 |
 |
Hi Everyone can I also add to Paul's reply that there are a number of international members on the list who might or might not want to be 'co-opted' as signatories - Paul makes the appoint that they might not fully appreciate the list they have joined but this I think is a case of buyer (or subscriber) beware. If a person chooses to join a network then he or she should spend some time 'listening' to the conversations contained on that list and examine the positions being put forward. there is no secret that the UK list is more political that the Australian version for instance and therefore it doesn't take long for anyone to be able to decide whether to stay or leave. From a personal perspective I fully support your initiative and would welcome the chance to be part of a network that is willing (and able) to respond in such a critical manner. Once (if) the network becomes part of a larger, more dominant collective that freedom and flexibility will be reduced. Having said that you also g ain access to the larger dominant collective in order to exert pressure from within. Dawn ____________________________________ Dawn Darlaston-Jones, PhD Lecturer Behavioural Science School of Arts & Sciences University of Notre Dame 19 Mouat Street (PO Box 1225) FREMANTLE Western Australia WA 6959 Tel: +61 8 9433 0567 Fax: +61 8 9433 0544 e-mail [log in to unmask] CRICOS Code 01032F IMPORTANT: This e-mail and any attachments may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient you should not disclose, copy, disseminate or otherwise use the information contained in it. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by return e-mail and delete or destroy the document. Confidential and legal privilege are not waived or lost by reason of mistaken delivery to you. The University of Notre Dame Australia is not responsible for any changes made to a document other than those made by the University. Before opening or using attachments please check them for viruses and defects. Our liability is limited to re-supplying any affected attachments. ----- Original Message ----- From : "Paul@home" <[log in to unmask]> Date: Tuesday, October 16, 2007 6:18 am Subject : [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] CPUK ... who? > Dear List, > > I agree with the critical stance we are taking towards CBT and > support the > forthcoming statement. I see no reason to include a positive > psychologyposition in the statement as positive psychology does > little other than > de-radicalise the issues involved. > > As to the question of whether a reply should be sent with a series of > co-signatories or whether it can be sent on behalf of the list, I > wouldprefer the latter (because I think that carries more political > weight, is > more collectivist than individualist and also because some members > may be > rendered vulnerable by becoming a co-signatory - particularly when the > statement is critical of those who have more power than us)- but > there are a > number of issues we might have to face, and perhaps the fact we > have yet to > face them means we can't issue such statements: > > a) are we happy that there are no formal structures in place to ensure > network members can be represented by statements issued by the > network?b) when people join the CPUK network/list, do they know > what they are > joining? > > One suggestion considered at the recent CPUK conference in York was to > transform our network into a community collective (similar to a > workers'collective). We have also had the first tentative steps > taken by the > participants at the Birmingham meeting to start defining who we (the > network) are in terms of setting our a blueprint of our core values > andconcerns. > > If we were to formally organise our network into a collective we > could,among other things, deccide to appoint a group who could act > as our > spokespeople for a period of time and act as media contact points > betweenour network and the mass media. There may be other reasons > why we might > consider formalising our network: > > 1) We already have formal structures, but these are usually arranged > informally (e.g., conference organising committees). > > 2) If CP becomes recognised by the British Psychological Society (BPS) > [www.bps.org.uk], the BPS could become our 'parent' organisation in > so far > as we might become subsumed by their rules and regulations. At the > Yorkconference, some delegates wanted to make any future BPS community > psychology section subservient to the CPUK network rather than the > CPUKnetwork subservient to it. To accomplish this, we might need > our own rules, > regulations etc. > > 3) A number of formal decisions have been made at UKCP conferences > (such as > joining the BPS, making statements on poverty etc). At present > these remain > decisions made by UKCP conference delegates rather than the CP > network.Though these decisions affect the network, it is not clear > how they can > presently be decided by the network. > > 4) The European Community Psychology Association is now a formal, > legallyrecognised organisation. We now have the opportunity to > affiliate as an > organisation to ECPA (as well as to other [more] progressive, > liberatorysocial movements and organisations). > > 5) We might find that we are increasingly joined on our list and at > ourconferences by those who do not share some of our basic concerns > as critical > and community psychologists. While we would not want to exclude > anyone or be > overly authoritarian, we should perhaps give everyone some warning > as to how > contributions might be received (I.e., if a meat eater goes to dine > at a > Vegetarian restaurant, they should know that they won't be eating > meat, and > might offend some by requesting to). > > The Birmingham meeting's tentative vision for the CPUK network in > terms of > priority areas for our attention and the network's core values and > concernsis summarised below. As far as I can tell, this material > has received no > collective response from our network since it was posted on the > list several > months ago. It was intended to help generate discussion. Is it time > (givenour apparent struggle to make a formal response on behalf of > our network to > the government's misanthropic funding of CBT) that we start > considering it, > start deciding who we are and what we stand for and perhaps look > ahead to > the next UKCP conference to find ways of formally constituting > ourselves as > an organisation that is radical in its agenda, representative of its > members, responsible to the oppressed and the exploited and forever > readyand willing to act to ensure the world's resources are most > equitably shared > and our institutions are more socially just? Might we need to do > this soon, > before we get our teeth knocked out again by local, national and > globalevents that leave us once again scrambling for the collective > voice of UK > community psychologists? > > p > > Birmingham Meeting outcome: > > Priority Areas > > > 1.. War and Imperialism > 2.. Sites of counter-system resistance > 3.. Action on global warming/environment > 4.. Public services/Privatisation of the NHS > The Birmingham meeting came up with some policy/positioning > statements in > relation to each of these which were sent out to the network for > debate. > > The Birmingham meeting also identified some core values for the UKCP > network: > > Core values and concerns of Community Psychology > > > > We are people with an interest in community psychology, who try to: > > > > a.. Consider 'in whose interests it is that this should be > believed',which emphasises the importance of critical thinking > b.. Take action to promote the interests of those who are > oppressed by > inequalities of power and economics, including those oppressed by > capitalisteconomic systems and globalisation > c.. Believe in the power of the oppressed to overturn oppression > d.. Recognise, appreciate and draw on individuals' and communities' > strengths, resources and resilience > e.. Be non-pathologising > f.. Promote social and economic justice > g.. Understand and take account of context > h.. Celebrate, value and respect diversity and multi-culturalism, > andstrive for a society that does so > i.. Emphasise relationships and connections between people above > individualism > j.. Take a stance against overvaluing competitive individualism > k.. Encourage the value of shared and collective achievement > l.. Recognise and appreciate the inter-dependence that allows > individualsand communities to flourish > m.. Emphasise the importance of compassion > > Paul Duckett > Division of Psychology and Social Change > Manchester Metropolitan University > England > Phone +44 161 247 2552 > Fax +44 161 247 6364 > email: [log in to unmask] > > ___________________________________ > COMMUNITYPSYCHUK - The discussion list for community psychology in > the UK. > To unsubscribe or to change your details visit the website: > http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/COMMUNITYPSYCHUK.HTML > For any problems or queries, contact the list moderator Rebekah > Pratt on [log in to unmask] or Grant Jeffrey on > [log in to unmask] > > ___________________________________ COMMUNITYPSYCHUK - The discussion list for community psychology in the UK. To unsubscribe or to change your details visit the website: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/COMMUNITYPSYCHUK.HTML For any problems or queries, contact the list moderator Rebekah Pratt on [log in to unmask] or Grant Jeffrey on [log in to unmask]