Tag Archives: African American

Opinion – Arizona’s Mental Health System: In Need of Psychiatric Intervention

The Front of the SAMHSA building at 1 Choke Ch...

The Front of the SAMHSA building at 1 Choke Cherry Road in Rockville, Maryland. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The State of Arizona‘s public mental health system is in dire need of a complete overhaul, from top to bottom, with more focus on the top.   The system is divided into multiple layers of bureaucracies,  and on each level, large salaries are involved.  The first level, is called a provider, which are several outpatient mental health clinics which provide services to persons who require mental health services.  Those providers hire individuals to provide services such as counselors, therapists, and so forth. And each provider has a number of sites, headed by clinical supervisors who are in charge of seeing that those services are provided to the parties. One would hope that the services would be provided fairly and consistently among those individuals in need. However, that hope is dashed by the overwhelming power vested into the clinical director, who is allowed to do as he or she pleases without facing consequences.  The group which allegedly suffers the most at the hands of these agencies in Arizona are African-Americans who need assistance.  They are provided with the least amount of services, and much less than their White counterparts.  For example, there are housing programs, for mental health clients who are homeless, or need help with maintaining stable housing. A homeless African-American is not provided with those services, whereas other races and ethnicities who are homeless are provided with those services.  African-Americans have been denied without even the opportunity to apply.  Other races are provided with hefty amounts of financial assistance, while African-Americans are, in rare instances, provided with small amounts to assist them.  When the clinical supervisor decides that she wants to save some money, she decides, unilaterally, which housing services will be discontinued for the person of her choosing, and if she decides to make up a reason, she can do so without facing any consequences.  That is the first level.

The next level is an organization called CPSA, ( Community Partnership of Southern Arizona ). This is where the party can file a grievance regarding issues such as referenced above. However, the grievances rarely find that the rights of the part have been violated.  But, with the notice of Decision, the party has a right to appeal.  Yet, first, there is an informal conference, during which, the clinical supervisor is essentially in charge.  A complete waste of time and money, for it is just that supervisor standing up for her decision, with CPSA having no authority to do anything other than ask them what they want to do.   The next level is the actual state agency, Arizona Department of Behavioral Health.  But that level is the same as the prior. No real authority to do anything other than ask the clinical supervisor what it is she wants to do.  (Getting my drift here?) So the only level left within the state hierarchy is a state administrative hearing.  Arizona Office of Administrative Hearings.  (This is where the fun really begins.)

Bearing in mind that the party who is appealing has mental health challenges, they attend the hearing, expecting at the very least, a fair, impartial hearing, lacking bias.  What they get instead is an Administrative Law Judge who does not even bother to hide their bias.  They interrupt the party, and, if the party is about to catch the witness in a lie, the ALJ springs to the defense of the party, essentially telling them to ‘shut up’ and/or ‘hurry up’.  For someone with mental health challenges, this sort of conduct becomes too much to bear and seem a futile undertaking. The ALJ makes it clear that their goal is not for justice or fairness, but to look out for those state employees.   One ALJ, (Kay Abrahmson), rushed a party to hurry up and finish, interrupted questioning, and refused to allow the party to address all of the issues which had been sent up on appeal.  She apparently was in a hurry to go home.   The party discontinued participation in the hearing, ended up crying and distressed, and feeling hopeless.  So, this is what happens to a client who is attempting to fight for their rights?  They are pushed to beyond their limits?  They are forced to accept falsehood upon falsehood without being allowed to challenge any of them? And treated like crap by the person who is supposed to be in charge and lead by example? Such a sad shame.

This should not be so.  The same bias encountered on the first level, finds itself present at every level, and the party is left stunned at the measure of disrespect shown.  If the system were fair to all parties on the first level, there would be no need for all of this, but the system is rigged, and those who are a part of it, are fooling themselves via pretending among themselves that they are doing a good work, when they are merely earning a salary, while allowing a group of people to be discriminated against and mistreated.  A group denied services based upon whims.   It took the state of Arizona 33 years to settle a lawsuit. Arnold v. Sarn, which was regarding the mental health of Arizona residents.  I suppose that further illustrates the problem in Arizona.  The good news is that is was finally settled, but many in the state, (Southern Arizona), are refusing to embrace it, and clinging to the hope that they will not be affected by it, even though, clearly it is supposed to be in effect for the entire state of Arizona.

If there were a way in which a state agency and all of its tentacles could receive psychiatric intervention, this would be the group who would benefit most.  Unfortunately, there is no way to do that, so people either leave the system and not get the medical care which they need, or, they stay within the system, being treated like they are nobodies.  Which is worse?

Michelle Obama’s address at Tuskegee University says it all.  It does not seem to matter what position African-Americans are in, they still have to deal with the bias of so many people who refuse to treat them or see them as equal human beings, worth of being treated fairly. From the White House to all others in this country.  When will things become just plain and simple, fair? Mental health professionals should not be allowed to engage in this sort of behavior.

Leave a comment

Filed under Injustice, Opinion, Radar Opinion

Opinion: Indiana Can’t Have It Both Ways

English: "At the bus station in Durham, N...

English: “At the bus station in Durham, North Carolina.” May 1940, Jack Delano. Deutsch: “An der Bushaltestelle, Durham, North Carolina.”, Mai 1940, Jack Delano. Français : “A la gare routière, Durham, Caroline du Nord.”, Mai 1940, Jack Delano. Español: “En la estación de autobuses, Durham, Carolina del Norte.”, Mayo de 1940, Jack Delano. Italiano: “Alla fermata dell’autobus, Durham, Carolina del Nord.” Maggio del 1940, Jack Delano. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Whether or not you agree or disagree with the new law in Indiana, everyone should agree that anyone who pays taxes in the state, is entitled to enjoy all of the benefits which their taxes provide. For example, human beings who are gay, work, and pay taxes,  and their money supports those businesses which are choosing to discriminate against them.  That support comes in the form of their taxes and money supporting those businesses with police protection, garbage collection, electricity subsidies, fire department protection, roads, and so forth.  So, in light of this law,  those individuals targeted by the particular law be refunded their tax dollars calculated via the amount utilized by those businesses’ usage of state funded resources.

An attempt at a discrimination graphic.

An attempt at a discrimination graphic. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The fact is, if a business is open to the public,  the public is everyone who wants to partake in those services, without exception.

Maybe this point will help some ‘ get it‘: What sort of outcry would there be if atheist decided that they did not want to serve Christians or persons of any other religion?

For those who do not get it, this is legalized,state-sanctioned, apartheid.  When a business offering services to the public at-large can choose whom they will not serve, they are discriminating against a particular group, and the Jim Crow image above is a perfect example of the state legally marginalizing a group of people, in that case, African-Americans.  And, under this law, which is Jim Crow by another name, it affects everyone who belongs to a race, religion, or creed. Just because the stated target is the gay population of Indiana is no reason to ignore it because it may not affect you. It is morally wrong to discriminate against anyone and it is morally wrong for the state to target a group of people under the guise of religious beliefs. And just in case anyone has forgotten, the recent history of persecution of Jews commenced with discriminatory acts which singled them out from the rest of the population via being required to wear a yellow star on their clothing, and that situation devolved further with their shops having the word Jude  written on the front.  This too was the state marginalizing a group of people, based upon religion, and we know the horrific consequences of those laws.  The point is that when the state/government sanctions and implements legalized discrimination, it is a slippery slope which historically has led to other negative and/or horrific consequences. Once the government sanctions discrimination, then hate-filled individuals feel empowered to act out their hatred in ways other than providing services to individuals.

Yellow badge Star of David called "Judens...

Yellow badge Star of David called “Judenstern”. Part of the exhibition in the Jewish Museum Westphalia, Dorsten, Germany. The wording is the German word for Jew (Jude), written in mock-Hebrew script. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Those united against this law consist of businesses, groups, and individuals who may not agree on anything else, other than this law is a bad one, and should be repealed… ASAP.

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Opinion, Politics, Radar Opinion