 |
 |
Paul thanks for this - v useful indeed, and i'll think on how it folds into the paper a key ponit i pick up is your celebration of belligerence so much of the grant funding stuff is about 'partnership' and consenus, and of course radical social change, of the type that my Trust pretends to advocate with one breath and then militates against with the next (the one that's to do with the money spending), is not about consensus, it IS about challenge - or zero sum power shifts rather than postive sum proposals-for-the-status-quo. specfically re SUG - I've have a look and a think....the example throws some of the options for a Trust-to-be (I hope) into sharp relief, which is exacty what you intended p "The UK Community Psychology Discussion List" <[log in to unmask]> writes: >This is a message in reply to Paul Cotterill's call for help with spending >a Trust fund. I was going to send my message straight to Paul, but then I >thought others on this list might need/want to hear about SUG. > >Paul, well done for speaking up at the board of trustees meeting. >Remarkable how radical sympathisers are out there in the most unexpected >places. Your posting made me think of SUG. > >Seroxat User Group (SUG) ([ http://www.seroxatusergroup.org.uk/ >]http://www.seroxatusergroup.org.uk/) are a small, largely underfunded >(surviving on just a couple of hundred pounds a year from private >donations) organisation that supports people who have experienced ill >effects from taking Seroxat (an SSRI anti-depressant) and seeks to ensure >people are provided with adequate information on all the possible effects >of taking the drug before they receive their perscription. As well as >offering support to Seroxat users/survivors, the group is simultaneously >seeking to take legal action against the drug manufacturer >(GlaxoSmithKline). The legal action concerns GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)'s >witholding of clinical data that showed the company knew about Seroxat's >toxic effects (including increased incidence of violent thoughts and >behaviour towards self and others) and lack of clinical efficacy (performs >no better than placebo in treating 'psychiatric conditions'). Moreoever, >SUG are working to hold the government to account for not adequately >protecting the public against GSK. > >Some of you who are based in the UK may remember a couple of BBC Panorama >programmes on GSK and Serxoat. For those who haven't seen the programmes, >you can view a 6min YouTube synopsis at [ >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WA7NrWdlMSE >]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WA7NrWdlMSE or access the whole >documentary from a link on the SUG website [[ >http://www.seroxatusergroup.org.uk/ ]http://www.seroxatusergroup.org.uk/]. > >Thus, SUG are trying to take legal action against GSK both through taking >out private citizen class action suits (which is difficult following the >changes to Legal Aid in the UK that mean pro bono legal support is now >much harder to obtain for those wanting to litigate against multi-national >corporations) and through the government's Medicine and Health Care >Products Regulatory Agency [MHRA] (which is difficult because MHRA have >ties with the Department of Trade and Industry (now known as the Dept. for >Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform) whose remit is to ensure the UK >is a good place for companies like GSK to do business. Indeed, the MHRA >legal investigation into GSK (MHRA were in effect forced into conducting a >legal investigation following successful legal action in the USofA taken >against GSK over the withholding of clinical data on Seroxat [aka Paxil] ) >has now been running for over four years. MHRA have told SUG that they >will not publically disclose the nature of the investigation nor >publically disclose when (if!) the investigation might reach a conclusion. > >Considering the massively powerful corporation they are confronting (GSK), >it is remarkable how SUG have survived for as long as they have. Indeed, >perhaps it is because SUG are taking on such a powerful, highly >litigious multi-national pharmaceutical corporation that it is virtually >impossible for them to get funding or government support. > >Paul, I wonder if the funding you mention could be used to help such hard >to fund organisations that are seeking social justice through holding >corporations and government to account for state-corporate created and >supported crime and social harm (ie., such groups are hard to fund because >they are confronting head-on very powerful organisations whose tentacles >of patronage and influence run long and deep into our economic, political >and judicial systems). I am not pleading a special case for the Seroxat >User Group (actually, that's a lie, I actually am because because I really >believe in this group and desparately want to find support for them) but I >thought it might be useful for you when you are writing up your paper - >i.e., gives a concrete example of a group that is radical by virtue of >being beligerent in pursuing it's agenda for social justice in the face of >being crushed by an extremely powerful multinational corporation (e.g., >GSK's pre-tax profits for the second quarter of 2007 was 1.89 billion >pounds). Moreover, it is a group that has been left largely unprotected by >governmental institutions (that are supposed to provide its citizens with >statutory protection against harm) perhaps because of the degree to >which this group's call for social justice threatens the economic and >political status quo (challenging government institutions that pursue an >agenda concerned with expanding UK economic growth and interests at the >expense of local and global social justice). In this regard, though those >who organise SUG do not identify themselves as radicals, SUG's activities >and aims are among the most radical and socially progressive I have come >across in my short life as a critical and community psychologist. > >p > > >Paul Duckett >Division of Psychology and Social Change >Manchester Metropolitan University >England >Phone +44 161 247 2552 >Fax +44 161 247 6364 >email: [ mailto:[log in to unmask] ][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]