovely description of a family working together. I, too, am a feminist grannie. My mom both criticized my working and didn't help. "No grandchild of mine should be in day-care". So, I decided to do things very differently. When my daughter and her husband had baby # 1, I offered one day a week. It has become "Tuesdays with Nonna" and now with baby # 2 I have added a second day. They need a Nanny for other days, and have been very thoughtful to find young women who truly enrich the children's lives. I admire their ability to also take time for each other, something ,as a couple’s therapist, I know is so important.
I love these days and when I arrive and hear Jane screech "Nonna", that is true joy. My son-in-law's mom died of ovarian cancer when the first grandchild was three months old. She and I were good friends and I always feel that I am doing this for both of us...she would have been another great feminist grannie. I especially like your description of the shift from elders having the knowledge.
Often my husband (me too but much less often), my daughter’s step-father, makes a dinner for my daughter's family and he even delivers it!...and he is always buying things at the market that he knows they like. The six of us (grandparents, parents and children) went to a CUBS game together yesterday...what a riot to hear my granddaughter belt out "Take me out to the ball game"
Marian wrote:
The idea of the feminist grandmother is interesting. I don't know that I was ever much of a feminist with respect to a sense of my own ability to be right about very many things. The word feminist has, for some reason, suggested to me persons of great self-esteem. . So, I did a little bit of reading about feminism and the word feminist. In the case of the grandmother negotiating with the parents for care of a grandchild to reach the goals of rich and healthy lives, the word feminist suggests an intertwining of maternal love and commitment with issues of social justice.I would say that my first recollection as a grandmother was of being completely in love with that small person and knowing in my heart that I would do everything in my power to never ever let him down. Here is something that I wrote in my journal just after Emerson was born.
02/99, a boy emerges just before the tulips under the mountain.
I hold your face over the poppy's face
Your face orange your eyes filled with poppy
I hold you lightly under the wide sky
My own pattern as care-giver to my grandchildren is such that I feel like I am able to support my daughter Suzanne's future by helping her schedule work and personal time. With Emerson, my other daughter’s son, since he is in school with many options for care away from home, I feel like my support is to be me, showing up one afternoon a week. I am not in the habit of telling my children that I think my ideas are better than theirs. That would be an unpleasant care-giver situation. If I am asked not to give the children, say chocolate, or let them watch television, I can manage that. I have even been able to correct my own behavior when I realize that I am not modeling well. For instance, I buckle-up, which I had hitherto enjoyed seeing as an evil government plot impinging on my personal freedom. If I have a doubt about how to manage behaviors of one kind or another, I always like to discuss it with the parents as soon as possible. Sometimes this can be a more difficult negotiation than the dates and times. I want to be sure that my concern is not heard as a complaint or criticism. I am convinced that by giving unsolicited advice or taking responsibility out of some personal feelings of guilt, I limit my children's freedom to develop their own strengths and self confidence. I enjoy the 'team-work' aspect of working out problems; relationship, scheduling, financial, with my own children.I am willing to give lots of advice to my grandchildren though, and that's part of the fun....you know the best way to keep from getting the sand in your eyes or how the tree trunk is rough and the grass is soft.It's somewhat sad to contemplate the situation of a grandmother who is forced to take care of a grandchild by misfortune at the cost of her own health and well-being.
Calling that scenario to mind gives rise to all manner of unhappy narratives. I'm not sure what the current view of grandmother as caregiver is. When I was growing up, I know that there was a caricature of the grandmother as a permissive spoiler, who kept secrets from your mom and fed you too much candy. My own grandmother took care of the children while my mother and her sister went to work. We all lived in my grandmother's house while the men were away at war. I'm not certain that any of these women thought they had a choice about their roles. My mother-in-law raised one grandchild because the father and mother were not capable, financially or emotionally. Her motives were complicated and probably not connected to feminism as I understand your use of that word.So, thanks for giving me the opportunity to contemplate the idea of being a feminist grandmother. As you describe her she seems a worthy standard and certainly worth researching our evolution.
Friday, August 03, 2007
Feminist Granny -Renewal
Feminist Granny
Ellen's voice:
The Teachers I have been writing about on this blog have led me to think about what in my life fills me with a positive sense of future. Here's what is at the top of this list. When my first grandchild was born and my daughter Sarah had to return to work when Cole was three months old, my husband Patrick and I decided to take on two days a week of childcare. We live nearby and we have flexible work schedules. My daughter’s husband Todd who works full-time would take the baby one day a week. He would pick up his fifth day of work on the weekend. Sarah would work three days a week and then take major responsibility for the baby on three days. The seventh day we would all pitch in depending on what was happening.
As we began to develop our childcare system I was thrown back to the days when my own children were young. My parents made it clear to me that they thought I should stay at home when my children were young. They lived far away from us and although they enjoyed the children they placed a priority on the freedom they had during those years. For my first child I stayed at home for nine months and then shared childcare with another young mother in order to to go back to school. When my second child was born and we returned from Lagos, Nigeria where I had worked full-time and could afford childcare I had no idea what I would do, but this was in 1974 and the women’s movement was alive and well. With eight other women I founded the Stockton Women’s Center which began with a childcare center. I felt supported by the community of families which held a feminist vision that included shared responsibilities in our households, cooperatives for food and childcare and a larger sense that work and home life were equally important. As some of us from the Women’s Center moved out into the wider community to find employment we were able to find shared jobs or jobs with flexible schedules. Our partners did the same. We didn’t have a great deal of money, but we felt rich in support and encouragement to develop what we believed were feminist households that supported women and men in fair and equitable partnerships and supported the nonsexist development of children as well.
But things have changed. We read a lot these days about the work-life divide and how feminism is dead. At the same time media stories are appearing about grandmothers who join with their adult children to develop more flexible childcare systems. The reasons given so far are that these grandmothers have more money and more time so this is what they are choosing to do. I have another idea about some of these grandmothers. Like me they were active feminists in the 60' and 70's and now are bringing what was then called visionary feminism to the families of their adult children. Here’s my definition of a feminist granny. Let me know if you are one or know about one.
A feminist grandmother is:
A woman who chooses to be a caregiver for her grandchildren as a way of increasing her children's options for a more balanced work and home life.
This is in comparison with grandmothers who make this choice for only economic reasons or their own desire to have a relationship with their grandchildren.
A woman who believes that her job as caregiver is not to give advice, but to support the knowledge of her children who she believes know best about their own children.
This is a shift form the belief that the elder generation holds more knowledge then the young. The idea here instead is that elders know about how to encourage the young to be themselves and to know what they know.
A woman who feels comfortable in roles and responsibilities that are negotiated in conversations with her children that lead to clear and workable agreements.
This puts the emphasis on an evolving relationship which is expected to change over time and takes into account the needs, wishes and knowledge of all three generations.
Let me know if these ideas resonate with you.
Ellen's voice:
The Teachers I have been writing about on this blog have led me to think about what in my life fills me with a positive sense of future. Here's what is at the top of this list. When my first grandchild was born and my daughter Sarah had to return to work when Cole was three months old, my husband Patrick and I decided to take on two days a week of childcare. We live nearby and we have flexible work schedules. My daughter’s husband Todd who works full-time would take the baby one day a week. He would pick up his fifth day of work on the weekend. Sarah would work three days a week and then take major responsibility for the baby on three days. The seventh day we would all pitch in depending on what was happening.
As we began to develop our childcare system I was thrown back to the days when my own children were young. My parents made it clear to me that they thought I should stay at home when my children were young. They lived far away from us and although they enjoyed the children they placed a priority on the freedom they had during those years. For my first child I stayed at home for nine months and then shared childcare with another young mother in order to to go back to school. When my second child was born and we returned from Lagos, Nigeria where I had worked full-time and could afford childcare I had no idea what I would do, but this was in 1974 and the women’s movement was alive and well. With eight other women I founded the Stockton Women’s Center which began with a childcare center. I felt supported by the community of families which held a feminist vision that included shared responsibilities in our households, cooperatives for food and childcare and a larger sense that work and home life were equally important. As some of us from the Women’s Center moved out into the wider community to find employment we were able to find shared jobs or jobs with flexible schedules. Our partners did the same. We didn’t have a great deal of money, but we felt rich in support and encouragement to develop what we believed were feminist households that supported women and men in fair and equitable partnerships and supported the nonsexist development of children as well.
But things have changed. We read a lot these days about the work-life divide and how feminism is dead. At the same time media stories are appearing about grandmothers who join with their adult children to develop more flexible childcare systems. The reasons given so far are that these grandmothers have more money and more time so this is what they are choosing to do. I have another idea about some of these grandmothers. Like me they were active feminists in the 60' and 70's and now are bringing what was then called visionary feminism to the families of their adult children. Here’s my definition of a feminist granny. Let me know if you are one or know about one.
A feminist grandmother is:
A woman who chooses to be a caregiver for her grandchildren as a way of increasing her children's options for a more balanced work and home life.
This is in comparison with grandmothers who make this choice for only economic reasons or their own desire to have a relationship with their grandchildren.
A woman who believes that her job as caregiver is not to give advice, but to support the knowledge of her children who she believes know best about their own children.
This is a shift form the belief that the elder generation holds more knowledge then the young. The idea here instead is that elders know about how to encourage the young to be themselves and to know what they know.
A woman who feels comfortable in roles and responsibilities that are negotiated in conversations with her children that lead to clear and workable agreements.
This puts the emphasis on an evolving relationship which is expected to change over time and takes into account the needs, wishes and knowledge of all three generations.
Let me know if these ideas resonate with you.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
