Recent Readings 11/08

Loose Girl: A Memoir of Promiscuity by Kerry Cohen - Tragic autobiographical account of a young girl's descent into promiscuity and her recovery. Unfortunately this 210 page book devotes 205 pages to the promiscuious part of her life, so the reader is not really sure the recovery actually happened.

New Geographies of the American West: Land use and the Changing Patterns of Place by William R. Travis - A scientific look at the changing demographics of the 11 western states in the continental US. Valuable for anyone interested in the growing cities of the west, the environment surrounding them, as well as water and land use issues.

The Kingdom of Ordinary Time by Marie Howe - Refreshing collection of poetry including brief poem "stories," and lots of questions.

The Great Awakening by Jim Wallis - This is the first book I've read by Wallis, one of the founders and leaders of the Sojourners Community in Washington DC, since "Agenda for Biblical People." ("God's Politics " has been sitting on my book shelf unopened for a couple years). Wallis looks at the current changing religious and political climate in the US emphasizes his interpretation of Christian teachings (which is similar to mine), and accents his mostly positive and upbeat report with quotes from scores of other people, including his two young sons. Nice overview, but no really new or eye-opening revelations.

In the World, But Not Of It: One Family's Militant Faith and the History of Fundamentalism in America by Brett Grainger - Grainger, formerly a part of the Sojourners Community, presents a concise history of fundamentalism enriched by his own first-hand experiences growing up in a fundamentalist family, church, and community in Canada.

One Secret Thing by Sharon Olds - Worthwhile collection of provocative, edgy poems by the award-winning former Poet Laureate of New York State.



Falling into Manholes: The Memoir of a Bad/Good Girl by Wendy Merrill - A largely unsuccessful attempt at a humorous telling of the author's attempts to overcome kleptomania, buliema, anorexia, alcoholism, co-dependancy, pot smoking, as well as sex and cocaine addiction on the path to becoming a "normal" adult. More sad than funny, but it's nice to see that the author still has a sense of humor...as well as her life.

Last Night I Dreamed of Peace: The Diary of Dang Thuy Tram - The Diary of a North Vietnamese doctor, working under horrid conditions to provide health care for her fellow Vietnamese. Killed by the Americans before she reached the age of 28. Highly recommended and very moving. More information is available at http://leonardnolt.blogspot.com/2008/11/remembering-vietnam-war.html and at http://www.thuytram.com/.

Dear Darkness by Kevin Young - Another worthy collection of poems from this prolific poet. Better than his previous collection "For the Confederate Dead" and almost as good as "Jelly Roll."

Saving the Queen by William F. Buckley Jr. - His first novel, published in 1976, about a CIA agent. Written by the conservative guru and founder of the National Review. Mildly interesting.

Learning to Breathe: One Woman's Journey of Spirit and Survival by Alison Wright - The very inspiring and unbelievable story of photojournalist Wright's nearly fatal accident in Laos and how she, against all odds, recovered to scale the highest peak in Africa, told against a backdrop of her travels and exciting experiences in Asia and other parts of the world. Enriched with touches of culture, religion, politics, and relationships. Easy, fast, and very worthwhile reading.

60 Poems by Charles Simic - This is the third time I've read this compact collection of bizarre, mysterious, and offbeat poems by the US Poet Laureate which is exactly the kind of excellent poetry we've learned to expect from him. These poems are taken from previous collections by Simic and they have a magnetic nature and keep drawing me back, like someone returning to a location where he once had an amazing experience, an experience that he still doesn't entirely understand.

Distracted: The Erosion of Attention and the Coming Dark Age by Maggie Jackson. A scholarly and heavily researched account of how many, perhaps most, people today in our culture are distracted and unfocused, and tells us how to regain "our ability to connect, reflect, and relax." It took me about 100 pages to really get into this book, and then it became really interesting for only a short while, but I gradually lost interest again the last couple chapters. I guess it was about me!

How Does it Feel to Be a Problem: Being Young and Arab in America, by Moustafa Bayoumi. Excellent and very readable account of the lives of seven people and the hassles they and their families had to put up with as a result of profiling and fear in the aftermath of 9/11. Reminds us that still in the United States some productive, law-abiding people are not as free as others. If you're going to read only one of the fifteen books on this post, this is the one to read.

The White Mary by Kira Salak - Average adventure novel with interesting descriptions of sloshing through the jungles of New Guinea and coping with war and other dangers in third world countries, but weak and predictable on relationships and interactions with other people. Fast, easy reading, but not much to think about afterwards.

The Cambium Level

Just in case you wondered where the name of my blog came from, if you remember the cambium layer of a tree is the living cells between the inner bark and the sapwood. It 's where the cell growth takes place. The cambium layer of a tree is also where the xylem and phloem is produced. The xylem is the tissue used for the tranport of water and minerals through the plant. The phloem conducts the organic food material through the tree. For obvious reasons I use the word "level" rather than the word "layer." My goal is to have "The Cambium Level" seen as a metaphor for writings and photos that are creative, life-giving, and informative.

Leonard Nolt

Remembering the Vietnam War

Recently I read "Last Night I Dreamed of Peace," by Dang Thuy Tram. This excellent book is the diary of a North Vietnamese doctor who was killed in the Vietnam War on June 22, 1970. Although her life was only one of millions who died in that horrible conflict, this book reminds us of how priceless each one of those lives were, and how much suffering resulted from the war. I was reminded again of how much influence the Vietnam War (which I've heard is called the "American War" in Vietnam) had on me and many other people from my generation. The Vietnam War is one reason, along with the Christian Anabaptist faith of my ancestors, (and also several other reasons), that I am not a conservative. Conservatives have a habit of choosing bloody solutions to problems. Unfortunately far too often liberals, progressives, and others support harmful conservative actions. It seems that the lessons of the Vietnam War have been forgotten by the conservative leaders of this country, and others, who currently have the US bogged down in two losing wars. It's estimated that the Iraq War alone will cost us from three to five trillion dollars, and, as in all wars, the financial cost is the cheapest expense. The cost of the lost lives, destroyed and damaged families, and the illnesses and injuries are even greater.



The use of depleted uranium by the US military guarantees that the death toll from the Iraq War will continue to rise indefinitely. Depleted uranium has a half life of a billion years. The rate of pediatric tumors in Iraqi children increased 12-fold in the areas where depleted uranium was used after the 1991 Gulf War when only 200 tons of depleted uranium was used, mostly in rural areas. Much more has been used in the current war, and most of it in urban areas, which means that long after the United States is as gone and forgotten as the ancient Babylonians, there will still be children in what in now Iraq coming down with potentially fatal tumors, as a direct result of the current military violence of the US. No dictator in history has yet been guilty of threatening the lives of children whose ancient ancestors have yet to be born, but that is exactly what the US is now doing in Iraq. The question that must be asked is this: is this the worst evil that any nation has ever inflicted on others, or is it simply a tie for the worst?



Dang Thuy Tram in her diary expresses some of the sentiment that the Vietnamese felt as they were targeted with US military violence not so long ago. This is also the sentiment that will be used to curse the US by other innocent victims, possibly for the next several thousand centuries. Hear her words:



"Oh! War! How I hate it, and I hate the belligerent American devils. Why do they enjoy massacring kind, simple folks like us? Why do they heartlessly kill, life-loving young men like Lam, like Ly, Like Hung and the thousand others, who are only defending their motherland with so many dreams" (Page 39)?



"The bleeding has stopped; the patient's urine has become clear and normal. A life saved should be a great joy, but somehow I feel apathetic and inadequate before my smiling patient, unmoved by his respectful eyes. Is it because I know I have stemmed but one bloodflow while countless others are still bleeding? I must mend all the wounds of our nation. The American are upon us like blood-thirsty devils, stealthily sinking their fangs into our bodies. Only when we have chased them all out of Vietnam will our blood stop pouring into the earth" (Page 47).



"Be willing to die, but also be willing to love life dearly, this precious thing that our people have paid for with blood and tears for twenty-three years" (Page 57).



"Every time I say good-bye to you, my young brother, I realize I love you even more. Hugging you in my arms, kissing your eyes, I feel that nothing can make us forget the hours and minutes we share. You have asked me many times why I love you. Why? It's because of your suffering, because of your courage before tremendous dangers, and because your heart thrists for love, but your life is lonely and cold" (Page 68).



"Life spreads before us in a thousand pieces of love, pain, hope, and jealously. Half of our heart is filled with red blood, half with black" (Page 69).



"Now Duong is captured again. Fresh out of prison - still not yet recovered from that saga - he has to weep for his father, shot by the Americans. His father's funeral was barely over before the enemy came again and killed his big brother in a tunnel, and captured Duong and took him away. They burned down his house. His mother is left to weep silently by her son's body, on the bare, charred ground of their burnt home. Is there anything more painful than that" (Page 74)?



"Late at night, I'm lying next to my comrades. They are sound asleep, their breaths are even. Outside artillery shells explode all over the sky. Oh. my comrades, we breathe the same air on this fiery, smoky battlefield. Let's love and care for one another" (Page 205)



"Come to me, squeeze my hand, know my loneliness, and give me the love, the strength to prevail on the perilous road before me" (Page 225).



(A foot note on page 223 states: The bombs and chemical defoliants used during the war decimated the bird population of Vietnam. Many Vietnamese commented on the eerie quiet, and on how sad they felt in the absence of birdsong.)



We should have learned a lot by now from these horrible mistakes we've made as a nation, mistakes that have resulted in the premature deaths of millions of people, most of them innocent women and children. One thing we know for sure is that neither the Vietnam War, nor any war we've been involved in since has had anything to do with defending the US. These wars have been about imposing our will on other nations, stealing resources, trying out new weapons, padding the Pentagon's budget, yielding to weapons manufacturer's pressure, and lobbyist's influence, and other reasons, but not about making the US safer. Families, doctors, and birds in Vietnam have never threatened the US. If there are any wonderful diaries like this left from the Iraq War, diaries that help us view the war from our victim's perspective, will we ever see them, considering that there is a lot more censorship imposed on the media now than during the Vietnam War? To get an idea of what the victim's perspective is in the current Iraq War, check Baghdad Burning at http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/, and when you get a chance, read "Last Night I Dreamed of Peace."

Leonard Nolt

Just Paying Attention.....

Open notecard found on a table at 5:00 am in the US Post Office in Boise on Aug, 16, 2008.

Dear ----;

We are so proud of you!
Have ---- put the kite together to hang in your classroom.
The DVD and books are from the World Birds of Prey Center in Boise, Idaho.

Love;
Mom & Dad ----

Question of the day...

"When and for what reason did the compliment "bleeding heart" become an insult?"
(answers welcome)

Zach and I decided we needed a new bedtime prayer,
so we wrote one and here it is:

Be with me Jesus,
As I rest.
Please stay nearby;
You are the best!

"And as the forests fell, the creeks and springs dried up, devastating winds swept from western prairies, and so the work of changing the climatic conditions of a world was well under way."

By Gene Stratton-Porter; an excerpt from "The Last Passenger Pigeon, first published in 1925. Taken from the anthology "American Earth," edited by Bill McKibben, page 193.

"The time will come when , with elation,
you will great yourself arriving at your own door...
You will love again the stranger who was your self."

Derek Walcott

"Tell Everyone!" (Part 3 of Workplace Psychological Abuse)

( I recommend reading Part 1 at http://leonardnolt.blogspot.com/2008/04/looking-at-work-abuse.html and Part 2 at http://leonardnolt.blogspot.com/2008/08/gap-part-2-of-workplace-psychological.html before reading Part 3.)

This is the third in a series on the experiences I had at my previous employer, Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical Center in Boise Idaho, where for the last app. two and a half years I worked there (Jan. 2004 until Aug. 2006), I was the consistent target of a bully, the "adult" workplace version of what many of us had to endure, or witnessed in grade school or junior high. Saint Alphonsus (often called St Als) is a part of Trinity Health, headquartered in Novi, Michigan. In this part of the series I will encourage those who are being, or have been, the target of bullies in the workplace to speak out and tell others. I will also address the part denial plays in this kind of situation. Often management simply refuses to acknowledge the problem exists, even when, as in my case, there is documentation that someone is being injured, and patient care compromised as a result of the bully's behavior. In addition I want to introduce a few of the findings of the 2007 WBI-Zogby Survey on Workplace Bullying.

This "adult" bully was a woman who I was responsible for supervising in the Respiratory Care Department where we both worked. Our respective job descriptions made it necessary for us to communicate with each other. She consistently targeted me with psychological abuse in various ways, including by making derogatory comments about me to others, making false accusations against me, refusing to communicate with me, pretending I didn't exist, and withholding information I needed to do my job. Her behavior daily jeopardized patient care.

I first reported the bullying to management in the spring of 2004, and when nothing was done to address the problem, kept reporting it repeatedly throughout the rest of that year. I sought help from an Employee Assistance Program counselor who diagnosed me with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) as a result of the bully's harassment. In January of 2005 I began a series of reports, first to the Human Resource Department, and later (in August) to Senior Management. In May of 2005 a manager from Human Resources requested the names of co-workers who might know about the conflict, so he could conduct an investigation. I gave him the names of approximately twenty people. Later in the middle of the investigation he sent me an urgent "high priority" e-mail asking me to not ask those twenty people if they had been contacted, or if they participated in the investigation. I followed that request. However when, weeks later, I was ordered to never talk to anyone about the investigation, I began to get suspicious. How does talking about an investigation in August change results obtained three months earlier in May?

As I did more research into the problem of bullying and the way businesses respond to it, I became aware of a couple new (for me) discoveries. I found out that investigations are conducted, not necessarily to find out the truth about what happened, but to protect senior management and the company from blame, liability, or any exorbitant expense associated with the conflict. It's clear that the investigation conducted into the conflict I was having fell into that category. No sincere attempt was made to find the cause of the problem. It's my impression that the investigation was manipulated to get pre-determined results. After the investigation, several people came to me and reported what they told the manager. Their reports contrasted drastically with what the manager told me in a very sparse verbal report I received at a meeting, scheduled by me, before the investigation was over. I was promised a written report of the investigation as well as a chance to discuss it with the department manager, but the written report never arrived, and when I requested it, the request was emphatically denied. The meeting to discuss the investigation with the department manager was never scheduled and didn't happen.

The part denial plays in this kind of situation is the second discovery from my research. Many companies, for a variety of reasons, try to deny that they have a bullying problem. That's certainly one reason why I never received a report of the investigation. Since then a member of senior management told me that I never should have been promised a report of the investigation, or expected one. But if the investigation is being done to get to the root of the problem, how can withholding the findings of the investigation contribute to solving the problem? The Workplace Bullying Institute (http://www.bullyinginstitute.org/) under 2007 WBI-Zogby Survey states: "Bullying is a Public Health Hazard." If that's true then the more everyone knows, the safer everyone will be. To protect the public, public health hazards have to be publicized.

Several times I was ordered to not talk about the conflict. This was part of management's attempts to enforce their policy of denial. On Oct. 4, 2005 in a meeting with him, the manager from Human Resources ordered me to lie about my PTSD injury if asked. Denial also seems to be a factor in the willingness of managers to even listen to someone who is reporting the problem of bullying. I think denial was a factor in the department manager claiming that the PTSD injury I was diagnosed with as a result of the bullying, was "petty." Surely he knew better. Before he met with me the first time on Jan 14, 2005 the manager from Human Resources refused to listen to my side of the story, and before our third and last meeting on Oct 4, 2005, he let me know ahead of time that I would not have any opportunity to respond to the information given at that meeting.

At no time was I given an opportunity to defend myself against the false accusations of the bully, not in front of the bully nor in front of any member of management. Although I requested the information, I was never told exactly what her accusations against me were. In fact I got the impression that management didn't even know for sure what the problem was. The Human Resource manager told me a couple times that there was "some ambiguity" about the bully's charges. Of course! Anyone who has done their homework on bullying in the workplace knows that ambiguity is a typical characteristic of a workplace bully's abusive behavior. The whole point of a bully's behavior is to be a bully. The bully will not provide management with precise information because that would make it easier to resolve the conflict. Then the bully will have to find another target. One of the chief characteristics of a workplace bully's behavior is "the refusal to be specific about criticisms" (from "Bully in Sight" by Tim Field, Page 41).

The writings of Marie-France Hirigoyen in her book "Stalking the Soul: Emotional Abuse and the Erosion of Identity," emphasize the fact that bullies refuse to be specific about criticism and also refuse to talk about the problem:

"Emotional abuse in the workplace goes through different stages, all of which have the
refusal to communicate as a common theme."...."By refusing to label and therefore discuss
the conflict, the abuser obstructs finding a solution."..... "Withdrawal from discussion is an
effective means of aggravating the conflict..." (Page 62).
"Abuse is perpetrated by the refusal to acknowledge what is happening, discuss the
situation, or jointly find solutions. If the conflict were out in the open, discussion would be
possible and a solution might be forged."........ "An effective way of aggravating the conflict is
avoiding dialogue, which silently imputes blame on the other person. The victim is
refused the right to be heard.".... "This refusal of dialogue is a way of saying, without directly
expressing it in words, that the other person.....doesn't even exist" (Page 96).

Hirigoyen make it clear that in any bullying situation, the person who refuses to be specific about criticism, and who refuses to participate in a resolution process should be assigned the responsibility for the unresolved conflict. Also note that when things are out in the open, a solution is more likely, so prescribing censorship is unwise and harmful. When someone suffers a psychiatric injury, such as PTSD, as a result of bullying, a responsible resolution will include the needed mediated dialogue between bully, target, and management, even if the injury occurred years before. Psychiatric injuries require a much different treatment than physical injuries. Unlike most physical injuries, treatment for psychiatric injuries have to take the cause of the injury into consideration.

On Aug. 29, 2005 I received an e-mail from a member of senior management ordering me to not talk about this issue with other employees. She was the third member of management to order me to not talk about this potentially disabling on-the-job injury. Managers claimed that information about the bullying was "confidential," but the truth is that their efforts to silence me were acts of censorship. It was, and still is part of their denial of the problem. Talking about the problem is necessary to raise awareness and prevent others from being injured. Managers of a medical center ordering employees to not talk about a PTSD injury that occurred on the job at their institution are acting as irresponsible as public officials prescribing censorship about mosquitoes and West Nile Virus, or about cases of mumps or measles in the neighborhood. Communication raises awareness and protects people while censorship endangers the public. With such overwhelming evidence, why would management deny that there was (and still is) a bullying problem at St. Alphonsus Regional Medical Center? Here are a couple possible reasons. Perhaps because they are not interested in, and have no training, skills or experience at addressing the problem. One reason is because some managers are bullies and they see bullying by them, or by others as a way of using fear to help keep employees "in line." Certainly a manager threatening an employee with termination for reporting a serious and potentially disabling injury, as the manager from Human Relations did to me on July 18, 2005 when I reported the PTSD to him, is guilty of a severe act of bullying.

What does it mean when management imposes censorship on employees concerning a public health menace like bullying? It means that managers are acting exactly as child molesters and pedophiles act when they tell their victims to not talk about the harmful and abusive treatment they are experiencing. Workplace psychological abuse is at the same place now that child abuse was fifty years ago. Half a century ago child abuse was hidden, denied, not talked about, and the victims who reported it were not believed. Now targets of bullies in the workplace face the same dilemma. Despite more than two dozen reports to them that I was being seriously injured on the job by a psychologically abusive co-worker, at no time to this day (Nov. 18, 2008) has any member of any level of management at St. Alphonsus responded, addressing that problem. Their "response," if you can call it that, is one of complete denial. What's the solution to this denial? The solution is to defy the censorship orders and "tell everyone!" You keep telling and telling until people wake up and address the problem. The solution is the same as the solution for child abuse. In her book for children "Something Happened and I'm Scared to Tell: A Book for Young Victims of Abuse," Patricia Kehoe writes on Page 11; "You tell and tell until somebody listens." Other authors on child sexual abuse echo Kehoe. In "Everything You Need to Know About Sexual Abuse," Evan Stark writes "Tell someone who can help you about the abuse," and also "Keep speaking up until you get the help you need to stop the abuse" (Page 7). Stark also writes, "Keep telling people you trust about sexual abuse until someone listens" (Page 24), and "...if you have been sexually abused, speak up" (Page 40). A pedophile tells his victim to not talk about it so the molester can continue to abuse his victim. A manager at St Alphonsus who tells an employee injured by a bully to not talk about it, as I was told at least half a dozen times by management at St Als, is doing exactly the same thing to the victim of bullying, as the pedophile does to his victim. Such orders have the effect of giving the abuser permission to continue to abuse his/her victim. In situations of sexual, physical, or psychological abuse, ordering the victims to be quiet about the abuse is medically inappropriate. Silence always supports and encourages the abuser.

The comparison between child abuse and psychological abuse in the workplace is a valid one. Numerous titles on bullying compare the emotional harm done to the victim of a bully with the emotional harm done to a rape or torture victim. (For one example check "Bully in Sight" by Tim Field, pages 6, 50, 317-318, 323-324). Judith Wyatt and Chauncey Hare in "Work Abuse: How to Recognize and Survive it," write that bullying in the workplace is "one of the most severe forms of emotional abuse anyone can experience" (page 13), and they also tell us that anyone bullied at work has experienced it as "a life-threatening event" (Page 158). They write that the experience of being bullied at work "is very similar to the impact on a child who is beaten every day" (Page 68). Wyatt and Hare also emphasize the destructive impact that a policy of denial, such as the one that exists at St. Als, has on the victim of bullying. They write, "Living under continual attack in an everyday setting and having it denied is a nightmare. It is a horrifying experience that depletes trust in the world and in one's perceptions of reality..." (page 68).

Psychological abuse is as serious as sexual and physical abuse. Bullying is a personal attack on another person's health, safety, and professional integrity. Bullying is an act of violence. Talking about it is necessary to raise awareness of the problem. However the target of bullying in the workplace who talks about it will probably lose his job as a result. It's important for any victim of bullying to realize that before he/she speaks up. An employer will not long tolerate an honest employee who is exposing the employer's dirty secrets. An employer who tolerates bullies is a bully. The Zogby Survey reported that "in 62% of cases, when employers are made aware of bullying, they escalate the problem for the target or simply do nothing." The report goes on to say; "It must be said that doing nothing is not a neutral act. When a person asks for relief and nothing is done, the employer becomes the bully's accomplice, whether deliberately or inadvertently, by allowing it to continue." My experience at Saint Als confirms those findings. Although I was initially targeted by a co-worker, it wasn't long before management became a part of the problem. I reported the problem to management numerous times but nothing was done to stop the bully. It seemed as if management consistently tried to support the bully. I requested a professionally mediated conflict resolution process with the bully to try to resolve the problem. It was denied by management because the bully "didn't think it was necessary." I have an e-mail I received from the Respiratory Care Department manager which states, and this is an exact quote; "If she (the bully) can accept your presence on her shift, then there is no issue other than for you to do your job" (Italics mine). He sent that to me more than six months after it had been documented that I was suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) as a result of the bully's harassment. To management the fact that one employee was intentionally causing a serious injury to a co-worker was "no issue." Is it surprising that bullying is such a problem at St. Alphonsus? I'm no longer working there, having been forced to leave because I was gradually becoming disabled by the bullying, but the bully is still there, and is now on day instead of night shift, which many would see as a promotion. The department manager who wrote that the fact I was being injured on the job with PTSD was "no issue,' is still there, and has received a significant promotion. Upper level managers who knew I was being injured and did nothing, are still there. The Zogby Survey confirms my experience at Saint Alphonsus by reporting that targets leave, and bullies stay.

The 2007 WBI-Zogby Survey is a valuable source of current information about workplace bullying. It can be found at http://bullyinginstitute.org/zogby2007/wbi-zogby2007.html. There are numerous interesting findings of the Zogby Survey, and most of the findings confirm my experiences at Saint Alphonsus. Thirty-seven percent of American workers have been bullied at work according to the poll. Being the target of a bully is an eye-opening experience. Although I knew little or nothing about workplace bullying before I became a victim of it, I was forced to learn rapidly and, in a few months, read eight or ten texts and scores of articles on the topic. That new information made me aware of how common the problem is at St Als. By the time I left Saint Alphonsus, I knew of half a dozen other employees who were having the same experience, or who had just left for the same reason I was leaving. I only knew approximately 250 employees at St. Alphonsus and most of them superficially. So with 37% of Americans workers having experienced the violence of being bullied and with app. 3,000 employees at Saint Alphonsus, you can calculate how big the problem is at St. Alphonsus. The Zogby Poll found out that 40% of the targets of bullying never complain. At St. Alphonsus undoubtedly that percentage is higher, perhaps much higher, especially if employees know what happened to me, as many do since I reported it to hundreds of them after I left Saint Alphonsus. Reporting it was the responsible action to take since, as the Zogby Poll reports; "Bullying is a public health hazard," Forty-five percent of the targets had detrimental health effects from the bullying. The number of days I missed work annually for health reasons doubled after I became the target of a bully. By reporting it, at least I helped to raise awareness, which will make it easier for others to defend themselves if targeted by a bully, and hopefully avoid a serious injury like PTSD. Unfortunately they still cannot safely report it since management at St. Alphonsus Regional Medical Center has yet to demonstrate any commitment to addressing the problem.

There is no question that management at Saint Alphonsus is capable of acting responsibly with regard to the problem of bullying. They have the ability to learn how to recognize bullying and help eliminate it from their workplaces. They can develop the skills needed to properly help victims of bullying, including protecting them from additional injury, and providing the kind of treatment that detoxifies the hostile workplace and creates a safe working environment for the injured employee. It's likely that high quality, experienced employees are being lost to bullying, probably by the dozens, each year. It's a matter of choice. Will they choose to address the problem, or will they continue to be a part of the problem? This can and should be seen by management at Saint Alphonsus and Trinity Health as a great opportunity to take the lead in addressing the problem of bullying in the health care sector, which is one of the areas where bullying is most common.

When an employee at St. Alphonsus falls down the stairs and breaks his leg, the employer will offer the required treatment in the emergency department and, if necessary, also as an inpatient. The injured employee will be allowed enough time to recover, and will be given an opportunity to provide input on how the accident happened, and on what could be done to prevent a re-occurrance. But if an employee suffers a psychiatric injury like PTSD as a result of intentional mistreatment from a co-worker, the victim will still be scheduled to work with the abuser, the victim's request for a change of schedule and a resolution of the problem will be ignored, as will his request for time off to recover from the abuse. He won't be offered any treatment. From Jan, 14, 2005 when I first reported the PTSD injury to Human Resource Management at Saint Als, (which was 20 months before I left St. Als), until today, almost four years later, I have had to seek, obtain, and pay for all my treatment for PTSD myself with no help from St Alphonsus. In a meeting with him on May 19, 2005 I requested compensation from a Human Resource manager for the PTSD injury and the expense it was costing me. He promptly denied it. Later I requested, from a nursing official, the forms needed to complete and apply for compensation. She told me that the only forms they had were for patients and covered only physical injuries. That says something about how primitive the care for a relatively common psychiatric injury such as PTSD is at Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical Center, which advertises itself as the "Center For Advanced Healing." Management has completely refused to acknowledge that I was injured, even though the first diagnosis of PTSD was made by Saint Alphonsus, as occurring on the job at Saint Alphonsus! To draw a parallel, if St. Als treated the broken leg the way they treat PTSD, they would let the injured person lying at the foot of the stairs indefinitely, ignoring his cries for help. The injured employee would have to drag himself to the nearest "other" health care facility for help. He would be threatened with termination if he talked about his broken leg, and how it happened, to other employees. He would be ordered to not report the fracture, and fired if he reported it to management. He would receive no days off work. He would be expected to show up at work and continue to do the same quality and quantity of work as before, and even work with the person who pushed him down the stairs!

Why is the response to bullying and on-the-job psychiatric injury at Saint Alphonsus so primitive as well as hopelessly irresponsible? Because management at St. Alphonsus has yet to take the problem of bullying and workplace psychological abuse seriously. Recently a vice-president told me that management has a lot more awareness of the problem as a result of the information I sent them. That's nice, but actions speak much louder than words, and so far there has been no action to address the problem and no accountability from managment at Saint Alphonsus with regard to those who have been injured and are still dealing with PTSD and the accompaning issues. We can only hope and pray that the Center for Advanced Healing at Saint Alphonsus Regional Medical Center will soon live up to its name and begin to apply some healing to the serious problem of psychological abuse on their campus.


Leonard Nolt

Next: Part 4 - Find out what happens when a responsible health care professional and citizen reports a public health hazard to the public. The title is "A Knock at the Door"

"The great menace to progress is not ignorance, but the illusion of knowledge."

Daniel Boorstin in "Cleopatra's Nose: Essays on the Unexpected."

"In a way, nobody sees a flower really, it is so small, we haven't time - and to see takes time, like to have a friend takes time."

Georgia O' Keeffe

The Post-Election Speeches... Plus

If you listened to or read the post-election speeches from the two major presidential candidates, you probably heard some of the same predictable platitudes we've learned to expect from the winners and losers.

I thought McCain's concession speech was clearly the stronger of the two. He seemed to harbor no bitterness and expressed what appeared to be genuine and unselfish support for the winner. He also had the shorter speech. The best and strongest part of Obama's victory speech was the section near the end where he told the story of 106-year-old Ann Nixon Cooper who voted this year on election day in spite of her sex and color, something she would have been unable to do as a much younger woman.



However both McCain and Obama repeated some comments that, I think, we need to examine, and even question as to accuracy and usefulness. McCain said, "Let there be no reason now for any American to fail to cherish their citizenship in this..the greatest nation on earth." I have no problem with people valuing their citizenship in any country. But what scale of measurement is McCain using to conclude that the United States is "the greatest nation on earth?" "Greatest" is a very vague term. How do we measure "greatness?" Is it comparable to wealth or destructive potential? If so than perhaps the US is the "greatest" nation on earth. We have more wealth than most other nations, although there are countries with fewer poor people. We also have more destructive potential, but that's because we invest more of our resources in developing our ability to destroy other peoples or countries. Some might call that "greatness," but others would call it foolish, wasteful, and dangerous. Certainly our treatment of slaves and our destruction of many Native American cultures and peoples are not signs of greatness. Our use of nuclear weapons against Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the only nation in the world to have ever used nuclear weapons to attack civilian populations, is not a sign of greatness. Neither was our war against the Vietnamese, nor is the current war against the Iraqi people a sign of greatness. Most industrialized nations give a much larger percentage of their GNP to non-military developmental aid than the US does. We spend more on health care but don't live as long as people in many other industrialized nations. We have much less support for families from business and government than any country in western Europe. The gap between the minority rich and majority middle and poor classes is increasing. Real wage increases for the working people in this nation have been, at best, nearly stagnant for many years, since early in the Reagan Administration. So what does McCain mean by "greatest?" It would be nice if politicians who claim that the United States is the "greatest" nation in the world would state exactly what they mean by "greatest."



Obama was caught making a similar mistake. At the closing of his speech he said, "And may God bless the United States of America." Some would say that asking for God's blessing on a country which has already been blessed more than most countries is simply selfish. I understand that view, but I'm wondering why Obama stopped with the United States. Why not ask for God's blessing on the whole world, or on Planet Earth. God knows that with all the problems facing this limited planet and it's finite resources, the Earth could use some blessings. I would think that if any presidential candidate would have a more global perspective for the future, it would be Obama. But in closing his victory speech he sounded just like dozens of winning politicians who have gone before him.

McCain might have had the better closing since he said "God bless America," not simply the "United States of America" as Obama concluded his speech. Presumably "America" could mean any country, or all the countries, in North, Central, and South American, making McCain's request for God's blessing broader and less selfish than Obama's. However I doubt if McCain was thinking of Haiti, Colombia, or El Salvador when he made that statement.

At one point in his speech Obama said, ".. we know there are brave Americans waking up in the deserts of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan to risk their lives for us." I have no problem with the bravery part of this quote, but I believe every thinking US citizen, including Obama, knows by now that the "brave Americans" in Iraq are not there to risk their lives for us, but for oil, and the oil companies who want access to those resources. Those in Afghanistan are still a part of an incompetent president's act of retaliation for the Sept. 11 terrorist attack that has been a complete failure in that it's done little to bring those to justice those who planned the attacks, and has done incredible amounts of damage to civilian populations.

McCain said, "Americans never quit. We never surrender. We never hide from history. We make history." Again these platitudes also raise questions. We "never quit," and "never surrender," compared to who? These statements are as empty and meaningless as a cheerleader's rah! rah! rah! Certainly there were and are times when quiting would be the more intelligent and civilized choice, like now, with regards to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Also now concerning our use of fossil fuels to run this country. It's possible to make the transition, in one decade, to a transportation system primarily run on electric. We should quit killing people in Iraq and Afghanistan and we should quit using fossil fuels, or significantly reduce our use of them. We should also quit polluting our rivers and atmosphere. We should quit using military violence to try to solve our problems with other countries. "Making history" is not necessarily good if it involves killing large numbers of innocent civilians, as it often has throughout US history.

Fortunately neither candidate resorted to using another platitude often heard at times like this and that is referring to the US as the "land of the free and the home of the brave." This one is particularly void of meaning and reflects in those who repeat it, a condescending and discriminating attitude toward other countries and citizens. There are other countries where people are not as free as in the US, but there are also countries where people have much more freedoms than US citizens have. Any country with universal health insurance provides their citizens with a freedom many people in the US do not have. With universal health insurance people have the freedom to change jobs and relocate, whereas in the US, such a transition could cost them their health insurance, and they may not be able to obtain comparable coverage due to preexisting conditions, or lack of availability. Bravery is even less of a unique US citizen characteristic than freedom. There are brave people in every country. In fact one could argue that those who are wealthy and have a nice home, a consistent income, and know where their next meal is coming from, do not need to be near as brave as the poor who work hard every day and yet barely survive. Bravery is probably a lot more common in third world countries than in the US.

It would be nice to hear a victory or concession speech from a national candidate that is free of the meaningless phrases and empty platitudes so often heard after the election is over, but it didn't happen this year.

"If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much room."

from "Learning to Breathe," by Alison Wright, page 36

Election Reflections

Needless to say I was pleased that Obama won and is now the president-elect. During the campaign he was accused of being the most liberal senator in the senate and his opponent made that claim indicating that it was a reason to not vote for Obama. However if the current President Bush is an example of what happens when one of the most conservative politicians in the country wins the presidency, then certainly what this country needs now is someone in charge from the opposite point on the spectrum, to undo all the damage Bush and his cronies have done. I sincerely hope Obama is as liberal as his critics say, because the conservative policies of the past eight years have severely damaged this country and our reputation around the world. One of the reasons I am not a conservative is because conservatives seem to be perpetually trying to drive the country backwards into the past, instead of looking to and addressing the problems and challenges of the future. Of course it's important to begin to address these problems soon, because if not addressed promptly, they will eventually become the problems of Obama and the Democrats.

The four major problems facing our new president, in my opinion, are (in no particular order) the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, energy, the environment, and health care. We need a president who will, as quickly as possible, put an end to the ongoing military attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq and address and reverse the destruction of the environment that has been promoted by the Bush Administration. Obama also needs to concentrate on an energy policy that focuses entirely on clean sources of energy, that is solar, wind, geothermal, ocean tides, electric cars, more mass transit, and conservation. Because of the cost, waste storage problems, and the potential threat of an accident, nuclear should not even be considered. There is no point in drilling for oil or digging for coal since using either aggravates the environmental problems. The USA is way behind other industrialized countries and even some third-world countries by simply not having universal health care. We need universal health care that includes coverage for everyone including psychiatric and medical care. After establishing that and getting it working properly in a couple years, before Obama's term is over, universal health care should also include vision and dental. For this to work it must be a single payer plan. Insurance companies should not be allowed to have any say in the development of the plan. Any input from insurance companies will not reflect concern for the sick and injured, but will simply be attempts to try to preserve or protect their profits and that will result in more expense and less coverage for the citizens of this country.

In case you think I missed one major problem facing this country by not mentioning the economy which has been in the ditch for some time, it's my opinion that if we properly address and correct the other four problems I mentioned, the economy will correct itself. It will takes some time, possible a couple years, but the appalling mistakes of the Bush Administration which is responsible for the current decrepit economic, energy, and environmental status of the US did not happen overnight and they won't be corrected overnight.

In other election issues, California voters approved a ban on same-sex marriages which indicates that there is still in this country, even in California, a majority of people who believe they have the right to shove their religious beliefs down the throats of others. Probably the most dishonest and outrageous claim of this and any recent election season is the fear-mongering by some Christians, that allowing homosexuals to get married in some way threatens the institution of marriage and the marriages of heterosexuals. If my 35 year old marriage to Karen fails, it will be our fault. It won't fail because homosexuals in California or Massachusetts are allowed to get married. That's an idiotic accusation, if there ever was one. I guess we have to wonder if the human race will ever advance to the point where we won't be looking for some group of people, slightly different from ourselves, to discriminate against. When laws prevent us from discriminating on the basis of race, sex, or religion, then we start railing against humanists, evolutionists, and homosexuals. Perhaps it's just nice to find someone different so we can blame the problems of the world on them. Honest, scholarly, and sincere people have always disagreed on the biblical interpretation of verses that address the issue of homosexuality, even though Jesus did not consider it important enough to say anything about. If there are two interpretations, one that includes accepting homosexuals into our churches and fellowships, and one that excludes them , why would anyone choose the latter? Can that choice be a "Christian" choice?

Voters in Colorado and South Dakota rejected measures that could have led to wide-scale bans of abortion. The Colorado version would have defined life as beginning at conception, which could have also resulted in a ban against some forms of birth control like IUDs. Although not a supporter of abortion, neither do I support laws banning abortion. The abortion rate in this country is determined by much more than laws that either permit or ban abortions. The abortion rate increased by 50, 000 a year when George W. Bush became president over what it was when Clinton was president, because Bush's economic policies made it more difficult for people to afford to have children, and because Bush also put the brakes on sex education in the schools, by emphasizing abstinence instead of protection, which was not an entirely successful approach to the problem. It's been my impression for some time that even though consevatives and Republicans use the abortion issue to try to get votes at election time, that's the only thing they are willing to do with the issue. Conservatives don't want to ban abortions any more than liberals do. We had twelve consecutive years of George Herbert Walker Bush and Ronald Reagan in the White House and nothing was done during that time to ban abortions. Now we've had another eight years of George W. Bush in the White House with only a ban against late-term abortions which make up less than one half of one percent of the total abortion rate. Those are puny and heartless efforts, to say the least. Much more can be done to reduce the abortion rate by supporting families instead of corportions, by providing universal health care, by facilitating adoption and making it less expensive, and by having an administration and a president in the White House who supports the working people, which we will have again starting next year. I expect to see a decline in the abortion rate, also probably starting sometime next year. The abortion decision belongs to women, not male law-makers. If men were able to get pregnant, the right to get an abortion would be at least as available as the right to get a driver's license. For another interesting perspective read: http://flotsamblog.com/2008/10/16/more-wounded-that-eloquent-im-afraid/.

An energy proposal in Missouri that requires the state's electric utilities to get 15 percent of their electric power from renewal resources by 2015 passed, while a more aggressive bill in California, requiring their state's utilities to generate half of their electric power from renewable resources by 2025, failed. It's likely this forward-looking measure failed, in part, because of the lack of commitment to clean and renewable energy sources by the federal government. But perhaps that will soon change.

Another interesting and worthwhile bill that passed and may be echoed in other states, is California's bill that prohibits cramped cages for chickens and other livestock.

"The United States is finished, but you and me, we're in peak condition!"

Jeff Bridges to Rosie Perez in the 1993 film "Fearless," directd by Peter Weir.

"If life and death just happened, there's no reason to do anything."

"There's no reason to love."

Conversation between Jeff Bridges and Rosie Perez in the movie, "Fearless."

Killing Pets... and Other Cross-Species Interactions

The September 19, 2008 issue of People Magazine contained an article entitled "The Puppy Saver," about Bill Smith in Pennsylvania who is committed to saving puppies from "puppy mills," Puppy mills are locations where dogs are bred in large numbers solely for the financial profit of the owner. These puppy mills are often places where the dogs are kept in squalid crowded conditions, without exercise or necessary care. The article says... "It is a dirty secret that picturesque Lancaster County is also the puppy mill capital of the United States - and that the otherwise gentle Amish and Mennonite farmers who live in the area dominate the trade." The article says that "Some of the largest Amish operations can produce annual profits of upwards of $500,000. The Oprah Winfrey Show also recently had an episode that focused on puppy mills and also featured Bill Smith.

The People Magazine article reports that one puppy mill owner, on finding out from a kennel inspector that he might be fined as much as $300. per puppy for inadequate care, shot and killed 80 dogs. The article goes on to say the following: "But the Amish see their involvement in puppy mills sanctioned by a higher authority as well. They interpret the Bible as giving them dominion over animals. "That's in Genesis, " says one Amish kennel owner, who asked that he not be named. "They are not people; they're animals. So they can be kept in cages."

As a Mennonite who grew up in Lancaster County I would like to look a little closer at the belief expressed by the anonymous Amishman who says that it's OK for people to keep animals in cages. (Actually, for the record, we also keep people in cages, especially the United States, which has one of the largest incarcerated populations of humans in the world). I recognize the comment by the Amishman as somewhat representative of the traditional beliefs of some, (hopefully a minority), Amish and Mennonites. Having dominion over animals has never meant abandoning the responsibility to be good stewards. We are still required to treat and relate to other species in a wise and respectful manner. In much the same way that "render to Caeser the things that are Caeser's" does not mean that we give Caesar anything that he asks for, likewise the instruction to "have dominion" over the plants and animals does not mean that we can do anything we want to other species. The arrogance that humans show toward the rest of God's creation is not limited to Amish or Mennonites in their treatment of dogs, but to some extent permeates all societies and is demonstrated by the disappearing habitat for other creatures, and the increasing number of species facing extiction.

I remember frequently seeing, in Lancaster County, country roads covered with dirt and mud where farmers cultivating their land, either with horses or tractors, would work the soil to the very edge of the pavement, and then turn their equipment around on the road to return to the field. If asked, they would probably tell you that they were simply practicing good stewardship by using all the possible soil for cultivating, but I suggest that such a practice is actually an act of greed. Why? Because the Bible makes it clear that some of the land must be preserved for the birds and animals. Landowners have a responsiblity to not use all their land for their own purposes. It's also true that in many parts of this country it is only in those extremely narrow strips of land between cultivated or grazed fields and highways, that native species of plants are able to survive.

From the time I was very young I was aware of the condescending attitude that people have toward other species of animals and plants. This is perhaps best demonstrated in the belief that it 's wrong to let another, especially domesticated, species suffer. So if a dog, horse, cat, or some animal suffers a serious injury, they are euthanized, or more accurately, executed, to end their suffering. This happened to a cat in my family on at least one occassion. We never spent any money on vets or treatment for injured animals. Perhaps my parents could not afford it. This belief was and is widespread throughout the country. The novelist Harry Crews, in his superb 1978 autobiography, "A Childhood: The Biography of a Place," writes about slaughtering hogs: "Animals were killed but seldom hurt. Farmers took tremendous precautions about pain at slaughter. As brutal as they sometimes are with farm animals and with themselves, no farmer would ever eat an animal he had willingly made suffer." Although Crews was writting about growing up as the son of a sharecropper in Georgia, at least a small part of his experience and mine overlap.

The belief that it's better to kill an injured or sick animal rather than let it suffer is another example of the arrogance people display toward other species. We don't even know what other members of our own speices want in that kind of situation. That's why we have living wills and advanced directives. Yet we are arrogant enough to pretend that we know what an individual from another species would want! Don't misunderstand me. I'm not suggesing that letting them suffer is a good idea, or that I have a better alternative. I don't. I'm simply saying that pretending we know what's best for them or what they would want, when we don't even know what other members of our own species want, is extremely arrogant. At least we need to recognize and acknowledge that fact.

Not all Amish or Mennonites act in a disdainful manner toward other creatures. Although I know of a Mennonite pastor who, when I was a boy, foolishly cultivated a hedgerow between two of his fields thereby destroying the nests of several ring-necked pheasants and numerous other animals and birds and also subjected his sloping fields to more erosion and loss of topsoil, I also remember another Mennonite farmer who while cultivating a field with a large tractor and disk carefully circled and preserved a killdeer nest with its four eggs.

The misinterpretation of Biblical passages on having dominion, and the selfishness of humans toward the creation is not evident just in Amish and Mennonite puppy mills. It's a part of our entire human culture and mainfests itself whenever a marsh is drained, wildlife is poached, and whenever air or water is used as a storage for some kind of toxic waste. It's also evident in the actions of "developers" who drive other species off their land in order to build homes for humans, (and the people who buy those homes), rather than using land already available by building more compact cities and towns. It's evident in the transfer of fertile farmland into suburbs, and rain forest into farmland. We see it every time a law has to be passed to protect an endangered species because people don't care enough to do it on their own. It's also visible in the absence of large preserved ecosystems and in the non-existance of wildlife corriders which make it possible for wildlife to have access to water and normal traditional migration patterns. Actually it would be difficult to find, anywhere in the world, a sensitive and responsible pattern of humans relating to other species, although it's true that some countries do it much better than the US.

Amish and Mennonite puppy mill owners who cage their animals, never allowing them to get any exercise and depriving them of needed medical care and proper nutrition, should be accountable for their abuse. However the foundation of their misbehavior, based on the idea that humans have dominion over the rest of the creation, and their failure to realize exactly what that means is a problem that most people, especially in this country, seem to have. Plants and animals, other than humans, are "good," independant of any human use or utilization. Their value as part of the creation is not dependant on how much they benefit human beings. The most important lesson we can learn from the story of Noah and the flood in Genesis is that the creation - all of it - is worth preserving and saving. We have an obligation to preseve and protect other species and their habitats. It's wrong to simply see them as having value only for the ways in which people can use them. Extinction of plants and animals also threatens humans. Most species of plants and animals can get along perfectly well without people. In fact most of them would be better off without any humans on this planet . But people need plants to simply survive. They don't need us, but we definitely need them. We need to remember that Planet Earth belongs to God, and it doesn't need people.