The Threat-sensitive Brain: a theory about animals applied to Gabriel Wortman

An analysis of
Seeking to explain Nova Scotia shootings: Inside the 'threat-sensitive brain'
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/mass-killing-portapique-mental-health-1.5602698
'A threat-sensitive brain that is always looking for evidence to confirm the world is against them' by Michael MacDonald· The Canadian Press· Jun 08, 2020 7:25 AM AT | Last Updated: June 8

The Threat-sensitive Brain 

Can such a theory be applied to human beings or is it better off being applied to animals who survive on instinct? (revision of response to same article previously posted elsewhere).

This type of mental health explanation, as described in the article, ignores the reality of informal social networks or community ideals of conforming to the authority of those who have been granted power to control the lives of those living within their borders. Communities based on tradition or other cultural values may well result in the individual being punished discreetly and informally for breaking the rules of the hierarchy, which could be based on sexuality, or gender, wealth, or another kind of perceived status of members of the community.

Seeking to understand the behaviour of the individual presumably isolated within it, in relationships with fragile bases in which loyalty and trust have little place, means that injustices will build up, and if not resolved may eventually result in the individual attempting to break away from this insurmountable problem.

The idea of the 'threat-sensitive brain' must surely result in loud beeps in the brains of those reading about it, as though the individual has some kind of physical brain disorder (or animal-like brain where instinct is what counts) that results in the individual being unable to reason, to adapt, to be in a relationship, and to live a life of substantial success within the community and at a distance, doing work that has earned him compliments and security, doing sensitive, personal work with clients/patients seeking dental repair. If Gabriel Wortman were this kind of person, he probably wouldn't have been able to achieve all that he did.

The term 'injustice collector' is the creation of those who have lived at the top too long and has little understanding of what really happens in society, in communities that are encouraged and rewarded for demonstrating the collective value of family, sharing, and conformity and excluding those who don't quite measure up.

Referring to being an 'injustice-collector' as a way of seeing the world, as Tracy Vaillancourt (children's mental health and violence expert) does, according to this article, is only one possibility of a motivation for this tragic event. This expert in child bullying would do better spending more time on the subject of 'peer victimization' among adults.

Read ‘Dangerous Instincts’: FBI profiler explains the dangers of that ‘nice’ neighbor <https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/dangerous-instincts-fbi-profiler-explains-the-dangers-of-that-nice-neighbor/2011/10/17/gIQAkvNCDM_story.html> for information on the world-view of Mary Ellen O’Toole, a former FBI profiler who coined the term.

Michael Arntfield, criminologist turned armchair psychologist, who speaks of the 'injustice-collector' as someone who often feels "cheated or disrespected by others, even though there may be no evidence to support those beliefs." And that is most likely the problem. If a community does show disrespect in small ways, in an unrelenting manner, there may well be no “evidence” of the type that someone like Arntfield, a former police officer now working in a 'customized academic appointment' at Western University, would value (see Wikipedia, Michael Arntfield). Most of his work seems focused on the individual rather than the community, as most psychologists involved in extrapolating this theory of 'injustice-collecting' and the 'threat-sensitive brain' are.

I suggest a focus on the community, and I don't mean accepting their stories on Wortman as 'evidence' of his guilt or fitness-of-mind or not, but treating them, too, as though they might not be as credible as the investigators of this horrendous tragedy would like them to be. Liking should not translate to 'credibility'. Rather, investigators should attempt to be objective and to keep in mind that when such a tragedy happens, evidence of the sort that shows the killer in a good light may well be kept hidden. No one wants to support the bad guy at a time like this. Mr Wortman was known to be a caring and community-minded denturist in his working community and among those who knew him in that role. But community is often set apart from a person's work-life. It doesn't mean that Wortman should be labelled 'injustice-collector' because those in the business of psychology see him as such. 

A perspective taken from the discipline of Sociology might be better at undoing some of the falsehoods of this perspective, and the very one-sided blame on one man, similar, in fact, to the moral culpability of the tragedy of the Montreal massacre of 1989, during which killings were committed by Marc Lepine, for reasons that were distorted and attempted to be hidden from Canadians.

References:

Seeking to explain Nova Scotia shootings: Inside the 'threat-sensitive brain'  
by Michael MacDonald·
The Canadian Press·
Posted: Jun 08, 2020 7:25 AM AT | Last Updated: June 8
 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/mass-killing-portapique-mental-health-1.5602698

 ‘Dangerous Instincts’: FBI profiler explains the dangers of that ‘nice’ neighbor
By Monica Hesse 
Style
October 24, 2011
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/dangerous-instincts-fbi-profiler-explains-the-dangers-of-that-nice-neighbor/2011/10/17/gIQAkvNCDM_story.html

CPSO complaints against Ontario doctors

See additional info added Friday, Aug 8 & Tuesday, Aug 12, 2014; one paragraph revised Aug 18, 2014; minor revisions throughout and update Sept 2, 2014, paragraph added Sept 3, 2014).

Today, in the newspaper - July 30, 2014 - the suggestion was made that complaints about Ontario doctors be made public (see Make all complaints about Ontario doctors public). Trial lawyers aren’t the only ones in favour of this potential exposé of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, an organization supposedly meant to protect the province of Ontario’s public and not only its physicians. Commenters on the article in the Star had the opportunity to express their views, if only for a few hours, before the comments section was closed to further comments. Those comments still remain, for anyone interested. It is one aspect of the health machine on which proponents of an improved health system have not yet been able to give their views, in only due to the secrecy involved in dealing with complaints by the public.

As chance would have it, today was also the first call I received from someone from CPSO in response to the complaint I submitted a month ago. I’m not sure, from our brief chat, however, that my complaint is being taken seriously. She started off speaking in such a shrill voice that I thought she must be new to the job, and a bit nervous.  She also spoke too loudly for me to hear her without holding the telephone receiver a few inches away, and even then, her voice was muffled and unclear. Combined with that were various interruptions, from being cut off for a few seconds to scratchy background noises, as indicated in these excerpts from the CPSO's rep's ten minute phone call , combined in one MP3 - 3 minutes long - and playable on various media.  It's difficult to get across how it felt to receive this phone call from this supposed investigator, who seems to be so unprepared and unprofessional (Paragraph revised Aug 18, 2014).

I eventually asked the CPSO contact to call back, after she had sorted out the problem with the new system she said she was using. When I inquired, she said she had been doing this job for 7 years, though it seems to me she was quite disorganized and had not even made herself familiar with the letter of complaint I sent to her.  She didn’t act like a person who was representing the CPSO and dealing with an official complaint. She sounded more like a receptionist - a particular receptionist with the same habit.  I’m not sure what kind of way that is some women have, of speaking three octaves higher than what’s normal. Is it done intentionally, or just a bad habit, I wonder.

The girl from CPSO, said she had dealt with this kind of case before and I asked what kind of case, exactly, and she responded “communication” and “termination.”  To me, the kind of case it was and the kind of treatment I received while under the doctor’s care was more of an abuse problem than one of his inability to communicate well.  And it was not so much that he decided to “terminate” me than the way he did it. Apparently, doctors can get rid of a patient, if they have good reason, and if they contact the CPSO and inform them, and provide reasons. That’s not how it happened in this case. I don’t consider myself a difficult person, and especially under such circumstances where my health depends on the good will of the doctor, I am not going to make life difficult for him. I always think a person deserves the benefit of the doubt.

The girl informed me about the process of an investigation, which involves her collecting information from me, then writing up her own "unbiased" report, and sending it to the committee of doctors and other members of society who would examine the case and rule on it. She said to me that she had sent to the doctor a copy of the letter of complaint that I had submitted to the College but had not yet requested a response from him. Instead, she was calling me and asking me about what was already in the letter of complaint, that she appears not to have read too thoroughly. She wondered what was most important, what I would like to see happen from this, and I could only respond with several important issues, as I saw it, not just one or two.

As far as this girl who called from the CPSO to deal with my case, I have already given her the benefit of the doubt, and there is little doubt left. And that goes for the doctor, too. I had already tried to have this situation resolved through the London & District Academy of Medicine, in a letter presented at their board meeting, with no response at all from them, except to find a new doctor. I presented them in writing with what at first was a minor issue but which soon evolved into something more serious. And yet these issues were not dealt with at all in the written response I received, nor in the telephone conversation I had with the President.

While many readers from the discussion on the article in the newspaper agree that it would be a good idea to make cases public, there can be no agreement how that would happen. If the CPSO is left to make them public, there needs to be a standardized complaints form for the main issues that are the basis of the complaint, or to describe what the problems were. As it is right now, when I attempted to complete the form, I found that the issues I listed as concerns – "manipulative, hostile, and bullying tactics," "rushed decision-making, irrelevant treatments and tests," and "unprofessional, lack of attention to maintaining records" did not match up precisely with the details I wrote about in the letter of complaint. The girl from the CPSO seems to have picked out a couple of items with the intent of focusing on them, apparently, when I speak with her next, after she has sorted out her new telephone system. So instead of seeing the entire time I spent with the doctor as a pattern of abuse, she appears to want to simplify it into a couple of specific problems. The form itself, as it stands, requires a list of behaviours, or areas of concern. She has taken those that I listed and changed them into two areas of concern – or two issues – "communication" and "termination." But that doesn’t cover it. It doesn’t make sense.

To be continued

Added Friday, Aug 8, 2014

I could speak at length about this, as there are so many things about not only the doctor himself but now, the person assigned to look into what happened, not to mention the complaints form itself.

The CPSO girl and myself spoke again the day after, on July 31. Her telephone was still not working as it should, her voice coming across loud and unclear at times. I found it difficult to talk to her and answer her questions as, like the doctor himself, she seemed to be missing the point or unable to understand, or chose to go off on a tangent – or perhaps use information retrospectively, to try to explain something that had not yet happened.

She did ask, at one point, did I still want him as my doctor, an indication that she did not comprehend one main aspect of my complaint, that the doctor quit, and did so suddenly, without a closing-out period to wind up, which is not the way the CPSO directs their physicians to “terminate” (her words) a patient.

Up to that point, when the doctor became exceptionally hostile and mean, I was still thinking that we might be able to work things out. But it is as though one must not bring shortcomings to some doctors’ attention, but simply put up with it, which I did for over a year, in this case.

So, she asked me if I still wanted him as a Dr and I said no.  But the doctor did make accusations against me, in a letter to me. And was I expected to be happy about the idea of this man still being my doctor, after receiving this letter?  What did she think, that I would want to still have him as my doctor, or was she going to use this statement of mine to imply in the formal report that I was going to quit the doctor anyway?

The CPSO girl also asked me whether the doctor had sent the final closing-out letter by registered mail. But that information was also available in the material I had sent to her. Perhaps there was too much to read through, or was she going to try to find a trivial matter to lay on the doctor, as an explanation for my insistence that he did not follow policy.

As it stands, the doctor made accusations against me, and according to CPSO policy, if he does that he is supposed to back them up. Although I did make an attempt to find a new doctor after he sent the letter to me, I did not succeed, and soon decided that I should not be the one to quit, as I did previously with a former doctor who had written nasty, untruthful comments about me in a letter of termination.

Doctors can do this – become unlikeable, thus an encouragement to the patient to leave the practice. I realize because of my research and writings, and somewhat controversial views, that some individuals and groups in society might not appreciate what I have to offer. So if being unkind doesn’t work, the doctor can then resort to harsher methods, such as blaming it on the patient in writing, after which, normally, I imagine, the patient would become only too willing to seek another doctor and try to put the past behind her. I know I did, the first time. And I now I suspect, from a comment made by the President of the London & District Academy of Medicine, that my past did come back to haunt me (via the letter written by the first doctor) and was being used against me in this new scenario with the doctor under complaint.

Thus, despite encouragement by walk-in clinics, where I have had to go for treatment and prescriptions, I have not continued to seek a new doctor. I have had a doctor make false accusations against me. If I let them go, they will stand as truth. So I am obliged to speak out. What’s more, it is entirely possible that the CPSO girl has misunderstood to such an extent that the real issues won’t even get looked into, possibly no farther than his not using registered mail to send his final letter to me.

How it stands at this time, after a second talk on July 31, with the same girl, she is going to contact the doctor and have him respond to some of the issues we have discussed, and I have a feeling they are not going to be the ones I asked about in my letter of complaint.                                                                                              

Update Tuesday August 12, 2014

Today I sent a letter to the Registrar, CPSO, explaining that the person assigned to my case was distorting what I said to her on the phone, ignoring what I had written in my letter of complaint, and generally, appeared to be either completely on the side of the doctor in question or just enjoying her position of power as mediator/troublemaker in this case.  I stated in my letter to the Registrar (dated Aug 11, 2014) that I would like to have someone else take over, that I will not speak with her again; I also requested a copy of the letter she informed me she had sent (the second letter) to the doctor I made the complaint about. But now, to return to the main problem . . .

This is about the doctor and letting him know what I hope to accomplish by making this official complaint. There was no space on the form to state what I hoped would come from it. If the girl had read what I wrote originally, however, she would see that it was implied in the details I gave. I would like to have my reputation restored, that was harmed by his harsh attitude towards me on April 28, 2014, at his office.  I need to have another doctor, and trying to obtain one while having unexplained problems with a previous doctor makes it more difficult. Of course, a patient with chronic medical issues, and with no apparent connection with the community, might be seen as not worth taking on. For these reasons I need to have the doctor take responsibility for his behaviour towards me, which was uncalled for.

So to make it clear, contrary to what the girl has assumed in her letter dated Aug 1, I am not seeking a new doctor. I have not derostered myself in order to be able to take on a new doctor. The doctor has made accusations against me in a letter to me, part of the method of termination of a patient. But he needs to stand by those claims, and not simply allow his claims about me to drop by having me deroster myself.  I did not deserve to be treated the way I was at the end, nor from the start, as it happens. Why the doctor did so, and what other people – other girls in the secretarial pool said to him I don’t know. I just want this done with so I can find a doctor to look after my health concerns as I grow older.

Update Tuesday, Sept 2, 2014

On Aug 29, 2014, I sent a letter to the CPSO - to Sandy McCulloch, the Director, and Associate Registrar, Investigations and Resolutions.

The letter was a followup to the letter I wrote about two weeks ago, on Aug 11, to The Registrar, from whom I never did hear back – though I did get a response to the letter from the girl investigator. I have decided not to post here the letters she  - the girl - has sent me as they would only draw the readers away from the complaint I made, which is probably her intention.

I am trying to get her taken off my case and someone put on it who hopefully would treat my complaint with sensitivity instead of making a joke of it and taking the doctor’s side.

Added Sept 3, 2014)
One main point in all this is that the doctor terminated me as his patient, with no follow up of current medical issues, and made accusations against me in the letter he sent to me. And yet it appears that I am expected to deroster myself formally so that I am able to register with another doctor instead of having to attend walk-in clinics and see whoever is available. But if I deroster myself with the Ministry of Health, then he is off the hook and doesn't have to explain his questionable comments about me. And it is these remarks and accusations by him that I would like the CPSO to investigate so that they can be shown for what they are  - as distortions and untruths (paragraph added Sept 3, 2014).

Reference List

Hospitals and doctors must make openness a top priority: Editorial  (added Aug 8, 2014)
The Star
Jul 29 2014
http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/2014/07/29/hospitals_and_doctors_must_make_openness_a_top_priority_editorial.html
                               
Make all complaints about Ontario doctors public: trial lawyers
By: Theresa Boyle
The Star, Health
Wed Jul 30 2014
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2014/07/30/make_all_complaints_about_ontario_doctors_public_trial_lawyers.html#

Should cautions issued to health professionals be publicly reported?   (added Aug 8, 2014)
by Jeremy Petch & Mike Tierney
Healthy Debate.ca
Feb 7, 2013
http://healthydebate.ca/2013/02/topic/quality/should-ontarios-regulatory-colleges-publicly-report-cautions

Mature students and the disabled: fast tracking (cheating?) through university

Revised June, 2012

More insights come to us from the press in the UK and Canada, related to mature students and the disabled.

First, from the UK, an article in the Times Higher about the USA's innovations in university education.' In 'Older, wiser, jobless . . ,' a new program endorsed by City University of Seattle commends and rewards the older student who has gained experienced in life in various kinds of ways, apparently, though the article itself mentions only the valuable contribution of the older wiser person who has previously had a career.

It seems that the original meaning of 'mature student' that was familiar to many of us at Western, that of the older student who was permitted to register for a BA without having a graduation certificate, has now been changed, or gotten lost in the intricate application program that neglects to mention this aspect of 'mature student.' True, this article is about the United States, not Canada or Britain. And the emphasis seems to be on the older person who has previously had a career and now wants a degree so she or he can use it to advance their career or regain one. The essential part of this process - the PLA or Prior Learning Assessment - is based on the candidate having an advisor. But I wonder how easy it is to get an advisor at university who could understand the value of one's life experience and want to see the student progress. I never had such a person, who was willing to take the time to understand and go through it with me, and despite having graduated from high school, and achieved a BA and MA, never got to either continue my education or have a career. This kind of mentoring is the foundation of the Prior Learning program in the USA.

It seems to me that the focus will be on only those students the advisor can relate to, can understand without it having to take up too much time or thought processes. That sounds as though a good many qualified individuals will be excluded, for not having the right network, or not living in the right neighbourhood, or having the right husband (not the mention not previously had the right kind of life experience - the career.) How do we know this isn't just another program created for the benefit of a certain segment in society, or certain individuals, so they can be fast tracked through the educational system, while their initial lack of qualifications stand a good chance of getting lost in the process.

In Canada, a related matter has occurred, whereby a student at the University of Manitoba was given a PhD despite not being able to handle certain situations, as he suffered from ‘exam anxiety.’ If all PhD candidates' weaknesses and deficiencies are overlooked or forgiven, then what would be the state of those who get to educate the next generation.

What of favouritism in higher education? Is it what we want? Or if we are one of the favoured would we, too, look the other way. The comments sections following the article 'Older, wiser, jobless' offer insights into what the people think.

Added June, 2012

Continuing on from the battle over the right of the disabled to be granted exemption from completion of requirements for degrees, in ‘Lessons from Lukács,’ 2011, Todd Pettigrew draws a divide between the administration and the professors, as though this is where the problem lies in differences of opinion about who is deserving or not. I’m not convinced of that. The second new piece, ‘Infamous University of Manitoba Professor,’ 2011, comes from the Centre for Interdisciplinary Justice Studies (CIJS) in Winnipeg, bringing into focus once again the decision-making powers of the administration in areas in which they apparently lack expertise. They may have made the final decision, but along the way surely other professors gave their own views on whether it was appropriate, in their view, that the anxiety-ridden PhD candidate be granted a PhD.

Whether it’s older students who have already had the opportunity to prove their worth in the ‘real’ world, or disabled students who wouldn’t stand a chance otherwise of competing, here are two groups from society that are receiving special treatment. Somebody’s making the decision, as to who gets it and who doesn’t. If exams don’t matter any more, or the ability to think, or do research, or write exams under stress, are universities being fair?

Court battle over PhD
By Aldo Santin
Winnipeg Free Press
Oct 30, 2010
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/court-battle-over-phd-106366028.html?path=/local&id=106366028&sortBy=rank

Infamous University of Manitoba Professor Ends Battle for Academic Integrity
By R. Jochelson
CIJS - Justice Blogs
Nov 15, 2011
http://cijs.ca/CIJS.ca/Justice_Blogs/Entries/2011/11/15_Infamous_University_of_Manitoba_Professor_Ends_Battle_for_Academic_Integrity.html

Lessons from Lukács: How the traditional university is under attack from all sides
By Todd Pettigrew
Macleans
Nov 14, 2011
http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2011/11/14/lessons-from-lukacs/

Older, wiser, jobless: US adults drawn by degrees
By Jon Marcus
THE (Times Higher Education)
Dec 2, 2010
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=414424

University defends giving PhD to student who failed
By Nick Martin, Winnipeg Free Press
Vancouver Sun
Nov 18, 2010
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/University+defends+giving+student+failed/3847406/story.html

Links updated June, 2012

Immigrants and refugees - and Canadians: cultural norms, health care and employment

Revised July, 2012

On the individual level, people from other countries can be lovely people, but what about our attitudes towards them in general, we - as self-perceived true Canadians, and what do they think of us and being in Canada? Furthermore, is it being foreign that matters, or is what matters what such travellers bring with them when they come - money, resources, access to culture in foreign lands, or important connections. Are foreigners disliked because we don't understand their culture or their goals in coming here, or are they disliked because they are strangers, a burden on our medical and employment systems, or just because they are different.

Ratna Omidvar claims that "While recent immigrants are more highly educated than previous cohorts and the Canadian-born, they earn lower wages and have more difficulties entering the labour market in the first place" (Immigrants want success now, 2010). I first became aware of this problem on the job at Western’s career centre, while a student. I spoke to immigrants who were waiting to earn accreditation in courses or exams that would raise them to the level of Canadians in the same profession, a really unfair situation, it seemed to me, with no easy solution at hand. Now I see things differently, having been unable to get the support I needed to follow through on a career, or even to complete my education the way I would have wanted.

Even Canadian university grads often have a hard time finding decent work, as opportunities so often depend on one’s family background and social network. If an immigrant can manage to enter Canada, through marriage or association with friends already here, or through having the kind of reputation that would do them good here, they can get a head start on a career. But to assume that any Canadian who has any ability at all will automatically find work is to ignore the politics of the workplace.

Nowhere is this more obvious, to those willing to open their minds, than in the experience of Marc Lépine, who was excluded from university as feminists opened up male-dominated fields of education – and the careers that followed - to women (Remembering tragedies of today, 2008). Whether he had merit or not, or the ability to complete the engineering program, is no longer the issue I once thought it was, as it takes something other than merit for a man or women to be accepted into program of higher learning and to get to complete it. Anyone who attempts to use Marc Lépine’s supposed lack of ability to do the work is indeed misguided, (and that’s giving them the benefit of the doubt).

One commenter said on Aug 20, 2010, in the comments’ section following Kelly McParland’s article (Poll shows Canadians are nasty, 2010), "Canadians are welcome to those that can come here and look after themselves and contribute. We're not and never have been welcoming to those that want to sit on our system costing us even more money."

But it’s not just immigrants who get accused of shirking their duty, being lazy, or not trying hard enough. Having to listen to the privileged in society, who got their careers going through people they knew or married or had relations with, or who their parents were, can be annoying. I know from my own experience, of being treated well and getting jobs I felt I deserved, and then later on in my life of not getting anything at all, despite the knowledge and ability I had acquired, that getting the job often has little to do with merit. There are dozens or even hundreds of qualified applicants for any decent job nowadays, but it takes something extra if one is going to be the person who gets it.

George Jonas uses four categories of immigrants: "gold digger," "exile," "homesteader" and "conquistador," which focus on the reasons they come here, or their expectations (Scenes from a Canadian gold mine, 2010). It was the fourth category he saw as problematic, and about which he wrote another article, Beware the colonizers, 2010, the title of which says it all.

More recently, ‘Sweeping Immigration changes’ (2012), tells of plans to address the criminal element in Canada, which threatens to ‘invade’ us, legally, that is. The last paragraph of this article also addresses other matters, to do with health coverage for immigrants and although unsaid, immigrants who might be applying as seniors for OAS. Two articles that address the immigration and refugee healthcare issue are ‘Health groups urge Ottawa’ (2012) and ‘Kenney rejects refugee health care’ (2012).  Not a word, however, on how introducing foreigners into Canada might be affecting opportunities for work, for Canadians themselves.


Beware the colonizers
By George Jonas
National Post, Full Comment
Aug 18, 2010
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/08/18/george-jonas-beware-the-colonizers/#more-9296

Health groups urge Ottawa to save refugee services
By Maureen Brosnahan
CBC News
May 18, 2012
http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/story/2012/05/18/doctors-refugee-jason-kenney.html

Immigrants want success now, not tomorrow
By Ratna Omidvar
Globe and Mail
Aug 04, 2010
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/immigrants-want-success-now-not-tomorrow/article1660760
http://maytree.com/tag/skilled-immigrants

Kenney rejects refugee health care concerns from provinces, doctors
By Kristy Kirkup, Parliamentary Bureau
June 29, 2012
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/06/29/kenney-rejects-refugee-health-care-concerns-from-provinces-doctors

Poll shows Canadians are nasty, anti-immigrant SOBs
By Kelly McParland
National Post, Full Comment
Aug 20, 2010
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/08/20/kelly-mcparland-poll-shows-canadians-are-nasty-anti-immigrant-sobs/#more-9523

Remembering tragedies of today and yesteryear: Oshawa and the Montreal Massacre
By Sue McPherson
Sue’s Views on the News
Dec 6, 2008
http://suemcpherson.blogspot.ca/2008/12/remembering-tragedies-of-today-and.html

Scenes from the Canadian gold mine
By George Jonas
National Post, Full Comment
Aug 11, 2010
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/08/11/george-jonas-scenes-from-the-canadian-gold-mine/

Sweeping immigration changes to give new power to minister
By Laura Payton
CBC News
Jun 20, 2012
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/06/20/pol-new-law-deport-foreigners-crimes.html

Links updated July, 2012

Motherhood, aging, and resentful adult children: Shirley Anderson's story

Updated Jan 1, 2013
Feb 3, 2013 - Edited and 4 additional references added

Shirley Anderson is suing her adult children for support. An ancient law based on English poor laws throughout Canada, except for Alberta, regards this as the children's duty (Payback time, MacLeans, June 24, 2010). The media has picked on an example of bad parenting, committed by Ken Anderson's mother and father when he was just 15 years old to support the argument of the four adult children being sued, that they shouldn't have to pay support (A bad mother's right to support from her children, National Post, July 27, 2010).

Ken was left behind when his parents moved from Osoyoos to West Kootenay in BC - abandoned, as they describe it. Shirley Anderson took her second-youngest son, Darryl, with her, apparently against her husband Gary's wishes (What do we owe our parents, Vancouver Sun, July 24, 2010). Shirley Anderson raised five children, developed lupus along the way (Payback time for parents, MacLeans, June 24, 2010), and never worked. At age 71, she now has nothing. Gary, her ex, gave her alimony when they divorced, though his boss, Labbatts, needed encouragment to split his pension with her. He has since died.

Shirley went into debt with her credit card. Her attempts to get support have been going on for ten years now. Darryl has been in and out of jail and is not being sued. Ken is 46, married with children, not wealthy but hard-working, and resents the additional burden supporting his mother presents. Daughter Donna Anderson "breaks down in tears when she recalls her tumultuous childhood with the 'mother we never had' " (What do we owe our parents, Vancouver Sun, July 24, 2010). She went to university and is raising two children.

Son Brian bought her a fridge once, in an attempt to build a relationship. Donna and her mother attended counselling together. But nothing worked, the children say. Keith hasn't talked to her in years. "She doesn't even know we're alive," he is quoted as saying (What do we owe our parents, Vancouver Sun, July 24, 2010), though it appears she does. He adds, "She never worked and she's never worked at her family either."

It's suprising that she managed to raise such enterprising children - none got put into foster homes, only one in trouble with the law. They have educated themselves and worked hard, formed relationships and raised families. They also seem to have little tolerance for women of that era, who often did stay home with the children while the husband worked - cooking, cleaning, driving the children to school functions, community events, and to the doctor and dentist - shopping, sewing, mending, filling out forms for school, getting them their shots at the doctor's, putting on birthday parties, and so on. And she had five children to worry about! At the time Shirley was raising her family, the one-salary family was the quite typical, the man being the breadwinner, his earnings enough for the entire family. That changed, in the 70's probably, until we reached this time where it takes two incomes for a family to feel they have enough.

There is uncertainty about this kind of law, though Surrey, BC, lawyer David Greig says that a child must have means to pay support before they are made to (Payback time for parents, MacLeans, June 24, 2010). Unfortunately, it's part of the human condition for people to always think they need more. And whether the reason the children are so critical of their mother is, in part, due to their not wanting to have to pay her, we don't know. Whether it should be the children's responsibility or the system's, is the larger question.

Shirley's lawyer, Donald McLeod, says "My interest quite frankly is to see that someone is treated right, and that's all I care about . . . I don't know very many people that would not be happy to support an aged parent. The duty to support and assist an elderly parent transcends everything else" (What do we owe our parents, Vancouver Sun, July 24, 2010). And finally he says, "What kind of mother she was, or is, shouldn't matter. To engage in any analysis of who is at fault, I think that is a useless exercise."

"Do vengeance and vindictiveness have a place in the lives of otherwise decent people?" is the question asked in another piece on this subject (Forgiveness for an errant elder, Vancouver Sun, July 29, 2010). If Shirley was as bad as the children's stories suggest and this was not simply about money, the eye-for-an-eye retribution seems to be a little extreme. It is a symptom of our times - this hatred towards the older generation, especially women or anyone who is isolated and cannot defend themselves. Read the comments with the articles, for an idea of how our society thinks about them. It makes one wonder just how civilized we are.


Added Jan 1, 2013
A recent international news piece in the National Post, about Palestinian women being denied their rightful inheritance, raises a related matter. It may apply to Shirley Anderson’s situation, or may not. It simply is not mentioned – and why would it be – if the children received an inheritance from one of their mother’s relations through plans made for it to skip a generation. Such plans would no doubt be legal, though if some coercion had occurred, of an elderly relative, to perhaps ensure that certain descendants be left off the list of beneficiaries, then could this be considered an ethical digression, if not outright illegal? (see Tradition, social pressure keeping Palestinian women from their inheritances, Dec 27, 2012).

It is easy for people on the outside to judge, especially if they don’t know all the circumstances. False accusations or distortions of events made against the mother may hold little if any truth. It is far easier for those who hold power to have their word taken as truth than a mother fighting for survival. Some of what has been said I find shocking, particularly as one who found it necessary to leave the marriage I was in, the effects of it following me for a long time afterwards. No one is a perfect parent or spouse, but the odd one may cause harm that lasts. So much is talked about of women being able to choose to be stay-at-home mothers, but that works if she has a husband who will treat her like a human being, during the marriage and if it should end for some reason, then afterwards too. As we see here, from children who surely must have taken a huge amount of their mother’s time to raise, Shirley Anderson deserves more than what she got, from her family and from the legal system.

A bad mother's right to support from her children
By Adrian MacNair
National Post, Full comment
July 27, 2010
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/07/27/adrian-macnair-a-bad-mothers-right-to-support-from-her-children/#more-7817

Adult children won’t have to support mom, court rules
By Ian AustinThe Province
Jan 31, 2013http://www.theprovince.com/news/Adult+children+have+support+court+rules/7896113/story.html

Anderson v. Anderson, 2013 BCSC 129 (CanLII)
Court case result
http://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2013/2013bcsc129/2013bcsc129.html

Forgiveness for an errant elder
By Catherine A. Mori
Vancouver Sun
July 29, 2010
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/editorial/story.html?id=004cf063-8823-4b2e-9864-9b0dee0e576d

Payback time for parents
By Nancy Macdonald
MacLeans
June 24, 2010
http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/06/24/payback-time-for-parents/

Runaway mom who sued adult children for support after abandoning them as teenagers NOT entitled to money: judge
National Post Wire Services
Feb 1, 2013
http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/02/01/runaway-mom-who-sued-adult-children-for-support-after-abandoning-them-as-teenagers-not-entitled-to-money-judge

Shirley Anderson, Mom Who Sued Kids For Support, Loses Case
The Huffington Post B.C.
Jan 31, 2013
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/01/31/shirley-anderson-mom-sued-kids-child-support-bc_n_2592170.html

Tradition, social pressure keeping Palestinian women from their inheritances
By Diana Atallah
National Post - The Media Line
Dec 27, 2012
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/12/27/tradition-social-pressure-keeping-palestinian-women-from-their-inheritances/

What do we owe our parents?

By Denise Ryan
Vancouver Sun
July 24, 2010
http://www2.canada.com/vancouversun/story.html?id=46e10b66-0c0e-4f80-bc01-e7bb262b67e5&p=6

Links updated Feb 3, 2013

Michael Ignatieff: leadership potential in Canadian politics

Revised May 29, 2010
Updated June, 2012

It's astounding that Michael Ignatieff is being treated the way he is, when you look at all he has to offer.

In our society, continuity is seen as normal, and better than discontinuity or separation. The lengthy, continuous career is looked upon as a model for a good work history, while travelling and working in diverse occupations, and in more than one country, can be viewed as a sign of flightiness. In reality, this kind of life can make a person 'more of a Canadian,' (a term attributed to Ignatieff in recent news articles, and not kindly eg ‘Michael Ignatieff thinks,’ 2010), more understanding of different ways of living and working, more able to stand back and look at the entire picture, but it can be detrimental when one comes to trying for a new career in a country that doesn't understand this. Ignatieff was probably right when he said the Conservatives were "provincial" in their thinking - the Conservatives and many Canadians (Michael Ignatieff accuses Conservatives, 2010).

After all Ignatieff has done in his life - teaching, journalism, writing books, serving as professor at universities, he is sometimes criticized for not doing anything substantial, for not showing Canadians what he is all about. But isn't what it's all about is having the "trust and confidence" of the people, and "vision for Canada," as this article claims? Could the problem, in part, be the people working for the Liberals. See this, from the article, apparently a comment by "one senior insider" : “Ignatieff hasn’t unveiled any substance yet and until he does, he can’t move anywhere" (The pressure is on Ignatieff, 2010).

So now we're back to having to have something of substance to convince the people of Canada that Ignatieff would make a good leader, not just knowing that he is able to think, write, do the work, act with determination, and do all the things a leader must be able to do. He actually has to show proof, and not proof gained while working in other countries for non party-political jobs.

To say it's up to Ignatieff to stop the freefall, if that's what it is, is unfair (The pressure is on Ignatieff, 2010).  According to this article, "Mr. Ignatieff has already fired one group of top advisors yet his poll numbers are still dropping." He must wonder what is going on too.

He may be the best thing to happen for the Liberals, and our country, but if people can't change their perspective on his travels out of Canada and return to it, and all the qualities he has proven (though not to us), he may not ever get the chance to be PM.

Ignatieff is not only being blamed for the Liberal freefall, he's the one being forced to take responsibility for stopping it. I think that's not so. It's got to come from the people themselves. If, when one is absent, one takes the time to look at what is going on in Canada, one might see things about it that are truly disquieting. and so, I'm not sure this would make one a "better Canadian" (as Rex Murphy claims Ignatieff said), when being a good Canadian often seems to mean keeping quiet about the norms of our society and the injustices committed here.

In his May 29th column, Rex Murphy becomes rhetorical, saying, "We learn our country by living in it, by absorbing the flow of its events, by acquiring an emotional as well as an intellectual grasp of its rhythms and moods. We inhabit this country, and it returns the favour: It inhabits us" (Michael Ignatieff’s out-of-country, 2010).

In reality, the ideas expressed in this sentence are nonsense. Being that close to a country or a person can make us take its qualities for granted, so much so that people are often advised to take a break from it - a vacation or a separation, to reflect and enable rational thoughts to emerge, where once feelings guided all decisions. No one can know the entire country, or all its people. We all live in our own little worlds, sometimes of our own making, sometimes not. We latch onto pieces of it that we recognize as being 'ours', as Canadian. But most importantly, it is the leaving that enables a person to get a better picture of what is going on - and the returning that holds the promise of something better for the country.

Ignatieff's absence is no obstacle to his ability to do well at the job of PM. In fact, I know that staying away will have given him so much more. Besides having been able to look upon Canada from a distance, he has now undergone critique by his fellow Canadians, who seem unable to grasp the significance of his time abroad. I have said before that leaving and then returning does leave one out-of-touch with prices, and changes in laws, but a read-up of these is usually enough. Does one ever forget how to ride a bike?

Rex asks, "There is an essence to this country. What we have in common, the core, is that which enables the embrace of diversity in the first place. Mr. Ignatieff may understand some of this, but does he feel it? Does he perceive the strength and depth of the common endeavour which has been and is this country since its founding? "

Perhaps not, Rex. I don't feel it. Perhaps it takes something from one's countrymen, after having spent time away, before one can feel it again. Perhaps one does have to take some time going through the motions before people start to see how unjust their behaviour and criticism is.

Added June 2012

In ‘Beyond Workaday Worlds’ (2005) I draw on the work of Mary Catherine Bateson, who wrote:

“continuity is the exception in twentieth-century America, and that adjusting to discontinuity is not an idiosyncratic problem of my own but the emerging problem of our era...In may ways, constancy is an illusion” (Composing a life, 1989).

As I state in that essay under the subtitle Unity, Continuity, and Contradictions, “her aim was to make sense of interrupted and discontinuous lives of the “composite life,” illustrating the importance of responding to change and learning to adapt (p 7). To illustrate what I had discovered about work and about such concepts as continuity, as they apply to real life, I incorporated aspects from life stories of five individuals I had written following interviews and research.

More often than not, in the past, it was men who had the careers that established continuity for them, thus a form of respectability and earned trust, I imagine. In the fairly recent past, it was more often women whose careers lacked that kind of continuity, and not just over childbearing. In some ways, it seems as though this is what’s bothering some people about Michael Ignatieff, that he didn’t have a long continuous career, or keep his focus on politically-oriented positions, instead branching out to academia and tv broadcasting, for instance, thus must have the ‘stability’ factor lacking in his character, I believe they must think.

If so many really are against Ignatieff, then it may be that they hold old-fashioned ideas about work, as well as about what it means to be a Canadian. For his own thoughts on this, see the 2011 article ‘My name is Michael Ignatieff, and I am Canadian.’ As for Rex Murphy’s question, “Does he perceive the strength and depth of the common endeavour which has been and is this country since its founding?,” this is not the way our country is going. The common endeavor has been lost, as people with diverse backgrounds and goals vie for their own place in society and to have their own culture recognized. What chance is there of having that unity back now that Ignatieff has left? See Adrienne Redd’s informed perspective that acts as counterpoint to all those who have expressed doubts about Ignatieff’s ability (Ignatieff, the Best Prime Minister, 2011).

There is no 'essence' to this country, and demanding that a PM encompass traditional values of work and continuity, rather than travelling and working abroad at more than one occupation places a stifling limitation on what a prime minister can or should project to the people.

Michael Ignatieff is currently teaching at the University of Toronto.


Beyond Workaday Worlds: Aging, Identity, and the Life Cycle
By Sue McPherson
SAMcPherson.homestead.com
2005
http://samcpherson.homestead.com/files/EssaysandWriting/BeyondWorkadayWorldsSMcPherson.doc

Composing a Life
By Mary Catherine Bateson
New York: Plume.
1989

Ignatieff, the Best Prime Minister Canada Will Never Have
By Adrienne Redd
TheTyee.ca
May 7, 2011
http://thetyee.ca/Opinion/2011/05/07/Ignatieff/

Michael Ignatieff accuses Conservatives of “divide in order to rule” politics

By Linda Diebel
Toronto Star
May 18, 2010
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/810818--michael-ignatieff-accuses-conservatives-of-divide-in-order-to-rule-politics

Michael Ignatieff thinks he's more Canadian than you are
By Matt Gurney
May 18, 2010
National Post
http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2010/05/18/matt-gurney-untitled-ignatieff.aspx

Michael Ignatieff’s out-of-country experience
By Rex Murphy
May 29, 2010
National Post
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/05/29/michael-ignatieffs-out-of-country-experience

My name is Michael Ignatieff, and I am Canadian
By Michael Ignatieff
Globe and Mail
June 29, 2011
http://m.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/time-to-lead/my-name-is-michael-ignatieff-and-i-am-canadian/article2079267/?service=mobile

The pressure is on Ignatieff to stop Liberal freefall
By John Ivison
National Post, Full comment
May 20, 2010
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2010/05/20/the-pressure-is-on-ignatieff-to-stop-liberal-freefall/
http://network.nationalpost.com/NP/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2010/05/20/john-ivison-the-pressure-is-on-ignatieff-to-stop-liberal-freefall.aspx
http://www.nanosresearch.com/news/in_the_news/National%20Post%20May%2020%202010.pdf

Links updated June, 2012