Mental Health as a Scapegoat

I am often amazed at the number of times people are declared "mentally ill" by individuals that are unqualified to make a mental health assessment. It is often used as a scapegoat to discredit individuals while empowering those that declare such an assessment. As far as I'm aware, a declaration of "mentally ill" can only be made by a psychiatrist, psychologist or designated mental health professional.

A neighbour had often proclaimed someone, "mentally ill", whenever their behaviour did not appear normal. I had reminded this individual to refrain from making such a declaration as it sets an unfounded environment of judgement, social shunning and exclusion based on false psychiatric assessment. Unfortunately, gossip and the use of power to create the image of an individual as, "mentally ill", contributes to an environment of ostracism and stigma that is irreparable and leads to increased marginalization and social exclusion.

Quite commonly, mental illness is utilized in bullying behaviours to discredit the target of bullying that is experiencing psychological trauma from the bullying. Bullying, or social terrorism, is carried out in such a manner that it creates an environment of persecution of the target through manipulation and disempowerment. This often leads to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Accute Anxiety Disorder as a result of bullying and stalking. Mob bullying starts without warning, is unstoppable once it gets going and, for the target, they don't know when it is finished as it is completely in the hands of the bullies. The reputation of the Targeted Individual is black-marked, not only within the group or immediate area, but with external organizations that may be able to assit the target. When bullying is identified, those carrying out the bullying react very much like Bart Simpson, "I didn't do it!" and a secondary bullying run occurs which may include legal and hard-core harm. What is interesting is the constant use of power to discredit, demoralize and dehumanize the Targeted Individual. It merely demonstrates a lack of humanity.

An individual disadvantaged by way of financial, health, social status, education, etc is predispositioned to bullying and the use of mental health as a scapegoat. In the area I live in, there is a high proportion of HIV positive individuals. I often am stunned with the frequency by which those that are challenged with their health are discredited by HIV negative individuals in a position of power over these individuals. It really should be the opposite and often makes me wonder why HIV positive individuals aren't working in these positions, for only these individuals really understand the daily challenges of life with this condition. Stress really can be the end of an HIV positive individual. It isn't a concern for a healthy person and nor do they care about the negative impact on an immunocompromised individual. For an HIV positive individual, mental health is very much a concern to ensure stress is kept to a minimum. Being labelled "mentally ill" just creates a preconceived label of predjudism that establishes an environment of stress and harm.

My Mental Scapegoat

Informant Persona

The mob bullying ring is comprised of many positions, one of which is the Informant. Basically the Informant is a "fly on the wall" for the mob. The objective of the Informant is to gather as much information as possible that could be used against the Targeted Individual (TI) for the bullying mob. So conveniently, the Informant shows up during heated debate and bullying by the mob to gather information about planned defences, rebuttals and damage assessments.

An Informant acts as if they are your friend or acquaintance. What sets an Informant from a friend or acquaintance is the timing in which they show up, come around or hang-out. Often, they will know more about conflicts, occurances, etc than the average friend, which should be an indication of their direct contact with the bullying mob. An Informant usually approaches with "siding with the TI" position but is actually digging for information to feed back to the mob. They will also "magically" appear after important meetings, document mailings, incidents and intense mob bullying/stalking. An Informant will also "fish" the TI's friends & family for information under the guise of concern or friendly interest. The Informants "intelligence gathering" is rewarded by the bullying mob and ensures the Informant a safe position in the mob.

The best way to deal with an Informant is to feed false and misleading information to the Informant so that it confuses the mob. The Informant relies on the honesty of the TI for information gathering. With damage assessment inquiries from an Informant, deflating any damage and actually turning it around that the mob helped the TI is most annoying to the mob. False information fed to the Informant in the right way can also bring light to the mob bullying with authority figures.

The New Sheriff In Town

Quite a few years ago a community gathering was held with the, then, new landlord. A variety of community members were in attendance including a friend and neighbour. My friend observed the new landlord making inappropriate sexual advances on one of the tenants. She approached the new landlord and adviced him to back-down. The new landlord's reply, "I'm the New Sheriff in Town!" From this point forward my friend and neighbour was a target for relentless bullying. Luckily, it was determined that this individual had a white-collar crime history, demonstrated in a Canadian law database, to which I brought up and a hasty departure, "due to health reasons". It was amusing to watch the budget change from healthy to not so good in such a short time. I realize I am bullied because I am a whistleblower.

 In the complex I live in, I have a friend who I've known for a number of years. One day I visited him to say hello. He was crying that he had to return his box heater outlined in a letter from the landlord. "What's wrong? Don't your heaters work?", I said. "No", was his reply and his apartment was quite cold. "How long has it been like this?", I asked. "A year". I looked at his heater and, sure enough, it wasn't working. I decided to check the heaters in the cold hallways and they were also not working. The entire building had been without heat for an entire year. I understood why the tenants had not spoken up as they are either all or almost all BC Housing subsidized tenants. They were concerned about losing their home if they speak-up so either you live in cold and keep your home or speak up, get heat and lose your home. Being a subsidized tenant myself, I phoned the office and advised them that there was no heat in the building. I guess that's one of the reasons I'm a target. Kind of an "unheated" topic.

This same friend asked me a few weeks ago if he should go to the police as the landlord has relentlessly accused him of being a drug dealer. How do you prove a negative? Having known this fellow for a number of years I am fully aware he is not a drug dealer. He is, though, a social person and has many friends. Culturally speaking, english is not his first language and his ethnic cultural background, which is Latin American, is social in nature. So, if you have a number of friends, you are labelled a "drug dealer". I think back to the Citizenship ceremony of another friend and the Citizenship judge discussing the importance of respecting different cultural backgrounds as a Canadian value. One could easily say that the landlord is encouraging and participating in discrimination based on ethnicity. By mentioning this, I am concerned he may lose his housing.

In a society that encourages "Have" over "Have-Nots", the differences in rights, dignity and respect granted to the "Have-Nots" diminish with each passing moment. As a prime example, the housing complex I live in has BC Housing "subsidized housing" and "market-rate" housing, which really isn't "market" as it is also subsidized. Over a number of years the "market-rate" tenants have become the "Have" and the "subsidized tenants" are the "Have-Nots". The market-rate tenants enjoy quick repair services, regular maintenance, access to all amenities and services, power influence of the landlord and society board of directors, dignity and respect. The subsidized housing tenants are subject to less building maintenance, limited access to amenities and services, little to no respect and dignity and discrimination. A market-rate tenant who possesses a great deal of power and has been a stalker and bully towards me once expressed that the subsidized housing was only meant as "temporary housing". I liken the situation to classism based on socio-economic position in housing.

It is without question that writing about this issue will result in my eviction. It is my fundamental freedoms of conscience, thought, and expression, amongst others, that I exercise according to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that I write this blog.

Big Leaf Maple = Future Big Problem as a Street Tree

7 February 2013 (I have sent the below mentioned comments as an email to every media outlet I could find, many arborists in multiple municipalities, municipal politicians, The Mayor of Vancouver, City Counsillors, etc)

Recently I received a press release (above) from Mole Hill Community Housing Society, my landlord, that the City of Vancouver has approved Big Leaf Maple Trees as a replacement tree for dying Cherry trees along the 1100 block of Pendrell Street in downtown Vancouver. The boulevard is under 2 metres in width between the curb and the sidewalk. Having been an admirer of this fine native species of Maple, with the largest leaf of any maple, I am troubled by this choice of tree as a street tree in the city core.

Acer macrophyllum (Big Leaf Maple) can grow to over 45 metres in height, have a trunk with a circumference of up to 3 metres and a significant surface root system (Mature Tree). My further concern for this Friday, 8^th February, planting by the Vancouver City Street Tree Program on Pendrell Street brought me to a Seattle City Ordinance, No. 90047, prohibiting the planting of this species in the City of Seattle on boulevards. In reviewing background on the use of this tree in Seattle, I found reference in “Trees of Seattle” by Arthur Lee Jacobson which states, “Around 1900, it was our most widely planted street-tree, but due to the ruinous effects of root-heaving on adjacent sidewalks, its use as a street-tree is now illegal by City ordinance.” Most municipalities I spoke to shy away from this magnificent tree due to its over-all size, wide and damaging root system, and tendencies to break large limbs during wind storms. Additional problems with this species include excessive seed production and excellent seed germination, powdery mildew and internal trunk rot. The City of Bellingham requires a planting strip with a minimum width of 30’+ for this species to be utilized in the city. Arborists for other municipalities stated that it was not a species they’d consider or had in their approved street tree lists. Don’t get me wrong – I find this tree to be a magnificent native maple with excellent fall colour, large leaves and a prominent trunk, but, it belongs in a suitable growing situation such as a park.

I spoke to Bill Steven, Acting City Arborist and Brad from the Vancouver Street Tree Program regarding the use of this tree and whether Mole Hill will be held responsible for future maintenance and repair costs, and their response was, “40 years and we will see sidewalk repair crews there and taxpayers will be responsible for paying for it.” It will, no doubt, be more like 30 years or less when roots will heave sidewalks and cause street damage with the potential of falling limbs and person/property damage. I’d imagine the city has good liability insurance. It was only little more than a year ago that a mature Big Leaf Maple in Nelson Park, only a block away, dropped a large limb during a wind storm. This tree is situated at the north-west corner of the school playground. The tree had become dangerous and was heavily pruned, no doubt at significant cost to tax payers. The expression, right plant-right place, wrong plant-potentially costly disaster applies to this situation. The City of Vancouver may be creating a costly future problem due to Mole Hill’s insistence for a native tree, namely the Big Leaf Maple. A native plant does not mean it is better than non-native plants. I outright stated to Bill Stevens & Brad, “…so what you are saying is that politics weighs stronger than common sense by planting this tree and taxpayers will end up paying for the end result of this decision?” I was dismayed that little regard for tax payers was expressed in the making of this decision. A street tree decision should be based on what is best for the tree, the city, tax payers and the environment. Just because this tree was planted extensively 100 years ago as a street tree does not mean it was a good choice, then or now, and probably explains the lack of seeing this tree currently as a common street tree. Brad mentioned that he had a hard time finding this tree, and for good reason. It is not a tree utilized in urban forestry for street tree use because of the aforementioned problems. Mole Hill Community Housing Society has long pushed for “native-only” plantings in the heritage block and ostracised those that appreciate non-native plants. Having had the front garden sprayed with herbicide a few times and killed and mob bullying has re-iterated this “native-only” drive. The overplanted and poorly kept native plant walk-through at Mole Hill has created a dangerous environment of drug dealing and criminal activity. With this commentary, I smell an eviction in my future!

What it really boils down to for the tree’s sake is I am asking for anyone’s assistance to prevent “Street Tree Abuse” that starts on Friday of this week. I am a plantsman and I care about plants. This, to me, is the same misguided environmentalist-type of action that Grant Hadwin bestowed on the Golden Spruce. If the City of Vancouver is vying for the “Greenest City” status, it should be done smartly, with the future in mind and without political motives at the forefront. If planting this tree is considered illegal in Seattle and punishable by a fine, wouldn’t the City of Vancouver take heed to this warning? Bill Stephen stated they will go ahead with this planting, despite my concerns. I’m encouraged that Drew Gilchrist, Superintendent of Arboriculture, Bill Stephen, Acting Vancouver City Arborist, Vancouver Parks Board, Donald Luxton, President of Heritage Vancouver Society, Sean McEwen, architect and Blair Petrie, Mole Hill founder and native plant person have vested interest in the community and I trust a sound resolution to this predicament will be found. None of us would want to end up paying for a poorly thought-out decision down the road. It would probably be best that Mole Hill Community Housing Society leave tree choices to the experts. After all, it would be an embarrassment for the Vancouver City Street Tree program, which I have held in high regard for tree diversity, arborists and urban foresters to make decisions based on politics instead of tree sense.

“I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees. I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues.” Dr. Seuss – The Lorax (1972)

Update 9 February, 2013

The trees were planted on the 8th February, 2013 as promised by the Vancouver City Street Tree Program. One could easily surmise that tree sense and common sense have been superseded by politics and misguided environmentalism. Out of curiosity I looked through several of my books to see what they said. The Western Garden Book, which is often considered the gardening "bible" of the west, states under Acer macrophyllum, "...Dense shade tree 30-75 ft. tall, 30-50 ft wide - too big for a small garden or a street tree." In Maples, by Rosemary Barrett, "There are other maples that call North America home, such as Acer macrophyllum (Big leaf Maple, Oregon Maple) and A. spicatum (Mountain Maple), but these are not suitable garden subjects nor are they readily available. This should not be of concern as the maples that have been described are so beautiful that we should not want for more." In An Illustrated Guide to Maples, by Antoine Le Hardÿ de Beaulieu, which is a marvelous book, it states, "...The tree's root system has adapted to these conditions and is very broad and superfial." I also found this Seattle Times article (October 21, 2002) regarding the tree which states,

"The tree is banned in Seattle for planting as a street tree because of its sidewalk-bursting roots and widow-making branches.
Plagued by compacted soil from parked cars and foot traffic, pavement and construction, the bigleaf is prone to root rot, said Linda Chalker-Scott, associate professor at the Center for Urban Horticulture.
Rot can make it more vulnerable to shattering in stormy weather.
The trees are also just too big to fit into street tree-planting strips, said Nolan Rundquist, city arborist for Seattle.
He has cut many a chunk of sidewalk out to make room for burgeoning bigleafs, and Rundquist remembers one sidewalk muscled up 18 inches by bigleaf roots.
"You had to just kind of fly over that part."
It's a tree for wild, open places, not the straitjacket life of a street tree. "Everything has its place," Rundquist said. "It's place just isn't between the sidewalk and the street."

I also wonder if the Cherry Trees (Prunus sp.) were suffering from honey fungus as almost all Maples (Acer) are susceptible species to this disease. I also noticed in the original Press Release that Acer macrophyllum is pluralized, which I don't even think is legal.

Fate

The supporting evidence is everywhere and experience with this species has taught some arborists but it seems others have forgotten or don't care. I guess some must error repeatedly to learn...or maybe not. It really comes down to understanding plants. Their characteristics, requirements, habits, negative and positive attributes and practical applications.

Georgia Viaduct & The Tsunami

There has been much talk about the removal of the Georgia Viaduct in Vancouver. Historically the area of Vancouver between where False Creek ends and the Burrard Inlet were tidal flats. If a severe earthquake happens in the waters of Georgia Straight and a Tsunami happens, it could potentially  flow up False Creek across to the Burrard Inlet thereby cutting off the downtown core of Vancouver from the rest of the Lower Mainland. By removing the Georgia Viaduct and not looking to upgrade the structure as earthquake proof is basically ensuring the downtown core becomes cut-off from the surrounding area if the Burrard, Granville and Cambie Street bridges are destroyed or damaged, if that could happen. We so quickly forget the bridge damage of the 1989 earthquake in San Francisco. Just watch the Tsunami affect on this village in Kamaishi, Japan.

Ok, now imagine that same force coming down False Creek in Vancouver and flowing into the China town area. Many people forget that a good portion of what we see today as land now was actually filled in areas of False Creek. It is also the lowest area of the downtown area connecting the rest of Vancouver. So, when you think about it this way, let's just remove the only possible means of leaving the downtown core after an earthquake and Tsunami that destroyed or damaged the other bridges. I'd say it makes logical sense. In this 1893 map transposed over a Google map, the area of False Creek was much larger and extended far past the current Science Word in the direction of Terminal Ave., all the way to Clark. I often wonder where the logic is to the management of Vancouver although I have long realized common sense is secondary to political motivations. The viaduct is a vital means to avoid slower traffic and street lights. It was, unfortunately, the only part of a city highway that should have been built.

Vancouver Parking Lot

Vancouver - a place I've called home for most of my life. It has changed significantly in my life and I wouldn't say for the better. The traffic has gotten so bad, it made the top of the TomTom list of worst traffic in North America, tied with Los Angeles. The citizens decided that Vancouver was not going to have a highway through to the centre of the city in the 1970's. Instead, vehicles across the city sit at traffic lights wasting gas and polluting the air. Trucks still need to deliver product. Cars still need to drive into and out of the city. Travel within the city can take up to twice as long as it should, but that doesn't matter to those who feel everyone should walk, use transit or a bike. I like my vehicle and find it helps with getting groceries, travel, camping, visiting friends and family, doing things that are not on transit lines and, besides, I have a bad back and can't ride a bike and have trouble with getting on and off a bus. Forcing everyone to use these forms of transportation is discriminatory.

With the advent of the new Port Mann bridge, I can only see a serious gridlock of traffic in Vancouver. Talking about Port Mann bridge, I wonder why they didn't use the old bridge for trucks only. Actually, a truck only lane all the way from Langley to Vancouver would have been smart. If money and economics are the name of the game, time=money and faster transportation of goods makes good economic sense for the province. A friend of mine, who used to work for the Washington DOT and designed roads and highways, often laughed at Vancouver roads. Anyone driving in from Seattle along the 99 gets dumped into messy traffic as it turns into Oak Street. All-of-a-sudden, you're driving on a 6 lane road past residential homes and numerous lights and side-roads. Following Granville is no better. The signage is pitiful, if nonexistent. I've often seen it as unwelcoming and confusing, particularly to visitors. Watching the development of Vancouver's roads and highways is like watching a slow moving traffic accident happen.

The City of Vancouver is busy building a greenway and bike lanes on Comox Street with a budget of $5.46 Million. While I hear the machinery outside, I read about the hundreds of people turned away at shelters during the below-freezing weather. I see Gregor Robertson, the mayor, has his priorities in place. Biking before people. Sorta like his focus on turning front lawns into wheat fields instead of addressing the potential for a Stanley Cup riot which ended up costing $5 million. While some take so much concern over whether they are eating organic or not, others try to find a place to sleep and something to eat, just to survive. The socio-economic positions get further and further apart. The most livable city? Not for everyone.