Trudeau, Mental Health and the Public Service

Good for Trudeau (text from his letter below).

Sad reality is that a growing number of Canada's public servants don't have job stability or benefits (renewed contracts replacing permanent positions) and for those who do, the culture, accommodations and design of government work is sorely lacking.  The stress, uncertainty, low morale, unclear direction, conflict of what they're supposed to do and what partisan staff pressure them to do is taking a toll.  Presenteeism is rampant, as are prescriptions (and claims) for depression and anxiety medication.  

Mental health issues in the civil service is a big thing.

It's a problem the private sector is twigging on to and, in fits and spurts, taking steps to address. They have realized that saying "get over it" and punishing people with the cognitive equivalent of carpal tunnel syndrome doesn't solve the problem, it only exacerbates it.  If the bottom line dictates better employee support, so be it.

Does it not make sense for government to do the same?  Should government not be leading by example?

Were I team Trudeau, I would talk about this a lot more in the coming weeks (and to a certain Trudeau advisor: I told you this was coming!); it's an issue that impacts Canadians at all levels deeply, ties into the values Trudeau speaks to and highlights the cognitive dissonance in Harper's stance on mental health vs. occupational mental health.

Sad part is, this could and should have been a win for Harper.  That's what happens when you're functionally fixed and unable to adapt though.

Mental Health

Canada is facing a growing mental health crisis; during their lifetimes, one in five Canadians will experience a mental health issue. It is crucial that we foster a welcoming environment for free and frank discussion, and the federal government has a vital leadership role to play in improving mental health support for Canadians. As the country’s largest employer, it must begin by tackling the challenges of mental illness, which account for almost half of its disability claims.

 I was encouraged earlier this year when a Joint Task Force on Mental Health was created by the Public Service Alliance of Canada and the federal Treasury Board. I fully support this type of collaborative process and commit to implementing the Mental Health Commission of Canada’s National Standard of Canada for Psychological Health and Safety in the Workplace. Supporting this standard is good for the employee, the workplace, and the employer.

Kevin, Christine and the Way Forward in Ontario

 

 

The next 18 months were unlike anything he had every experienced.  The committee members - six Liberals, two Conservatives and a New Democrat - set aside their party loyalties and worked single-mindedly toward the same goal.  The let down their guard.  They talked late into the night.  They shared run-down hotel rooms in isolated communities.  As their sense of common cause grew, so did their determination to submit a report the government could not ignore or study to death.

 

 

That report called for a comprehensive mental health and addictions strategy.  Phase I of this strategy was targeted towards children and youth - it made sense that, to start addressing the problem in a sustainable way, you begin by providing youth the best support and education available.  That way, you could hopefully inoculate them against future mental health challenges, or at least help them identify and find the supports they needed not to fall through the cracks.

 

Phase II was to look at occupational mental health; this got stalled during the last term for many reasons, not the least of which was the reality of competitive politics in a minority parliament.

 

I would like to think that Kevin Flynn's appointment as Minister of Labour is an indication that Team Wynne is serious about addressing all things mental health in the workplace, including reducing the stigma, preventing accrued psychological injury and maybe rejigging notions of labour to positively impact customer service, productivity and even innovation.

 

It's all possible.  It's also something Flynn is very much familiar with.  I remember sitting down with him and Christine Pelletier, currently working comms with Children's Mental Health Ontario to talk about what a comprehensive "cognitive labour" strategy would look like.  It was one of many conversations I've had over the years with countless stakeholders in mental health, health, labour, justice, so on and so forth about how that common thread that weaves between sectors - people, behaviour, the minds that shape our activity - must be at the root of any structural solutions.

 

This conversation dove-tails nicely with that of Open Government - the process by which we can fix our structural governance problems and re-engage the electorate in our democratic process in meaningful, dynamic ways.

 

You simply can't have one without the other - what we need is a culture change, and the only way that can happen is by a majority of people inside and outside the system changing their view.  It's where mental fitness and behavioural insights overlap.

 

There's a good chance that a colleague and friend of Kevin's - Progressive Conservative MPP Christine Elliott - will be the next Leader of the Opposition.   There are few people in the Legislature as committed to fixing Ontario's mental health challenges as these two.  There are strong voices in the NDP Party, too - including France Gelinas and Cheri DiNovo.

 

I'm hopeful about what can be done - that collaborative change that starts on the common ground of mental health - can be achieved.

 

Time will tell, I suppose, but I'll say this - who'd have thought we'd be where we are now even three years ago?

 

Just Imagine, Ontario

The most workable arrangement in a minority context, surreally, is another Liberal government - propped up, yet again, by the New Democrats.

Lord knows how the election will shake out.  None of us are precognitive, after all.  If the above scenario proves to be true, though, Hudak will be gone and it's possible Horwath might not last, either.  

That means new leaders and directions for Opposition Parties, a definite good thing for the Liberals - in the short term.  If this happens and a minority Liberal government follows the proper political playbook, we'd end up with a snap election while the Opposition is in disarray.

Just imagine how much fun that campaign would be.

There is an alternative, however - unlikely, even fanciful, but worth considering.

If our Political Parties decided to build their brands by acting like governments, not partisans, they could do this crazy thing called collaboration; find some common ground, key issues that they can agree upon and focus on doing the heavy lifting that is vital for the recovery of our economy and the strengthening of our weakening social fabric.

Of course, it'd be hard to see that happen if we weren't prepared to support the process, proactivley.

Are we ready for collaborative change?  Are we ready to be part of the solution rather than prognosticators of the problems?

If hope is on the way, it won't land upon us from without - it will be nurtured from within.

Why Rob Ford Isn't Getting Any Better

"I am definitely working at it," he said.  "I take full responsibility.  I have learned my lesson."  He said he has been eating well in rehab and working out, and feels he has lost some fat off his stomach and built some muscle in his arms.

"I feel good," he said.  "You are going to see a difference.  You are going to see a healthier Rob Ford and I am going to win the election on Oct. 27."

Note the framing here.  Rob Ford, who has repeatedly denied and repeatedly apologized for substance abuse and out-of-control behaviour is talking about his recovery in terms of losing fat and building muscle.

While it is vital to be in good physical shape both in terms of energy levels and discipline, you can be in marathon-running shape and still be an addict and still be manic.  

I've never been consumed by addiction problems, nor had to face the re-evaluation of self that comes with it.  For a great read on that process (and the one Ford needed to go through) read Jim Coyle's brave depiction of the process, here.

What I can relate to, however, is the need to recognize that behaviour isn't just a matter of choice; it's got deeper underpinnings than that.  More on this in a bit.

Rob Ford makes bad choices.  He makes them all the time.  He lies or diminishes his actions, but invariably gets caught and is forced to apologize.  These apologies are followed up with a promise to never again do all the bad things he does.

Then the cycle resets, and he ends up a bit deeper in the hole than he had been previously.  This is how he ended up in treatment in the first place - not out of a "come to Jesus" moment that he needed help, but because he/his brother thought it was necessary for PR.

It's great that Rob Ford has apparently taken ownership of his choices (It's a cop-out to blame it on others.  No one has enabled me) but he still hasn't identified the right problem.  By figuring some exercise and time in the rehab penalty box counts as paying his dues and lets him back into the game, Ford is missing the whole point.

Back to me.

In elementary school, I was a terrible student - bad at taking notes off the board, regularly late for class, distracted, so on and so forth.  Despite this, I was gifted, a natural problem-solver and developed solid critical thinking skills early on (which, alas, landed me in detention more than once).

It wasn't until highschool that I was diagnosed as ADHD - a controversial label, to be sure, but one that gave new perspective on the challenges I'd faced as a youth.  This diagnosis wasn't a convenient excuse to forgive my dis tractability or diminish my social responsibility - quite the opposite.  By realizing I faced a different suite of challenges than my peers, I was better able to develop the internal tools and external accommodations I needed to excel.

The great thing is, with these accommodations and such, I'm able to waste less time lost in a distracted fog and am better able to harness the massive bandwidth my lateral thinking process affords me to addressing big-picture problems.  

Recognizing the challenges I faced wasn't an excuse or an admission of weakness; it was a crucial step in overcoming barriers and maximizing my personal potential.

I don't know if Rob Ford has ADHD - his behaviours suggest a number of potential diagnoses, best left to professionals - but he's clearly got some internal influences that guide him towards making poor choices.  Lifting weights and eating less fried chicken isn't going to change this reality; thinking so is only ensuring the cycle gets repeated, again.

Just as you wouldn't tell a diabetic to "just produce more insulin" independently, it makes no sense to tell someone with a "mental health" issue to just make better choices and be done with it.  Better choices are possible, but not in isolation.  Internal tools and external accommodations are necessary to facilitate those outcomes.

Who knows - maybe Ford is developing these tools at rehab and maybe his family has turned over a new leaf and will be proactively empowering Ford to make better choices going forward.  The "it's all on me and by willpower alone I'm going to do better" narrative might be PR, as the Fords are afraid of losing face or appearing weak, as they have accused so many others of being.

But I doubt it.

What we have all seen, time and again, is a family that insists Robbie is a good boy who just needs to clean up his act a bit instead of an individual with more pervasive but equally-manageable challenges that needs some help to be at his best.

In the real world, there's no shame in that - even Stephen Harper has sung that he gets by with a little help from his friends.  When you believe in survival of the fittest, however, you will refuse to admit anything that could be misconstrued as weakness out of fear an opponent will seize on that weakness to tear you down.

The Fords have reason to harbour such concerns, of course.  While Ford has been particularly egregious in attacking his foes and deflecting all criticisms, he's really just a caricature of what we see across the board in War Room politics.

"Defining your opponents" has become a more palatable way of saying "tear their character to shreds."  "Message discipline" is the modern-day equivalent of omerta.  Actually taking responsibility is impossible in this scenario, because to accept ownership of any mistake is to open yourself up to remorseless, vicious attack.

Just watch the remainder of the Ontario election for evidence of how this plays out.

By refusing to recognize that he's got additional challenges, Rob Ford is fixating on and attempting to address the wrong problem.  As such, he won't be getting any better - if anything, his next fall is likely to be even harder.

At least he's in good company.

Until we collectively get past the stigma and taboos we've placed around cognitive functioning, the witchcraft or left-handedness of our age, we will continue to whack the wrong mole and apply band-aid solutions to structural problems.

It's a frame the political right, by all regards, should already be comfortable with; you have to recognize that salvation isn't something that rests in your hands alone.

Only by accepting our own limitations and recognizing our place as parts of a greater whole can we empower a responsible society, rather than enable individual selfishness.

Move forward together, etc.

Doug Ford the Sociopath Gets Challenged

"You can't destroy a community like this.  People have worked 30 years for their home... My heart goes out to kids with autism.  But no one told me they'd be leaving the house."

You might think Doug Ford would take counsel before opening his mouth about issues of mental health and cognition given that his brother is, among other things, a drug addict.  I wouldn't - like many others in Toronto, I have suspicions that Doug Ford is a sociopath.

Sociopaths are:

 - superficial and portray themselves as smarter than others

- delusional

- figure they can get away with anything (like blatant cash bribes)

- they lie, all the time, with ease and confidence

- feel neither guilt or shame

- don't learn from mistakes; they double-down

- their heart "goes out" to no one - not even their own brothers

Does that sound at all like Doug Ford, the Worst Brother Ever?  You see where I'm coming from then.

So, back to Ford's comments about autism.  He mentions "violent behaviours" like screaming.  How does he feel about punching your own friend, beating a friend, barrelling through an elected official to go join a fight or saying things like "get her a shot right now or I'll fucking break her..."?

Autism is not a cause of violence.  That's a facile, ignorant comment made by simpletons looking for a quick answer.  Violence is not a product of mental illness, the way we tend to view it.  If that were the case, we'd have to label a lot of hockey players and fans as mentally ill, wouldn't we?  They engage in violence and calls for violence all the time. 

As do, might I note, certain politicians seeking more efficient ways of doing away with undesirables that make them uncomfortable.

Violent behaviour is a response to that which makes us uncomfortable, which we feel threatens us.  We respond to threats reactively, the same way we pull our hand back from a hot stove or feel an urge to lie down while in high places; this threat-response behavior manifests as stomping on a bug, smacking a child who talks back, promising consequences to employees to question us or screaming at a world that feels threatening, seems not to make sense.  Like Rob Ford does, or like some autistic kids do - depending on their circumstances.

There's really no difference - the reactive behaviour is the same whether you're flipping out at Pride or screaming because nobody's communicating the way you do.

Which is what happened to Jacob Barnett for ages.  Haven't heard of him?  You will - he's the autistic kid who many think will be the next Einstein/Newton.

Temple Grandin was misunderstood by many - now she does TED Talks.

Winston Churchill had mental health issues.  Abraham Lincoln had mental health issues.  It's quite likely that Stephen Harper could be diagnosed with a "mental illness" - as Bob Rae was.  These aren't weak men - they're dynamos, catalysts, outliers.  You'd be surprised how many "mentally ill" people have shaped the course of human history.

What we don't get - what people like Doug Ford, pathologically incapable of understanding others as they are don't get - is that different isn't bad.  It's different.  It's the interaction that defines good and evil.  The more empathy you have, the less sinful you become.

Being black, or gay, or tall, or autistic doesn't make you good or bad.  These are all aspects of the elephant, one trait amongst the many combinations that make us all unique. 

When we focus on the negative, we become angry, fearful, reactive (and violent) to. 

When we seek comprehension, we are inquisitive, patient, engaging and, ultimately, powerful in that special Ender Wiggin way.

Rob Ford has, through his illness, shaken a status quo that was desperately in need of being shaken.  He is a parody of all the norms we have come to accept of politicians.

Doug Ford is something even more extreme - a glimmer of what we could become, as a society, if we choose to focus on what irritates us instead of seeking common ground.

We can opt to stand against that which we disdain or makes us uncomfortable, as the Fords do - but that's a path that history teaches us has a dead end.

The alternative is to get beyond our own stigmas and learn how to understand, rather than react to.

When we learn to look beyond ourselves, that's when community truly begins.

Doug Ford sees himself as tough, better-than, shiny, independent.  There's nobody better than him - certainly not some autistic upstart.  Why, Dougie could wipe the floor with an autistic nobody, physically or verbally.

Hey Doug - I've been diagnosed as on the autism spectrum; that makes me your inferior, right?  But I'll bet you're not brave enough to go toe-to-toe with me in the arena of ideas.  You've got nothing but bluster; I've got everything, including the facts.

I've called you a sociopath, Dougie - I'm telling you that you're a lesser-than.  Are you going to take that?  Want to prove you're smarter than I am by disproving everything I've written here?

I'm betting you aren't.  Shows how weak your position is, doesn't it?

Hudak's Tragic Mental Health Irony

Savings would be directed at the health-care system to focus on treating people with chronic and mental health illnesses, Hudak said.

Unions would lose monopolies to bid on government contracts, and government jobs would be opened up more to the general population.

I really think Hudak's heart is in the right place, but it's his head that needs to step up a bit here.  

I'm hoping he's familiar with the federal workplace standards for mental health; a great initiative supported by the federal Conservatives, I might add.  The reason this is such an important undertaking at this point in time is that mental health is a growing cause for disability claims, absenteeism and lost productivity. 

If you want to talk about cost savings - mental health-related concerns cost the Canadian economy some $50 billion annually.  That's a lot.

The elephant in the room around mental health, though, is that it doesn't work the way we think it does.

For one, conditions like bipolar disorder or schizophrenia are genetic, which means they aren't actually illnesses, but inherited traits, like pigmentation or height.  You can be pale and prone to sunburn or too tall to fit in small cars - they're not considered illnesses, but conditions to be accommodated.  They're also manifested physically and therefore clearly discernible by the general public.  

Life can be harder for left-handed people, but society has become far more accommodating.  When society isn't understanding or accommodating, however, we tend to react to behaviour rather than explore the causes beneath that behaviour.  ADHD kids and adults have greater trouble landing and retaining jobs; some autistic folk will have amazing, never-harnessed skills because of communications challenges that some teachers and employers feel no need to come half-way on.

For people like this, accrued mental illness becomes much more likely.  Common examples of these are forms of anxiety and depression, which are increasingly related with family and work stress.  With the right supports and accommodations, workplaces don't need to be illness-inducing; families can have the supports they need to cope with mental illnesses at home.

You don't need to have extra-normal cognitive function to accrue a mental illness, though, any more than you need to be an albino to get a skin burn.  Every day, people are developing accumulated mental injuries at work in the same way repetitive psychical stresses-related ailments like carpal tunnel syndrome develop.

It makes no sense to tell someone with carpal tunnel to suck it up and exacerbate their injury more; it really makes no sense to pressure mentally injured people to push themselves to the breaking point.  That's in no small part why we've got a mental health crisis in the first place.

Here's where the irony part comes in.

By focusing on economic competitiveness, Hudak is envisioning more sales-focused workers, more laissez-faire employers and more carrot-and-stick discipline for workplace behaviour.  These sorts of conditions have helped foster the rise in occupational mental illness claims we're witnessing.

Are these people faking it?  Are they slacking off, not working hard enough, whatever?  Do they need to get tough to get ahead?  Where does Hudak draw the line between workplace behaviour and mental health? 

There is precedence for this sort of conundrum; unions, oddly enough, arose in response to poor workplace conditions related to physical well-being.  It was due to union engagement that workplace safety standards and things like reasonable work hours and washroom breaks were implemented.  It's because of unions that these things continue to this day.

While there are some smart employers taking behavioural economics to heart and properly designing work, workplaces and management techniques to foster greater productivity and innovation from mentally health (and supported) employees, this is far from the norm.  

Most employers still think the tough-boss model works best.  They also oppose unions who "coddle" employers and reduce a company's ability to cull less-able staff or find efficiencies by getting more for less.  

But this is what unions do.  They're as behind the times on mental fitness as anyone, but they're still best positioned to champion the causes of their members in much the same way a political caucus does.

So here's Hudak's conundrum; it's great that he wants to afford more mental health support for those who need it, but by cutting into the existing, proactive support structures, he's guaranteeing worse mental health outcomes and an increased cost.  

You can't treat mental health supports like a Jenga game, but that's what Hudak is doing.

I applaud his commitment; it's absolutely the right priority for the times.  But his plan not only won't work, it'll make the situation worse.

There's an alternative approach available to him that I hope he's willing to take.

If not, I know someone else who could be.

How Stephen Harper is Making Canada Sick

The strength and quality of Canada's governance is diminishing under Stephen Harper's iron-fisted rule.

Any challengers to his agenda are ignored, attacked or, where possible, fired.

Evidence that demonstrates there may be a problem with the way he governs is dismissed, buried or where possible, starved out of existence.

This presents a tough challenge for bureaucrats whose job isn't to serve Harper's partisan ideology, but the well-being of Canada.  When they have facts that prove Harper's policies are detrimental to our national interests, it's their job to raise concerns with the government.  

When that government, in turn, bullies the civil service into doing as they're told, the combination of stresses (doing what you know to be wrong, micro-managed to death by ideologues with no respect for the facts) takes a toll on individual health.  And through aggregate, collective health.

Which is why Canada's bureaucracy is growing sick, too.  They're not alone, though - tough-minded, top-down managers are fostering the same kind of illness across the board.  

There's consequence to this laissez-faire approach.

Here's the thing, though; when you have an individual who refuses to listen to advice, makes decisions they should know to be unsound and gets mad at those who challenge their destructive behaviour - behaviour like Stephen Harper's - well, there's a precedent for that, too.

Not long ago, people had trouble following me when I connected labour reform to mental health.  Now that it's a legitimate thing, they're not seeing how occupational mental health connect to Open Government.

Give it time, folks - you will.

UPDATE: Need any further proof that our PM is functionally fixed and likely addicted to power - to the detriment of us all?  Voila.  What's needed at this stage of the game is an intervention.

Autism Speaks For All

 

An estimated one in 88 Ontarians is on the autism spectrum, a developmental disorder that affects communication and social interaction.  They can have a range of abilities and needs, including extreme anxiety, narrow but intense interests, and repetitive or disturbing behaviours such as self-harm.

 

"For years we have been hearing from families about the gap around mental health services, meaningful vocation, housing and daily activities," said Marg Spolestra of Autism Ontario, the province's largest parent advocacy organization.  "All of it needs to be addressed.  And now we have clear evidence to back up those concerns."

 

 

Meet Jacob Barnett.  Jacob is a 16 year-old genius touted as a successor to the likes of Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein.  Jacob is also a disruptive leader, challenging our educational model (and he's hardly the only one).  Plus, he's the star of a popular Ted Talk and has been on the Glenn Beck show.

 

Oh, yeah - and he's autistic.  Didn't learn to speak for ages, but when he did, spoke in multiple languages, including physics.

 

If Jacob had been forced to learn in a traditional manner, apply for jobs in a traditional manner and compete with more "normal" communicators for those positions, he'd likely be a failure, costing the healthcare system and/or impeding his family from their own economic contribution.  Whole families have been brought down this way.

 

But because his mom, Kristine Barnett, paid attention to the cues she got from her son and worked to support his growth and development in a way that worked for him, Jacob is now poised to change the world.

 

There's a lesson in here about how we identify and manage "mental illness" and "developmental disorders" that we are painfully slow in learning. 

 

Where it comes to all things cognition, we're still tying left hands behind backs and trying to force people to right strictly with their right.

 

We want people to think and act in one way - laissez-faire, competitive, sales-oriented and succeed through one frame.  We expect outliers to sell themselves to us without any effort on our part. 

 

It doesn't work.

 

Right now, there are cognitive outliers out there working in mail rooms or living on the street, struggling to come to terms with a cognitive gift they can't see as anything other than a curse as work opportunities and relationships pass them by.  Some of these people, given the right tools and support, could cure cancer, remodel government or develop an eco-friendly, completely sustainable energy source.  Who knows?  We never will, because we're not prepared to listen to them.

 

At the same time, we have "normal" people becoming less productive, less social and more likely to suffer from illness because we're designing work and work places wrong.  A bit of design thinking could fix all this, but that's too much like committing sociology, isn't it? 

 

There's nothing more frustrating than watching people flail in the dark when there's light available.

 

But try explaining that to the overconfident people in The Cave.

 

Tikkun Olam: Rethinking Depression

People still feel inclined to whisper when they talk about depression.  Depression has no "Race for the Cure"; this condition rarely spawns dance marathons, car washes, or golf tournaments.  Consequently, the lacerating pain of depression remains uncomfortably private.

Private, in terms of how we feel about it but very public in how it manifests and impacts societal functioning.

Which is why I (and many, many others with far more knowledge and expertise in mental health) think it's time we need to broader our horizons a bit and stop thinking about depression and mental health in general as an individual illness instead of what it is - a social issue.

When we look at mental health - let's focus on depression and anxiety for the moment, as those are the two conditions easiest to understand as developed conditions, like Diabetes Type II or carpal tunnel syndrome - as social issues, the solutions become less about one person and more about context.

You don't solve lead poisoning by focusing on the sick any more than you can stop starfish being washed up on the shore by throwing them back in one at a time.  

Mental health is a social illness with a shared solution.  Only when we get that into our heads can we aspire to peace of mind.

Why Leaders Should Think Before They Speak

In short, this decision-making process transforms our vague, generalized emotions into concrete decisions and action.  An excellent metaphor is the igniting of gasoline.  Without the concrete form of an engine and car, this event is a potentially harmful explosion.  With that form, the event becomes a transformative tool in our lives.  Similarly, without the techniques and tools to express ourselves, our emotions lack a practicality that will allow us to enhance our lives.  In some cases, they might even harm ourselves and others.

Cognitive science is fascinating stuff.  It bridges realms from mental health to leadership to creativity and, of course, communication.

Despite what we like to tell ourselves, human beings are not rational actors.  This is even more true when we have such utter confidence in ourselves that we never pause to consider why we come to certain conclusions.  The less you think something through, the more it's your reactive brain that's in charge.  

It's one way to live your life, certainly.  It's what we were originally designed for.  But now that we're capable of so much more, isn't it a sin not to use our cognitive tools to the furthest extent of their efficacy and actually nudge into rational-actor territory?

Vote For Mental Health Ontario

 

"There'll never be an election in this province where they don't talk about education and health yet they never talk about children's mental health.  This is astounding to me.  They talk about crime, services, gun control and a number of other stuff yet they never talk about children's mental health," said Hoy.

 

Hoy will be happy to know that conversation is, in fact, happening.  There are some folk even trying to get the province's mental health agencies to do another targeted campaign this election.  Even Tim Hudak has come out, talking about the importance of treating mental health as of equal importance to physical health.

 

There's been a big change over the past four years; just think what might happen over the next four.

 

Especially if every Ontarian joins the conversation.  Doing so - being part of the mental health movement - might even be the best thing you do in your life, for you and for us.

Promoting Psychopaths In the Worksplace

 

Psychopaths work to amass their power.  Emotion is not in the equation.  Therefore, they're immune to the feelings of others, including their own. 

 

 

You likely know a few psychopaths.  You might even have one leading you.  The funny thing is, there's this belief going around that psychopathic traits are good for business. 

 

You want aggressive, competitive people who aren't afraid to bust some heads to get things done.  Work is work and it's all about making the objective best decision for yourself, which means succeeding, which then makes you valuable to your company.  Right?

 

Watch Question Period some time.  Not everyone in the room is a psychopath or sociopath, but see how many of them are trying to be.  Because that's the culture we've told ourselves makes for a healthy democracy.

 

The first step to addressing any health issue is admitting something is wrong.  The same goes with admitting a workplace environment problem.

 

Here are some psychopathic traits to look out for:

 

 

- Be male (three times more likely)

 

- Establish tight control over their environment and others

 

- Create and enforce policies, procedures and rules to their advantage, punishing violators harshly

 

- Break the very rules they enforce upon others

 

- Think or say something such as, “Nothing personal, this is business”

 

- Prize objectivity almost exclusively

 

- Lie even when it’s obvious they are

 

- Have a bottom-line orientation, meaning relationships won’t sway them

 

- Lose no sleep in making adverse employment decisions such as terminations, demotions, etc.

 

- Surround themselves with “yes people”

 

- Create homogeneous work cultures, avoiding diverse personalities

 

- Possess average to above average intelligence

 

- Exhibit charisma especially in one-on-one and group situations

 

- Function awkwardly in small, diverse groups of three to eight people

 

- Work extended periods with little concern for impact on family and friends

 

- Spread negative news and attributes of those who threaten their power

 

- Undermine those with strong personal relationships

 

- Extend their power by “constructively criticizing” others’ ideas

 

- Focus on taking credit for the creativity of others rather than exhibit creativity themselves

 

 

Why Rob Ford Should Compare Himself To Winston Churchill

These observations suggest that when he wasn't depressed, Churchill probably had hypomanic (mild manic) symptoms: he was high in energy, highly sociable and extraverted, rapid in his thoughts and actions, and somewhat impulsive.

It's well-known that Toronto Mayor Rob Ford can be erratic in his behaviour, tenacious in his beliefs, has moments where he's excessively social and others where he's a crying wreck.  There's more than enough video evidence to go around.

Equally, Ford can be hypomanic and impulsive (although it's quite possible such episodes are artificial).  Beyond magnets and phone calls, however, I'm not sure our Mayor can match Churchill in terms of productivity, but that's another topic.

Churchill was fiery, stubborn and proud.

Such is equally true of Rob Ford.

Winston Churchill was dogged by mental illness his whole life. 

More than a couple people have questions Mayor Ford's state of mental health.

Here the similarities end.

Whereas Churchill was very open about his depression, calling it his "black dog," Rob Ford has admitted to smoking crack cocaine but vehemently denied any mental illness, including addiction.  Ford has also repeatedly lied about his own behaviour and, when caught out in his lies, demonstrated a helplessness to do anything other than say sorry.

Churchill faced his demons head on, accepted them as part of who he was and channeled all his abilities into heroic deeds.

Rob Ford refuses to face his demons which return time and again to plague him, his term as Mayor and the City he clearly loves.

I doubt that Ford has an inner Churchill waiting to be unleashed, but I am certain that accepting the fact that he's got some issues that need addressed would do him (and his performance) a world of good.

The key point is that mental illness is nothing to be ashamed of, any more than stigmatism, asthma or even polio.  Churchill may have been sick, but he certainly wasn't weak.

We have to get over the notion that mental illness is indicative of weakness.  That's like feeling that gay is a contagion or foreign populations have a zombie-like sameness.  After all, when we give in to stigmas, we're simply demonstrating our susceptibility to limbic thought.

As someone in a position of leadership (and with aspirations to lead again), Rob Ford has a perfect opportunity to show how brave and citizen-minded he really is.  

Churchill did - and because of this, he's remembered for what he accomplished, not the symptomatic expressions of his illness.

Is Rob Ford tough enough to face his demons head on, as Churchill did?  One way or another, the answer to that question will define his legacy.