Identifying as a 'person w/ lived experience' has become a route for marginalized ppl to be, in some ways, 'on the inside', of policy processes that are about us. the example of a formal process that springs to mind is the task force on mental health & addictions, 2013 onwards.
at the time, it was nearing the end of the DTES planning process, therefore terrible. i was the rep from gallery gachet, the token out nutcase on the committee. but the whole point for many of us there was that the diversity of our collective experiences, as low-income
and marginalized residents, had given us knowledge & insight that would improve the planning process, and so plan would centre low-income residents. but the danger is that while you might be in the room, you simply don't have the resources & capacity to participate meaningfully.
you're in the room, but the power imbalance is ... striking. the people who have it speak specialist jargon. & 200-page reports in that language are a emphatic No-Go to people w/ differing literacies. plus life is a constant emergency. so in 2013 the mayor declares a crisis.
& creates a mental health & addictions task force. it was locally condemned; why push for inclusion - the city's strategy was to co-opt, isolate, keep people busy, select people inclined to fall in line, & spin it publicly as 'inclusion'. i was invited, as gachet rep.
"Nothing About Us Without Us," the slogan goes. the room, first meeting:
vancouver.ca/your-governmen…
vancouver.ca/your-governmen…
the cops brought their guns with them to the meeting. the 3 of us flipped out about how incredibly tokening it was, the lack of Indigenous people, no young people, and that quickly changed. but i'd learned by that point that flipped out would be self-marginalizing, playing a role
if you didnt follow up with research and advocacy and plans. the first bit of task force 'actions' were pretty much a done deal. we went off about how being 'consulted' and 'included' were different. the "People W/ Lived Experience" became a working group, gained new members
(we'd get a city 'living wage' honorarium for the meetings. but for the follow-up stuff, we were on our own. organizational interest waned. tracey actively caught heat for attending [she attended on behalf of WAHRS, the heat from vandu.]) meanwhile at the meetings -
we were trying different approaches. we were expected to play a role - get up and recite our histories of trauma & exclusion (which we all had). the Deciders did not expect us, the crackheads and lunatics (and lunatic crackheads) to pitch policy initiatives at them.
or be able to articulate the implications of anti-drug user stigma in policy. by this point (2015) i was also at vandu - the local exemplar of lived experience political advocacy
there was always talk about fighting Them. demanding such-and-such of Them. nobody knew who They were. Tracey and I did, or knew how to find out. again, the follow-through. otherwise it's very likely a "lived experience" person will be heard, for a moment, but never listened to.
& people dont realize that governments & large public authorities like health agencies are deliberated structured to move very slowly & reluctantly. people thought we went to meetings for the $. the meetings were hell, yo. as the task force was winding down, overdoses rose. a lot
people were dropping in the alleys. neighbourhood reeling & grieving & dying. everyone was desperate, scrambling. we co-ordinated narcan training for 300 people with the city. we had meetings about funding for peer-based initiatves. and we marched & agitated & worked 18 hr days
but Tracey died, one year ago tomorrow, one year ago tonight
unroll please @threadreaderapp
