USA indigenous psychologists criticise APA refusal to consider support on Standing Rock

The Society of Indian (i.e. First Nations/indigenous) Psychologists in the USA has issued a strong statement on the blocking of a call for the APA to support the Standing Rock protestors against State violence.  The APA decision was made behind closed doors and would seem to reveal a staggering degree of institutional racism.

The statement begins:

We are writing to express deep concern with the way that certain senior APA staff took it upon themselves to quash our efforts to entreat the APA for support in addressing the current circumstances of conflict and state-sanctioned violence against the Water Protectors at the Standing Rock Indian Reservation.

The senior staff in question elected to eschew making any kind of statement or to take any responsive action, to include further consultation with any of APA’s American Indian experts citing that: 1) it was a State, not a federal, issue (which of course Standing Rock sovereignty elevates such concerns to a federal level); and 2) that the issues raised by the situation at Standing Rock (environmental racism, community violence against an American Indians, health disparities, and historical re-traumatization) were not in line with APA direction and priorities.
Read the full Statement (pdf file)

 

Share

NACCHO #Aps2016 Australian Psychological Society issues a formal apology to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People | NACCHO Aboriginal Health News Alerts

  “Apology to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People from the Australian Psychological Society. Disparities between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians and other Australians on a range of different factors are well documented. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people experience much higher rates of psychological distress, chronic disease, and incarceration than other Australians.

“They manage many more stressors on a daily basis and, although suicide did not exist in their cultures prior to colonisation it is now a tragically inflated statistic.

The fact that these disparities exist and are long standing in a first world nation is deplorable and unacceptable.”

“We, as psychologists, have not always listened carefully enough to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. We have not always respected their skills, expertise, world views, and unique wisdom developed over thousands of years. Building on a concept initiated by Professor Alan Rosen, we sincerely and formally apologise to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians for:

  • Our use of diagnostic systems that do not honour cultural belief systems and world views;
  • The inappropriate use of assessment techniques and procedures that have conveyed misleading and inaccurate messages about the abilities and capacities of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people;
  • Conducting research that has benefitted the careers of researchers rather than improved the lives of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander participants;
  • Developing and applying treatments that have ignored Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander approaches to healing and that have, both implicitly and explicitly, dismissed the importance of culture in understanding and promoting social and emotional wellbeing; and,
  • Our silence and lack of advocacy on important policy matters such as the policy of forced removal which resulted in the Stolen Generations.

“To demonstrate our genuine commitment to this apology, we intend to pursue a different way of working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people that will be characterised by diligently:

  • Listening more and talking less;
  • Following more and steering less;
  • Advocating more and complying less;
  • Including more and ignoring less; and,
  • Collaborating more and commanding less.

“Through our efforts, in concert and consultation with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, we envisage a different future.

“This will be a future where Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people control what is important to them rather than having this controlled by others.

“It will be a future in which there are greater numbers of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander psychologists and more positions of decision making and responsibility held by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Ultimately, through our combined efforts, this will be a future where Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people enjoy the same social and emotional wellbeing as other Australians.”

Read the full article at this source: NACCHO #Aps2016 Australian Psychological Society issues a formal apology to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People | NACCHO Aboriginal Health News Alerts

Share

Indigenous children in North America and the damage done by diagnostic labelling

An article of interest, one of a series by the author on this subject has appeared in the online journal Indian Country.

Betrayal by Labels: The Feebleminded, ADHD Native Child

1/21/16

Diagnosing Native children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and treating them with stimulants does nothing to improve their educational or intellectual growth. Even worse, it sets them up for failure. Such an idea may upset the many caretakers, educators and mental health providers who think they are helping so-called “ADHD children,” yet Native children have been sabotaged by a similar mentality for generations.

Read the rest of the article at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2016/01/21/betrayal-labels-feebleminded-adhd-native-child-163122
Share

Liberation Psychology: 25 years on. Imagining Ignacio Martín-Baró and Steve Bantu Biko in conversation.

IMAGINING IGNACIO MARTIN-BARO AND STEVE BANTU BIKO IN CONVERSATION ABOUT IMAGINATION – Mohamed Seedat

Ignacio Martín-Baró and Steve Bantu Biko
Ignacio Martín-Baró and Steve Bantu Biko

Today, 16 November marks the 25th anniversary of the killing of Ignacio Martín-Baró, the founder of Liberation Psychology in Latin America, along with 5 other priest-academics and two women workers by the Salvadorean army at their residence on the campus of the Unversidad de Centroamérica, San Salvador.  It is fitting that today we bring you a typically beautifully written piece by Mohamed Seedat, in which he draws parallels between the work of Martín-Baró and Steve Biko, prominent leader in the Black Consciousness movement in the struggle against apartheid in South Africa.

Mohamed himself wrote a landmark piece (1) in which he independently set out the principles of a liberation psychology in the context of his region.  Although I had known of his work for some years, it seems harshly appropriate that I should have met him for the first time last year in occupied Palestine, where all the practices of racist domination, and resistance, are there to witness.  The tools that Nacho and Steve left us are there to use in the many regions, countries, towns, villages and micro-spaces where oppression is the daily reality, and resistance is everyday praxis.  He particularly focusses on the reproduction of the daily practices of exclusion of the ‘other’, by those in positions of relative power in post-colonial societies like South Africa, noting the emotional labour required of the oppressed to do simple things like make use of public services – although I was reminded of the way class oppression operates in many of my own country’s public service systems.

As Mohamed notes,

“For Martín-Baró and Biko social transformation and liberation were about confronting exclusionary social structures and dehumanizing policies as well as internalized oppressive scripts, structured by dominant ideologies and discourses of superiority…..

“I return to imagining Biko and Martín-Baró in deep conversation to help us make sense of the raging anger, the burnings and the crass markers of success entrenched and perpetuated by the ruling and economic elites in post-colonial societies? They ponder: what are our people really burning? What is the psychology of the post-colonial elite that reproduces dominance with the support of the ruling and avaricious classes in Washington, London, Paris, Moscow and Beijing? What should people struggling for freedom in all its forms really burn and what is worth igniting, preserving and growing? “

You can read the full piece HERE

Mohamed Seedat holds several positions at the University of South Africa, Pretoria (details in the article’s footnote).  He and his colleagues will be hosting the 6th International Congress of Community Psychology in 2016.

reference
(1) Seedat, M. (1997). The quest for liberatory psychology. South African Journal of Psychology, 27(4), 261–270. doi:10.1177/008124639702700410

Mark Burton, 16 November, 2014 (file updated with corrections, 19/11/14)

Share

Article on liberation ethics, coloniality and psychology

Here is a link to my article, “A Renewal of Ethics”, in the British monthly, The Psychologist.  The article is based on a lecture I gave at the British Psychological Society conference last Easter.  Rather breathlessly, it considers some ethical challenges, the inadequacy of dominant frameworks for guiding action, the origins of the contemporary malaise in the colonial encounter, and some alternative frameworks to consider.  Liberation thought runs through the article.  I’d like to develop the analysis presented in more detail in further work, so I’d really appreciate constructive comment, either on this site, by email, or where possible in  person. Read the article HERE.
Mark Burton

Share

Special Thematic Section on “Decolonizing Psychological Science”

Special Thematic Section on “Decolonizing Psychological Science”.

Forthcoming publication from  colleagues in Kansas (USA) and Costa Rica on the 50th anniversary of Fanon’s ‘Wretched of the Earth”.  You can register to be notified when it appears.

 

 

Share

Responding to contemporary crises: an ethical action framework.

This is the text of the lecture given by Mark Burton, recipient of the 2013 British Psychological Society award for promoting equality of opportunity, at the BPS Annual Conference, Harrogate, Yorkshire, 10th April, 2013.  The title is Responding to contemporary crises: an ethical action framework.  Maybe it doesn’t quite offer such a framework, but the lecture does try to explore some of the factors that make this necessary. It focuses in two contemporary crises, recent scandals in health and social welfare and the ecological crisis of climate change.  It introduces the concept of ideology-action-structure complexes and links the hegemonic ones to the overall ideology-action-structure complex of coloniality, introduced from 1492.  It contrasts professional ethical codes with the liberation ethics of Enrique Dussel and draws on Maritza Montero’s characterisation of the new liberatory and decolonising social science paradigm, adding an emphasis on the role of the public intellectual.  A more extended treatment of some of the themes can be found in the working paper: The mess we’re in.

Share