Category: Systems

Categories
Consult-Liaison COVID-19 Homelessness Medicine Nonfiction Seattle Systems

“The Impact of Covid-19 on Homeless Services in Seattle.”

On Friday, I presented Grand Rounds to an agency in New York City. The title of my presentation was “The Impact of Covid-19 on Homeless Services in Seattle, Washington”. The audience was comprised mostly of psychiatrists who also work with people who are currently unhoused or have been homeless in the past.

In some ways, this presentation was easy to create: I simply described the agency I work for and walked the audience through the timeline of events:

While the Seattle-King County region was scrambling due to the first death from Covid-19, the first case of Covid-19 was diagnosed in New York City on March 1.

In other ways, this presentation is the only one I’ve made where I had to take breaks while making it because of anger, grief, and sadness.

The month of March was hectic for us and everyone else: We tossed routine policies out the window and scribbled new ones down. We shattered many of our old habits and hastily introduced new practices. Our collective workload increased significantly as we tried to be as flexible and responsive to the changes that were coming at us. We watched systems grind to a halt because systems can’t change that fast: We had to buy hand sanitizer from local distilleries and we donated N95 masks to hospitals. Systems that had long failed us suddenly had the harsh glow of media light on them: In all of Seattle, there were only five bathrooms with hand-washing sinks that were open 24/7. Congregate shelters, where over 200 people had no choice but to share one giant room and one bathroom, suddenly became unacceptable because the beds were not at least six feet apart.

And, yet, eight months later, not much changed. We haven’t had the opportunity to abandon restrictions; many of these new practices are now status quo because the situation hasn’t gotten better. I was honest with the audience: There was no resolution or hopeful conclusion at the end of my talk. Why was that? How could it be that, eight months later, things hadn’t actually changed much?

The audience said nothing. What is there to say? The lack of ownership and coordination at the federal level is the same now as it was in March/April. New York City has significantly more resources than Seattle, though those resources only go so far while SARS-CoV2 can cross state lines and national boundaries when no barriers are erected and no interventions happen. If people in a boat are not rowing in the same direction—or if people aren’t rowing at all—then the boat and everyone in it wastes a lot of time and energy.

I was surprised by the gifts of validation from the audience. Yes, we all work as psychiatrists and the last time most of us saw someone get intubated was when we were residents. However, we all recall doing consults on people in the ICU who were sick. Ostensibly, we were there to take care of the patient and maybe their family members. We also know, though, that an important (and often unspoken) part of psychiatric consults is to support the treating team.

We all have a sense of how terrible it is for the treating teams. These are the reasons why we desperately try to keep people healthy and out of hospitals. We know that our contributions are small—most people don’t live on the streets, in shelters, or in supportive housing; most people don’t have diagnoses of schizophrenia or severe substance use disorders—but we also know that our people are often maligned when they pass through the doors into traditional health care systems. We all have a sense of how terrible it is for our people. We also know that, due to the stress of living marginalized lives, our people often have more severe health conditions. They already have many risk factors that increase the likelihood of complications and death due to Covid-19. We’re trying to mitigate the stress of everyone involved.

It’s heartbreaking, terrible, and unfair.

To end the talk on a positive note, I mentioned several things I am grateful for:

  • The rainy season has arrived in Seattle and I get to sleep in a dry bed indoors.
  • I have confidence in where I am going to sleep tonight.
  • I have a job and can pay my bills.
  • I know I will eat (again!) today.
  • There now exists technology where I can speak to an audience of colleagues on the other side of the continent!

These both mean a lot and nothing at the same time.

In the meantime, we continue to do what we can while we wait.

Categories
Systems

Revisiting Racism in Psychiatry.

While much of the current conversation has focused on racism within the criminal-legal system, institutional racism also exists elsewhere, including psychiatry.

I’ve written a few posts about this topic in the past:

Here’s one from 2017 that discusses “drapetomania“.

In 2018 I wrote about the use of race in advertisements for antipsychotic medication.

I also wrote about the intersections of race, jail, and psychiatry in 2017.

More to follow….

Categories
Observations Seattle Systems

About the CHAZ….

You’ve heard about Seattle’s Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone (CHAZ), right? With free press from President Trump, people both in the US and abroad now know about the “Seattle takeover” and his imperative to “Take back your city NOW”.

Well, dear reader, if you believe that I am reliable narrator, let me share with you my observations of the CHAZ.

First of all, this is how the CHAZ website describes the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone:

The Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone née “Free Capitol” is a 6 block section around the East Precinct in Seattle, WA. Abandoned by police and left to burn, this area was instead siezed [sic] by anarchists, BLM supporters and other protestors who have since transformed it into a unverisal [sic] community based on mutual aid. Fundamentally, CHAZ is an occupation of Capitol Hill, not an official declaration of independence.

Here’s some context about the Capitol Hill neighborhood where the CHAZ is located: In addition to being the gay mecca of the Pacific Northwest, Capitol Hill is the hip neighborhood of Seattle.[1. Some would comment that Capitol Hill is the hipster, not hip, neighborhood of Seattle.] Bars old and new cater to the spectrum of genders. There’s wood-fired bagel cafe; a bike shop where, after spending time in the physio lab, one can order a Matcha Chicken Avocado Bowl; and a music venue called whose full name includes “Crystal Ball Reading Room”. Two blocks south from the CHAZ is a dealership shared by Ferrari and Maserati. A local cafe offers apricot jam doughnuts for $3.85 each. Rent for a one-bedroom apartment near the CHAZ is around $2000 a month.

Now, onto my observations:

According to the City of Seattle, about 65% of the city population is white and nearly 7% are Black. The vast majority of people (much more than 65%) I saw in the CHAZ were white. Perhaps this was due to the clumps of white tourists who wanted to witness the CHAZ themselves. Maybe white allies had taken upon themselves to “do the work” and use the CHAZ to advocate for Black Lives Matter (BLM) causes and demands. (Of note, I cannot find any comments from the Seattle-King County chapter of BLM about the CHAZ.) Despite the ongoing pandemic, a notable fraction of these white individuals were not wearing face coverings.

While there is a beautiful mural of “Black Lives Matter” physically on Pine Street and references to Black individuals of Seattle and beyond who have been killed by police, the overall vibe of the CHAZ seems more focused on opposing authority. The graffiti on and around the now abandoned police station, the “conversation cafe” stations, and the new community gardens seemed to chiefly cater to white audiences and suggest an anti-establishment philosophy. Black Lives Matter and “a universal community based on mutual aid” are not the same thing, and this is highlighted in the deliberate demands of the Seattle-King County chapter of Black Lives Matter. To be fair, there is overlap between the demands of CHAZ and BLM, though what people do often reveals actual intentions compared to what people say.

In addition to philosophical contrasts, there were physical contrasts within the CHAZ. A man was hugging his adult poodle like a baby, while a crowd of people were nearly running after a man who was yelling at someone about a stolen phone. A white man with what appeared to be a taxidermy weasel draped around his shoulders got into a profane shouting match with a Black man (one of the very few I saw) seated on a bench, a push cart stuffed with belongings next to him.[2. I promise you, dear reader, that there was indeed a man who had draped what appeared to be a taxidermy weasel around his neck. Maybe it was a plush weasel, but the effect was the same.] A (white) man was shoveling wood chips into a new community garden marked with a hand-written sign that read “This garden is for Black and Indigenous folks and their plant allies”. All the doors to the public bathroom were closed and the phrase “shoplift your future back” was scrawled in spray paint on its foundation.

Meanwhile, Seattle Parks and Recreation collected trash from the CHAZ and hauled it away. An employee, wearing a face covering, emerged from a Seattle Public Utilities truck with a clipboard and headed towards the park.

Here are my questions:

Is the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone a distraction from Black Lives Matter? If yes, what are the consequences of that distraction at local, state, and federal levels, now that President Trump has condemned this “occupation of Capitol Hill”? What are the consequences to BLM if it is conflated with the CHAZ?

Could an Autonomous Zone exist anywhere else in Seattle? Does it matter that this part of Capitol Hill is young, trendy, and expensive? Could the Autonomous Zone exist in a Seattle neighborhood with more Black lives, such as the Central District or Rainier Valley? Even if the Autonomous Zone could exist in another neighborhood, would it exist? Would protestors want that? Would the neighborhood support that?

Has the local chapter of BLM made a statement about CHAZ? If yes, why is it difficult to find? If no, what worries or hopes does BLM have about doing so? The Seattle-King County BLM chapter has demonstrated great thoughtfulness about its activities in the midst of this pandemic, including specific rules about their protest. Their silent march drew around 60,000 protestors despite the rain. I look forward to learning more about and supporting their perspectives.

Will the CHAZ protestors vote? Some argue that the only way to change the system is to join it. Others insist that change can only come from the outside, as there are too many conflicting interests from within. Voting applies in either scenario.

Will the CHAZ protestors follow the lead of BLM? Sometimes the urge to “do something” is overwhelming, when the most productive and helpful action is to wait and follow. Before people congratulate themselves on the actions they are taking, it is prudent to ensure that these actions are in the service of the goal that will both change and improve the system.

How will the CHAZ end? Will the protestors leave of their own accord? Will they stay until forced to leave? Will there be non-violent negotiations, or will we witness more violence? How much effort will Seattle Police put into returning to their precinct building? What is the Mayor’s strategy about this, now that she is the target of antagonizing messages from both Seattle residents and the President of the United States?

When will the CHAZ end? With unemployment rates high in Seattle, as in the rest of the nation, some people may choose to remain in the CHAZ because the economy continues its slump. There is a Presidential election in November and if the President continues to give his attention to the CHAZ, that may reinforce their desire to remain. If Seattle sees a spike in coronavirus cases, will the city recruit Public Health to help assess the safety of the encampments and gatherings and then ask people to leave?

If you live in the Seattle-King County area and are able, please donate money to the Seattle-King County chapter of Black Lives Matter. Whether you live in Seattle or elsewhere, please also participate in the US Census and make sure you vote in the upcoming elections. Please continue to ask questions, engage your mind, and exercise critical thinking. Change will take all of us.

Categories
Consult-Liaison Medicine Nonfiction Reflection Systems

Mental Health Awareness Month During a Pandemic.

It’s been Mental Health Awareness Month during a pandemic.

When we look back at this time, people will have different memories of their experiences: Some will remember changes in job duties and extra time for leisure. Others will remember intense pressure and stress as essential workers. Still others will remember the despair due to unemployment and financial worries. We all will remember how the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted our routines and affected our mental well-being: It impeded our freedom to go outside, abilities to pursue the activities we want to do, and usual opportunities to express ourselves.

Wearing a face covering may mask the expressions of displeasure and anxiety on our faces, but it does not diminish the discomfort and worry we feel within. As many in our community try to avoid illness, some will fall ill and and others will succumb to death. There are reasons to grieve.

Because discomfort and anxiety are internal experiences, our culture often frames these reactions as a personal problem—a disorder of one individual mind. However, this pandemic has had adverse effects on everyone. Many of us are feeling the same emotions. These are unsurprising reactions to an unexpected and (hopefully) once-in-a-lifetime situation.

We must avoid medicalizing these reactions. Individuals receive psychiatric diagnoses within specific contexts. Our reactions as a result of the the pandemic are collective experiences within the same context. It is unfair to argue that all people experiencing distress during this pandemic have psychiatric disorders. This argument also undermines opportunities for communities to support their own members who are suffering.

Not all distress reaches the threshold for a clinical diagnosis, especially during extraordinary times. While mental health professionals can help people who feel anxiety and sadness, that doesn’t mean that increasing the number of mental health professionals and their services is the primary solution during this pandemic. Most people feeling worry and anguish now will not need specialized services. Support from people from the same culture or context can and will help people tolerate and then grow from these emotional experiences. Relationships, stemming from faith traditions, hobbies, cultural groups, and friendships, are invaluable during these times of stress, loss, and grief. Providing education and resources to the community at large, such as through programs like Mental Health First Aid,[1. You can learn more about Mental Health First Aid here. I have no affiliation with them.] can help ensure that those in our community receive attention and emotional support. Communities can also provide support through other concrete means, such as financial donations, food assistance, and employment opportunities. Though individuals should remain six feet apart, the distance does not dilute the healing power of relationships.

To be clear, some individuals do experience levels of distress due to the pandemic that warrant professional mental health intervention and support. This does not mean that they have meaningless relationships or are “weak”. We often do not know the struggles people endure. Complications from the pandemic can overwhelm already strained internal and external resources.

We are living through an extraordinary time in history. We are all experiencing psychological stress, though perhaps at different frequencies and intensities. There is nothing routine about our external circumstances, so there is nothing routine about our internal experiences, either. The pandemic has demonstrated how interconnected we are. Let us focus not on individual distress, but focus instead on how we can all help each other during this difficult time. This will not only bolster the mental well-being of others, but will help our mental health, too.

Categories
Homelessness Medicine Nonfiction Policy Seattle Systems

More Reflections about COVID-19 from Seattle.

This is another unpolished post. Several physicians and nurses in other states have reached out to ask for suggestions and perspectives related to behavioral health and homelessness during this COVID-19 epidemic in Seattle. Here are some reflections:

Coordination with partners is not only essential for services, but also to maintain morale. No single agency is able to address this alone. Government partners need feedback and information about what the community needs (and, I’m sorry to say, sometimes the community ends up providing government officials with updates that government should be telling us). The actions and energy of partners can buoy others when it seems things are stuck.

There aren’t enough supplies. Clinics, hospitals, and agencies can’t get face masks, hand sanitizer, and other sanitation supplies. Vendors are all sold out. Local governments are appealing to the federal government to provide supplies; I understand that the US military protects a national stockpile of such items? Which is something I had never considered in the past. And, perhaps most importantly, there aren’t enough COVID-19 tests! It seems that most of our local publicly funded primary care clinics have, at most, 30 test kits on site with no replenishment coming. Some private labs are only now agreeing to provide COVID-19 testing.

Many employees don’t have enough paid time off accrued to take time off of work for self-quarantine. Thankfully, our state and federal governments have passed or will pass legislation to address this and ensure that people can still get paid despite having to take time off of work. HR departments everywhere would do well to look out for their employees, particularly those who provide direct service to people who are higher risk of experiencing illness due to COVID-19.

People may (or may not) bristle at the infringement of civil liberties. The Washington State Governor has banned gatherings of more than 250 people. The CDC has provided “mitigation strategies” specific to Seattle-King County for the next 30 days, some of which are about workplace behaviors and COVID-19, which includes checking temperatures for fever and screening for illness when employees show up to work. The CDC has also recommended prohibiting visitors to certain sites. These are extraordinary times, hence these extraordinary measures… and some people may bristle at having to follow these rules. So far, people have been voluntarily complying with these changes.

The balance of individual patient health information and public health wobbles. For the past two weeks, a local clinic and our shelter have gone back and forth (in a collegial way) about protecting an individual’s privacy versus protecting the health of other people staying in the shelter. In short, the clinic argued that if Mr. Doe, a person who stays in the shelter, gets tested for COVID-19, the shelter isn’t entitled to know (a) that the test occurred and (b) the test results. We have countered that the shelter should know about Mr. Doe’s testing and the results during this extraordinary time because we want to do everything we can to prevent or minimize a localized outbreak within our shelter. Thankfully, the State Attorney General issued guidance that sided with our view (to be clear, the clinic was sympathetic to our view and did not balk with the change in practice… and I completely understood where the clinic was coming from). However, this is something that the clinic and our shelter had to pursue on our own; this was not proactive guidance we received from our government officials.

Government bureaucracy is in full effect. In this instance, I’m referring to practice of government officials who are unwilling to send out official communication until numerous gatekeepers have vetted it. Thus, guidance is slow to come out, so everything slows down. I understand the reason for vetting—confusion isn’t helpful, either—but we also feel frustrated when we feel like we’re losing a race against an invisible enemy.

People staying in shelters are resilient. Many staff feel anxious about how COVID-19 will impact the people who stay in shelters and receive clinical services from us. I find that I have to remind myself that many of the people who stay in shelters have experienced traumas and horrors that we will never know or understand. Many of them have already experienced illnesses and pain that we cannot fathom. I do not mean to minimize the very real possibility that some of them, should they contract COVID-19, will develop severe illness and die. I don’t want that to happen, which is why we are in constant communication with our partners to coordinate services and care. However, many of them will either not get sick, or they will recover despite our anxiety and efforts. It is a privilege that these individuals even let us into their lives.

Screening guidelines for COVID-19 are mushy. Some of our local infectious disease experts have taken to crafting their own screening guidelines because they are dissatisfied with the vague guidelines from the CDC. (This ties back to the lack of available tests—if we had more COVID-19 test kits, then we wouldn’t be wringing our collective hands about screening guidelines, particularly for vulnerable populations like people staying in shelters, which, no kidding, includes a significant proportion of people who are over the age of 60.)

The workforce shortage seems like it will only get worse. Social service and health care agencies often struggle with having a sufficient number of staff to address the clinical need. As people call out due to illness, whether COVID-19 or otherwise, this will turn into a vicious cycle: Fewer staff for a constant or growing need means that those staff will get tired and sick, which increases the likelihood that they will call out, and if the return to work rate doesn’t match the “attrition” rate, then soon there will be only minimum staffing at best. We also cannot expect individual people to successfully address systemic problems. It is not uncommon for people who go into social and health services to overwork (whether in quantity, quality, or both); this is unsustainable during usual times, let alone during an epidemic.

Social distancing seems like it will have the highest yield. The Institute for Disease Modeling published a paper specific to King and Snohomish Counties (the “epicenter” of the outbreak in the US) about the importance of social distancing. It is both compelling and disturbing. I don’t know how to successfully balance this with the clinical services that the medical team provides to the agency. Telehealth options are limited because of the population we serve (i.e., they generally don’t have telephones), though we plan to implement some creative ideas to at least try to keep people out of emergency departments.

It’s a weird time. We continue to do the best that we can, while recognizing that what comes next may knock us off our feet.