Occupy Humanity: Can Empathy Be Saved?

Like most Americans these days, I have worked a variety of jobs over the years. Somehow I have managed to maintain a common thread of occupational skills between jobs, because almost all of the positions I've held have been associated with caregiving. Each new employer could look back on my resume and see that I had been charged with the responsibility of caring for living beings that whose very survival depended on me in one way or another. Whether I cared for children, older adults, disabled persons, or animals, the rules are pretty much the same.

No matter who or what you are responsible for, you must treat them with respect and attempt to maintain the dignity and comfort of that individual. I don't care if you're caring for a sick, aggressive pitbull, or a sick, aggressive older man with dementia; you keep BOTH your prejudice AND "values" the hell out of the room and treat either scenario with the same amount of respect and concern. If you think you can treat either the dog or the man with less respect than the other, then you obviously have no business caring for the one who (due to your bias) receives less of your respect. When it comes to caring for that other living person, their rights are up there nearer to the ceiling, whereas yours are somewhere down below the sewer lines.

That's not an exaggeration or veiled complaint. It has to be that way. Placing the utmost emphasis on the needs of the being who is dependent on you is the only way to ensure that you meet those needs appropriately. Working within this structure of "them before us" prevents neglect, and oddly enough, high turnover of caregiver employees. If you can complete the tasks necessary for your job, do them correctly, and adhere to the standards expected from someone in your particular position, it's a lot easier to "leave it at work" and feel good about what you've done. Those who can achieve some level of "job satisfaction" are a lot more likely to remain in their line of work.

Certain things really came into focus for me when I became certified as a nurse aide. I decided that I eventually wanted to become a registered nurse. Having researched the field of nursing, I became aware that in a hospital or nursing home, nurse aides perform basic nursing tasks under the direction of registered nurses. RNs have more education and authority than nurse aides, and are paid better because of it. It makes no sense from a financial standpoint to pay for a floor's worth of RNs when you can pay a few of them to supervise a team of aides who are trained for basic nursing tasks. I got that part. What I didn't understand is how anyone thought they could be a good supervisor when they'd never done the actual job of the person below them. Thus, I decided to learn the "grunt work" and become a certified aide. I figured if I could get through physically challenging part of nursing, I could get through the academic parts a lot easier, PLUS I'd be a much more effective supervisory nurse than one who'd never had to work as an aide.

I realize now that I had identified a need to develop empathy.

At the time, I just figured it would be in my best interest to be prepared, and that the discipline of learning the job that "real nurses" didn't want to do could only help me in my studies later on. In retrospect, I think there was some part of me that wasn't quite "ripe" yet, and even then, young and stupid, I knew it. I was trying to develop a part of me that could extend the necessity of my career beyond simply meeting my own needs. An ever nagging, "pragmatic" part of me kept whispering in the background, "This is a waste of time. You're practically a straight-a student and you're dicking around with this diploma when you could be putting time into a degree". The "pragmatic" voices outside of my head, namely two friends who were (respectively) a dentist and a doctor, were both pretty busy calling me a fool for not pursuing a degree that would lead me to medical school. They treated my decision to become a nurse like a mental illness, or some sort of self-destructive habit. Upon finding out that I had chosen to first become a nurse aide and not even a full nurse, they began avoiding me whenever possible. My dad, who I'm sure wanted nothing but the best for me, wanted me to do something with my mad computer skills, but the idea of sitting on my ass working in an office (and the few times I had done so) made me sick. Sometimes I wonder if he didn't get some sort of 1980's power-suit idea in his head, and likened that and the presumably accompanying business/marketing/information technology degree to "success". In short, the thought of me changing bedpans seemed to make him feel like I was pursuing a diploma program as a scullery-maid, or worse, scullery-maid trainee. He thought it was "beneath" my capabilities, which didn't exactly make me feel great about my chosen career when things were tough. I took a little bittersweet solace in the fact that almost every one of my friends who had gotten degrees in those aforementioned fields had ended up working jobs in coffee houses or in offices that I, without a degree of that kind, could easily talk my way into. Even though I felt bad for my friends, whose own dads had clearly won the day, at least I knew I'd have a job eventually taking CARE of their dads.

I think it's kind of funny, in a dry sort of way, to recall that all the disapproving people in my life were politically conservative. I'll get back to that in a moment, though.

During the course of my later work in elder care, I realized that by putting my opinions and feelings on hold while I was on duty, I was actually able to not only do my job, but thrive in it. I've met a lot of "retired" CNAs who are working in other fields, usually due to their decision that caregiving work was "too depressing" for them. It's not like these women are making any more money than they were as aides, but the idea of being around people who were either actively dying or just irreversibly on their way to death, was more than they could bear. I had been taught a lot in my courses and a few rules still stick out, even after all the time that's passed between then and now. Notably..

1 - Certain things are never to be brought in to your working hours with someone you are taking care of, specifically your germs and bacteria, your negative emotions, your religion (or lack thereof), your political opinions, and details of your personal life.

2 - Certain things are never to be brought out from your working hours with someone you are taking care of, such as their germs and bacteria, their negative emotions, their religion (or lack thereof), their political opinions, and details of their personal life.

3 - Thou shalt never violate, and always remain alert and in timely practice of the laws of the land. It is your place to adhere to them, not bend, alter, or disrespect them. In remaining vigilant in adherence to legal and ethical standards, the client and caregiver shall both be protected.

4 - Lots of things are simply none of your business. No, really, most things are none of your business. That doesn't mean you get to be snippy and make a comment, gesture, or other flippant, passive-aggressive action that indicates your opinion while somewhat satisfying the job requirement that makes this issue none of your business. If you cannot work with someone without making things your business that shouldn't BE your business, you should call your agency, explain YOUR failing, and ask to be assigned elsewhere (if they still want someone like you to work for them).

5 - It IS your business to care enough about the things that are important to your client (religion, politics, family) to listen, learn, and be able to carry on a conversation that addresses THEIR need for camaraderie, NOT YOURS. If it has to be an act, be Oscar-worthy for it.

6 - If you are treated unkindly or with disrespect, you are never to respond in kind. It is your place to avoid those sorts of outbursts. If your client is too hostile and you cannot seem to resolve the issue OR work with it anymore, contact your supervisor for advice or another assignment. Additionally, consider another line of work. Clearly, something about you that you cannot help is too agitating to your client for you to remain caring for them, OR you're not adhering to rule #1, and/or #2.

These rules are probably read as simply "common sense", but when they have to be put into practice, one finds that most people don't have the discipline to follow them. Worse still, most people do not possess the empathy needed to obviate the need for discipline. If you can empathize with others as well as you need to in order to take full care of another living thing, then it shouldn't be so difficult that you NEED strong discipline to adhere to these fairly simple rules. If this empathy is what it takes to look after someone as their caregiver, then it is reasonable to assume that other positions of authority require the same. In fact, these rules could very easily apply to occupations like teacher, policeman, doctor..

.. politician.

It's really starting to concern me as I watch the ability to empathize, a necessary skill for those in a position of authority or as a representative of others, is not only difficult to discover in our "leaders", it is now something that some of us are beginning to treat with derision. The current crop of hopefuls for the GOP nomination are promoting the poorer sides of human nature to such an extent that public displays of it are not only being accepted, they are being celebrated. Public displays like booing our soldiers for asking questions that someone doesn't want to answer, laughing at the idea of someone dying due to lack of medical treatment, and making rape victims legally and permanently responsible for the ramifications of their attackers actions. Since when did our public opinion change from "Oh how awful, we can't let that happen if we can help it" to "serves them right"?

The "53%" rails against those who "don't pay taxes" because they're old and retired or they are literally so poor that they wouldn't survive if they did pay taxes on the mere pittance they make. The "53%" forget sales tax, payroll tax, and property taxes that everyone pays. Tax refunds are NOT "free money". Tax refunds are exactly that, a refund, of money that very poor people had ripped out of their paychecks over the year, causing strain and hardship to the family hanging on tooth and nail for that paycheck. Worse still, the "53%" have been so indoctrinated with hate, fear, and anger directed at their "opposition", they won't even stop and look at the fact that they are essentially fighting for the right to live a way that THEY don't even want to.

Empathy is defined as "the ability to understand and share the feelings of another", which is something that politicians typically make grand attempts to feign, if nothing else. Historically, this has been done because the ability to empathize is typically demonstrated in those people we feel to be the "best" of us. Empathy is the reason your mother knew why you were sad, even when you didn't. It's why she still hugged you and loved you, even when you knowingly broke her rules. Empathy is the reason your friends call, make efforts to comfort, and listen to you cry when they never liked the stupid boyfriend who ended up breaking your heart exactly the way they KNEW he would. Empathy is the reason the best of your friends don't start off with "I told you so".

A massive load of "us against them" is being heaved upon our society, and the core premise is that the dirty, unwashed "them" is stealing undeserved resources from the noble, moral pockets of "us". Through misdirection of fear and anxiety, some (like the" 53%") are blinded to the fact that there's an effort to divide the ACTUAL "us", and apparently it's working. The truth is that there's only about 1% of "them", and they're doing all they can to bleed "us" dry and cast us into a million tiny factions until we don't recognize anyone else as one of "us". Worse still, "they" are claiming to be devout followers of Christianity, which requires empathy and love for others. "They" profess faith in an effort to make themselves appear moral, ethical, and inarguable. Real "faith" dictates that charity, tolerance, love, and concern for others is what makes you a morally upright human in the eyes of your God. Clearly "they" have no faith whatsoever in God, or they would trust that He would do His works and that their micromanagerial efforts here on Earth were not only unnecessary, but possibly an affront to Him.

With a bit of empathy for those that share your humanity, it's not hard to see that most of "us" are all suffering under the same tyranny brought about by just a few of "them".

The Feminine Context

Occupy Together: Sad Paper Airplanes Don't Cost Postage

On October 28th, members of the Occupy Wall Street movement marched through Manhattan to the headquarters of many major banks, including Morgan Stanley, Citigroup, Bank Of America, JP Morgan Chase, and Well Fargo. Assembling outside the entrances to these banks, the OWS protesters threw paper airplanes made of folded up letters from members of the "99 percent". These letters had been written to banking executives and published to the website "OccupyTheBoardroom.com".

Now, personally.. I kinda dig the whole OccupyTheBoardroom thing. Here's a description, in their own words.

"Life gets awfully lonely for those at the top. What can we do to let them know someone's thinking of them? Maybe they need some new friends! We've thought of two ways we can help them with that.

Option 1: Pen Pals
Make your voice heard by the Wall Street elites who wrecked the economy and made the rest of us pay. Click on someone below and tell them a story that you think they should listen to. Just got a college degree and nothing to show for it? Just got evicted while your banker gets bonuses? Share your special story with someone who ought to know.

Option 2: Best Friends Forever
If you're feeling even more generous, why not reach out in a more creative way? Click on a banker below, then read the instructions and examples to get inspired. Maybe your banker needs some kind words, or maybe an intervention. Most importantly, use your imagination! The best, funniest, most revelatory interactions win prizes."

Now that's some old-school-meets-new-tech, good vibes, sarcastic American protesting. That warms me to the cockles of my heart. Maybe the sub-cockular area as well. Either way, I freakin' love it.

When you fold that shit up into a paper airplane, tossing it limp-wristed into the air to watch it nosedive onto the sidewalk... well, shit. How do I put this? This paper airplane gig leaves me cold. It kinda puts the "pussy" in "pusillanimous".

I'm sorry. I'm all for peaceful protesting, but the paper airplane thing looked sad and pitiful. It looked like a bunch of little birds dropping dead at the doorstep. On a purely visual level, to me it made the 99-percent look as weak and fragile as those paper airplanes that no one apparently knew how to fold in such a ways as to make them fly. Don't know what I'm talking about? Watch it for yourself by clicking here. Set it to a string quartet composition in a minor key, and it'll be the most depressing eighteen seconds ever filmed.



In what I can only surmise is a direct response to the sad paper airplane display, YouTube user RansackedRoom gives us THIS.


Our clever friend here has devised a lovely form of protest utilizing the junk mail that people receive every day from banking corporations. His suggestion is to take all of the credit card (and other banking product) offers received in the mail, and simply MAIL THEM BACK, using the postage-paid envelope that the banking corporation has so generously enclosed.

Don't stop there! He also recommends that while you add an insert of your own to indicate your support of the Occupy Movement, that you also enclose ALL your excess junk mail. Why? Well to drive up the postage cost to the bank, of course! For extra points, why not add a small piece of wood or roofing shingle? This will not only make the envelope heavy enough to count for extra postage, it will also make the envelope RIGID, which equals to an ADDITIONAL postage cost.

Sorry, but if I want to make an impact with a peaceful protest involving paper, I'd rather send a roofing shingle, an OWS-themed note, and a firm NO THANK YOU written on the offer sent to me by the bank, than to throw some dumbass paper airplane at a door. Besides, this also makes for a "greener" protest. RansackedRoom's method involves recycling materials that you would have only thrown away, and reusing them for a purpose.

Enjoy! I'm going to go start collecting flat, heavy things. Right after I check my mail.

If anyone's interested, RansackedRoom can be found on Twitter by clicking on this link.


The Feminine Context

Topeka, Kansas. America's #1 Bitch-Slapping City

A budget war in Kansas between the city of Topeka and Shawnee County has resulted in city officials making good on a threat they'd issued in an effort to try and get their way. Because Topeka's leaders don't want to get stuck with the bill for arrests, jailing, and prosecution of misdemeanor cases, a law has been repealed and those suspects previously arrested on misdemeanor charges (over half of whom were suspects in domestic violence cases) are being set free without charges.

Many states are committed to jailing individuals who are arrested for domestic violence, and even when they are released they are often let go under "no contact" orders in the interest of protecting victims. A great number, if not most states, do not allow for victims to drop charges, instead taking the authoritative role and pressing charges against the accused as the state itself. This is ALSO done for the protection of the victim.

Domestic violence is a crime of arranged opportunity, for lack of a better description. Violence in these cases is most often precipitated by long periods of abusing the victim in ways that demoralize, isolate, and demean. By way of methods that slowly alter the perception of reality of both the victim and the abuser, an opportunity to control and perpetrate violence toward the victim is afforded to the abuser. In turn, the codependency of the relationship between the abuser and the victim sends BOTH PARTIES spiralling into a dangerous living situation that can result in long-term damage to their emotional and mental well-being, if not a deadly outcome for one or both of them. The most painful yet helpful method of breaking this cycle is to separate the abuser and the abused for some period of time, if not permanently. Unfortunately, the secrecy due to shame and guilt on the part of both parties makes it often NECESSARY that law enforcement intervene.

Often, the abuser has gone so long unchecked by anyone, that they bear very strong opinions and often feel persecuted themselves due to the power-imbalance that has existed in their homes for far too long. An abuser KNOWS their actions are incorrect, and the guilt often causes their reactions to conflict to become MORE excessively violent and paranoid as they develop exaggerated defense mechanisms. The abuser's guilt mounts, and s/he seeks to justify their actions by seeing a threat or insult in almost everything the victim does. The fear of exposure for their mounting misbehavior grows more intense as time goes on, making them, paranoid, jumpy, hyper-aggressive, and the abuser will sometimes turn to drugs or alcohol to cope, leaving them now mentally imbalanced AND inebriated.

The victim of the abused usually begins accepting and tolerating the abuser's behavior out of a place of love and concern. Excuses are made for their loved one's abuse, such as "He's under stress", or when things begin to escalate further, "He's not well. I can't leave someone who's sick or having a problem. If I stick it out, I can help them". Domestic abuse suffered as children translates into a higher tolerance for it in an adult relationship. For example, if your father was abusive, to condemn or judge your partner unworthy for engaging in the same actions your father did, means to some degree that you are also condemning the father that you know, love, and accept. The abuser will shift blame to the victim when he is wrong, just as most people shift blame (when remotely possible) when they are wrong.  Before it becomes a physically or sexually violent relationship, the abused person has most often become conditioned by the hostile environment to the extent that they may feel they deserve the abuse or that it's "not that bad". As the abuse escalates, so increases the victims' likelihood to excuse or rationalize it.

This is why law enforcement is SUPPOSED to step in and separate the victim from the abuser. The two parties have become so adept at and codependent in rationalizing horrendous behaviors and a lifestyle that emotionally healthy people would find abnormal and alarming, that they literally need to be forced apart before death or major physical injury occurs (or occurs AGAIN). Both the victim and the abuser are so isolated from healthy relationships, that they will seek to cling to each other AND their unhealthy lifestyle because everything outside of it has become foreign and terrifying.

That's why states and cities have to protect the victim long enough that some mental and emotional clarity can be found, and a healthy decision about the relationship can be reached. This protects not only the victim, but the ABUSER. If the abuser is not stopped, held, and given adequate time to collect him/herself, the anger at being exposed and challenged may often be enough to result in a murder, suicide, or both. Its not uncommon for abused persons to feel wracked with guilt over asking for help and getting their abusers into trouble. Remember, over time, the victim comes to see the abuser as the central figure in their whole world, and maybe the only person they have had to even talk to in a long time. Remove that from someone's life abruptly, and it's going to be like losing a limb.

This might not be a popular opinion, but there is something to be said for protecting the abuser as well as the victim. The person who abuses another is still someone's child, brother, relative, or most likely the much-loved partner of the very person that domestic violence laws are enforced to protect; the victim. There's no EXCUSE for abusing another person, but there should be an expectation that the abuser is not playing with a full deck if they've managed to convince themselves that what they are doing is justifiable. That in mind, this isn't someone you can turn loose, expecting them to make appropriate decisions without any chance to get their heads straight.

Someone who gets caught committing an act of physical injury to someone they live and share a life with needs to be punished for it, certainly. What's the purpose of punishment, though? Are we, as a society, about causing harm for harm, or are our punishments going to be enacted in a more thoughtful way as to try and rectify the problem that eventually warranted punishment? Forcing an accused abuser to spend a night in jail and calm down doesn't hurt them. Sure, it's embarrassing and it can probably make them more angry, but that's what that whole aforementioned "no contact" order is for.. so that the angry person cannot go an exact revenge upon someone who they blame for their embarrassment and anger. It's also to allow that person a chance AWAY from the individual who, in their altered viewpoint, they see as responsible for causing them so much anguish.

It's a win-win to enforce these laws for both parties, abused and abuser, even though at the time that the situation comes to a head and law enforcement has to become involved, everyone (victim included) is going to feel violated, exposed, hurt, and desperate. Sometimes you just have to rip off the bandage if you want a wound to heal, rather than leaving it covered and festering. In most (if not all) states that STATE charges are brought against an accused abuser, pre-trial intervention (PTI) programs are offered for first time offenders. This program requires offenders to plead "no-contest" and agree to random drug screenings, counseling and anger management classes, and some amount of community service. This is offered as an alternative to trial, jail time, and fines. PTI programs, when completed successfully, also allow most offenders an opportunity to get their offense eventually expunged from public record.

But if the state, city, or county can't be bothered to maintain enforcement of laws to properly handle domestic abusers and their victims, who is anyone supposed to call for help? I sincerely doubt that police would let a relative off the hook for enforcing "vigilante justice" (potentially at the barrel-end of a shotgun) to protect a loved one. So where are abused persons in Topeka going to go for help?

PSA:

If you believe that you or a loved one may be suffering in an abusive relationship, take a look at this site for a start.

LoveIsRespect.Org