I’m neither qualified nor experienced Hilary, I was just wondering if there is something a little less loaded, in order to better distinguish these episodes from their temper tantrum namesake.
Thanks for this Russell, I’m curious, does the medical community have an alternative to the terminology “meltdown” or is that as advanced as our current description of these issues reaches (replete with the implied associations with irreversible destruction, toxicity, radioactive half life, genetic mutation, evacuation and death)?
Pity the family member quoted in the article you linked to has few qualms about using the potential power of this manifestation of mental illness to have a bit of go at someone else…
Absolutely Rosemary, there are serious questions that need to be asked here regarding the support available for all concerned.
He chooses to be an arsehole. His mental illness issues are shared by many others who manage not to be persistently nasty towards others.
Sacha, so the sufferers of chronic depression etc who are similarly unable to contain the anger and emotional outbursts associated with their disorder – causing them to negatively impact the lives of those around them – are “arseholes” and managing illness largely boil down to the apparently simple act of patients choosing not to display the symptoms of the condition?
Not being in possession of a world view that contains a dismissive ‘arsehole’ category for living breathing beings, especially not those afflicted with underlying issues, I can only assume that your propensity to pigeon hole people in your “arsehole” category and broadcast that judgement may feel like something of an imperative, just as it may for someone with ‘lazy prick’ or ‘feral’ categories, What may differ however are your respective senses of agency.
This site is incredibly progressive in its exposure of issues surrounding disablement, as for mental illness, there’s clearly so much ground to cover.
Cameron Slater has a mental illness that causes him to attack, with a great deal of savagery, those who are also clearly suffering pain and disablement.
Exactly Rosemary, and that is why amplifying, emulating and disseminating that affected voice and advancing those page views is not in society’s best interests.He is the pin up boy for a failed mental health system:
He shoots from the hip with no thought of the consequences for himself for others or indeed his family. The very fact that he says hurtful things that show a total lack of empathy is the evidence that he is seriously ill.
“He watches me cry my eyes out again and again and it moves him not one iota. You want me to be upset that he has hurt others? I am too busy dealing with his lack of empathy towards me."
because he does has some influence…at the highest of levels.
Clearer than that is that the highest levels have had absolute influence on the life and livelihood of this compromised individual. His family have yet to meaningfully intervene.
Surely, if he wanted to deal with his issues, first and foremost would be to stop what he’s doing.
I suspect that it’s indicative of the level of compulsion he’s grappling with right now Sofie, The potential remains for him to become a force for good in this world and in the mean time if we see this type of behaviour for what it is – symptomatic of illness – this presents a softer landing for many.
Thanks for your reply Marc, that is awesome.. Anyone who lacks advocacy is in big trouble, some are very lucky to enjoy the support networks they have. That these support networks are so needed is testament to our having produced generations of school leavers lacking the confidence and/or the ability to articulate themselves far beyond “Speights.”
The vacuum left by so many moderate voices can only distort our national discourse, A thread begins with some excellent suggestions for improving our benefits system and ends up with a commentator calling “feral” in response to the unfortunate comments made by a prominent mental illness sufferer in our community – his word, hiffed to the forefront of our modern popular lexicon, the way he sees people, a totally inappropriate choice on his part planted in the armoury of an enemy he craves..
Due to the nature of mental illness, anything Cameron Slater says is subject to the influence of his illness. Yes he puts that tone out there, but at the end of the day it’s a symptom of a greater problem, he is high conflict, clearly he is dealing with a great deal of pain. In this context we are equipped to either ignore or absorb that without retaliation, just as we would the outbursts of a Tourette sufferer, a choice most with sufficient empathy are free to make.
As spectacular as that portrayal sounds – I certainly hope not, but if he is then perhaps a quiet word in the ear rather than a nasty national news headline might better benefit everyone concerned.
No not exclusively, my last work provided full time contracts and had difficulty finding teachers willing to sign up for that. There is all sorts of work and plenty of opportunities available, long or short term, contracted or freelance, poorly remunerated for the most part but there all the same,
that the article defines hosting an online shop as a 'gig' where as a bricks and mortar version would be seen as a business. While the article appears to largely ignore the fact that many RL industries are and always have been a 'gig' for most players involved, 'gig economy' as used in the article to describe the more encompassing and 'online economy' is lazy pigeon holing from the Guardian. Like the RL job market the internet presents an array of opportunities.
oops, sorry Rosemary, my reply to Sofie, anyway, that’s me have a great year people!
We gotta start somewhere. If we can find just one Minister ( it would be nice if it was the Prime) that wants change, that person could effect change.
I guess that what I’m getting at here though is that regardless of any legislation that may be implemented, it’s the administration of that legislation that will remain the core aggravation. It’s all very well proposing a UBI or any stop gap measures for that matter, but if that in turn leads a much larger demographic being subjected to the same indignities as our current beneficiaries already suffer then I don’t see that as a great improvement. This isn’t just about the money, and throwing more money or rejigging specific rules will do little to alleviate the wider issue. They could give us all the money, sooner, but in all likelihood the authorities would continue treating us in a sub- human manner and in the end one may suggest that our proposals are little more than fire fighting an apocalypse.
As I see it, the fundamental here is our increasing lack of respect and regard for our fellow earthlings, and that arguably begins with better education and ends with more stringently protected rights for workers and non-workers alike. It’s all very well being a vocal proponent of the three Rs, as some here are, but if that comes at the expense of producing a kinder more respectful, more humane culture, then we’re just sending more lambs to slaughter – expect this downward spiral to continue unchecked.
With regards to unemployment figures and jobs, via the internet there are numerous opportunities now available, we are no longer limited to working for companies based within the country, we no longer require full physical mobility, the job market has changed irrevocably, so referrals to those kinds of phenomena (as have been bandied about) need no longer occupy the position of relevance they may have once enjoyed.
As clarification, I chose not to use WINZ to supplement any shortfall in my income, for reasons made abundantly clear by other posters- the indignities our authorities perpetuate widely, on a daily basis. My experience with WINZ was under the previous Labour and National Governments and I’m sorry to say neither presented any marked differences to me beyond the rebranding exercise.
I do appreciate that not everyone enjoys the luxury of having this kind of choice. My refusal to submit to their hoop jumping has occasionally caused me to go hungry, but I’ll continue to persevere with the status quo. As there is literally no higher rung within earshot, and while our cultural dictates remain focused on demeaning our weakest, the poorest, the least materially endowed, the losers, the unwell, the outsiders, of anyone for that matter, then the difference between the othering that WINZ offers to the employable and what employers of the LCD are offering as alternative remains largely indistinguishable and academic, give or take a few dollars here and there.
To be fair to Emma and everyone contributing I'm not jumping in to contend any of the suggestions I have seen presented here, I just don't see the issues faced existing in isolation from our general societal sentiments or at the very least those sentiments expressed consistently by New Zealand's media/ government/ celebrity clique.
WINZ is darkly classic “Catch 22” material–staff are personally rewarded for denying what their “clients” seek rather than providing it!
what was in earlier times Social Security is now a sadistic bureaucratic punishment maze
I think pinning this on WINZ and bureaucracy is something of an oversight. I applaud Emma’s sentiment, however I feel that the issues underpinning the treatment of beneficiaries are consistent with those measured out by society as a whole. I understand that most posters here are white collar workers and independent contractors and have little grasp of life for blue collar workers in New Zealand.
In our family, my wife grades fruit where she is subject to random mandatory drug testing, her work place regularly subject to visitations by the drug dogs. I work online and have done so for 5 years (not as a Nigerian Prince as previously suggested by a regular poster here – but this attitude is indicative of the wider issue). I have dealt with zero hour contracts and I have been required on a regular basis to provide the company that I now freelance for with photographic evidence of my genitals confirming that I am the gender I claim to be – in order to keep the channels for earning money open.
So with specific regards to unemployment beneficiaries; attending a seminar or meeting or two doesn’t seem at odds with the larger trends within our culture i.e that everyone is guilty until proven innocent, that our bodily fluids, our bodies and our right to previous expectations of privacy are now the property of those with either the money to support us or those who provide us with the opportunity to support ourselves.
Sorry to sound like a Strangelove knock off but this is now the world we live in. Which isn’t to say that it shouldn’t be fixed, but in order to do so, meaningfully, we may need to widen our scope beyond a couple of ministers and a department or two and address the wider cultural and societal issues and attitudes, both nationally and as part of the international community we are aligned with.
What I fear with that Craig is that Labour really aren't reading the game, already this year we've seen National slip in a watered down CGT. On May 10 Grant Robertson appeared on Q&A, refloating Labour's election policy regarding the introduction of incentives for migrants to go to the regions. A week later we get this headline:
Which again is not at all what Labour promised, but it's a massive step in the right direction. These are all in their way the apparent fruits of the National Government, in much the same way as if you ask most people who invented the light bulb they'll answer Thomas Edison, public perception being paramount.
So I won't be holding my breath waiting 2 years for Labour to implement this new tax policy.