PRISONER WRITES FROM THE PROVINCIAL PRISON FOR WOMEN

Recently my life has taken some interesting turns to places I really thought were long behind me forever.  I was arrested and held for 25 days at Vanier (provincial jail for women in Milton) before an amazing and true friend who lives what she believes in, bailed me out.  I wrote a little about my experience below.

Hepatitis C Treatment Journal - Post 3

Post 3 - Hep C Treatment Journal

Middle of May - About Twice as Long a Wait for Test Results as Promised

Four weeks ago I was told that the genotype testing I completed would take a couple weeks for results to return.  I don't know about everyone else but to me "a couple" is two.  If it were going to potentially take longer, why can't people simply say, " a few"?


I had prepared myself to hear news in about 2 weeks time - bad news (that yes, I'm eligible for treatment) or worse news (that I'm not).  Now I wait here in the fourth week chewing my nails relentlessly day after day......after day.  I could, I should just call.  Find out if my results came in and they've just been sitting on them, considering a ransom maybe, or biding their time, waiting for me to relinquish the last shred of sanity I have selfishly been clinging to....
Maybe tomorrow I'll call.


So its now tomorrow and I called about my results for genotype testing.  This is the test that will tell me whether I am one step closer to treatment.  Some genotypes are more treatable than others, or perhaps more accurate is that some types have effective treatments developed and others do not.  In North America and other parts of the privileged world most people who are positive for Hep C have genotype 1, the most researched for treatments.  The type which it turns out that I have.


Also as it turns out my treatment staff have had my results for some undetermined amount of time.  "Did you try calling me?"  Yes of course they had tried "a couple" times!  "Oh I see, a couple....". (that vague term which for some really means indeterminable)   "Well did you leave messages?"  Though I knew damn well they had not, I was told that they had tried and were unable to leave a message for some reason they can't quite remember!   OK......???? and WTF???


My immediate thoughts after making an appointment for the next round of blood work and then hanging up, were;
What a half assed, lax attempt to reach me.  If any attempt was actually made at all.  Typical medical, elitist, classist, discriminatory, mentality - all drug users are hard to reach, unstable, disorganized and probably won't return staff calls anyway, so we'll get to it when and if we get to it - all good.


These were thoughts that crossed my mind immediately.  They may or may not have been accurate analysis of what was going on.


Staff and I made a telephone appointment to discuss my results, an appointment which staff also missed by the way.  Though to their half assed credit they did make efforts after that to contact me by calling until they reached me (for which I am grateful).  Who knows what goes on behind the scenes.  What kind of pressure people are under, what environments they may be working within.  Whatever the case may be at the particular Toronto medical establishment I attend (one that I chose because it offers an entire Hep C treatment and support program) I find their handling of my treatment to this point - lacking.  For some, it could be downright dangerous.


What must it be like for people in less privileged parts of the world?  Where resources, staff, and training are often in short supply.....I guess I should count myself lucky?


About HCV: Government of Canada - Hep C

Hepatitis C Treatment Journal- Post 1

Post 1

Personal Experience with HCV Diagnoses

 I contracted HCV the very same way many women contract it... from sharing equipment with a trusted partner.  I naively believed that he would disclose to me (out of respect and care) if he were HIV or HCV positive. Silly me!  He was Hep C positive, he knew it, and he didn't tell me about it.   

What an asshole right?

Yes and No.  If there were not such a severe stigma associated with HCV and hence with disclosing, maybe he wouldn't have been so scared to tell me.  Is fear of stigma and judgment a good enough excuse?  Not in my books, but it happens - a lot.  
He, himself contracted HCV from injecting and sharing needles in prison.  If sterile equipment had been available to him and to others in his shoes maybe there wouldn't have been anything for him to disclose to me in the first place!



We had a friend over one day who disclosed that he had contracted HCV in prison.  My partner blurted out that he also had Hep C, contracted while in prison.  This is how I found out in our 4th year together that he had Hep C, and why I suspected that I likely did too.  I had never shared injection equipment with anyone else at that time and was careful about protection in non-long term relationships.

Diagnoses Confirmed
 
I was diagnosed with HCV about 10-12 years ago.  I have done little else by way of monitoring and/or treating it since then.  I have however recently initiated the process for HCV genotype testing and will be writing about my experiences including the subsequent process of treatment if it is deemed necessary.  I will be participating in a program run by a community health centre in Toronto.  I chose this particular program because it offers a somewhat holistic approach to treatment.  What I mean by "somewhat" holistic is that the treatment is based pretty heavily on the medical model (for obvious reasons, but hardly supportive of holistic healing).  However, it also offers individual and group counselling/support - which makes it slightly more holistic.  

Next Steps
 
My first appointment is later this month.  I have already cancelled once and played phone tag with the program nurse for about a month after that.  Not sure if this was nerves or simply that other thing which causes me to cancel appointments and avoid people...depression.  In either case, I'm committed to attending the next appointment.

Hepititis C Testing and Treatment - Post 2

Post 2 
(if this journal post on Hep C treatment was of interest to you, try post 1 and my most recent - post 3 from last week)

March 2012 – sometime in about the 3^rd week of the month.

So what else is new?  

I have difficulty with structured appointment times (not to mention, structure in general) and managed to miss my first screening appointment for HCV (hepatitis C) genotype testing Tuesday morning by 20 minutes.  Not bad really, but apparently nurse “M” disagreed and had left for lunch.  Reception invited me to come back at 1 o’clock when M was set to return.  I stayed and I waited.  At 1:00, they informed M was to be 20 minutes late returning from lunch!  Payback?  Probably not, but maybe....  In any case I had another appointment and needed to leave.  But knowing myself and knowing that there was no way I would return any day in the near future, and being increasingly aware that I’ve already waited about 10 years too long to look into my possible need for HCV treatment, I asked about any openings later in the day and lucked out with a 3 o’clock opening.

So finally at 3:00 pm and after some struggle, and wondering why the hell I didn’t schedule this appointment for late afternoon in the first place (especially considering my hatred for morning), I met with M, the community health Nurse.  Very sweet, considerate, and informed.

Symptoms: Something to Look Forward to?

Depression, nausea, vomiting – things to expect should Hep C treatment be necessary. 

Weight loss - the one side effect which comes as a bonus for my trouble and which I’m actually looking forward to.  Given that depression has been a constant companion since Sept 2000 when my children were kidnapped by the state, a constant companion which never departed (surprisingly) when I won the fight to bring my kids back home in 2007.  

Steps to Treatment: Genotype Testing
 

Side effects of this 12 year depression?   Loss of:  joy and motivation – Gain: pounds of fat.  So yes I’m looking forward to depression which culminates in weight loss instead of weight gain for a change.

The first step (recent step) in this particular little HCV exploration party was to see my family physician who took blood and confirmed only that I had been exposed to HCV at some point.  Facts I’ve long been aware of (13 years).   Blood taken today will confirm which genotype I have and whether its a type known to respond to the standard treatment, the “cure” for HCV infection; Interferon, a form of chemotherapy . Yeah!!!

About a week to go before the results come in and I know for sure if chemo will be in my immediate future.....fingers crossed for weight loss!

Prison Needle Exchange Advocacy Project

Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network (CHALN) Video 

As per their usual standard of high quality, thoughtful, prisoner rights advocacy in Canada and internationally, the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network (CHALN) have been working on an informational advocacy video which demonstrates the need for needle exchange in our jails and prisons.  The video project is part of CHALN's mandate to reduce harm for prisoners living with HIV/AIDS and for those at risk of contracting the infection.

Participating in the Project

 
I was lucky enough to be invited to participate in this project and did a filmed interview here in my home last Wednesday.  The fact that everyone was flexible and able to come to my apartment made things much more comfortable for me.  It also provided a backdrop of "normalcy" to the filming.  In other words, yes drug users also have families, homes, furniture, and photos of our loved ones!

Video Advocacy Team

 

CHALN has hired an exceptionally professional team with experience in social justice issues.  In fact they recently put together a video project for PASAN - the Prisoner AIDS Support Action Network, around the work PASAN does in advocating for prisoners who are HIV and/or HCV (hep C) positive.

Unsafe Drug Injection in Prison

 
The criteria for the video was that participants had injected drugs in prison.  What we talked about was my experiences of injecting in prison and how my family and I have been affected by the lack of sterile injection equipment.  Yes I have injected in jail, yes I used equipment that had been used by others (many others) and yes I was lucky, I did not contract HIV or HCV from those experiences.  Though I am HCV positive and I did contract HCV the very same way many women contract it... from sharing equipment with a trusted partner.  I naively believed that he would disclose to me (out of respect and care) if he were HIV or HCV positive. Silly me!  He was Hep C positive, he knew it, and he didn't tell me about it.  

What an asshole right?

Yes and No.  If there were not such a severe stigma associated with HCV and hence with disclosing, maybe he would'nt have been so scared to tell me.  Is fear of stigma and judgment a good enough excuse?  Not in my books, but it happens - alot.  
He, himself contracted HCV from injecting and sharing needles in prison.  If sterile equipment had been available to him and to others in his shoes maybe there wouldn't have been anything for him to disclose to me in the first place!

Rates of HIV and HCV Among Canadian Prisoners

Approximately 70% of those imprisoned in Canada have problematic drug use issues.  Injection drug users in general have higher incidents of HIV, HCV infection than the rest of the Canadian population.  This coupled with the lack of sterile injection equipment in prison ensures staggering rates of HIV, HCV infection rates among Canadian prisoners.  The HIV prevalence rate among prisoners is 10-19 times higher than the general population.  The HCV prevalence rate is between 19% and 40% higher than the general Canadian population.  
Studies conducted in 2005 at the provincial level throughout Canada found that between 33% and 67% of incarcerated injection drug users had shared equipment with other prisoners.  One Vancouver study found that as many as 21% of injection drug users had contracted HIV while in prison.

Human Rights Abuse

Is this a human rights issue?  You bet!  Does the government of Canada see it as such?  Not so much.  Particularly not the current conservative devils!  This fact should not prevent us from continuing to push and fight for drug abuse/drug use to be treated as what it is, a health issue, a coping mechanism, a reflection of mental health troubles, and not the individual moral corruption those without expertise or experience like to pretend it to be.  

Personal Experience with HCV Treatment

I was diagnosed with HCV about 10-12 years ago.  I have done little else by way of monitoring and/or treating it since then  I have however recently initiated HCV genotype testing and will be writing about my experiences with this process and the subsequent process of treatment if it is deemed necessary.  I will be participating in a program run by a community health centre in Toronto.  I chose this particular program because it offers a somewhat holistic approach to treatment.  What I mean by somewhat holistic is that the treatment is based pretty heavily on the medical model, but also offers individual and group counselling/support.  My first appointment is later this month.  I have already cancelled once and played phone tag with the program nurse for about a month after that.  Not sure if this was nerves or simply that other thing which causes me to cancel appointments and avoid people...depression.  In either case, I'm committed to attending the next appointment.

10 Reasons to Oppose C10 - A Critique

The article included below, “10 reasons to oppose Bill C10” has good intentions but stops short on some issues, and is mis-informative on others.  Though we should all welcome and cheer most any support in opposing Bill C10, I also think we should think critically and welcome and cheer each other for those efforts.

Yes it is true as the article's authors states, that the Canadian Bar Association representing 37000 wrote a collective letter of opposition to the Harper government. But so did dozens of others including another collective letter, this time of human rights organizations from all across Canada including the Civil Liberties Association, and the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network. The Urban Health Research Initiative also organized a petition letter with over 550 signatures from healthcare workers.

Letters however were not the only form of address taken. Other organizations arranged actions which included developing web sites and blogs, building community coalitions, hosting discussion panels, forums, and public speaks, as well as designing letter and petition campaigns. Articles have been written, letters to MP's sent out, and conversations with friends, neighbours, and colleagues have taken place individually by 10's of thousands of Canadians since 2007 when the current law and order agenda was first introduced.

For those who wish to be involved there are current campaigns including a petition at AVAZZ.org (www.avaaz.org) asking Premiers to oppose Bill C10 on the basis of dollar cost. Another petition at Lead Now (leadnow.ca/keep-canada-safe) asks for a more radical re-thinking of the law and order approach to justice period. Lead Now requests that government officials “establish an independent commission of diverse citizens and experts to create a 21st century Canadian justice plan.” Lead now is also in the process of building a national campaign on this issue for those wishing to do more than write their MP's.

Most recently several Premiers have stated publicly that they will not be responsible for footing the dollar cost of this Bill. This is wonderful new but has 2 failings I can see. First, in attacking only the dollar costs associated with Bill C10 we fail to acknowledge that the greatest consequence will be the human cost. (although both human and dollar costs are intertwined and one failure increases failings in the other) Secondly, what do our Premiers intend to do if Ottawa steps up and provides funding? Will they simply continue to disregard all of the more important reasons for not supporting this Bill?

The author, Trinda L. Ernst begins in point one with a call to increase use of and funding for preventative measures to community harm – that which we refer to as crime. However she leaves out some of the most crucial and impactful measures known to both prevent community harm and increase public safety. Measures such as affordable housing and childcare, quality education, meaningful, well paid work, and equitable access to healthcare must be the focus of any “crime” prevention strategy where human rights, and community safety are the prime considerations.

Points 2, 3, and 4 discuss the rush with which the conservatives are pushing Bill C10 through parliament, the subsequent lack of review, and the methods with which they are promoting this legislation. In addition to stating that these processes are problematic we need to talk about why its a problem, who stands to benefit from this approach, and how.

The conservatives have made it known time and again that they care not for proven best practices, nor the evidence, research and statistics backing those approaches. What they care about are the demands and ideology of their core political base. People who tend to be mainly white, and middle class. People who are a long way from the experiences of oppression that many of us are subjected to which have often lead to our continued impoverishment and criminalisation. Not only do most of the conservatives political base not understand the day to day realities of what it means to be criminalised but they are also lied to and provided misinformation from their leaders in regards to the connecting issues of poverty and trauma. As Trinda states, those who support increasing criminalisation do so without fact based information.

Who benefits from this approach? The status quo, and those who represent them. By keeping mostly working class people under foot and not only infringing on civil rights as evidenced by the many recent attacks on labour unions and protestors, but by also threatening imprisonment more often and for longer periods of time, people are made fearful, and kept silent. These tactics combined allow the upper classes to maintain ownership, high profits and unfair percentages of our national resources, all off the backs of the low waged poor.

Point 5 deals with our youth. One important point left out here is that Canada leads the world in our rates of incarcerating young people. This trend will likely not only continue but be made worse under the conservatives who are once again pandering to ideology. That is that our youth have become dangerous and are out of control, that they need to be locked up. In fact just the opposite is true. “Crime” rates among young people are like most rates of “crime” in Canada, on the decline.

Trinda makes the point that imprisonment is a forerunner to later law breaking, that community based options are less likely to see continued lawbreaking behaviour. The piece she leaves out is that all people, not just youth are known to fare better with regards to increased stability, and decreased lawbreaking in community based programs as opposed to imprisonment.

In point 6 Trinda significantly points out that despite the title the conservatives have given to the portion of the act dealing with house arrest, (Ending House Arrest for Serious and Violent Criminals Act) it does not merely target acts of violence. In fact most people who are sentenced to conditional sentences or house arrest are non violent, property law breakers. So who benefits from this mis-information and how? Once again the owning classes are seeing their property and their profits protected as a priority in legislation which despite conservative claims, has nothing to do with ending violence in our communities.

Trinda's comments in the next point about prison creating predators were particularly annoying to me. People subject to ongoing degradation and humiliation at the hands of others for extended periods of time can become less socially able to live and work among us on a number of levels. But I would argue that someone who was not a predator going into prison, will still not be one when they come out. Moving on to the point behind Trinda's line of reasoning; disregard for prisoners human rights is a serious and prolific issue even with fairly strong law in place to protect them. Prison walls have the effect of blocking all public scrutiny, it is difficult to monitor what really goes on behind their walls even in the best of circumstances. The “Parole and Conditional Release Act” which is the Canadian legislation that deals with prisoner treatment states that prisoners maintain all rights afforded every Canadian except those necessairly restricted by withdrawal of individual liberty.

The conservatives want to see these rights transformed into privileges that have to be earned. This means for instance that freedom to protest conditions could be made illegal and subject to sanction. Protesting illegal treatment of one self by guards is already extremely difficult and indeed dangerous for those inside. Now with law on their side, stories of rape, assault and other abuses could be legally silenced.

I agree with Trinda in that the system with regards to prison overcrowding is at the breaking point right now. I would argue that this overcrowding fits into the effects of degrading and humiliating conditions I alluded to above. There are few if any quiet moments in prison, and no privacy at all, ever. These conditions can have the effect of causing anxiety and depression, as well as heightening survival instincts (fight or flight mechanisms) which in turn can increase incidents of aggression which become more difficult to turn off or undue as time goes on.

I don't agree that the police need more money to do their jobs. They are already some of the highest paid cops on the planet with access to some of the most up to date technology and resources available. Policing money would be better spent in alternative, grassroots, prevention and treatment initiatives.

In point 9 Trinda talks about victimizing the most vulnerable, a top issue of any law and order based agenda. But Trinda gets a little confabulated here.

The truth is that aboriginal folks are often moved far from their homes in order to be imprisoned. This is true of all women imprisoned in Canada as well, even after the building of 5 “regional centres” for women. The truth is that aboriginal peoples are vastly over represented throughout the criminal legal system. What we also need to know is that women are the fasted growing segment of the prison population and that aboriginal women are most impacted by this trend. Its also important to note that women account for 80% of all people victimized in Canada. In prison populations those statistics rise, with 85% of all women noted as survivors of sexual or physical assault. That number increases still more to 95% when speaking of aboriginal women. Other populations known to be vulnerable to criminalisation and imprisonment are the poor, people of colour, youth, people living with mental health issues, trans men and women, and those who use drugs. The methods by which they are criminalised almost always relate in some way to extended periods of poverty.

And finally the financial cost of this travesty called Bill C10? No one knows, and not enough people seem to care. What they are doing is not only irresponsible and disrespectful of the Canadian people, this kind of devil may care spending is not particularly conservative.... or is it?

10 reasons to oppose Bill C-10

Published On Mon Nov 14 2011

Under Bill C-10, prison officials will have more latitude to disregard prisoners’ human rights, bypassing the least restrictive means to enforce discipline. This means inmates are more likely to re-enter society as predators hardened by their prison experience.

Chris So/Toronto Star

Trinda L. Ernst
Bill C-10 is titled The Safe Streets and Communities Act — an ironic name, considering that Canada already has some of the safest streets and communities in the world and a declining crime rate. This bill will do nothing to improve that state of affairs but, through its overreach and overreaction to imaginary problems, Bill C-10 could easily make it worse. It could eventually create the very problems it’s supposed to solve.
Bill C-10 will require new prisons; mandate incarceration for minor, non-violent offenses; justify poor treatment of inmates and make their reintegration into society more difficult. Texas and California, among other jurisdictions, have already started down this road before changing course, realizing it cost too much and made their justice system worse. Canada is poised to repeat their mistake.
The Canadian Bar Association, representing over 37,000 lawyers across the country, has identified 10 reasons why the passage of Bill C-10 will be a mistake and a setback for Canada:
1. Ignoring reality. Decades of research and experience have shown what actually reduces crime: (a) addressing child poverty, (b) providing services for the mentally ill and those afflicted with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, (c) diverting young offenders from the adult justice system, and (d) rehabilitating prisoners, and helping them to reintegrate into society. Bill C-10 ignores these proven facts.
2. Rush job. Instead of receiving a thorough review, Bill C-10 is being rushed through Parliament purely to meet the “100-day passage” promise from the last election. Expert witnesses attempting to comment on more than 150 pages of legislation in committee hearings are cut off mid-sentence after just five minutes.
3. Spin triumphs over substance. The federal government has chosen to take a “marketing” approach to Bill C-10, rather than explaining the facts to Canadians. This campaign misrepresents the bill’s actual content and ensures that its public support is based heavily on inaccuracies.
4. No proper inspection. Contrary to government claims, some parts of Bill C-10 have received no previous study by parliamentary committee. Other sections have been studied before and were changed — but, in Bill C-10, they’re back in their original form.
5. Wasted youth. More young Canadians will spend months in custodial centres before trial, thanks to Bill C-10. Experience has shown that at-risk youth learn or reinforce criminal behaviour in custodial centres; only when diverted to community options are they more likely to be reformed.
6. Punishments eclipse the crime. The slogan for one proposal was Ending House Arrest for Serious and Violent Criminals Act, but Bill C-10 will actually also eliminate conditional sentences for minor and property offenders and instead send those people to jail. Is roughly $100,000 per year to incarcerate someone unnecessarily a good use of taxpayers’ money?
7. Training predators. Bill C-10 would force judges to incarcerate people whose offenses and circumstances clearly do not warrant time in custody. Prison officials will have more latitude to disregard prisoners’ human rights, bypassing the least restrictive means to discipline and control inmates. Almost every inmate will re-enter society someday. Do we want them to come out as neighbours, or as predators hardened by their prison experience?
8. Justice system overload. Longer and harsher sentences will increase the strains on a justice system already at the breaking point. Courts and Crown prosecutors’ offices are overwhelmed as is, legal aid plans are at the breaking point, and police forces don’t have the resources to do their jobs properly. Bill C-10 addresses none of these problems and will make them much worse.
9. Victimizing the most vulnerable. With mandatory minimums replacing conditional sentences, people in remote, rural and northern communities will be shipped far from their families to serve time. Canada’s aboriginal people already represent up to 80 per cent of inmates in institutions in the Prairies, a national embarrassment that Bill C-10 will make worse.
10. How much money? With no reliable price tag for its recommendations, there is no way to responsibly decide the bill’s financial implications. What will Canadians sacrifice to pay for these initiatives? Will they be worth the cost?
Canadians deserve accurate information about Bill C-10, its costs and its effects. This bill will change our country’s entire approach to crime at every stage of the justice system. It represents a huge step backwards; rather than prioritizing public safety, it emphasizes retribution above all else. It’s an approach that will make us less safe, less secure, and ultimately, less Canadian.
Trinda L. Ernst is president of the Canadian Bar Association.

EMAIL EXCHANGE: KIM PATE, MYSELF, AND MP RATHGEBER

After reading the following article where MP Rathgeber was embarrassingly disrespectful to Kim Pate of the Elizabeth Fry Society.  He objected to language Ms. Pate used in describing the impacts of excessive strip searches currently forced on the female prisoners at Kitchener's prison for women.  This particular story struck home.  Not only have I been subjected to multiple strip searches but I am also aware of the deeper issues which can surround them.

Prisoners are subjected to multiple strip searches during any period of incarceration as a matter of routine and under special circumstances such as a suspected presence of drugs in the institution.
 Some guards really detest carrying out these searches, especially those which are done as a matter of routine rather than the safety of the institution.  These state employees have been known to only pretend to carry out a strip searches at these times.  Simply handing prisoners clean clothing and standing in such a way as not to be watching them dress.  At the other end of this spectrum are those guards who get off on the "power over" dynamic of such searches.  These state sanctioned abusers take their time stipping inmates, sometimes carry out the proceedure in open walkways with substantial pedestrian traffic, arrange surprise searches at odd hours with women pushed and hurded into line ups with their hands kept atop their heads or cuffed behind their backs, orders to bend, turn, and lift are carried on much more thoroughly than normal or than called for in regards to the stated purpose of locating restricted weapons and drugs..  

Most prisoners will be subjected to both ends of this spectrum and everything in between during even a minimum sentence.  Many of us cope by transforming the process into a normal routine in our minds.  Oh well, whatever kinda situation.  But its not.  Especially for those men and women who have histories of sexual abuse.

Below is the email exchange between Kim Pate, myself and MP Rathgeber, below that is the article referred to.       by sheryl jarvis
 

 

Email Exchange,Re: Supreme Court Selection Committee Work

‏

 From: SHERYL JARVIS [mailto:j-sheryl@hotmail.com]
Sent: October 8, 2011 3:08 PM
To: Cotler, Irwin - M.P.; Rathgeber, Brent - M.P.; Comartin, Joe - M.P.; Hoeppner, Candice - M.P.
Subject: re: Supreme Court Selection Committee Work

 Dear Members of Parliament

I would like thank each of you for your  dedication to Canadians through the work each of you are doing on this most important panel, the election of new members to the Supreme Court of Canada.

I would like to believe that each and every portion of this process would be given ample thought and consideration with all those present provided his or her own space to speak from their personal and professional experiences.  This after all is a fundamental aspect of what constitutes a thriving democracy.  It also happens to be included in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms:

"(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;"

I read about an incident which occurred recently where an invited guest and presenter(Kim Pate) from the Elizabeth Fry Society was disrespected for having discussed openly what is the reality for most women in prison - that is, being subjected to unnecessary strip searches which are experienced by those female prisoners as a form of sexual assault and a continuation of what has for over 80% of incarcerated women been a life time of sexual, physical, and emotional abuse.

Mr. Rathgeber how dare you claim to be speaking for survivors of sexual predators when you stated that Ms. Pate's comments were an affront to victims of such predators.  When it is common knowledge that women in prison are as a group those most often victimized sexually, emotionally and physically.

All Canadians including those imprisoned have the same fundamental rights and freedoms, especially those which necessarily protect human rights.  This of course is contrary to what you and your party would have Canadians believe when you continue to repeat media sound bites such as  “putting the rights of criminals against the rights of law-abiding Canadians”

Ms. Hoeppener, shame on you as a woman for putting the process of state sanctioned abuse of the most vulnerable women ahead of their individual Human Rights.  How very cruel!

Sincerely

sheryl jarvis
Woman, Mother, Survivor

From: brent.rathgeber.a1@parl.gc.ca
To: j-sheryl@hotmail.com
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 15:23:10 -0400
Subject: RE: Supreme Court Selection Committee Work

Dear Ms. Jarvis,

 Thank-you for your correspondence with regard to comments I made in the House of Commons regarding the Elizabeth Fry Society.

 Ms. Kim Pate recently appeared before the Public Safety Committee as a witness for the Elizabeth Fry Society.  In the course of her comments, Ms. Pate stated that strip searching inmates is tantamount to “sexual assault by the state”.  She used this phrase throughout her opening statement and in the rounds of questioning that followed. 

 I am concerned by Ms. Pate’s characterization, especially because it has no basis in fact or in law.  The Criminal Code clearly defines an assault as a non-consensual application of force and sexual assault as having an added aspect of sexual need, gratification, or sexual degradation. I only take issue with the characterization of these situations as having a “sexual” aspect. 

 While I have the utmost respect for the work the Elizabeth Fry Society and its members carry out on behalf of incarcerated women, I stand by the statements I made in the House of Commons. 

 Regards,

  Brent Rathgeber, Q.C.

Member of Parliament

Edmonton-St. Albert

Subject: Re: Supreme Court Selection Committee Work
To: j-sheryl@hotmail.com
CC: kpate@web.ca
From: caefs@web.ca
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 22:26:05 +0000

Dear Ms Jarvis,

Thank you so much for copying us on this. I am preparing some information for the Committee. Please let me know if you would also like to receive it. 
Thanks again and all the best, 
KimSent wirelessly from my BlackBerry device on the Bell network.
Envoyé sans fil par mon terminal mobile BlackBerry sur le réseau de Bell.

From: SHERYL JARVIS <j-sheryl@hotmail.com>

Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 17:48:30 -0400

To: <brent.rathgeber.a1@parl.gc.ca>

Cc: <kpate@web.ca>

Subject: RE: Supreme Court Selection Committee Work

Dear Honourable Rathgeber

The newspapers quote an MP who said that you are usually more reserved and respectful, that he was surprised to find out it was you who had made the comments to Kim Pate.  The tone of your email seems to bear that out.  However its tough to tell if you wrote it or one of your assistants did.....

You point to specific acts of law regarding the definition of sexual assault.  The problem with relying entirely on the law books is that peoples life experience's and thus their reactions to situations such as prison strip searches can not be accounted for.

The purpose of a strip search is to maintain the safety of prisoners and staff.  Tobacco is not a weapon.  The possibility of tobacco being smuggled into prison is not nearly reason enough to put prisoners, women in this case through what is for some a highly traumatic event. 

In the case of women's federal institutions these strip searches are happening regularly and persistently.  The staff are not required to strip search prisoners in order to address the question of tobacco but they do it anyways.

It is common knowledge that many prison guards chose their professions because they enjoy the "power over" dynamic.  There is for some a perverse sort of pleasure in degrading and humiliating others.

Most women who end up in prison have been sexually assaulted in their life times.  A strip search can cause a woman to relive feelings of degradation and humiliation.  Whether this is the staffs intention or not and whether it is written into law or not assault is the woman's experience.  Here again she is being ordered against her will to remove her clothing and to stand, bend, lift, and stretch her body on command for no good reason.

The truth is that many female prisoners find a way to cope with this by dissociating themselves from their bodies.  They may pretend it isn't happening, or that it is someone else standing there, or they may simply pretend to themselves that it doesn't matter, that they don't care.  In any case it does have an adverse impact on the woman's mental health.  This is just the opposite of what we should be aiming for.  

I know you may not believe these statements to be accurate or you may dismiss them as the babble of a "bleeding heart liberal", but I hope you will at least consider that perhaps there is some merit to what I say. 

Human beings, human relationships are all so very complex and often there is more than what meets the eye.  I'm sure you will at least agree with that last statement. 

thank you for continuing the conversation on this topic

sheryl
Mother, Advocate, Survivor 

---

27/10/2011

Reply  ▼

 kpate@web.​ca

To SHERYL JARVIS

Many thanks for your compelling confirmation and correspondence with Mr. Rathgeber, Sheryl. Thanks, too, for being such an articulate ally. All the best, Kim

Sent wirelessly from my BlackBerry device on the Bell network.
Envoyé sans fil par mon terminal mobile BlackBerry sur le réseau de Bell.

---

Tory MP Rathgeber refuses to apologize for criticizing director of national group devoted to helping women in prison

Democrat MP Peter Stoffer calls for Conservative MP's apology, but Brent Rathgeber says NDP 'putting the rights of criminals against the rights of law-abiding Canadians.'

Veterans Affairs Minister Steven Blaney, Defence Minister Peter MacKay and Status of Women Minister Rona Ambrose launch Women's History Month on Monday before a Tory MP crticized the Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies. (Photograph by Jake Wright)

By TIM NAUMETZ October 5, 2011

PARLIAMENT HILL—A Conservative MP who sat on a Commons advisory panel screening candidates for nomination to the Supreme Court of Canada is under fire for making a formal statement in the House sharply criticizing the director of a nationwide group devoted to helping women in prison.

Brent Rathgeber (Edmonton-St. Albert, Alberta) slammed Kim Pate, executive director of the Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies, for comments she made opposing a rise in strip searches of female Corrections Canada prisoners, describing the naked searches as “sexual assault by the state.”

Ms. Pate made the comment during testimony at the Commons Public Safety Committee the previous day, when she told MPs the strip searches are so invasive and prevalent that some women inmates have refused to have their children visit them in prison out of fear they would also be strip-searched.

She said the searches are for contraband of all kinds, including jewellery and cigarettes, and “virtually no drugs” have been found and no weapons in the searches of female prisoners, which Ms. Pate said have increased “massively” because of a recent ban on cigarettes in federal prisons.

Conservative MP Candice Hoeppner (Portage-Lisgar, Manitoba), who chaired the advisory panel screening nominees for two Supreme Court vacancies and is also a member of the Public Safety committee, also criticized Ms. Pate, after she made the comments in the committee.

Coincidentally, the third government MP on the Supreme Court panel, Robert Dechert (Mississauga-Erindale, Ontario) was recently the subject of lengthy controversy after he admitted to a series of romantic email exchanges with a Toronto-based journalist with China’s Xinhua state news agency, often accused of spying for the Chinese government.

NDP MP Peter Stoffer (Sackville-Eastern Shore, Nova Scotia) asked Mr. Rathgeber to apologize in the Commons to Ms. Pate but the Edmonton MP refused. A lawyer, Mr. Rathgeber and the other members of the panel took part in one of the most sensitive phases of the Supreme Court nomination process.

He accused Mr. Stoffer and the NDP, which had invited the Elizabeth Fry Societies to send a representative to the Public Safety Committee as part of a review of the use of drugs and alcohol in prisons, of “putting the rights of criminals against the rights of law-abiding Canadians.”

The phrase has been used repeatedly by the government and Conservative MPs to attack opposition MPs who have challenged a string of government crime bills over the past three years.

The Conservative members of the Supreme Court appointment advisory panel were all named by Prime Minister Stephen Harper (Calgary Southwest, Alberta) as he and Justice Minister Rob Nicholson (Niagara Falls, Ontario) began the reviews of candidates who will sit on the court as it braces for expected cases that could be among the most important it has heard in years.

Human rights lawyers say challenges against the omnibus crime bill, Bill C-10, the Safe Streets and Communities Bill, that the Conservative majority is currently rushing through Parliament are inevitable. They also say provincial challenges of legislation proposing to limit Senate terms severely and allow provinces to hold consultative elections on Senate appointments are also expected.

Mr. Hoeppner’s appointment as chair of the advisory panel came under scrutiny earlier because of the notoriety she won as the champion of the Conservative drive to dismantle the federal long-gun registry. Although a private member’s bill Ms. Hoeppner sponsored in the last Parliament to end the registry died in the Commons, her position on the panel was seen as a reward for the cross-country campaign she mounted.

Mr. Stoffer told The Hill Times he was astonished by Mr. Rathgeber’s attack against Ms. Pate, not only because of the group’s longstanding advocacy for women in prison, but because Mr. Rathgeber made the statement only four days into the internationally recognized Women’s History Month.

“We all have statements and if the Conservatives wish to attack the NDP or anyone else, in terms of political things, we don’t really care,” Mr. Stoffer said. “But if you’re going to attack the Elizabeth Fry Society and impugn their evidence, and impugn their motives, I think it is simply wrong.”

In the House, Mr. Stoffer said that the organization has been protecting womens' interests in the country and Mr. Rathgeber "goes after the Elizabeth Fry Society when it cannot defend itself. ... For many years it has been protecting the interests of women in this country, it has been protecting women who are incarcerated, many of whom are mentally ill and should not be in prison.”

In refusing to retract his statement, Mr. Rathgeber told the Commons: “The record from yesterday’s committee will reflect that I quoted the said society accurately and correctly, and I stand by those statements.”

Page 2 of 2

Ms. Pate told the committee the strip searches are a particularly traumatic experience for women inmates who have experienced sexual abuse and assault.

" Going back to the history of sexual abuse and physical abuse that many women have, many women find those kinds of invasive searches not just humiliating, but they become additionally punitive in terms of their histories of post traumatic stress, their histories of abuse,” she said.

NDP MP Joe Comartin (Windsor-Tecumseh, Ontario), his party’s representative on the panel, said he was surprised by what he had heard about Mr. Rathgeber’s statement.

“I’m a bit surprised it’s him, because as much as he is fairly mainstream conservative on these issues, he usually has more of a diplomatic approach,” Mr. Comartin said, suggesting it is possible the government directed Mr. Rathgeber to say what he did.

Liberal MP Irwin Cotler (Mount Royal, Quebec) cited his oath of secrecy for the panel and said he has not commented on any topic or MP associated with it.

Mr. Rathgeber told the Commons Ms. Pate’s description of strip searches as sexual assault by the state were “a slap in the face to our correctional officers, and legally dubious, it is absolutely insulting to those who have actually been victimized by a sexual predator.”

Mr. Comartin said the panel of MPs, which interviewed prospective candidates and reduced the field to a short list of six, reported the list of six to Mr. Nicholson last week. Mr. Nicholson and Mr. Harper are expected to announce the final two nominees next week.

tnaumetz@hilltimes.com

Safe Streets and Communities Act - Speaker's Forum Summary

Organizing with Anti-Oppression in Mind

As organizers for the event we were cognizant of the fact that our speakers should be representative of those most likely to be impacted by the conservative crime agenda. We wanted to ensure that we heard from women, aboriginal peoples, and other people of colour, as well as those who have already been criminalized and have “done time”.

While I had my concerns along the way about how successful we would be in this part of our endeavour. Tuesday was a testament to, I believe, our success.

Tuesday night was a success. All our speakers turned up, had important points to make and engaged the audience (of 225 people) by answering their questions directly. In this way our format was a little different than many speakers forums I have attended. The audience had a chance to submit written questions which were then passed to our moderator and put directly to the speakers.

Gladue

We heard from a really lovely, intelligent, young, aboriginal woman named Krysta Williams from the Native Youth Sexual Health Network. Krysta reminded us about the optimism many felt when we as a society made the progressive and extremely warranted move to institute what became known as Gladue courts. Gladue was intended to ensure that sentencing judges take the context of vulnerable, usually minority persons lives into account. One of the main intentions for its use is to reflect the ongoing effects of colonization in sentencing aboriginal men and women.

Unfortunately Gladue is not being used nearly as frequently as it should be and only a few cities have instituted separate Gladue courts. Krysta warned that Bill C10 will be at serious conflict with Gladue particularly where mandatory minimums are concerned. If a judge must give a minimum sentence that fact in and of itself conflicts with the stipulations in Gladue and how they are to be considered.

The Native Youth Sexual Health Network  www.nativeyouthsexualhealth.com

For Information on Gladue: http://www.turtleisland.org/news/news-gladue.htm

The Native Women's Association of Canada at www.nwac.ca

National Film Board Native Canadian Projects http://www3.nfb.ca/enclasse/doclens/visau/index.php?mode=theme&language=english&theme=30662&film=16933&excerpt=612109&submode=about&expmode=2

The Revolving Door of the Drug War

Greg Simmons has spent 14 years of his life traversing the dark corridor's of Canada's prisons. He is a survivor of the drug war. Greg like most of us who have used drugs in a manner disruptive to our lives, did what many of us do to support our habits...he sold drugs to other drug users. Greg had an interesting take on the effects of longer, tougher sentences on the choices law breakers will make. He suggested that many will become more reckless. This is not the first time I have heard this refrain from so called career criminals. My ex of 13 years spent many years in and out of the system as well. I recall hearing that sediment from him and from other guys with similar histories as his. “If the sentence is going to be harsh then I will avoid it at all costs and if they are to take me out, I will go down with a vengeance.”

Greg also expressed repeatedly his concern for victims of violent crime and championed restorative justice programs as opposed to prison or in addition to at sentencing. He spoke of the need for healing on both sides of the equation. The victim or survivor and the prisoner.

Greg is both client and volunteer at PASAN – the Prisoner HIV/AIDS Support Action Network. www.pasan.org

Giving Victims a Voice?

We also heard from Steve Sullivan, the inaugural Federal Victims Ombudsman from 2007-2010. Steve began by noting the unlikeliness of the panelists sitting together Tuesday evening. He went on to say that in beginning the ombudsman position he felt the way many Canadians do – lock em up and throw away the key – Restorative programs are soft on crime and have no place in addressing violence. If the conservatives had their way we would all believe that victims and their advocates want nothing more than to see law breakers, especially those committing violent acts locked away forever with no rehabilitation or treatment. However many victims feel excluded, even silenced by traditional justice practices. Many don't want to see anyone jailed in their name, particularly without any voice in the matter. And most victims are never provided the support they need to move forward.

What changed Steve's mind was what he was hearing from the victims who had gone through a program of restoration. They were talking about healing. This was far different from what he was accustomed to hearing from those who had gone through a traditional court process. Many of those victims felt unheard and when they did feel included it was satisfying that someone was being held to account but healing was never mentioned.

Despite what some believe, restorative justice unlike traditional justice, promotes the need in people to accept true responsibility and to hold themselves to account. In fact what could be more real than facing the person you have hurt. One to one, face to face, confronting how you have impacted their life.

While I don't agree with everything Steve has to say about what we must do to stop victimization I do believe he is on the right track. Most importantly he uses his brain and seeks the truth as opposed to ideology.

Steve's blog can be found here. http://advocateforvictims.blogspot.com/

To learn more about restorative programs in Canada go to http://www.sfu.ca/cfrj/

HIV and HCV - Coerced Contraction

We also heard from Pat Allard, Deputy Director of Research and Policy at the Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network. The Network has long championed the plight of those with HIV/AIDS or at risk of contracting the virus. This includes those drug users who in Canada are sentenced to jails and prisons which refuse to provide harm reduction services and equipment. This stance ignores the fact that people are addicted and not in complete control of addictive compulsions. These two pieces combined leave people in a position where they are vulnerable to sharing scarce injection paraphernalia and more likely to contract HIV and/or HCV.

This in fact was my situation. I have HCV and am lucky not to have contracted HIV. There are everyday consequences which are ongoing in my life and that of my children. From health to financial to emotional.

Prisoners and Family

Pat reminded us to remember that those people we lock away are assets to their families, both financially and emotionally. The vast majority of them are parents, whose children also need to be considered.

I would ask you to consider too that most children which to remain with their parents. Separating them causes the most severe trauma. And later consequences often far outweigh any harm the parent may have caused society initially.

Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network: www.aidslaw.ca

Families and Corrections Canada Resource http://www.cfcn-rcafd.org/text/cfcn.html#story1

Sensible Drug Policy - Youth

We also heard from Caleb Chepesiuk from Canadian Students for Sensible Drug Policy. Caleb and I have collaborated and/or run into one another around a number of similar events which seek to educate others around drug policy, harm reduction, and this crazy conservative law and order agenda. I've come to know Caleb as a thoughtful and intelligent activist who is quick to realize the connections between the anti drug war, and anti poverty movements.

Caleb is a true advocate for the young. He knows many are at risk of being caught up in certain elements of this Bill C10. The conservatives claim that C10 will protect our kids from drug dealers but in reality it will actually transform the act of sharing a joint or passing a pill into trafficking, thus transforming our kids into drug dealers. Convictions of this sort will see them doing prison time.

Canadian Students for Sensible Drug Policy http://www.cssdp.org/

Sensible Drug Policy – Expert Analyst’s

Eugene Oscapella, a lawyer, professor, and founder of the Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy agreed with Caleb about the effects this Bill will have on students. Eugenie’s expertise is in policy around issues such as privacy, human rights, illicit drugs, national security, and criminal justice. Eugene told us that Bill C10 will potentially see as many as 80% of his students criminalized, with 10-20% of them at risk for imprisonment.

He used the example of a group of college kids at a party. He told us that those who share a tab of Ecstasy or Ketamine (special K) could see up to two years in prison under provisions targeting those who “traffic” (which includes sharing or passing drugs). Particularly if this occurs near a school, or in a place normally frequented by youth. Those most likely to be targeted by these provisions which could in some cases see mandatory prison terms of 3-5 years are other youth. Youth associate with youth. The dark stranger on the corner wont be the guy dealing to our kids, the best friend from grade school very well could be.

Canadian Foundation for Drug Policy. www.cfdp.ca

Impacting Canadian Families: Law and Order Ideology

Introduction

The Conservative government has introduced no less than 16 crime Bills into parliament since 2007 under their “Law and Order” regime.  Those Bills that did not pass before the recent federal election are sure to be rolled out in the new omnibus multi law Bill.  Many towns and communities having bought into the myth[1] that a prison will increase job growth and benefit the local economy, have applied to the government to have prison’s built in their towns.  The Northern Development Initiative (NDI) trust and the City of Terrace, B.C., in researching the cost efficacy of building and running a prison in that town have estimated that there will be a 70% increase in the Canadian prisoner population if just 3 of these Bills are passed into law.  One might ask who these new prisoners will be, where they will come from, and how much locking them up will cost the tax payer.  Just one of these Bills, Bill C-25 (elimination of 2 for 1 in pre-trial custody[2] and now passed into law) will cost the tax payer over $2 billion to implement and another $618 million annually to maintain (Page, K., Parliamentary Budget Officer, 2010).  While these costs are shocking they refer to only 1 of 16 crime bills likely to be re-introduced under the Harper regimes omnibus crime Bill.  The human costs are what we should be most concerned about.  The impact on Canadian families will be devastating, not only to those affected directly through criminal records and incarceration, but on all of us through diversion of money into the prison system from social programs.

“The increase in costs to operate prisons will draw funds away from social programs, like those addressing improved education, health care, child poverty, drug treatment and employment programs which reduce crime” (Craig Jones, Director of the John Howard Society). 

Approximately 40% of the current adult male prison population are fathers and over 77% of the female prison population are mothers.  2/3rds of the mom’s were sole support parents at the time of their arrest.  In 2003/04 there were 358,350 admissions to the federal, provincial and territorial adult correctional systems, of which women accounted for about 10%.  This was an increase of 50% over the previous decade.  Nearly 5% of Canadian children had at least one parent in prison in 2003/04.  All of these numbers have been steadily increasing over the last 30 years, even as our crime rate reach’s a 32 year low.  If the omnibus Bill is legislated into law and it is sure to pass with the conservatives holding a majority of seats, the number of people in prison will explode.  The adult prisoner population will increase to a minimum of 609,195 women and men.  The numbers of children affected by parental incarceration will increase to 809, 620 or 10% of all Canadian children, an entirely unacceptable future for Canadian families. (Cunningham, A., Baker, L., 2003; Withers, L., & Folsom, J., 2007).

 “When thee builds a prison, thee had better build with the thought ever in thy mind that thee and thy children may occupy the cells.” — Elizabeth Fry 1780 – 1845

---

[1] American statistics have shown that when a prison is contracted for building, the builders are most often brought in from out of town.  This happens because out of town builders may already have a contract with the state to build prisons or have prior experience or are able to offer a more competitive rate than a smaller, local contracting firm could.  The construction jobs worth the highest pay’s will be awarded to current employee’s of the contractor and not offered to locals.

The positions for guards and other staff will first be offered to existing government staff.  If there are positions open at all they will be the lower paying ones.

Positions for jobs in the laundry, kitchen, etc will be performed for free by the prisoners, not given to town’s people.

[2] Pre-trial custody or “remand” as it is referred has historically offered prisoners 1.5-2 days for every one day spent in remand.  This is because the prisoners have not yet been tried or convicted and many will not be convicted at all.  Other reasons for this additional credit are the harsh conditions of overcrowded, maximum security settings people are held in without access to programming such as addictions treatment and employment training which are available to sentenced prisoners.