UPDATE ON ANDRINA'S MOTHER

Thank you Andrina for this update on your mother.  Kudos to you for helping her do the right thing for herself. This new place sounds just right for her in many ways.  Of course we would have preferred that she had a warm dry place indoors to indulge in her enjoyment of two or three cigarettes per day, but hopefully one day, through hard work, devotion, perseverance and patience we will knock some sense into the public health tyrants' heads and we will see civility and harmony reinstated in society starting with our most deserved members:   the vulnerable elderly. 

We have managed to find a private facility for my mother. It too has a non smoking policy but as long as she is well enough and  wishes to have a cigarette she is free to go outside to smoke and join others who also enjoy a cigarette a couple of times a day.  Chairs and ashtrays have even been provided for this purpose! A simple chair and ashtray have become a treasure.

 

Those in wheelchairs are taken outdoors if they wish to smoke. When seniors are given access to the outdoors they are also enjoying  nature, fresh air and friendship with others who have a common interest. The most important thing is freedom to choose and not to be stuck in a lock-up facility like street criminals! 

It has been difficult to take her outdoors twice a day but with the help of friends we managed to do just that. We could not stand by and watch her beg staff to take her outside for just ten minutes. Begging became her nightmare and ours too and not one that any of us will soon forget.

My mother will now have all meals provided in a beautifully appointed dining room , assistance with bathing, a hairdresser in the facility, medications dispensed and a measure of safety as well as privacy. Most importantly she will have freedom of access to the complete facility and be encouraged to talk with others at the same level as herself. Until now she has been with residents who for the most part are unable to speak because of dementia or severe strokes and other impairments. She has been using plastic cups for coffee and plastic juice glasses like one would give a little child.  Thank goodness she is a reader and listens to world issues on TV. There have been few activities in the time she has been in this lock-up facility.

 

God bless the other individuals who are such lovely people but for the moment my mother and her happiness has become our only concern.

Basically at the new facility they are given their rights as they would be at home. Independence is encouraged and so is wellness. There is a  bill of rights in Canada for seniors in long term care facilities private or government run. This should be read by all Canadians especially those who have loved ones in Ontario long-term care homes. Please read this and pass it along if possible.

http://www.cleo.on.ca/english/pub/onpub/PDF/seniors/everyres.pdf

We all know there is not a perfect place for seniors to live once they have given up home ownership or private apartments. What is important  is that family, friends and community attempt to ensure safety, security, wellness, happiness and independence. We must do more for seniors both in private and government run facilities. Surely at this point in their lives it is wrong to put them to bed at 6.30 PM as is often the case in government  run facilities. My mother was unable to have a bath because one staff member called in sick and that situation made it impossible to give baths that evening. 

I am sad for those we leave behind but happy for my mother who might have a few years of enjoyment left in her life. She will now be able to have her own bed and chair from home and even her own linens. She might for the first time in months find a little joy in living. She is happy to make the move and though a bit anxious about the changes she looks forward to a better life. 

Thanks everyone for your support.

Andrina Lejon

"Principles are never a good enough excuse for cruelty and lack of compassion" -- Dan Romano -- C.A.G.E

 

A comment to the following letter that we received from one of our readers would be tainted with mixed emotions such as anger, sadness and resentment.  Nothing constructive is ever obtained from such emotions we will therefore abstain from commenting.   

My mother, a recent but hopefully  temporary resident of a Stratford Ontario Nursing facility is 82 years old. She has smoked for 62 years! Some idiots in the health ministry/ Stratford Ontario bylaws have decided to ban smoking within 9 meters of this facility. Also, staff are not allowed to accompany her to smoke outdoors. My mother has become slightly physically disabled and she requires assistance even to go outdoors. It matters not that a verandah of 70 ft or more is in place because that verandah (mostly unused) is off limits also. This facility is a relatively good care place to be but unfortunately the short staff situation has become a problem. If the government would provide even one more staff my mother and others could have a daily cigarette. Has anyone ever seen or heard an elderly person beg for a cigarette while in a nursing home? Sadly, this is the case for my mother. She quite literally begged them to let her have a cigarette. She was independent until a short time ago so begging is new to her.
 
I should mention she smokes 2 perhaps 3 cigarettes a day and healthwise when this is withdrawn, her last enjoyment of life is being denied. Firstly it was her driver license, secondly her partially disabled body was in trouble and now she is forbidden to smoke ( a legal cigarette ) even on the verandah. How anyone in power could do this to an elderly citizen is beyond my scope of understanding especially one who has smoked for 62 years and is unable to defend or protect her rights. Strangely as a smoker she is very beautiful in appearance and looks 10 years younger than her age.
   
Compassion has vanished and so has her right to smoke. They protect her privacy but strip her freedoms. It is horrifying to think what else Canada might do or is doing to its elderly. None of us expected this to be happening in my mother's new residence. For God's sake someone help the elderly who are being denied their basic rights! At some point we will all have to walk the walk and I wonder what it will be like for us in the hands of these fanatics who have decided to remove all of our risk behaviors. I can only say this is not done with

" alcohol" because many of our law makers are drunks! Believe me when I say that I would prefer to sit next to a smoker than a "drunken" arrogant law maker! Only drunks and idiots believe the manipulated stats if it will reduce the payouts for elderly in long term care.

Allow her to smoke on the verandah with the assistance required.. It is her right to do so. Dictated by compassion instead of draconian laws would enable us to rectify this for an elderly citizen, who does not have many years left. She did pay her taxes for decades and this is her reward -- often referred to as the "golden years". Let me mention that my grandmother (her mother) lived to age 99 complete with second hand smoke. She never had a surgery of any kind in her life. My mother had one surgery at age 60 or so.  Health wise the smoking itself had not harmed my grandmother and if in fact it finally does harm my mother at 82 years old that is her own choice from a life time of smoking but not from 3 cigarettes a day at this point in time. Her doctor knows about her smoking and of course he prefers she does not smoke but he does not dictate her life and agrees that a couple of cigarettes a day no longer can harm her at this age. She has told me to be sure and let her smoke as a last wish before she dies.

Part of the year (in winter ) I live with my Italian born partner who has Parkinson's disease and for this reason we must return to Italy for his health and for him to visit specialists and take part in the trials of new medicines. Because of this we had to arrange a compassionate man who will take my mother outdoors once a day. Also, a female caregiver who is willing to take her outdoors three times a week. This is all at our own cost. What do residents do who are living on a small govt. pension? My family is very much anti smoking and believes she is better off to be distracted from her dirty harmful habit. I feel alone in my quest to give her assurance that she is a worthwhile effort no matter her addiction. I believe she has a right to smoke. This is a lady who reads world history and economics and is not easily distracted by child-like activities that take place in many nursing homes today.

It has left a foul taste so I have begun to think of my own aging and will have to make a decision on which country I should live in and what care might be provided. We must begin at a younger age so that we have a measure of control regarding the facility where we will spend our "golden years" should we ever reach them. Who will protect our rights and who will deny us the simple pleasures we have gotten used to throughout a lifetime? Who will it be to lock the doors and inform us we must stay indoors because there is a lack of staff to

assist us to the outside for a fresh air walk, and/or a cigarette? Pity the poor souls who must live in these conditions of fanaticism set down by our health ministries and governments. The elderly have been silenced and have no hope to recover a measure of independence. God help us all for allowing this to happen.

Last night in the rain I managed to push my Mom in a wheelchair outdoors. Having a slight disability myself made it next to impossible but after some effort we managed with an umbrella in tow to let her have the evening enjoyment of a cigarette. She said «thank you thank you thank you" Poor lady outside in the rain like a second class citizen but it was worth it just to see her smile.
 
"This ministry thought it could de-normalize smoking but what it has achieved is non other than the normalization of bigotry and intolerance. " 

"Principles are never a good enough excuse for cruelty and lack of compassion" -- Dan Romano -- C.A.G.E

"Why, then 'tis none to you; for there is nothing either good or bad,
 but thinking makes it so: to me it is a prison."
 - William Shakespeare
  
Thanks for reading this letter.
  
Andrina Lejon.

THE PERLEY VETERAN SMOKING ROOM

An update on the Perley Veteran smoking room (for background see THE PERLEY VETERANS SAGA CONTINUES and ARE PEOPLE RESIDENTS OR INMATES?).

While they finally got their room, at least one journalist – Earl McRae – is starting to understand how over the top the fear of second hand smoke has become. Actually, although we know that the propaganda does feed the hype of a number of hypochondriacs, we don’t believe that most people are afraid of second hand smoke. Many non-smokers simply don’t speak out because 1) They don’t care since it’s not affecting their lives 2) Go along with it because they don’t like the smell of burning tobacco. It is too bad that many people only care and get involved in an issue when it affects them directly and by then it’s already too late because the precedent has been established. Many of the modern day campaigns against this and that, take their model from the anti-smoking campaign. For those who are apathetic to the smoking issue, may we remind them that ‘’first they came for the jews…’’.

Room to improve

Veterans finally have their smoking lounge, some of the time ...

By EARL MCRAE, OTTAWA SUN

The aged war vet was angry. I encountered him in the corridor leaving the smoking room at the Perley and Rideau Veterans Health Centre where he'd just had his third cigarette of the day.
Yes. Believe it. The renovated room is finally open. After months of opening promises and letdowns that confused and frustrated the smokers who had to go outside to indulge their pleasure -- their frail health vulnerable to rotten weather -- the room that the benevolent you, the public, made possible with some $80,000 in donations opened last Thursday.

I went over yesterday to check it out, not expecting anymore glitches, (surely no more glitches), and saw the sign: Hours Of Operation 9:15-17:00 Daily.

Hold it. The room is open only between 9:15 in the morning and 5 o'clock in the afternoon?

"No one told us this," said the vet bitterly. "It's saying 'We don't like you smoking, so we're only going to let you smoke up to 5 o'clock.' They're treating us like children. Bloody ridiculous."

Ridiculous, indeed. Does the Perley and Rideau think smokers automatically stop smoking at 5 p.m. each day only to automatically start again at 9:15 a.m.? What is the room -- a retail shop with closing and opening hours, including for holidays?

Does the Perley and Rideau believe bad weather only happens between 9:15 a.m. and 5 p.m. after which lovely weather automatically sets in making it a delight for the smokers to once again go outside between 5 p.m. and 9:15 a.m. the next day?

"I had to go outside last night to smoke," said the vet. "Why in blazes can't that room be open 24 hours? I'm telling you, they're trying to discourage us from smoking. Sure I'm addicted, but it's what I enjoy. At my goddamn age in life, I don't need do-gooders trying to get me to stop."

The room for the smokers is off a smaller non-smoking room that connects to the main corridor. The smoking room is windowless, not large. Maximum Occupancy -- 6 Persons, says its sign. Six? It's big enough to comfortably seat more. It has two green, hard plastic chairs. A round table with two ashtrays. Thirty-eight butts are in the ashtrays.

Another sign on the smoking room door: You Have To Live Here To Smoke Here. And Due To The Grave Health Effects Of Second-Hand Smoke, Employees Are Not Required To Enter. Grave health effects from second-hand smoke? From the smoke that is being provincially-standard, state-of-the-art ventilated to the outside? Give me a colossal break. You'd think "employees" would be stepping into the screaming hell of a thousand, torturous, diseases.

FIRE-RETARDANT APRONS

And in the outer-room, what were those six plastic, beige aprons hanging on hooks, aprons with the printed words Smoking Lounge?

Fire-retardant aprons? The smokers so careless they have to put on these aprons, kind of like an apron being put on a child in a highchair? Aprons to be worn voluntarily? Or enforced?

I phoned Paul Finn. He's managing director of the Perley and Rideau Foundation that co-ordinated the fund-raising. A non-smoker, Finn has been a huge supporter of the room for the smokers. A hero, no villain. The delays, the glitches, were outside his control.

The closing and opening hours sign. "The room doesn't shut down at 5 p.m. until the next morning. By law, it has to close each day for cleaning, but only for two hours and 15 minutes after 5 p.m. Except for that, it's open 24 hours." The sign is wrong, he says, needs to be clarified, and will be.

The aprons? He was puzzled. "I don't know about that. I didn't see them. I'll find out and let you know on Monday."

Finn said there will be more furnishings for the room to make it pleasant, including wall ceramics, and a large, flat-screen, high definition TV. "We want to thank all those who made the room possible. Since it opened, we've received calls from people saying thank you."

On the wall outside the entrance off the corridor, are two gold plaques: One crediting the "individuals and businesses" who "generously supported" the room; the other a dedication of the room on behalf of District G, Ontario Command, the Royal Canadian Legion.

The words on those two got it right.

ARE PEOPLE RESIDENTS OR INMATES?

In the following article, Mr. Dave Brown from the Ottawa Citizen, describes to us how he was thrown out of the Carlingview Manor, a long-term facility when he attempted to interview a perfectly lucid 60 year old smoker who took the leadership to fight for a smoking room for the 40 smokers in the facility.

Kudos to Mr. Brown for bringing yet another horror story to the public’s attention and shame on the legislators of the Smoke Free Ontario Act for having created such a barbaric situation for the elderly who are not only put in danger when left unattended in the cold to smoke, but whose constitutional basic rights are also violated by tyrannical house rules in these homes.

Will Mr. Delahunt, have the same fate as the other four known Canadians who, dare we say, were murdered by such an irresponsible, inhuman legislation? Is this the type of society the rest of us want for our retirement years? Where is the outrage from the relatives of these seniors? Where is the outrage from the public? Incidentally, with a little bit of luck, the Perley Veterans will get their room in February 2008 as you can read here. Let’s remember that this 80 000 $ room will be dismantled in five years as we reported here. The public's generosity is a clear sign that the citizenry does not want to punish smokers, however as generous as their gesture was, it is not the public’s responsibility or duty to finance these rooms. Anti-tobacco has created this situation, anti-tobacco should be held accountable for the suffering, deaths and dilapidation of public funds they have caused! If you are outraged and disgusted by this situation, you can tell us, but more importantly please call, write or visit your MP’s and MPP’s and let them know exactly how you feel.

Facility curbs right to meet
Order to end interview raises question: Are people residents or inmates?

Dave Brown, The Ottawa Citizen Published: Monday, January 14, 2008

The war against smoking has fallout as the vanquished discover they've lost not only the right to smoke, but in some cases, basic Charter rights -- like freedom of speech and freedom of assembly.

One week ago, I was ordered out of the lobby of Carlingview Manor, a long-term care facility on Carling Avenue. Apparently, the resident who invited me had not first sought management approval for the visit. The order came from the home's director, Bruce Peterkin.

I didn't leave quietly and, in a later telephone conversation, apologized to Mr. Peterkin for the temporary loss of my volume control. Volume doesn't show in print, but I'm still screaming.

An interview with resident Don Delahunt about his efforts to get a smoking room at Carlingview Manor took a darker turn when the long-term care facility's director intervened, and said the reporter needed permission to speak to Mr. Delahunt -- who is not of diminished capacity and has the paperwork to prove it. Don Delahunt is 60 years old, a smoker, and he's sane. He has the paperwork to prove it. It was part of his medical package when he moved in after months in hospital. He had a stroke July 27. It left him blind and in a wheelchair. He's one of 40 smokers in the place, and they want a smoking room. He took on a leadership role in the fight.

It was my use of a notebook that triggered the alarm that an interview was in progress, and Mr. Peterkin appeared. When his order to leave was refused, he said police would be called. Fine. I'll wait. But Mr. Peterkin stayed, and it became clear an interview would be impossible.

The only way it would happen, he said, would be if I left, called him, and had my acceptance of Mr. Delahunt's invitation approved. The story suddenly moved from smoking to basic rights. Perhaps if Mr. Delahunt invited me to his private quarters upstairs?

I was told to leave, call, and talk about it. My volume increased. He said he would make himself available for our talk later, but meanwhile, had more pressing matters.

On the edge of losing my temper, I left. Mr. Peterkin called later to tell me I had been approved, and gave his view on the smoking issue. He said government regulations shut down the manor's smoking room more than a year ago, and new regulations make upgrading costs prohibitive. It's the same for 630 similar long-term care homes in Ontario.

But the issue now was the right of the institution to control residents' rights to speak to whomever they want -- or to use the lobby for such conversations.

Are they residents or inmates? Is there a fear of whistleblowing or complaining?

The need to protect a person of diminished capacity is understandable, but should not equal care be taken to protect the rights of the able?

Mr. Peterkin referred the issue to head office. That's Central Care Corporation in Mississauga, with 90 seniors facilities in Canada, and the spokeswoman is Mary Nestor.

It's a confusing issue, she said, pointing to just some of the legislation that governs such homes -- The Residential Tenancies Act (2006), Landlord and Tenants Act, Nursing Homes Act, Charitable Homes Act, Municipal Homes Act and the list goes on. The Smoke Free Ontario Act is in there, too.

She supported Mr. Peterkin's handling of the situation.

Ann Dobbins didn't. A registered nurse and long-time seniors advocate, she is now a researcher and liaison officer with Alavida Lifestyles, a new player in Ottawa's retirement residence field. She called the approach "ridiculous" and a "violation of rights. They (residents) have a right to talk to anybody they want to."

It's a situation that is growing more complex as legislators grind out more legislation.

My suggestion: If management is concerned about a resident conferring, its first question should be to itself. Is there a power of attorney on file for that patient? If there is, step in immediately. If there isn't and you step in, you're out of line and don't be surprised if somebody raises a voice of objection.

I think I just withdrew my apology.

With Mr. Delahunt and myself at the lobby meeting was Howard King, 87, another resident/inmate proudly born and raised in Sydney, N.S. He said he's been smoking for 80 years. He offered something to think about: If they (anti-smoking campaigners) are worried about polluting the air, they should think again about a room with exhaust. He said he's pretty sure not every resident is, like smokers, stepping outside to pass gas. Ask him if he always does that, and he'll give you a look of great piety.

Society declared war on smoking. We won. What's happening now is the mopping-up phase, and we're giving no quarter. We've become mean. It's tantamount to shooting the wounded.