For the Record

MarieCo Research Services
1143 East Pender Street
Vancouver, BC Canada

November 8, 2011
Dr. Jeanette Takamura, Dean,
School Of Social Work
1255 Amsterdam Ave
6th Floor Mail. Code: 4600
New York NY 10027

Dear Dr. Takamura:
This letter is to express my concern about the 2010 Capstone Project and the total disregard of Ms Eli Painted Crow’s rights.  It was my understanding that academic institutions of the calibre and prestige of Columbia University would have a rigorous and mandatory ethics review policy in place.  If you do have such a policy in place, why wasn’t if followed in this instance.  Not only did you fail to receive Ms Painted Crows informed consent, the “data” was gleaned from the perspective of a third party, Helen Benedict. 

Veterans, and especially women veterans, have enough to deal with when they return to civilian life without my fellow academics disregarding their rights as human beings.  Most troubling to me is the possibility that your institution is lax on ethics procedures when it comes to minority and or vulnerable populations.  The Tuskegee Experiment is a prime example of where such deviations from ethics policies can lead. 

At the University of British Columbia (UBC) any research conducted by faculty, emeritus faculty, staff, sessional instructors, clinical professors, administrators, students, visiting or adjunct scholars, fellows, paid or unpaid associates and any other person associated with research at the University must be approved by the ethics review board.  The UBC Ethics Policy states:

All research involving human subjects should be conducted ethically in ways that protect individual subjects and respect their dignity and rights. …It is the intention of the University to ensure that, where a human subject is involved in research:
• respect is shown for the dignity of research subjects;
• selection of subjects is fair;
• vulnerable persons are protected against abuse, exploitation and discrimination;
• standards for privacy and confidentiality are observed with respect to access, control and dissemination of personal information;
• the ethics review process is fair and effectively independent of the University’s other academic and administrative decision-making processes;
• foreseeable harms will not outweigh the anticipated benefits;

The 2010 Capstone Project failed ethical standards on several of the points listed above.  Although the people interviewed for Benedict’s books signed releases for the research she was doing, this release did not automatically transfer to anyone who reads the book.  How beneficial is it to “diagnose” and prescribe treatment for a person by seeing them through another person’s eyes.  Research such as this can hardly be called “rigorous”. 

In closing, respect for fellow human beings should be the hallmark of any socially conscious research.  The lack of respect for and the potential harm done to Ms Painted Crow far outweigh any possible benefit this project could claim.  Further, racism in this instance is highly suggested by your actions.  As a researcher and academic of colour, I urge you to apply your ethics review policy equitably.  If you don’t have one, institute one immediately and make it mandatory for all research involving human subjects.

Sincerely,
 
Dr. Victoria Marie, Director (retired)
MarieCo Research Services

CC: Dr. Marion Riedel,
  Professor of Professional Practice,
  School Of Social Work

I understand the "public persona" situation, however, that does not take away your rights under "human research laws" pursuant to the Declaration of Helsinki and/or The Belmont Report. Public speaking has little to nothing to do with research criteria. Don't let one thing confuse the other.

Gosh, Eli, I am so sorry you are going through this....

Much love, Terez

I assume someone has written to the Provost. In reviewing the Columbia University administration, I came across this regarding the Provost:

Claude M. Steele is the 21st provost of Columbia University, as well as a professor of psychology. He is recognized as a leader in the field of social psychology and for his commitment to the systematic application of social science to problems of major societal significance. His research focuses on the psychological experience of the individual and, particularly, on the experience of threats to the self and the consequences of those threats.

Bruce

Sent: Friday, To: jtakamura@columbia.edu; provost@columbia.edu; ,
Cc: Daigo Shima; Adrienne Carey Hurley, Prof
Subject: Regarding Ms. Eli Painted Crow, Prof. Helen Benedict and the School of Social Work

Dear Dean Takamura, Assistant Dean Yoshioka, and Provost Steele,

My name is Brent Lue and I recently received word of a particularly offensive capstone project assigned by the Columbia University School of Social Work from my mentor, Adrienne Hurley, an activist and professor at McGill University. In particular, I (and many others) couldn’t help but be outraged when we heard that Ms. Eli Painted Crow (a Native American veteran and the subject of this particular capstone project) was to be “diagnosed” by students using only the limited testimony recorded and penned by Prof. Benedict in her 2009 book, The Lonely Soldier. Furthermore, I am appalled to hear that part of this final project required posters of Ms. Painted Crow’s image and name be created so as to promote these so-called “interventions”, all without her consent.

I am neither a legal scholar nor an expert on the mental health approach taken by Social Work, but I am not blind to what is right and wrong. And as both a survivor of sexual assault and as someone who has received the generous help of mental health professionals in my own healing process, I am sincerely baffled by this project’s pedagogical approach to “diagnosis” and Prof. Benedict’s grievous violation of the trust graciously offered to her by Ms. Painted Crow. Though I have only been a patient and never a physician myself, I have come to embrace a firm belief that mutual communication between therapist and patient is at the core of competent mental healthcare. As such, I fail to see how coercing students to “diagnose” a living trauma survivor--using solely the written testimony recorded by Prof. Benedict--is invaluable in training them to help and treat real, dynamic people with feelings, emotions, dignity and intelligence who can freely communicate both their sufferings and strengths.

Frankly, the single-sided approach to diagnosis emphasized by this project seems to have more in common with telephone psychics, online Viagra prescriptions, and selling copies of Prof. Benedict’s books than really helping anyone here. Furthermore, I will go ahead and venture to say that this project’s insistence that Ms. Painted Crow’s image and real name be plastered on posters to promote these “interventions” is not only telling of Ms. Benedict’s unfortunate insensitivity and potentially exploitative intentions, but also plainly inexcusable in light of Ms. Painted Crow’s ongoing civil and judicial protests against such defamation.


This entire affair stinks of a journalist who views the wounded as playthings and lab rats and has zero qualms about using them to further their career. This pungent stench leads me to also profoundly question Prof. Benedict’s numerous publications in fiction, the latest of which, Sand Queen, seems to incorporate a good deal of her actual research on female soldiers. Be as it may that scholars of literature often employ psychoanalysis on fictional characters, they are (usually) careful not to march into hospitals and begin one-sidedly “diagnosing” real people with mental disorders. Despite Ms. Benedict’s journalistic research on living humans, I wonder if her endeavors in fiction have allowed her to lose sight of the very real emotional damage and discomfort she has caused Ms. Painted Crow by allowing the assignment of such a callous and exploitative project.

Dean Takemura, Dean Yoshioka, and Provost Steele, I am sure that if any of us were to offer our most painful experiences to educate future generations, we would all feel extreme discomfort at being “diagnosed” and scrutinized by 400+ future mental health professionals without our consent or input. No human being deserves to be so dis-empowered, least of all a veteran who has fought for and protected others for 22 long years of service. And as people of color, I hope we ALL can appreciate Ms. Painted Crow’s struggle against being silenced and defamed by people in positions of significant power.


If it has not yet been carried out, I join the call for a full and thorough investigation into how on earth this major capstone project was conceived and approved, in addition to a clear response from the University to prevent such a thoughtless assignment from ever being forced upon Columbia students again. Professor Benedict must be strictly reminded that people of color are not her playthings, and the committee who put this project together must be made to reflect on what examples they are setting for their students.

If I remember the first and primary tenet of the Hippocratic Oath, it is to “do no harm”. How can I—or we, for that matter--trust the Columbia University School of Social Work if the capstone project assigned by the school has already inflicted irreparable and unnecessary emotional harm upon the very person they are ostensibly trying to help?

I humbly await your reply.

Sincerely yours,
Brent Lue

Subject: Concerns and Request

Morning!

I apologize for not getting back to you. I had supervision late night and ended up rushing to get things done.

Eli, my notes indicate that you and I did not talk until after "thanksgiving" b/c you were renovating your house. I don't have our actual conversation in this particular book however, there is one more place I can check for the details. I hope this is helpful.

On another note, it is important for me reiterate that when I spoke to both you and Anu, as far as I knew, CUSSW had NOT definitively decided what/who the project would focus on. In conversation w/ Marion who I have know and worked w/ for several years, she mentioned "Lonely Soldier" and it was ME who said if they chose to focus on you, that I knew you and was sure you'd be willing to participate in the project. I later apologized to you for even making that suggestion after I spoke w/ Anu.
In addition, please note that I was having a conversation w/ my friend/colleague/comrade, there was nothing official about it.

My main concern is that I am not misrepresented by either side. Although I respect each sides need to outline facts in support of a larger point, just as I have said to various member of CUSSW, I am not willing to be used to make that point.

And if I may be honest, I think it is critical for us to remember that we all hold multiple identities and at any given time we act from a place of those multiple identities depending on context. While I do identify as a veteran, I first and foremost identify as an Afro-Latina anti-oppressive social worker in community practice. All the parts listed represent the most important pieces of my whole. I am proudly part of a much larger community of anti-oppressive social work community organizers and for me, that role is always first. My conversation w/ Marion and my suggestion to first choose you and then to consult you was born out of my belief that you would bring both oppression and peace politics to the table in a way that the other women of the book would not.

I think this is important to note. In my conversations w/ you and Marion, I was not acting as a representative of SWAN or holding my veteran identity as primary. In that context, my commitment to anti-oppressive social work practice was/is primary. In fact, in most cases anti-oppressive existence and practice is my personal and professional charge.

While I don't think you would disagree w/ my choice of identity and could even argue that what I am saying is exactly the point of the organizing, it is really important for me that I am clear about what was happening, where my suggestions were coming from, and why. I was not aware of the details of the project and frankly, I was not interested. The limits of my role was to continuously make the suggestion of bringing you to NYC if they chose you for the reason listed above.

I want you to know that I support your organizing and think what you're doing is courageous. You are creating a space for a much needed critical dialogue. I really hope that everything works out in your favor. I also hold a lit candle for the initial hopes of suggesting you. As an Afro-Latina anti-oppressive social worker in community practice, my deepest hope is that this will ultimately result in sustainable long-term, transformative change that will benefit generations of social workers not just the ones who graduate in a week.

With Love,

Kalima
kd11- revolution, love & liberation
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

Dear Eli,
Thank you for meeting with me today. I apologize that the capstone project caused you such personal discomfort, given everything that you have been through. It was my hope that our meeting today could begin a process of healing—a process that is important to me, and I sense it is for you also. Please note that the focus of the Friday capstone session was changed and will not include a discussion of your account. Students were notified a week ago to remove your name and identifying information from all posters and papers. I have heartfelt regret that our meeting this morning did not provide the opportunity to clarify this and other things and that it did not begin that process of reconciliation and collaboration, but I sincerely hope that we can try again to work towards this.
Best,
Jeanette
Dean and Professor
Columbia University
School of Social Work
1255 Amsterdam Avenue, MC4600
NY, NY 10027
212-851-2289 phone

We spoke to several attorneys and stakeholders all across the country today.

The Dean of the School of Social Work, Dean Takamura, reached out to Eli for a meeting, which Eli is trying to push for tomorrow. She will likely be bringing me and Aaron Frishberg, and attorney Rachel recommended, to that meeting. (The Dean has only allowed Eli two guests to a meeting with her. I wonder how many lawyers and faculty the Dean will have present?)

The faculty have told students that any student not willing to do the micro analysis on women veterans in The Lonely Soldier will not graduate

Eli is going back to Columbia tonight to do a prayer ceremony with the students.

We have no idea who is being officially invited to speak on a panel/closing presentation on Friday. The students will be doing poster presentations in the morning.