OOPS!!!

I thought I backed up my Outlook files when I recently wiped most stuff off my computer. But I made a mistake. As a result, I lost all my contact information.

This is my plea to all friends and fam to please send me an email so that I can save your info easily.

While you're at it, tell me how wonderful I am.

FASD Ride coming to Winnipeg

Manitoba Horse Council
together with the
Behavioural Health
Foundation
welcome The Great FASD
Horseback Ride Across Canada

Please join us to Welcome Bruce Ritchie to Winnipeg as he raises awareness of
Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder
BBQ, Games, Pony Rides, Music and Celebration

When: Tuesday, July 10, 2007
5:00 –7:00 pm
Where: Behavioural Health Foundation
35 avenue de la Digue St. Norbert

Sicko

I happened to score 2 free passes for Michael Moore's new movie, Sicko. I highly recommend it. It starts off a bit slow, but quickly gains speed and then is entertaining right until the end. The movie looks at US Health Insurance, the scare mongering about socialized health care and the health care systems in Canada, Britain, France and Cuba.

It becomes clear that for all their talk of freedom, Americans are oppressed. Rather than being oppressed by their government, they are oppressed by the rich corporations they have to turn to for health coverage who then proceed to toy with their lives. Health insurance companies do not exist to provide healthcare, they exist to make a profit. And to make a profit, the worst thing in the world one can do is to actually provide the insurance coverage. So they find ways around it.

Of course, in the stories featured Moore contrasts the worst of the US with the best of other systems. In Canada, he interviews people in an emergency waiting room who wait about 20 to 45 minutes, which is a far cry from the 6 hours I waited in emergency after my car accident a few weeks ago. However, it makes me cautious about how private health care advocates do the opposite: contrasting the worst of Canada's woes with the best of the US stories. Every Canadian should see this movie to understand the perils of private health care.

Every Canadian should also see this movie for a reminder of how much better a society we could create if we elected people with the political will to make radical changes. Fear mongering about big government and high taxes prevents us from creating the benefits for Canadians that people from France take for granted. Some benefits featured in the movie:

• high quality child care for about $1 an hour*
• 5 weeks of holidays a year is standard for employees, even part time ones
• when a woman has a baby, she gets home care to help with baby, laundry, cooking, etc.

In other words, in France they expect their government to not be hands-off, but to create conditions that improve the quality of their lives.

The ending is priceless, as 9-11 volunteer rescue workers - whose health problems caused by their rescue efforts have been ignored by government - are taken by Moore to Cuba where they get medicines that were over $100 in the U.S. for about 5 cents and considerate, helpful medical treatment for free.

Yep, I'm glad I'm Canadian, but I wish Canada would become more like Europe. No chance under Harper, however.
_____________________________
*Incidently, not covered by Moore in the movie is the fact that one of the reasons child care is such a great system in France is because the government sees it as an excellent employment program. Why, in North America, is it acceptable for the government to hire people to build roads or fight wars but not to take care of our precious children? We want to have low unemployment, parents are desperate for quality child care but yet we can't seem to put the 2 together. It seems to do with the perception that when the goverment spends money, it is a loss. In reality, when the government pays a child care worker, that worker pays taxes. That worker also spends money on goods and services, and the businesses receiving that money pay taxes, their workers pay taxes, the businesses when they get more business from people who would otherwise be unemployed can afford to hire more people, who then pay taxes, the ripple effect grows and grows. The government gets their money back and the economy overall gets a boost as more and more people have money to spend on goods and services.

So what do the Conservatives do about this well-known economic principle? They concentrate on tax breaks for the rich, who are more likely to save their money and invest it outside of Canada, where it doesn't help our economy at all. Think about the economic benefits of doing things the way France does. It's common sense.

Change coming?

Many moons ago I was part of an "appointment process" in the federal government. Rather than having a job vacancy and filling it, sometimes the government gathers a pool of people that they can call upon as positions open over a year or more. After sending in my resume, writing a 3 hour exam, giving a presentation and having an interview I found out a few months back I did make it to the final pool. Which could mean nothing, because I will not necessarily ever be offered a job, I just might be offered a job.

Today I received a paper saying that I got a certain security clearance for "current position/employment" and needed to sign some document and send it back.

What does this mean? Is this happening for everyone in the pool or will I be offerred a job in the near future? Explanation please!!!

Sounds better than it works

Disconnect.

A long time ago a friend of mine decided to pursue a lesbian lifestyle. (While I recognize the fact that many people do not feel they choose anything about their gayness or lesbianness, it was clear through our conversations that she had had attractions for both sexes and was clearly making a choice). I remember feeling a disconnect at that point that was not to do with her decision so much as it did that I wasn't sure what we shared in common spiritually anymore. I had always had the impression that, having both been raised in Christian homes, both gone to a bible institute/college, that we shared the same beliefs and that I could just assume that there was this base in conversations that I didn't have to explain or wonder about. Now I didn't know where she was spiritually. Did she decide not to believe in the Bible anymore? Did she decide that certain passages were translated or interpreted wrong? Did she just not care? I wasn't sure what we had in common.

More recently I conversed with someone who told me about events in her life that she was sure had God-purposes in them and clearly had a strong belief in demons and curses. In my own life, I'm come to doubt how much of a hand God has in anything and how much is just life that we interpret as God. I also don't believe in demons. I don't not believe in them. I just don't feel I can be sure they exist, I have no personal experience with anything having to do with them, and I notice how much the descriptions of people who are supposedly demonized seem strangely familiar to symptoms of mental illness, and 2000 years ago, that was probably the best explanation they could come up with.

Now I find it increasingly difficult to have spiritual conversations with anyone because of that disconnect, that not necessarily sharing the same underlying beliefs that add to the meaning of conversations. I found myself just making "hmm" I'm-listening kind of noises a lot because I didn't know how to respond. It's not the kind of relationship where I would share my own views and doubts. But it is weird that now when I am with people who identify themselves as Christian I no longer have this instantaneous sense of connection.

To renovate or not to renovate

A week ago Rob and I got together with a couple I went to college with who have a contruction business. They offerred free advice and we accepted. We are totally and completely disillusioned about ever finding the house that we want and decided to look into the possibility of renovating the one we're in.

When we said the kinds of changes we would want, the husband of the couple said his approach would be to level the place above the floor of the first story. He said it's quite a hassle to work within an existing structure when windows, doors and stairways all change. He said we would pay more in materials but we'd make it up and more on labour.

This is very attractive is some ways. We get a house we want, in a neighbourhood we like, our kids can still attend a school we love and our yard, while not huge, is a tremendous improvement on a lot of lots we've seen.

Downside: Living with my in-laws for up to 3 months while the work is done, tearing down a house that is not perfect but pretty good seems a bit of a waste.

Anyone reading this done extensive home renos? Experiences, advice?

Appeal update

I am in the process of getting ready to appeal the U of M's decision. First of all, I've decided that even if I should be granted entrance, I want to wait until 2008 so I can try for the studenship again. I also want to be very careful how I approach this, as it's probably my only chance. Thus I'm not in a rush.

First, I made requests under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act for copies of:
1) my file - so I can be clear on why I was rejected
2) information on the university's policies around acceptance of degrees - so I know if I am fighting for something acceptable within the guidelines or if I am fighting for a just change in the guidelines.
3) information on the university's review of the credentials of the colleges I went to. I don't think this information exists, but I want them to tell me it doesn't exist as grounds for my appeal (i.e. you haven't even examined the credentials of the schools and yet you've rejected them outright?)

Once I have that information, I'll decide where to go - will I just write a letter or ask to meet with the dean.

In the meantime, I had a meeting with the pres, academic dean and head of social work at Booth. They are pleased that I am going to appeal and they want to do what they can to help, because it can only help other grads, too. Others have been turned down not only by the U of M, but also by other universities who look to the U of M's decisions to guide their own. U of M is getting in the way of many people in pursuing further education because of their shortsightedness - and whether it is stated or not, religious discrimination - not overt, the more underground systemic kind. The president is going to attempt to meet with the university's president and the academic dean likewise with the dean of graduate studies. The purpose will be to see what needs to be done so the barriers can be removed. They are not appealing my case, although they may use me as an example. They are hoping that by gettting the conversation going in a very open way that is sympathetic to the concerns of the university that I will experience a more favourable reception to my appeal.

It's been an educating process so far. Acceptance by the Association of Universities and Colleges in Canada is considered a bit of a gold standard in accepting degrees. Which is weird because they are not an accrediting agency, and one university president described it to someone I know as a social club for university presidents. It represents the interests of post-secondary institutions. It seems that membership is bit of a popularity contest - an institution has to get voted in. So even with very good academic credentials (which both my alma maters have) if someone has a grudge against faith-based education, they can block access. A few years ago the AUCC decided to raise the measure to institutions that have more than 500 students, and there seems to be a bit of a design in that to keep out most faith-based institutions. Still, Trinity Western and a few others have managed. Not sure how. So while AUCC membership MAY be a good reason for inclusion, it is a horrible reason for exclusion.

Governments at both federal and provincial levels are recognizing the need for the post-secondary world to make it as easy as possible for students to transfer credits and have degrees recognized. We are a knowledge-based society and we need a population of educated people. It does not help us to have a skilled labour force if people face many obstacles in pursuing further education through numerous institutions. Right now there is a political climate that is pushing for less politics in this arena. That can only help me.

The interview

I have been interviewed by Erica. Here are the questions she asked me:

1. If you had to change your first name right now, what name would you choose for yourself? Why?

I'll go with Susan. I don't know why. I just like the sound of it. Goes well with my last name (which I assume I'm not changing).

2. If you could go anywhere in the world for just 48 hours, where would you go? Why?

I would choose Australia. I'd like to see the Australia Zoo, spend time in a slightly differnt culture without the language barriers, and if it was winter I'd like to be warm.

3. If you could have free, live-in help for one year, what would you choose: a nanny, a chef, a maid, a personal trainer or a gardner?

This is an easy question to answer. My husband is essentially my nanny, chef, maid and gardener. I would choose the personal trainer.

4. The first time you fell in love, was it the real deal or did you have to wait for something special?

No, it wasn't the real deal. I had a total of two serious relationships before Rob and I met. With both of them I always had this feeling of come here/go away. They were good friends who should have stayed friends, but I found it very flattering to have someone attracted to me. And less lonely.

5. You won a contest, a publishing company is going to publish your “How-To” book… all expenses paid, international circulation and guaranteed success on book sales. This is your chance to communicate with millions of people. What is the book about?

I actually would love to write a book someday entitled "How to raise an abnormal child." The idea would pertain to how it is considered "normal" for kids today to do things that are unhealthy and immoral. To raise a healthy and loving child is becoming a rarity. You can't go with the flow, raise your children according to cultural standards and have a child who is well adjusted. Essentially, you have to be prepared to raise an abnormal child.

I am willing to interview you if you should care to join in the fun....come on, take the risk! Here are the rules.....

1. Leave me a comment saying "Interview me."

2. I will respond by emailing you five questions. I get to pick the questions.

3. You will update your blog with the answers to the questions.

4. You will include this explanation and an offer to interview someone else in the same post.

5. When others comment asking to be interviewed, you will ask them five questions.

Events

Last week I sent out an email around the University's rejection of my degrees. It went to fellow alumni and others asking for input that could help me in an appeal or in a human rights complaint. One particular friend sent it to someone else, who sent it to seomone else who sent it to an old professor of mine who now works in a role supporting the role of Christian post-secondary education in Canada. He expressed interest in helping me with my appeal, as has the president of one of the colleges I went to.

In the meantime, I have had second thoughts about ever doing a human rights complaint. At first I thought about it from a perspective that I have nothing to lose. Then I realized that losing an appeal like that could just set some people's poor attitudes in concrete, contributing to their distrust of faith-based education and possibly creating a harder time for other graduates in making headway. While I don't rule out a human rights complaint, it will be something that I'd have to have fairly strong evidence for, and I don't think that kind of evidence is out there.

On Thursday I dropped Taryn off at school and headed down MacGregor to work. The car in front of me stopped very suddenly, and I slammed on my breaks, tires squeeling, and stopped just in time. Then I heard squeeling behind me and looked in my mirror just in time to see a white minivan plow into our TransSport. Our van hardly looks like it was hit. Hers looked like it would be totalled. She couldn't drive it off the street and rad and transmission fluid were leaking all over the place. Someone called 911 so while we were exchanging information we heard sirens, looked at each other and said, "Is that for us?" Sure enough, an ambulance, fire truck adn police were soon on the scene. Seemed like overkill as we were all okay. The paramedics heavily encouraged us to go to hospital just in case. I refused to go in ambulance but decided to go on my own because if I ended up in pain in the next few days I wanted to CMA for insurance purposes. I waited 6 hours at the hospital. Surprisingly, I have had relatively minor amounts of pain or discomfort from the accident

Friday I flew to Saskatchewan, rented a car, drove out to Mom's and picked her up, went back to the airport and picked up my sister, then we spent the next couple of days shopping and at Manitou Springs. My work has given me new insights in how to respond to my mother's idiosyncracies. Yes, she's Fragile X, not FASD, but because both conditions affect the mind and thinking, the learning I've done about FASD has helped me to understand possible reasons behind her limitations. Still, she surprises me, although I don't know why anything surprises me at this point. For example, I learned that she has no idea how to floss. 71 years old and it appears she has never flossed properly. I attempted to show her how and she handled it the way my daughters did when they started to try at age 4 - grabbing both ends of a long piece and trying to shove it through the spaces between 2 sets of teeth, one on each side of her mouth, at the same time. She couldn't figure out how to wind it around her fingers or manipulate it between her teeth.

She also does not pick up on social cues. At one point we both entered an elevator and I made a small talk remark to someone who was already in there. The person smiled politely. Then my mom said something to the person, too. The person smiled politely again. My mom said something else; the person smiled uncomfortably. My mom said something that she thought was funny, but wasn't, and laughed, all the time looking at the very uncomfortable person, who was probably extremely relieved to be able to get out at the next floor. Social cues are a very abstract idea. Most of us can get the rule - that you don't keep on talking to a stranger who is not responding in kind - without being explicitly told the rule. But not everyone's mind can pick up on this. I think Mom may have been able to learn some of these things when she was younger, but now she's just too stubborn to change anything.

Just before flying back I was able to visit a couple of people, including the people who are buying our farmyard and see how they have begun to fix the place up. It looks really good and I always feel good to see the family loving the place I grew up.