Norman Strange on Campaign Against Psychiatric Oppression (CAPO)

CAPO READDRESSED: YES, THE STRUGGLE IS WORTHWHILE

After reading issue 24 of the Southwark Mind Newsletter I felt the need to comment on the article entitled The History and Philosophy of the "Survivor Movement." Having been involved in the Survivor Movement since 1980 when I joined PROMPT, I feel the need to set a few facts straight.

First I would like to correct a date. CAPO was formed in early 1985, not 19S3 as stated in the article. CAPO was in fact PROMPT carrying on with a new name.
Secondly it saddens me to hear Peter Campbell accusing CAPO of being separatist. Over the years these accusations have done much harm. When I first became involved with PROMPT it did seem like it was us against the world. National MIND was dominated by mental health professionals and was very supportive of KCT. Is it any wonder that we felt suspicion of what was going on around us? However, we did a lot of valuable work to reach people, like campaigning on the streets. Hard and sometimes punishing work, but work that I personally feel was worthwhile. Also our constant criticism and challenging of National MIND helped to pave the way for survivor involvement in MIND. And we also helped to pave the way for Survivors Speak Out. Our uninvited presence at the MIND Mental Health 2000 conference in Brighton in the summer of 19S5 was part of the inspiration behind the formation of Survivors Speak Out.

It's true that when Survivors Speak Out started there were differences of opinion that took place on both sides. At the time some of these differences seemed unsolvable. But during the late 1980s I did a lot to bridge the gap, including joining Survivors Speak Out. PROMPT and CAPO were part of what was once called the International Anti-Psychiatry Network. Names change as time goes on. Such a term would no longer be considered relevant. At the time, it meant trying to set up alternatives outside of the system. We had contacts in other countries, the principle links being in Holland and parts of America. By 1S96 these groups were disbanding as some people went off to work with mental health professionals while some people opposed this. The same thing was happening in this country. CAPO stuck to its principles. This unfortunately meant that we became quite isolated. One can be too suspicious or perhaps sceptical of change. But there will be differences between the old broom and the new broom.

I also feel concerned about the suggestion that we spent too much time arguing about philosophical and ideological issues. We were very concerned about how medical terminology undermines and discredits someone's life experience. Our aim was to replace this terminology with everyday language. In this, giving validity to people's life experiences and feelings of injustice. This to me makes common sense, as we always felt that our life experiences are the reason that we end up in these oppressive situations. Another point that I feel I need to mention here is the PROMPT and CAPO fund-raising benefits and the poetry magazines that we produced alongside our campaigning literature. I have always played them down because they always overshadowed the other work that we did. But they gave voice to and brought together many survivor poets. They were also an inspiration to the original Survivors Poetry. This was not in any way separatist.
There were weaknesses and CAPO had its weaknesses as no doubt did Survivors Speak Out. We were perhaps sometimes sceptical of new ideas. But so was SSO sometimes sceptical of some of the old ideas. However I see my involvement in the Survivor Movement as having been one of learning and I can see how some of our ideas have influenced the Survivor Movement in recent years.

During the 1990s I made various attempts to get CAPO up and running as the powerful campaigning group that it always set out to be. In 1995, it nearly took off, but was sadly sabotaged by the pessimism of certain people who came to meetings, somehow trying to banish CAPO to the past. I realize now that CAPO doesn't fit in with the Survivor Movement as it now stands. I myself feel out of touch with the current day Survivor Movement. While I will still give my support to demonstrations and days of action that take place, I feel I belong to a Survivor Movement from the past that no longer seems relevant. But I will continue to communicate my views on mental health issues through poetry, and perhaps when you are reading to non-survivor audiences this will have value, as perhaps someone in the audience will think about what you are saying. However I hope the above piece of writing helps to clarify the role CAPO played in the Survivor Movement of the 1980s and creates a better understanding. It makes a mockery of be hard work we did to dismiss us as separatists.

One last thing before I sign off. This concerns the Johnny Haliperidol column which for me often spoils an otherwise excellent magazine, with its unnecessary swipes at other people. I refer here to issue No.22 of the Southwark Mind Newsletter and his poking fun at a certain Barney Rubble. We are not all going to agree or get on, but the issue of terminology shouldn't me made a mockery of.

Having come from a Survivor Movement where we sought to replace the medical terminology with plain English, it saddens me deeply to see this issue made fun of. I believe that many survivors are currently making links with the disability movement. A movement that is continuously attacking negative terminology and replacing it with plain English to fight for a strong voice. If we are going to keep reclaiming all the negative terminology from the past it is surely going to put us into a submissive role within the disability movement, and is going to set the Survivor Movement back into the past. I personally disagree with Mad Pride's plans to reclaim all the old terminology.

I am afraid that for me Johnny Haliperidol often comes across as being intimidating and not the sort of person that I would like to have a disagreement with. We are all in this struggle together. So I suggest he tries to listen to Barney Rubble, he might find that Barney has some valid points to make.

Norman Strange.

	\| home \| Survivor articles and Opinion \| Peter Campbell on the Survivor Movement \| A response from Donnard White \| Norman Strange on Campaign Against Psychiatric Oppression (CAPO)
	Norman Strange on Campaign Against Psychiatric Oppression (CAPO) CAPO READDRESSED: YES, THE STRUGGLE IS WORTHWHILE After reading issue 24 of the Southwark Mind Newsletter I felt the need to comment on the article entitled The History and Philosophy of the "Survivor Movement." Having been involved in the Survivor Movement since 1980 when I joined PROMPT, I feel the need to set a few facts straight. First I would like to correct a date. CAPO was formed in early 1985, not 19S3 as stated in the article. CAPO was in fact PROMPT carrying on with a new name. Secondly it saddens me to hear Peter Campbell accusing CAPO of being separatist. Over the years these accusations have done much harm. When I first became involved with PROMPT it did seem like it was us against the world. National MIND was dominated by mental health professionals and was very supportive of KCT. Is it any wonder that we felt suspicion of what was going on around us? However, we did a lot of valuable work to reach people, like campaigning on the streets. Hard and sometimes punishing work, but work that I personally feel was worthwhile. Also our constant criticism and challenging of National MIND helped to pave the way for survivor involvement in MIND. And we also helped to pave the way for Survivors Speak Out. Our uninvited presence at the MIND Mental Health 2000 conference in Brighton in the summer of 19S5 was part of the inspiration behind the formation of Survivors Speak Out. It's true that when Survivors Speak Out started there were differences of opinion that took place on both sides. At the time some of these differences seemed unsolvable. But during the late 1980s I did a lot to bridge the gap, including joining Survivors Speak Out. PROMPT and CAPO were part of what was once called the International Anti-Psychiatry Network. Names change as time goes on. Such a term would no longer be considered relevant. At the time, it meant trying to set up alternatives outside of the system. We had contacts in other countries, the principle links being in Holland and parts of America. By 1S96 these groups were disbanding as some people went off to work with mental health professionals while some people opposed this. The same thing was happening in this country. CAPO stuck to its principles. This unfortunately meant that we became quite isolated. One can be too suspicious or perhaps sceptical of change. But there will be differences between the old broom and the new broom. I also feel concerned about the suggestion that we spent too much time arguing about philosophical and ideological issues. We were very concerned about how medical terminology undermines and discredits someone's life experience. Our aim was to replace this terminology with everyday language. In this, giving validity to people's life experiences and feelings of injustice. This to me makes common sense, as we always felt that our life experiences are the reason that we end up in these oppressive situations. Another point that I feel I need to mention here is the PROMPT and CAPO fund-raising benefits and the poetry magazines that we produced alongside our campaigning literature. I have always played them down because they always overshadowed the other work that we did. But they gave voice to and brought together many survivor poets. They were also an inspiration to the original Survivors Poetry. This was not in any way separatist. There were weaknesses and CAPO had its weaknesses as no doubt did Survivors Speak Out. We were perhaps sometimes sceptical of new ideas. But so was SSO sometimes sceptical of some of the old ideas. However I see my involvement in the Survivor Movement as having been one of learning and I can see how some of our ideas have influenced the Survivor Movement in recent years. During the 1990s I made various attempts to get CAPO up and running as the powerful campaigning group that it always set out to be. In 1995, it nearly took off, but was sadly sabotaged by the pessimism of certain people who came to meetings, somehow trying to banish CAPO to the past. I realize now that CAPO doesn't fit in with the Survivor Movement as it now stands. I myself feel out of touch with the current day Survivor Movement. While I will still give my support to demonstrations and days of action that take place, I feel I belong to a Survivor Movement from the past that no longer seems relevant. But I will continue to communicate my views on mental health issues through poetry, and perhaps when you are reading to non-survivor audiences this will have value, as perhaps someone in the audience will think about what you are saying. However I hope the above piece of writing helps to clarify the role CAPO played in the Survivor Movement of the 1980s and creates a better understanding. It makes a mockery of be hard work we did to dismiss us as separatists. One last thing before I sign off. This concerns the Johnny Haliperidol column which for me often spoils an otherwise excellent magazine, with its unnecessary swipes at other people. I refer here to issue No.22 of the Southwark Mind Newsletter and his poking fun at a certain Barney Rubble. We are not all going to agree or get on, but the issue of terminology shouldn't me made a mockery of. Having come from a Survivor Movement where we sought to replace the medical terminology with plain English, it saddens me deeply to see this issue made fun of. I believe that many survivors are currently making links with the disability movement. A movement that is continuously attacking negative terminology and replacing it with plain English to fight for a strong voice. If we are going to keep reclaiming all the negative terminology from the past it is surely going to put us into a submissive role within the disability movement, and is going to set the Survivor Movement back into the past. I personally disagree with Mad Pride's plans to reclaim all the old terminology. I am afraid that for me Johnny Haliperidol often comes across as being intimidating and not the sort of person that I would like to have a disagreement with. We are all in this struggle together. So I suggest he tries to listen to Barney Rubble, he might find that Barney has some valid points to make. Norman Strange.