by David Oaks, Director, MindFreedom

MindFreedom got another official response from the church that owns Ray's "guardian" agency, but not the response we had hoped for.

We got a bit of sarcasm instead, and that e-mail exchange is at bottom.

But let's identify the organizations and individuals first.

The agency charged with being Ray's "general guardian" is Lutheran Social Services of Minnesota (LSSMN).

LSSMN is not to be confused with a different type of guardian, Ray's "guardian ad litem," Terri Bradley, who directly supervises Ray's shock. A TV station mis-reported that Ms. Bradley works for LSSMN, she does not.

While LSSMN does not directly supervise the electroshock of Ray, they could speak out against forced shock, and support Ray's campaign.

Instead, in a variety of ways, LSSMN has been an obstacle to Ray's campaign.

What is remarkable is that LSSMN is owned by the six Minnesota "Synods" or branches of the largest Lutheran church in the USA, and one of the largest Christian denominations anywhere: the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America [ELCA] with headquarters in Chicago.

MindFreedom encouraged people to ask ELCA, in a civil way, to stand with Ray, and to speak out against the injustice of forced electroshock. After all, Lutherans have spoken out about other forms of injustice. And there are ELCA churches practically everywhere in the USA, hopefully making dialogue much easier.

Here is an opportunity to address a neglected social justice issue.

Unfortunately, ELCA has not expressed an interest in real dialogue on the emerging issue of mental health and human rights. Instead, ELCA issued a public statement that falsely claimed MindFreedom "misdirected" people about the Ray Campaign.

On Christmas Eve, MindFreedom issued a response to ELCA's public statement, asking "What would Jesus do about forced electroshock."

MindFreedom's response refuted ELCA's public statement. We repeated ourselves: We're not saying ELCA is in charge of Ray's shock, and we never have, but ELCA could stand up, speak out for human rights, and stop being an obstacle.

You may read MindFreedom's open letter here:

http://www.mindfreedom.org/shield/ray/alert-9-sandford

In response to MindFreedom's open letter, many people again spoke out over the holidays to ELCA, saying this time they were not misdirected by MindFreedom.

Unfortunately, ELCA's director of Communication Services Miriam L. Woolbert decided to continue to e-mail out the same old note to all of these folks, continuing to falsely claim MindFreedom "misdirected" people.

Psychologist and author Paula Caplan noted to MindFreedom she was still getting this boilerplate response.

So I phoned up Ms. Woolbert to find out why.

Ms. Woolbert said they have received hundreds of new complaints. When Ms. Woolbert returned from her Christmas holidays she said she had "220" e-mailed complaints waiting, leading her to say that she felt "persecuted."

In fact, she even mentioned that I had e-mailed a few times. I did so because of technical problems related to e-mailing an alert and update to more than 10,000 people, but Ms. Woolbert apparently and unfortunately took this personally.

So she again sent out the same-old same-old, with the discredited claims.

So Ms. Woolbert, you tell me you feel "persecuted"?

MindFreedom has called for civil communication with ELCA. We have not heard of any uncivil or offensive communication to ELCA. If by "persecuted" you mean many people are concerned about Ray, and have expressed this to ELCA, then you are misusing the word "persecuted."

Your church is used to controversy. Your church leader, Bishop Hanson, has courageously flown to the Middle East to address the conflict there along with other Lutheran leaders. Surely many people have expressed perspectives on controversies to ELCA before.

Let's save the word "persecuted" for something that has meaning.

Now, Ray is someone who would understand the true meaning of the word "persecuted."

Sadly, Ms. Woolbert and ELCA have also continued to try to wash its hands of the matter by saying that they do not have oversight of LSSMN.

Perhaps ELCA is not providing adequate oversight to LSSMN and their other social service agencies. Perhaps that's part of the problem. But legally ELCA definitely has an ownership role, and morally they have an obligation to do something.

Ms. Woolbert then chose to add a little sarcasm to her e-mailed responses to MindFreedom.

Here's a sentence from her e-mail of 30 December 2008 to me:

"I suppose you are a licensed therapist who has had a long-time professional relationship with the person about whom you are writing, so you know best what is right for him, eh?"

Given this level of unprofessionalism, MindFreedom has now moved to directly contacting the individual in charge of ELCA, Bishop Mark Hanson.

You may join in contacting him with civil notes of concern here: bishop@elca.org

Ms. Woolbert also said the proper procedure was to instead complain to the six Synods that own LSSMN. Even though this looks like a bureaucratic dead end, MindFreedom immediately complied with her suggestion that same day, contacting all six Synods. After two weeks not one of them has answered, even to acknowledge receipt of the concern.

Truly, it's time for all of us Americans to make a friendly visit or phone call to your local ELCA church. Given all the great and caring Lutherans I know, I feel it is highly likely there are individual participants who will be concerned, or who at least will not reply with sarcasm.

You may find a local church with this handy ELCA congregation finder on the web, just plug in your zip code:

http://www.elca.org/ELCA/Search/Find-a-Congregation.aspx

Whether or not you do such outreach, remember to contact Bishop Hanson here:

bishop@elca.org

BELOW is the e-mail exchange between MindFreedom and Ms. Woolbert following the MindFreedom Christmas Eve Open Letter to ELCA which, again, you may read here:

http://www.mindfreedom.org/shield/ray/alert-9-sandford

The below begins with my reply to MindFreedom member Paula Caplan about how she was still receiving the same old ELCA reply, even after the Open Letter. I copied this to ELCA.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

29 December 2008

From: David Oaks, Director, MindFreedom

To: Paula Caplan, PhD

Copy: ELCA  - info@elca.org

Dear Paula,

Because you received the identical response from ELCA that you received two weeks ago, even though we have made it clear we are not saying ELCA is in charge of Ray's shock, nor that we are asking for any violation of confidentiality, I have phoned up Ms. Woolbert.

Unfortunately, she is not taking the public's expression of concern really well. Ms. Woolbert said she returned to find 220 e-mails, and said she feels "persecuted."

Since I've been a human rights activist for 32 years, I take that word very seriously. I asked her if anyone in ELCA was working at all on the topic of human rights and mental health, and she said, "no."

I therefore phoned and asked to speak with Bishop Hanson. Violet in that office has asked me to e-mail Bishop Hanson. Although he is planning to leave soon for extensive travel (including in the Middle East), I am hoping he will have a chance to take a look at this.

I am concerned that our sincere request for dialogue has been met by Ms. Woolbert with words such as "misdirected" and "persecuted." This seems unfair, and uncalled for.

I did talk to Ray today, his spirits are up, and he is someone who understands the true meaning of the word persecuted.

By the way, there is a contradiction in ELCA's response:

1) On the one hand Ms. Woolbert is saying that certainly she could not violate confidentiality of a client by speaking about Ray, whose story was featured on National Public Radio.

2) On the other hand, Ms. Woolbert says ELCA has absolutely no control, oversight or direct connection with LSSMN which is overseeing this client.

If ELCA must maintain confidentiality because Ray is technically their client, how can Ms. Woolbert claim ELCA has no legal or moral connection to the situation?

Sincerely,

David W. Oaks, Director, MindFreedom International

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On Dec 30, 2008, at 6:12 AM, Info@elca.org wrote:

Mr. Oaks:

I said the ELCA did not have a staff person with mental health responsibilities. I did not say we were not "working at all on the topic of human rights and mental health."

I suppose you are a licensed therapist who has had a long-time professional relationship with the person about whom you are writing, so you know best what is right for him, eh?

I suggested yesterday that, if you think the ELCA ought to have a statement or take a specific action on mental health issues, the way to do that is to propose such action through the synods. Starting with the synods you *know* are the "owners" of LSS of Minnesota would be a good place to start. Compose a resolution and present it at the synod assemblies, who can then pass it along to the churchwide assembly next year. That is how statements are developed and actions taken in the ELCA; we are not a hierarchical church body. That is what I have been trying to get across to you all this time. The churchwide office is not a "vatican" that can tell the synods or other expressions of the church what to do in specific circumstances.

Miriam L. Woolbert ELCA Communication Services

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

30 December 2008 10:17:55 AM PST

To: Info@elca.org

From: David W. Oaks, Director, MindFreedom

Subject: I am not a licensed therapist, I'm a community organizer

Dear Ms. Woolbert,

As you suggest, I have contacted the six Synods in Minnesota that own LSSMN.

Your second paragraph about whether or not I am a "licensed therapist" is interesting and revealing.

1) I do like humor, I'm fine with humor, and I think it helps ion challenging issues.

2) However, I think you are going a bit past humor, and using sarcasm here, even though this is a controversial topic, which seems provocative.

3) I am glad to hear in the news that quite a few bishops in ELCA will soon be making the difficult trip to the Middle East, during a time of turmoil, when there is such a need for peace there.

No doubt, ELCA will hear controversial points of view from a variety of perspectives at this time.

I highly doubt anyone, including you, will respond in a sarcastic and unprofessional way to communication about Middle East controversies. Why? Because all sides involved in that conflict, as oppressed as they may be, have a certain level of power and respect, at least enough to command dignity from those communicating with them.

It is in the mental health field, where we are working on behalf of extremely disenfranchised people, that someone with your level of authority -- a gatekeeper of communication on this issue, crucial to Ray's life -- can feel they could act so sarcastically and unprofessionally.

I bet you have never heard of the word "sanist."

"Sanism" is discrimination against people based on the mental health issue, and it is an "ism" that is huge, but isn't even named. The fact that you would speak sarcastically to me below, but not to anyone else on any other controversy, would say a great deal, and I feel it is sanist.

4) I am not a licensed therapist, I am a community organizer for 32 years, at some personal sacrifice. Community organizing as a profession been mocked in the last election cycle as not "official," but the fact is that community organizing is a crucial occupation, and I reject that kind of negative categorization of people who are not licensed therapists as somehow unqualified to speak out about social justice issues in mental health.

5) Ms. Woolbert, you and your career are not the issue here. But I am beginning to feel like perhaps your communication below is something that our human rights alert list readers would like to read too.

A key part of what we are saying is that the general population -- not just licensed therapists -- ought to speak out about the mental health topic. It is time for democracy to get more hands on with these topics. Again, we do love humor. For instance, we have a MAD PRIDE campaign similar to "gay pride." Perhaps our MAD PRIDE movement might speak out to Bishop Hanson by pointing out in creative ways, that "no" many of us are not licensed therapists... we are human beings, we are citizens, and we deserve basic respect and consideration.

6) And finally, please note that we have a Scientific Advisory Committee composed of medical doctors, psychologists with PhD's, etc. with long clinical experience. If you'd like them to comment on this, just ask.

But they know someone does not have to know an individual personally to spot extreme abuse. You do not have to know someone personally in the 1950's to know that, for exampled, forced lobotomies back then were wrong.

One not have to know the people personally who received forced sterilizations in psychiatric institutions in the 1930's and 1940's to know it was wrong.

One simply has to have the heart, the empathy, to hear suffering...

Many people can hear Ray's suffering, and that's why you're getting so many contacts from concerned people.

I am worried about the many people who, for some reason, cannot hear the suffering Ray is experiencing, and do not want to genuinely dialogue about this situation.

Sincerely,

David W. Oaks, Director, MindFreedom International

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If you too would like to take up Ms. Woolbert's suggestion to contact the six Minnesota ELCA Synod's that own LSSMN,

http://archive.elca.org/synods/synod.list.asp

Then go down to "3D" and use the 'email link' for this one and the next five, total of six Minnesota Synods.