Adulthood - do I have unreasonable expectations about this?

I realize that by writing this post I am, in a sense, doing precisely what I'm about to rail against. However, these issues continue to swirl around in my mind and I've got to find a way to let it out. I've got far more important things to think about than immature drama. I'll be using real initials of real people, so I'm certain I'll get some backlash, but as some of those involved refuse to stop the drama anyway, I don't guess it'll make any difference.

If you don't have time to read the whole blog, here's the gist of it: 

• We are all (supposedly) adults. If you don't want to approve a friend request, just click "no thanks". Don't be childish and ask someone else to deliver the news for you. That's cowardly, it pulls others into drama you created the moment you asked someone else to do the talking for you (which is a shitty thing to do to a friend), and it's just plain stupid.
• An ADULT alternative to this sort of drama is to speak for yourself. If you're not the confrontational sort, just a simple "sorry, but I can't" will suffice. If you are more mature and have an issue with someone, the ADULT thing to do is speak directly to that someone and say "here is the problem as I see it". Yes, that can be an intimidating, hard thing to do, but it speaks VOLUMES about your sincerity and your maturity.

I guess I'm just naive, but I truly thought (at 41 freaking years old) I'd left the elementary school drama far behind. You know, the whole "I'm not talking to Jane, so can you tell Jane I said ___?" thing, rather than just speaking for yourself and not dragging others through a bunch of self-made b.s.? Unfortunately, I was very wrong.

First, here's some back-story about one of these recent drama incidents:

Recently a woman I've known for many years, C.H., created a group on Facebook with (it appeared initially) the best of intentions. In this group, she stated, she wanted to create a safe place for a small number of women to express themselves in an authentic manner. In this group, she proclaimed that she wanted to learn how to sit quietly with her feelings, to learn how to address some of the issues that continued to crop up in her life, and to allow the other members she hand-picked to do the same. In essence, it appeared she created this place as a way for her to improve her life as well as to offer a place where others could learn and grow.

Having known her for so long - having, in fact, even worked with her in a sense - I immediately had a feeling of hoping for the best but expecting the worst. While she is a woman who has been through many hardships and survived them, she is also (in my opinion) a woman who is very ill. Given my personal experiences and education on the subject, it is my strong belief that she has untreated ultra-rapid-cycling bipolar disorder.

Initially, things started out well. This small group of women got to know each other a bit better and new friendships were formed. Soon, however, drama started cropping up, and most of it had C.H. at its center. She would post about some pretty erratic behaviors, then become upset if other members didn't respond with support for her inappropriate behaviors or didn't respond at all. Some days, she absolutely flooded the group with post after post, creating new ones when she didn't get the responses she wanted.

C.H. has a history of deleting her Facebook profile, and so I and a another mutual friend (J.B.) tried to gently but firmly remind her that if she deleted her account, the group and all of the connections and wonderful discussions would vanish. C.H. also has a history of deleting comments or entire posts, thereby attempting to "rewrite history". Both J.B. and I began sending out friend requests to all of the members of the group, preparing ourselves for C.H.'s inevitable deterioration.

Things quickly went downhill. Dealing with C.H. became the source of ongoing drama. Some women limited their postings to cute photos or uplifting quotes, but stopped sharing much of their "real selves". Others (myself included) tried in vain to be peacemakers or simply walked around on eggshells. This push-pull emotional roller coaster began to feel like abuse. There would be a day or two when C.H. was kind, thoughtful, and open. Then, something would "set her off" and the group watched as she would bring up old hurts, state that apologies made for any upset wasn't the "right" apology, and otherwise take everyone on a bumpy ride through Anger Town. I can't speak for the others, but as for me, I cried almost daily thanks to the building drama. I ruminated about what I could have said differently, about what ways I could have eased tensions. I felt like an emotionally battered woman, trying to figure out what I'd done to get punched so I could try to avoid getting punched again.

A couple of weeks ago, things came to a head. C.H. had, once again, been just - and I'm sorry for the expression, but it fits - off her freaking rocker. I couldn't take it any longer. My friend J.B. called me and couldn't even understand me through the sobs and gasps for air - she'd caught me in the middle of a building panic attack. I was in the process of writing a post indicating that as much as I had come to like some of the members there, the drama was having an incredibly negative impact on me and I wanted to let them know that while I'd enjoy remaining Facebook friends I could no longer remain in such a volatile group.

J.B. is my best friend, and she is a pit bull, mama bear type when someone she loves has been hurt. C.H. had been picking, picking, picking for WEEKS, holding J.B. up as a villain. J.B. has a long fuse, but hearing the pain in my voice was the last straw in a metric ton of emotional straws. She went, in basic terms, batshit crazy on C.H. She finally called C.H. out on a lot of her issues. I was having a yard sale that weekend, attempting to make a little money and get rid of some things, so I missed out on the whole back and forth between J.B. and C.H.

I logged back in later that Sunday evening to formally remove myself from the group as I'd stated I'd be doing. The first thing I saw was that I'd been made an administrator of the group! So was J.B.

C.H. had removed herself from the group. Um...what!?!

I started reading through things and catching up on the latest drama. J.B. was already apologizing to the group for losing it, and there were a few women who let her know that they understood that she'd been pushed and pushed and pushed by C.H. and were kind of amazed it took as long as it did for her to fight back.

Still with me? AMAZING! Okay, so we're pretty much caught up with the back story.

Naturally, after this roller coaster, some people removed themselves from the group. Some stayed but remained quiet. Then came the behind-the-scenes, note-passing, childish bull that drives me nuts.

One of the former members both J.B. and I had sent a friend request to (we'd both found her to be intelligent, interesting, and one who'd tried to combat the drama with uplifting posts), had told C.H. she didn't want to approve our friend requests, and had C.H. relay the message to J.B. and I through a mutual friend. So this woman, L., couldn't just click "no"? She had to do the "I'm not talking to her, so YOU tell her blah blah blah" thing?

One of the women who'd stayed with the group but had remained silent apparently started "reporting" on the goings on in the group to C.H. Now, this group was supposed to be a safe, PRIVATE, space - and people were passing along information to a non-member? Not! Cool!

During all of this, C.H. was having second thoughts about handing over the group, and started letting us know (through the same mutual friend) that we'd "hijacked" it, that we'd "stolen" the group from her. She continued to make requests/demands (remove certain posts, give the group back to her, etc.).

Here's the thing. If you and I have a problem, just talk to me. I recently had a really difficult discussion with a good friend of mine. She said some things that were hard and uncomfortable to say, and that were hard to hear. Yet she had the maturity, and the kindness, to express her thoughts and feelings to me directly in as kind and gentle a way as she could manage. It would've been SO EASY for her to just slide it under the rug, or avoid me, or have someone else tell me what she wanted to say. But instead, this friend made the effort to carve out some time so we could sit together privately, and she talked with me directly. It was hard - for both of us - but I respect and appreciate the fact that she conducted herself as a mature adult, and it makes me respect her all the more for the efforts she made.

Back to the C.H. drama. I've done my best to maintain myself with her. I've wished her nothing but wellness and good. I wasn't even online during the big showdown between C.H. and J.B. I've made myself available to her - she knows how to contact me via email and phone. But because when she asked me why I hadn't responded to her post about her very inappropriate, unhealthy behavior, I honestly stated that I didn't know what to say because I didn't agree with her actions, I'm now an enemy. I truly hope C.H. gets evaluated for ultra-rapid-cycling bipolar disorder, but she has gotten VERY angry whenever that's been suggested.

I only expect adults to either be direct, or to just remain silent if they are afraid of confrontation. What makes me angry is when other people are put in the unenviable situation of being dragged into the middle of something that need not involve them.

Let's break this down into really simple terms by using "dos and don'ts" examples:

I've sent you a friend request on Facebook and you don't want to be my friend.
     DO click on the "no thanks" button
     DO, if you have a problem with my request and want me to know that, speak with me directly.
     DO NOT contact a mutual friend and make them be stuck in the middle as the messenger.
I've sent you an invitation on Facebook to join a group, and you are not interested in joining.
     DO click on the "no thanks" button
     DO, if you have a problem with being invited and want me to know that, speak with me directly.
     DO NOT contact a mutual friend and drag them into the middle by making them your messenger.

How hard is this concept to grasp? I mean, really? How old are we again? My 11 year old knows better, for crying out loud.

I've got PLENTY of drama in my life that I need to focus on, including little things like:

• my children struggling in school academically or socially/emotionally
• my family dealing with losing the only home my son has ever known and the only one my daughter truly knows
• my family not knowing where, or even being able to look for until this house sells, we will "land"
• my family dealing with the massive medical bills that have been incurred over the last 2 1/2 years
• my health challenges that include (but aren't limited to) constant pain, memory problems, and enough medications to call breakfast on their own
• my husband's recently being the victim of a sleeping driver wrecking his car (and totaling hers - it's a miracle she's okay)
• my daily struggle against worsening depression

So please, alleged "adults", just STOP with the freaking drama already. In other words, can we all please just grow the hell up?

Missing toddler Sky Metalwala

As we approach the weekend, I find myself pondering the case of  Sky Metalwala, who was reported missing on the morning of November 6. This coming Sunday will mark six weeks since little Sky was reported as missing by his mother, Julia Biryukova. Her story rapidly fell apart, yet there have been no new leads for weeks now. Mommy and her family still refuse to cooperate with the police. Julia seems to be in hiding. Meanwhile, Sky's Daddy is working like crazy, passing out fliers and asking businesses to display fliers in their windows. He voluntarily took two lie detector tests. He's staying in close contact with the police, answering any questions they have and seeking all sorts of ways to try and find his son. Solomon is trying to stay positive and continues to have faith that Sky will be found alive and well.

None of this makes sense to me. The last time anyone (aside from the mother and sister) saw Sky was at least two weeks prior to his disappearance. Days before his allegedly being taken from the car in which his mother had abandoned him to go get help as she had ran out of gas (although in truth the car had gas, as investigators soon learned), she and estranged husband Solomon Metalwala was in an 11-hour mediation session where they were trying to work out a mutually agreeable custody and visitation plan for Sky and big sister Mailie, age 4. Julia and Solomon had gotten in trouble a couple of years ago when they left a sleeping Sky in their car while they went inside a Target store in below freezing temperatures. They were both charged and had to attend parenting classes as a part of their punishment. Solomon has stated very clearly that it was the biggest mistake of his life and he learned from it and would never do such a thing again. Apparently Julia didn't learn her lesson, though, as is proven not only by her allegedly leaving Sky in the car on November 6, but also (in my opinion) by leaving the two children alone for about 12 hours on the day of that grueling mediation session. Otherwise, why wouldn't a babysitter come forward and say "oh, yes, of course I saw Sky just a few days before his disappearance!"?

The more we learn about Julia's past, mental health status, family of origin, and that she wanted to undo all of that work in mediation so that Solomon would never see the kids again, the more concerned I am that something happened to Sky on the day of the mediation while she'd left him alone with only a 4 year old to supervise him. Yes, 4-year-old Mailie did tell FBI agents specially trained to talk to children that Sky had been in the car "wrapped in a blanket" on that fateful Sunday morning. However, listening to Julia Biryukova's blog, it seems apparent to me that she knows very well how to talk to her children in such a way as to manipulate them and make them fear and distrust their father. I wouldn't be at all surprised if little Mailie had been told little Sky was just sleeping. Or, heaven forbid, that she was the one who'd go to jail if anyone learned that Sky was dead because it happened while she was supposed to be babysitting him. I honestly wouldn't put it past Julia to brainwash and manipulate her daughter in this way.

One bright spot in all of this is the fact that Solomon has not only finally gained full custody of Mailie, but was told that a mistake was made when the children were given to Julia back when they first started the custody battle. I just hope that mistake hasn't resulted in the death of Sky, either accidentally or at the hands of Julia. While I pray that little Sky is alive and safe and warm, as time marches on it seems less and less likely that he'll be coming home to Solomon alive. If Julia does know the whereabouts of Sky or his body, I hope that she will share that information so there can be at least closure if not a happy ending. And if she did, in fact, harm him in any way, I think death by fire ants would be too kind.

When "cutting spending" results in tragedy

As many of you know, I've been a long-time advocate of mental health issues. My ex-husband is on permanent disability due to his bipolar disorder (which was well-treated until insurances changed and he had to switch to a doctor who I personally believe is responsible for making my ex-husband into a man who can no longer work). My daughter was diagnosed with Early Onset Bipolar Disorder (NOS - Not Otherwise Specified), ADD, and other issues. I have battled with the demons known as depression and anxiety nearly as long as I can remember. I had severe postpartum mood disorders after the births of both of my children.

So believe me when I say that I feel strongly about the issues surrounding mental health insurance coverage, stigmas, access to treatment, and so on.

As someone who has worked for many years within the interests of postpartum mood disorders, I've unfortunately become familiar with those rare but tragic cases in which a mother suffering from psychosis has harmed her child. I've also tried to educate myself about other issues tied to the health and well-being of families.

A trend I've noticed getting worse in our tough economy is that there is more violence against others, both within the family and outside of the family. In so many of the cases in which someone goes on a shooting spree, or abuses a spouse, or harms a child, we find that the perpetrator of the violence is experiencing high levels of stress and very often has an untreated or poorly treated mental illness.

When so many people are struggling just to find or keep a job, struggling to feed themselves and their families, struggling to make ends meet, it seems completely irresponsible to cut funding to outreach programs, to affordable mental and physical health care, to eliminate or greatly reduce the availability of support systems in place to help the very ones who need it the most.

It seems that whenever our governments - from the national level down to the local level - need to cut spending, the first thing on the chopping block is the absolute LAST thing that should be cut. We need to encourage our leaders to offer support to those in need, not pull the rug out from under them. We need to reach out to our communities and ensure that there are options for those who are struggling financially, so that they can at least maintain their health.

Until we start making the mental health of our people a priority, start making mental health services available everywhere to everyone that needs it, we'll keep seeing a rise in crime. We'll keep reading tragic stories about parents harming or killing their children. We'll keep seeing suicides rise.

Without affordable, available mental health care, we take away what is already so hard to come by in these trying times - hope for a better tomorrow.

Tragedy in Tuscon - gun violence, politics, and mental illness

It's taken me a few days to try and process my feelings about the violence that erupted when 22 year old Jared Loughner opened fire in a grocery store parking lot on January 8, 2011, wounding 14, including Democratic Representative Gabrielle Giffords, who remains in critical condition, and killing six.


This is such a complex issue. Whether politics was to blame, both the right and left are using this as a springboard to either deny any responsibility for the hateful rhetoric being cast around or to point fingers and lay blame. People for and against tightening of gun laws are using this tragedy to "support" their arguments. And many people are asking "why was this obviously mentally unstable young man not somehow treated and prevented from doing what he did?".


I'll try to tackle these three issues as best I can, but it's just not as cut-and-dried as we'd like, to be honest.


Politics, Rhetoric, and the Social Climate We Live In Today


While it's true that just because someone like Sarah Palin has targets over the politicians with whom she disagrees on her website, it's also true that she didn't actually commit this heinous crime personally. Glenn Beck spouting his beliefs doesn't equate to someone acting violently. However, when a person in a position of power (a politician, a television or radio personality, a popular musician, and so on), they MUST remember that words have an impact. Words have POWER. The Becks and Palins of the world have got to understand that they have a responsibility to not just their fans or supporters, but to the society as a whole.*


What good can possibly come from anger, from fear-mongering, from putting all of this negativity out there about our fellow Americans, our fellow human beings? Why not use those public voices to truly try to build bridges rather than tear them down, to work together for the good of the entire country and its citizens? Maybe they all just need to read and adhere to the concepts of this article, and learn how to fight in a way that actually accomplishes something, solves something.


When Rush Limbaugh uses this tragedy to say things like Democrats seek to profit from the shooting and that Jared Lee Loughner has the "full support" of Democrats, I have to wonder if anyone truly even WANTS to make things better, or if they just thrive on the drama and the chaos, the American public be damned.


Furthermore, while they are not directly responsible for the actions of one individual, they should at the very least have the decency to apologize for the possibility that their words or deeds might have influenced anyone to commit a violent act. Instead, some of them seem to fall back onto more finger-pointing, more rhetoric, more incendiary speeches and actions.


* I realize that both sides do this. It just happens that with the current political situation it's the right's turn to create this chaos.


The Right to Bear Arms


Gun ownership is another hot-button issue, with strong feelings of what's right and fair. In the aftermath of these sorts of violent events, the whole gun control conversation heats up. Some call for restrictions on certain types of guns or ammunition. Some call for tighter control over who can legally purchase a weapon. You may hear comments like "we should all have guns so we can take out guys like these", calling for what is essentially vigilante justice. You also might hear "only cops, soldiers, and other such people should have guns". There are plenty of variations on the theme from one extreme to the other.


Apparently, reacting in fear among gun buyers that changes in the current laws may be coming, gun sales in Arizona and other states have increased dramatically. Meanwhile, people like the folks at the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence are actively working on making it more difficult to obtain and carry firearms in an effort to reduce gun violence.


While our Constitutional rights must be protected and upheld, it's hard to argue against tightened security measures for gun sales when you look at 9 year old victim Christina-Taylor Green, who was interested in becoming a politician herself one day. 


Mental Illness, Personal Rights, and the Law


As we learn more about Jared Loughner, it becomes apparent to many of us that he was an increasingly mentally unstable young man. The community college from which he was suspended has released records that highlight the troubles he had while attending. According to friends from his youth and neighbors, his home life was one that became isolated over time. Even strangers on a message board urged Loughner to seek help.


It's important to note that not all violent people have mental illnesses, and not all people with a mental illness are violent. It's easy to say "he's clearly crazy, so why wasn't he locked up?", but it's much more of a complex situation with a much more complicated solution. Should we really consider locking people up because they might one day "snap"? Isn't that a slippery slope to start down?


Everyone, including the mentally ill, have rights. The law is such that an adult cannot be involuntarily committed unless it's determined the person is an immediate danger to himself or others. Once upon a time, the mentally ill were stashed away in institutions. Nowadays, there are laws to protect civil rights - laws that can be frustrating when trying to have an adult involuntarily committed.


This sort of violent act leads to the question of whether, and how, should mental health care practices change. During a time when so many people are without jobs, when many insurance companies refuse to cover mental health treatment, and budget cuts from the local to national level limit the resources available to this segment of the country, it's hard to see how we can keep people from falling through the cracks. We must address the fact that we don't currently have adequate resources.


As a side note, I feel it important to mention that the National Alliance on Mental Illness not only functions to advocate for the mentally ill and their families. NAMI also provides information and support to individuals and families dealing with mental illness. If you or a loved one is struggling, please contact them.


Now What?


We, as a nation and as individuals, have some thinking to do.


What do we want to do in terms of our future as a country? Do we really want to keep on going down the path we're on - one of suspicion and vitriol, one in which nothing seems to get accomplished aside from a lot of fighting and not a lot of moving towards something better? Do we want to support the people who seem to want nothing more than to stir things up?


In terms of gun ownership, do we want more or less restrictions for those who want to purchase a weapon? Do we want to allow just anyone to have certain types of ammunition, or to restrict it to police and the like, or to ban it altogether? Do we want to require not only background criminal checks, but also checks for any history of personal or mental health issues? Do we want to insist that gun safety classes be a requirement for owning a weapon?


As for mental illness, do we insist on more funding, more resources and more afford-ability for everyone who needs treatment? Do we accept that some of this funding might necessitate a hike in our taxes? Do we lobby to have the rights of the mentally ill destroyed so that we can more easily have them forcibly institutionalized?


Ultimately, this is OUR country. Yours and mine. Ultimately, it's OUR voice, OUR support, and OUR money that decides the future of this nation. The big question is, will we strive for a better tomorrow by addressing the issues of today?


Our current President Barack Obama has encouraged civility in the wake of this tragedy. Will we be civil as a nation, or will we continue to up the rhetoric ante on both sides until we self-destruct?