* Frode Moe, Lee Moe, Millers Inc, Arno Crous
* 27 Apr: LJ v GHJ Copy: EoP Q’s Re: SASOP PS9: Culture, Mental Health and Psychiatry
* Tygae: EoP Leg Sub / EoP ADR: LJ v GH Johnstone, LJ v Frode Moe / EoP NWO SCO: EoP NTE GM: EoP NTE GMZA | EoP Axis MilNec Evac: Lotto: EoP v WiP Law, EoP v WiP Academia, EoP v WiP Media, EoP v WiP Charity, EoP v WiP Psych, EoP v WiP Religion, EoP v WiP Peacenik / EoP v WiP Neg.
From: Lara Johnson <firstname.lastname@example.org>
* Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2019 20:56:37 +0200
Subject: Copy: EoP Q’s Re: SASOP PS9: Culture, Mental Health and Psychiatry
To: Frode Moe <email@example.com>
Cc: Lee Moe <firstname.lastname@example.org>, “Counsel: Millers Inc: Arno Crous” <email@example.com>
To Frode Moe (firstname.lastname@example.org)
CC: Lee Moe (email@example.com); Counsel: Millers Inc: Arno Crous (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Re: 27 Apr: LJ Re: Frode Moe 27 Apr Re Notice to Oppose, Psych Doctrine Belief & Talitha Moe.
Pub: 27 Apr: EoP Q’s Re: SASOP position statement 9 on Culture, Mental Health and Psychiatry
From: Lara Johnson <email@example.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2019 20:14:45 +0200
Subject: EoP Q’s Re: SASOP position statement 9 on Culture, Mental Health and Psychiatry
Attachment: 19-04-15_ReqCInfo.pdf; 19-04-15_ReqPInfo.pdf.
TO: SASOP: SA Soc of Psychiatrists: Bernard Janse van Rensburg:
CC: Islamic Medical Association:
CC: HPCSA: Kgosi Letlape, PsySSA: Helen Dunbar-Krige:
CC: Royal College of Psychiatrists SPSIG; World Psychiatric Assoc: RSP:
Re: SA Journal of Psychiatry: The South African Society of Psychiatrists (SASOP) and SASOP State Employed Special Interest Group (SESIG) Position Statements on Psychiatric Care in the Public Sector; SciELO: South African Society of Psychiatrists guidelines for the integration of spirituality in the approach to psychiatric practice [PDF]; Durham Univ: Royal College of Psychiatrists London Position Statement PS03/2013: Recommendations for psychiatrists on spirituality and religion; World Psychiatry Association: WPA Position Statement on Spirituality and Religion in Psychiatry.
SASOP: Bernard Janse van Rensburg et al:
EoP Q’s Re: SASOP position statement 9 on Culture, Mental Health and Psychiatry.
I currently have an application in the George High Court: Case H 51/19: LJ v GHJ et al [lj-v-ghj.tygae.org.za] which include intersections between psychology doctrine and culture; as documented in attached excerpts of Request for Cultural and Psych Information Statements of Claim submitted to respondents.
If my interpretations of one of the respondents ‘mental disorder’ allegations are accurate, he is alleging that all psychiatrists mental disorder legal definitions are based upon scientific law.
Consequently: One of the ‘questions of law’ between applicants and respondents are:
Are South African psychiatrists legal definitions of a mental disorder based upon scientific law or cultural law. If cultural law: what are SA psychiatrists reasonable professional cultural ethics policies to avoid cultures with different subjective cultural consent as to ‘normal behaviour’ cultural values from making erroneous negligent and/or malicious mental disorder allegations against individuals from other cultures, for not following their own cultural ‘normal’ norms and values.
Scientific laws are based on objective scientific empirical facts.
Scientific laws summarize and explain a large collection of facts determined by experiment, and are tested based on their ability to predict the results of future experiments. They are developed either from facts or through mathematics, and are strongly supported by empirical evidence. It is generally understood that they reflect causal relationships fundamental to reality, and are discovered rather than invented. Scientific laws apply to individuals equally across cultures, races, religions, classes and genders.
Cultural law are based on subjective cultural norms and values.
Cultural laws refer to shared cultural or sub-cultural values, attitudes, standards, and beliefs that characterize members of a particular racial, religious, class, gender or professional culture and define their cultural frame of orientation and object of devotion. In a human mental disorder context, cultural laws refer to the idea, values, attitudes and opinions people in a racial, religious, class, gender or ideological cultural group hold with regard to ‘normal’ vs ‘abnormal’ conformity to their cultural or sub-cultural law values. In a fully informed consent multi-cultural community, society or nation, a cultural groups laws apply only to the individuals who have consented to the particular cultural groups cultural values.
EoP Q’s Re: SASOP position statement 9 on Culture, Mental Health and Psychiatry:
3.6 Culture, mental health and psychiatry
Over recent years, the critical role of culture, religion and spirituality in health has become evident in SA. As such, the ‘Western scientific’ model of healthcare has increasingly been regarded as only one approach that should be adopted next to others, and, in particular, in parallel to traditional African healing practices, with greater emphasis on the unseen, cosmological view of the emotional and relational lives of adherents. The importance of having to reconsider the role of culture, religion and spirituality in health, mental health and psychiatry in SA has, in particular, been emphasised by recent legislation on African traditional health practice. Great emphasis is placed on mental health by the Traditional Health Practitioner’s Act no. 35 of 2004, defining it as a significant part of what is regarded as the traditional health practitioner’s spectrum of responsibilities.
A large body of SA and international literature describes the existence of these 2 parallel health systems – the ‘formal’ and the ‘alternative’ (or traditional) – while generally advocating a closer collaboration between medical/psychiatric interventions and more traditional or cultural/religious interventions.
SASOP position statement 9 on Culture, Mental Health and Psychiatry
Culture, religion and spirituality should be considered in the current approach to the local practice and training of specialist psychiatrists. This should, however, be performed within the professional and ethical scope of the discipline, and all faith traditions and belief systems in the heterogenous SA society should be respected and regarded equally. In the public sector domain, no preference for one particular tradition should be given over another, as a result of a practitioner or a dominant group being from the one tradition or the other. Building relationships of mutual trust and understanding will require training and health education initiatives aimed at psychiatric practitioners, their patients, carers and students, and cultural and religious practitioners whom patients and their carers may choose to consult. The protection of individuals with psychiatric conditions within traditional and other religious/spiritual healing systems, however, needs to be ensured and all forms of abuse in this context, or neglect and delay with regard to appropriate psychiatric care, should be identified and prevented.
– SA Journal of Psychiatry: The South African Society of Psychiatrists (SASOP) and SASOP State Employed Special Interest Group (SESIG) Position Statements on Psychiatric Care in the Public Sector; SciELO: South African Society of Psychiatrists guidelines for the integration of spirituality in the approach to psychiatric practice [PDF].
EoP culture’s interpretation of SASOP ‘s official policy as enunciated in position statement 9 on Culture, Mental Health and Psychiatry; is that “SASOP psychiatric mental health doctrine and its consequent legal definition of a mental disorder are based upon cultural law”.
Is Ecology of Peace interpretation of SASOP position statement on Culture, Mental Health and Psychiatry – “SASOP psychiatric mental health doctrine and its consequent legal definition of a mental disorder are based upon cultural law” – accurate, reasonably accurate or totally inaccurate?
If accurate or reasonably accurate: What are SASOP’s cultural ethics policies to avoid cultures with different subjective cultural consent as to ‘normal mental health vs mental disorder behaviour’ cultural values from making erroneous negligent and/or malicious mental disorder allegations against individuals from other cultures, for not following their own cultural ‘normal’ norms and values?
If inaccurate: Kindly edit for accuracy.
Summary Applicants and Respondents Info:
The applicant and respondent are objectively members of different professional, class, gender and age cultures; and subjectively different ethno-racial, religious and ideological cultures.
The applicant is a European ‘Steppe Aryan’ abolitionist race traitor [Race Traitor: 15: Tim McVeigh and Me: SQ Copy] South African amicably separated from her husband who is African American who spent over 30 years in maximum security prisons in California, who has lived as the only white face for blocks, in the Oakland ghetto. She is a deep green ecologist feminist peacenik activist, and is a member of an Ecology of Peace culture, who expends approximately 70% of her time and resources on fighting for a better future for all. The applicant was a member of the Radical Honesty culture, at the time of the respondents psychosis mental disorder allegations.
Gimbutas noted the stable – no population & economic consumption growth – Steppe Aryan population: that a low tech agrarian village founded in 8000 BC was still a low tech agrarian village in 4000BC. This also allowed them to sustainably farm the land, and live in peace. Nobody was ripping off others to feed the kids he sired. Hence the peace of yeoman low tech agrarian farmers who are all betas. There are no [steppe] Aryan palaces. No harems; they didnt even have marriage, just as the Musou still today. Among whom, rape & murder are so rare they dont have words for it. Men who do not own women, do not fight over them, much less join war parties to go out to kidnap women for harems. All of this arises out of living without privacy, and without men making rules about who can have sex with who. – SQSwans: Day Brown: Proto Indo-European: 23 January 2017.
 In 1999 I filed a Submission to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, promising to donate my inheritance to the TRC; in support of sincere – racial, religious, class and gender – land and/or economic inequality reform reconciliation in South Africa. The TRC responded in a brief form letter thanking me for my submission. If it is confirmed that there is no interest in sincere – Ecology of Peace – peacenik reconciliation between South Africans, I shall withdraw my submission to the TRC and use my inheritance funds for my Dignitas [eop-v-dignitas.tygae.org.za] assisted suicide departure plans.
» EoP Leg Sub: 11 Mar: Electoral Court: LJ v IEC: Filing of Pro Se Application: Affidavit.
The respondent is a European corporatist Norwegian doctor, who has never written an activist letter, let alone gone to a protest or spoken out for justice for anyone of a different class, gender, race, religion, culture or age in his entire life; probably never sincerely invited a non-european to dinner, let alone lived alone amongst or had friendship and/or sexual relations with non-europeans; who is a recipient of financial largesse from large medical-industrial corporations.
I am the applicant, a member of an Ecology of Peace culture [EoP Oath PDF], a culture based upon scientific resource conflict problem solving; that advocates on behalf of implementing EoP Scientific and Cultural law [eop-scicultlaw.tygae.org.za] as international law.
I am a qualified paralegal and yacht sailing captain. I have no qualifications as a psychologist or psychiatrist. I do have thousands of hours of psychotherapy experience as an employee and colleague of Fritz Perls Gestalt trained psychologist: Dr. Brad Blanton, founder of Radical Honesty [Radical Honesty: 01:02:03; SHO: And Nothing but the Truth: Brad Blanton; Radical Honesty Channel: The Importance of Telling the Radical Truth] and Jacob Moreno psychodrama trained psychologist Dr Richard Korn [SF Gate: Richard R Korn; Time: Prisons; SNAC: Richard Korn], a co-founder with John Maher of Delancey Street Foundation [SQ: John Maher of Delancey Street: A Guide for Peaceful Revolution in America]. I worked with Dr. Korn on prison reform cases and subsequent thereto with Dr. Blanton on Radical Honesty cases, for about ten years. I was officially employed by Dr. Blanton, and barter exchange employed by Dr. Korn. The EoP Amicus submitted to the Concourt in the case of The Citizen v Robert McBride [tc-v-rm.tygae.org.za], with consent from Concourt Judges, was on behalf of my then cultural membership of the Radical Honesty culture.
The EoP TRC to End Abel and Kane Cold War Pro Se Amicus submitted – with consent from SA Concourt Justices [PDF] – to the South African Constitutional Court in CCT 23-10: The Citizen v Robert McBride [tc-v-rm.tygae.org.za] argued that South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission was negligent and/or a fraud, denying both sides – Apartheid and Anti-Apartheid – an honest enquiry into the root — clauses of international law enabling procreation and consumption above ecological carrying capacity limits — causes of all planetary racial, religious and class resource conflict.
» IG: 17-06-02_eoptrc-citizenv-mcbride; EoP Leg Sub: 12 Jun: IAEA & UNODA: DRAFT: Consent to Ecology of Peace CVID – weapons & power – Denuclearization Definition.
The respondents are estranged/alienated family members, who are not psychologists or psychiatrists. I don’t know the number of hours any respondent has spent in voluntary existential self analysis therapy; if any.
A transcript copy of all Ecology of Peace Truth and Reconciliation negotiations informal and formal legal correspondence is documented at EoP Leg Sub [eop-leg-sub.tygae.org.za]: Correspondence [eop-leg-sub-corr.tygae.org.za].
Pro Se, EoP Applicant [EoP Oath PDF]