Grieving Through a Disordered Mood

I haven't posted for a while because last week I lost someone very important to my life. My aunt passed away after a short battle with liver cancer and I have been struggling a bit with it. 

Normally under such circumstances I tend to make myself as busy as possible to try and forget about it. Once I kick into work mode, the pain and distraction of grieving melts away like an inattentive child's popsicle on a hot summer's day. So I tried it this time, and it failed.

What is it about grief that makes it different each time one experiences it? There have been many people who have gone in my lifetime, most tragically and most young, yet they all affect me differently. Some were present or former classmates, others older family members, one was a fellow poet and one was my best friend. I miss them all. But my aunt's death has been very different from the others.

This is the first time I lost someone after my diagnosis of depression and anxiety this past May. In this sense I live in a totally different world from the one I inhabited previously. In the past, the chemical balance of my brain wasn't being managed the way it is now since I became a consumer. The weird fluctuations in mood and temperament are highly unusual to me and I've had to get away from everyone to take a bit of time inside my own head to start to sort through it all. My friends have noticed my weirdness but have been good about it. I'm not so sure I feel at peace with it, at all.

However, now that this is my new reality I have to learn how to cope. I know there are others out there who read this blog and have similar stories. It would be great if we could start a discussion in the comments on this topic. Grief is always hard and I'm learning it might be even tougher when one is newly learning how to cope with a mood disorder. 

We bury my aunt on Friday. But I can't bury this emotional turmoil. I hope by speaking openly about it, this conversation might positively help someone else in the future.

A Brief Break From PS&R Blogging ...

I've been very happy about the increased readership for PS&R the last few weeks, so thank you to all the new readers and welcome to the blog! I encourage you to subscribe to it -- simply click on "Follow" on the top menu bar and receive notifications when a posting has been added.

I'm currently sitting in the US Departures area of the Vancouver International Airport, mere moments from being called to board my flight for San Francisco. I am unsure how ofter I will have access to the internet while out of the country, so this is adieu for now. Look for the next blog entry on Sunday, unless the gods conspire to give me a bit more time before then.

Have a good rest-of-week and a fabulous weekend everyone! I'll check back in a few days from now.

The Canadian Winter of Youth Unemployment

In today's Globe and Mail, Gwyn Morgan argued the most dangerous force in the world is the large number of unemployed youth across the globe. In making his argument, Morgan wrote the main protesters driving the Arab Spring revolts in the Middle East and North Africa are disaffected, jobless young people who live in societies where youth unemployment runs as high as 40 percent.

Without a doubt, their plight in oppressive societies in which they have limited class mobility, few or no avenues for significant political engagement and high levels of corruption could lead them to take to the streets in protest. But levels of youth unemployment are high in the Western world, too. Could the lack of job prospects also lead to social unrest in North America and Europe?

Morgan doesn't think so. On the situation in Europe, he writes:

"... financial woes have driven youth unemployment to more than 20 per cent. Spain’s jobless rate among young people is twice that, comparable to that of the Arab world. But there’s a crucial difference. Low European birth rates have progressively lessened the proportion of youth in society, and the longer-term outlook is for worker shortages as baby boomers retire. By contrast, there are sixteen Middle Eastern and North African countries where at least six out of every 10 people are under 30 years of age."

Since demographic trends in North America are very similar to Europe's, it's fair to extrapolate Morgan's perspective would also more or less fit our situation here in Canada.

Youth unemployment rates are unacceptably high in this country. Ontario has the biggest challenge, with 15% of its young people unable to find work. There is a growing group of unemployed/underemployed, highly educated people increasingly expressing their disenchantment with the current state of affairs. These individuals see their investments in higher education providing ever-diminishing returns for themselves and their peers. More and more have returned to the nest, unable to find decently compensated work that provides enough capital for self-sufficiency. Others have given up and gone back to school for something to do, only to find themselves further in debt and just as unlikely to find work after graduating with a professional degree, advanced degrees or a post-undergrad college certificate.

This, of course, says nothing about the young people who have dropped out of the workforce, are no longer enrolled in school, or who never completed a high school diploma and/or a post-secondary program. Official statistics only tell part of the story. These uncounted youth, equally disaffected, have just as many reasons to be disgruntled by current economic conditions as their brethren with academic credentials. When you add these various populations together, a sizeable proportion of Canada's under 30 crowd are losing the economic battle due to a combination of stagnant job creation by the private sector, public sector employment cutbacks, baby boomer reluctance and/or financial inability to retire, escalating education standards being demanded across the board in hiring practices, restrictive employment regulations by government in certain sectors, and ongoing global economic uncertainty.

Morgan's implied belief that skills shortages will lead to improved employment opportunities for youth down the road ignores the fact that older workers are working longer and harder, thereby blocking younger workers from accessing employment. These older workers are also continuously upgrading themselves (through an added emphasis on skills development training by industry), which helps them remain employed. How does a young person fresh out of college or university compete with that? How do they find work if skills learned in school atrophy or lose relevance after years of unemployment or working low-paying jobs in another sector to try and make ends meet? Worse, how is a young person facing socioeconomic barriers or a lack of educational opportunity supposed to compete on anything approaching an equal footing to others, no matter the age of their competitors?

The youth of Canada live in a country with democratic principles written into its constitution. The need for armed revolt is not high. However, social unrest like we've seen in the Middle East may yet find a uniquely Canadian expression if young people here cannot fairly compete to gather the fruits of their labour past generations have enjoyed. 

A Quick Comment on 9/11

I've been in transit this weekend and have mostly been off the internet. I haven't seen any television. I have only read a few things in the newspaper, courtesy of my BlackBerry data plan (thanks Fido!). But I'm sure discussion and coverage of the tenth anniversary of 9/11 has been all over the place. 

There are only two things I want to add to the discourse:

- As I made clear on Facebook today, while I consider the loss of life a personal tragedy for those directly in relationship with the victims on that day, I also think the deterioration of our democratic rights and freedoms under the guise of security is an unprecedented pillaging of our heritage that we may never fully reverse. This long-lasting byproduct of the "war on terror" shall haunt us for a very long time until and unless we get very serious about reversing its ill effects. The fact the Harper government wants to bring back many of the old provisions of anti-terror legislation (with the support of the original Liberal architects of the provisions), and we have no way to effectively stop it, means we have a very far way to go to learn the lessons 9/11 should have taught us as a nation.

- Margaret Wente's ridiculous assertion that "[d]espite many warnings and much alarm, a backlash against Muslims in North America never materialized" has to be one of the most offensive things I have seen written anywhere about the aftermath of 9/11. I could go on a rant to make Rick Mercer proud right here, but suffice it to say that the quality of life Muslims experienced on September 10, 2001 is quite different from what it is today. For any person with the privilege, access to information and (purported) intelligence she has to write this tripe amounts to the worst kind of anti-Muslim revisionism -- a literary misadventure that treats the assaults, desecrations, racism, slander, wiretaps, unjust arrests, increased survelliance and decreased personal security Muslims confront daily as a figment of their overactive imaginations. The Islamaphobia that has become one of the most challenging social issues any citizens of any description face in contemporary Canada is as obvious as the growing length of Wente's nose anytime she writes about any topic involving "the other" in this country.

It's been ten years now. The time for overblown memorial ceremonies is over. Let the families continue to grieve in dignified privacy, and let's get on with the task of making our democracy safe for everyone who lives within our borders. That is the true debt we owe to 9/11's dead.

Why Two Years of Teachers' College Is Not Better Than One

The McGuinty government is proposing the extension of teacher's college from one year to two years in an attempt to look hardcore on education. This election promise is perhaps the dumbest education-related proposal the "Education Premier" has yet come up with since first winning office.

I was enrolled in the Concurrent Bachelor of Arts/Bachelor of Education (Con-Ed) program at Queen's University in the first year of a major overhaul -- for the first time, the experience and background of an applicant would be balanced in importance with academic achievement. It was one of the hardest programs to gain entry to in those days, as only 1 in 8 applications were approved straight out of high school.

Without those changes I would not have been accepted. Period. My marks were decent (an 80.3% average in my OAC courses, just good enough to be named an Ontario Scholar), but hardly outstanding for a Queen's applicant. However, my experience was off the charts in comparison to most people trying to get in, and that was the great equalizer. Had I applied the year before, when marks were the only determinant of entry, I wouldn't have even been given a second look.

What the Con-Ed program administrators had figured out was this: a brilliant mathematician can never clearly explain to a struggling C+ student how to apply complex concepts the scholar understands with little difficulty. In fact (as I found out later, when I had to teach math after I graduated), the student who fought for a B all the way through school is a far better math teacher, because they understand what it means to struggle and have handy tips and tricks to overcome some of the difficulties such students encounter with the subject matter. 

In Con-Ed you take education courses throughout undergraduate studies, then spend the final year at teacher's college with a reduced course load. A Con-Ed student also has the opportunity to have supervised practica throughout their first degree program, usually in May. This allows a prospective educator (known as teacher-candidates) the chance to practice what they learn, work in a school environment, and figure out if this profession is really for them. A few of my classmates realized through this process that they were in the wrong field, and they switched programs. This is a good thing for the education system as a whole. 

Everybody's an expert on teaching because everyone attended school. There is nothing more irritating as a teacher than dealing with people who think they can do the job better than the obviously inadequate person teaching their future physicist/Olympic athlete/doctor/lawyer/insert-six-figure-earning-career-here. My retort is simple -- if teaching was so easy, then why aren't you doing it yourself?

Oh, right, it's a ridiculously challenging, all-consuming, stressful and under-appreciated profession. It requires empathy, subject matter knowledge, attention to detail, the patience of Job, a good sense of humour, irony, self-control, excellent instincts, the ability to work alone, the ability to work collaboratively, public speaking and facilitation skills, sacrifice and an unrelenting belief in the students they see every day in all manner of mood and temperament. 

That's why spending an extra year in school makes absolutely no difference to the quality of education your students will receive. An extra year in university will fatten institutional coffers but will not additionally expand the brains of teacher-candidates. Ultimately, a teacher makes it or not in the crucible of day-to-day work with students. The profession demands of its best practitioners intangible skills that the technocrats in the Ministry of Education and Training will never be able to quantify. One year is quite enough to learn the basics, then be thrown to the wolves.

The idea of two years of teachers' college is not going to improve the quality of our teachers. Attracting quality people to the profession is the only way to deal with that issue. And it's best addressed through modifying admission requirements rather than keeping teacher-candidates in school (and in debt) longer.

Vancouver, San Francisco, and International Mental Health

Tomorrow morning I will board an airplane bound for Vancouver. After a weekend of spending time with good friends and reacquainting myself with the west coast, I will attend events related to the International Initiative for Mental Health Leadership.

My leadership exchange is in Vancouver,
then I'm off to San Francisco for the main
gathering (source: http://www.iimhl.com)

Roughly every 16-18 months, the IIMHL gathers people from its member nations in the English-speaking world (England, Scotland, Ireland, the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand) to attend a network meeting and leadership exchanges to focus on the various issues facing people who work in mental health, and the consumer/survivors they support. Since 2007 I have acted as Poet Laureate for the organization. In that capacity I participated in previous gatherings in Ottawa (August 2007), Brisbane (March 2009) and Killarney (May 2010). 

I have been invited to participate in a leadership exchange focused on homelessness in mental health in Vancouver next Monday and Tuesday before proceeding to the network meeting Wednesday through Friday in San Francisco. I consider this my most important ongoing poetry-related engagement, where my poems are used as part of the final record of proceedings, and participants share my words within their organizations and their mental health systems.

Source: MHCC Website

When I move from meeting to meeting in Vancouver next week, I will be talking with participants, researchers and advocates involved with the Mental Health Commission of Canada's At Home project. This project is gathering empirical evidence of the impact housing-first care has for people dealing with the double negative of no street address and no access to mental health and addiction services. The project is operating in five Canadian cities, and Vancouver is the western city in the study.

A man sleeps on a Vancouver street
as a passerby looks on

I'm constantly amazed at the number of homeless people on our main streets in Canada. I've lived in Toronto, Kingston, Montreal and Ottawa, and have also travelled to many other midsize and large cities across the country. We have a serious problem on our hands, and it's compounded by the fact that the majority of homeless people concurrently deal with mental health issues. If we're ever going to get a grip on this problem we need to use different, innovative solutions to get things on a path to mitigation and eventual resolution. I'm hopeful this project will produce some positive results and inform new approaches that get people into a safer environment to receive the services they require.

IIMHL delegates in Killarney, Ireland
(source: Martin Brogan)

In the meantime, I have to get myself packed and ready to get on a airplane to stay with friends or in a hotel and be fed well as we face this issue and so many more at the IIMHL events. Understanding my own privilege in all this is a big part of the ongoing struggle. 

But I try my best. And we as a nation must try harder and learn from our international partners about what works elsewhere. People living with mental health concerns in Canada deserve nothing less.

Building the Tribe: An Ode to Teachers on the First Day of School

In the crucible that forged us all

That stood at most three stories tall

And housed the minds the future hopes

Successfully jumps through its ropes

A tribe of people wait to see

This slice of our humanity

Approach with skin scrubbed to a sheen

To cleanly face the unforeseen

These last few weeks the tribe has come

Back to the base to be among

Those others who have also learned

That learning is their main concern

And so they prep for new demands

The tests, the bells, the shows of hands

But on this day, as youth arrived

They hoped their plans were strong devised

But now, first class -- it's far too late

To save their lessons from a fate

That calls to mind a crash and burn

Their principals can scarce discern

From flaming wrecks charred crisply black

By vandals waging bold attack

So all that's left is heartfelt hope

That students over time will cope

Too soon the days transform to weeks

Where sickness wears until they're weak

Fatigue sets in and multiplies

Through blood-red shots within their eyes

They know their fate; despite this fact

They waver not, they never slacked

When working in those last few days

Contending with late summer's haze:

So long! to summer school upgrades

For which they pay and are not paid

Farewell! to summer's warming break

And barbecues with sizzling steak

Goodbye! to time spent home at rest

So briefly August manifests

Adieu! so quick you had to go?

September's here to say hello!

So on this day that school resumes

I wanted to take up this room

To hail, salute and send support

To those who write progress reports

And mark all night, and serve all day

Our kids at work, at rest, at play

So teachers -- smile and have no fear

On this the first day of your year

Your job is tougher than some think

So when stress holds you at the brink

Remember this -- when times are hard

We hold your work in high regard

Without compassion at your core

To push our kids to aim for more

The road ahead is dim and bleak --

So never cease to guide and speak.

The Canadian Inferiority Complex, as Expressed Through Hockey by Boogaard, Rypien and Belak

This has been a horrible summer for the National Hockey League. Three of its players known primarily for their pugilistic talents -- Derek Boogaard, Rick Rypien and Wade Belak -- died over the last few months under circumstances that call into question the continued need for fighting in the NHL. The howls from certain people in the public have grown only louder for rules to be changed to ban players from dropping the gloves during a hockey game.

You're probably wondering why I would write a blog entry on this situation. After all, most of my commentary focuses on the political realm or on the art form I practice. In fact, like most Canadian kids I was raised with the notion that hockey is one of the things that defines us as a people. So from that perspective, talking about hockey is intensely political -- especially when the topic is fighting.

From Don Cherry on down there is a large, predominantly Canadian, faction within the NHL sphere who will not countenance a league without fighting. However, as Jack Todd writes, most fights in the league are now set pieces that have little or nothing to do with the actual flow of the action, as fights once did in a bygone era. They are nothing but interruptions, brutish sideshows, and increasingly dangerous ones at that.

The Neanderthals who would keep fighting in the NHL try to argue it's intrinsic to the nature of the game. They espouse the ridiculous notion that people come to games for the fights, they are entertaining, and without them the game will lose its edge. Despite the fact that other equally fast, strength-dependent, violent sports like rugby and football thrive without fighting, and that the international game and the Stanley Cup playoffs get along excellently without fisticuffs, these NHL tall foreheads refuse to listen to reason, or join the rest of us in looking for root causes for the alarming rate at which former and present players are being damaged by injuries such as concussions and fight-related trauma. 

I could write a seriously long entry on all the intricacies of this issue, because it bothers me that much, but let me say this: the way we Canadians view hockey is, in a sense, a reflection of the way we view ourselves. 

For decades, we have suffered from something of an inferiority complex. Canada has never been able to exercise primary policy-shaping influence in world affairs. We have existed as a middle power neighbouring a superpower, and that has played upon our national psyche for a long time. We have always looked for approval from our "big brothers" on the international stage -- first France, then Britain, and now the United States. We have been forced through the dual accidents of history and geography to literally hack an existence out of the wilderness while sleeping next to a proverbial elephant. The society that emerged from this combination of ruggedness and neighbour envy produced a sport for the world -- hockey -- that perfectly reflects this personality.

But times have changed. We no longer need to instigate a fight with others to make ourselves feel bigger, or to catch the attention of our southern neighbours. Canada has enough going for it to gain plaudits for a variety of laudable reasons. In the same way hockey has become an international athletic staple, played at a high level in dozens of countries and recognized as one of the world's great team sports, the originator nation of that game has come over time to stand on its own, independent of past colonial entanglements and respected as an important player on the global stage. 

We as Canadians must relieve ourselves of childish things for we are no longer children. It is grown men who are suffering as the result of the NHL's infantile approach to head injuries and fighting in the league, and these men are orphaning actual children in the vacuum created by league inaction. The NHL claims fans want this paradigm to continue. It's time for all of us to maturely state this is no longer tolerable.

As the originators of the game, and as a mature society, it's on us to demand an end to the suffering. 

Whither Labour?

Tomorrow is Labour Day, the annual celebration and reflection on the role of workers who, over the decades, have contributed to building Canadian society. I plan to participate in the parade in downtown Toronto. This will be the first time I will participate, even though for most of my adult working life I have been a member of a union.

For me personally, I have had a checkered relationship with unions. While I have worked successfully with the labour movement as a contractor, providing services for both the Ontario Federation of Labour and the Canadian Labour Congress over the past few years, I have not always been able to gain the protections I needed as an employee. When I was a teacher in Quebec, my union let me be pushed out of my teaching position because of a technicality. It was this negative experience that led me to leave the province and move to Ottawa so I could work in Ontario. I found a government job after a few months and the unions that represented me (CAPE and PIPSC) were very helpful to me during the nine years of my public service career.

Ironworkers march in 2008 Labour Day Parade, Toronto ON

I am a strong believer that unions continue to play a valuable role in the marketplace and in broader actions aimed at social justice. At their best, unions are a powerful force for good in Canada, and should be encouraged to strive for those positive contributions at all times. 

There is a debate right now within the New Democratic Party about whether or not unions should continue to hold a special bloc of votes at leadership conventions. In the past, 25% of the votes used to select a leader were reserved for labour. Some in the party wish to maintain this arrangement while others argue it's time for a change.

No matter which way you slice it, in my opinion the NDP will always have a difficult time justifying to the public why labour should wield such influence within a political party. If the Conservative Party, for instance, were to set aside 25% of the votes for any identifiable interest group (business leaders, anyone?), the public and people in other parties would quickly claim the Tories were beholden to a special interest. People in the NDP would be squawking loudest of all.

In this day and age, when corporations and labour unions have been banned from making donations to political parties, allowing unions to vote influence instead of purchase it will be a hard sell. As much as some well-meaning people may want to maintain historic ties, the times have changed. The NDP is no longer a fringe party whose decisions have relatively little impact on the federal scene. The party is now the Official Opposition, and in order to be taken seriously as a true government-in-waiting, the former trappings of protest must be muted or set aside entirely. 

By all means, encourage unionists to be heavily involved in the leadership process. But to have a bloc of votes set aside for an identifiable interest in the modern age would be an unforced error handing the Tories a bat to beat the party with for the next four years.

The NDP: Aftermath and The Way Forward

I have been thinking of writing a blog post about the passing of Jack Layton for some time now. There were many things I wanted to say about him, but I felt they were being said far more eloquently than I ever could in the actions and the genuine outpouring of grief by everyday Canadians of all political persuasions from coast to coast. From the chalk covering Nathan Phillips Square in Toronto, to the vigils held spontaneously across the nation, to the letters, notes and online expressions of grief, this was a rare unifying moment in our history when our politics were consumed whole by our collective humanity.

This moment was most searing for the followers and members of the New Democratic Party. The loss of a leader so tragically and so soon after his (and his party's) greatest triumph has been a body blow to the NDP. In the aftermath, people have started to move ahead and plan for the next steps in the journey. Next Friday, the national executive will establish the rules of engagement for a leadership contest that will choose someone to replace Layton at the helm. Shortly thereafter, the people currently considering a run at the leadership will weigh the rules, their personal desires, their potential support and fundraising bases, and their potential competition and then decide whether or not to throw their hats into the ring.

And then the NDP will pursue that great task of selecting the man or woman who will take up Layton's work and push the party towards the next federal election in October 2015, all the while working to establish the NDP's newfound second-place status as a stepping stone upward and not as a fluke followed by a crash back to earth. 

NDP MP Thomas Mulcair

In his final message, Layton hoped this race would begin quickly and run about as long as the 2003 contest (which selected him as leader). It's been widely reported that the length of the last contest was roughly seven and a half months. So why are people in the party and in the media tied to this bizarre idea that the race will be concluded by January? This idea has become so prevalent that Thomas Mulcair has already made his first big mistake in this race, claiming he won't run if the leadership convention is held too early. 

Rebecca Blaikie has been tasked by the party's executive to lead the crafting of the rules of engagement. There's simply no way she's going to suggest the party dispense with Layton's final suggestions. So let's do the math: it's September. A leadership race with a timeline of seven to eight months would place a convention in March or April 2012. That's plenty of time to build a campaign, go across the country and meet people, sign up people all over the place (especially in Quebec), strengthen local associations, conduct debates and consultations, and otherwise conduct the business of a party looking for a new leader. 

Hey, NDP supporters -- chill out. Everything will be fine, and there won't be a convention in January.

I personally feel excitement about the process of choosing a new leader. The invigoration of the party at the local level can only bode well for the continued success of the NDP as a political force, and make it harder for the Liberals to try and come back and reclaim second-party status. The NDP will also be out in front of the other parties in the House of Commons that currently lack permanent leaders, and will give that individual maximum time to grow into the role. Jack Layton did not arrive fully formed as the formidable leader he had become by 2011 -- it took years of hard work and dedication for him to get there. The new leader will need similar time, and the stability of a Conservative majority until 2015 actually works in his/her favour in that regard.

This timeframe also permits the party to work towards building a stronger funding base in preparation for the battle ahead with the Conservatives, who are currently biding their time and waiting for things to shake out before unloading their heavy artillery on the new leader. They will try Ignatieff tactics again -- spend lots of money trying to define the new person before they get a chance to define themselves. New Democrats will have to be ready for the onslaught, and the need to build a war chest in the coming months has never been clearer.

I have ideas and perspectives on how this race may come to pass. Until candidates start to declare their official entry into the race I will hold my own counsel. But look for more posts on this topic in the weeks and months to come.