Philip: “possession of alcohol” should also include “or other intoxicants”
Sigi: are we including the back of roses and the wall in this proposal right now?
Ron: seems like this might be too much to tackle right now – but we can certainly revisit
Gary: if you are unconscious because of a prescription medication that you are supposed to take, what will happen
Greigh: who will decide if someone is unconscious because of drugs or alcohol
Ron: the group felt strongly that it is ultimately up to the staff to make a call
Michael: will the police be called if someone is belligerent?
Greigh: right now it is cold out – so someone who is really drunk would be in the building, but what if it is summer and someone is sleeping under a tree?; is it belligerence followed by unconsciousness
Ron: seems like generally, we would let someone sleep it off and then have a conversation with the person; would not be in favor of the police picking up some unconscious guy
Matt: think that OCP has dealt with this in the past pretty well, but it seems like we have slacked off a bit; maybe it is time to step it up again; all in all, this place isn’t meant for people to come beat people up and be belligerent
Sigi: think we need to be a little more careful about this drinking thing – people in early recovery who are around, we shouldn’t have people passed out in the bathroom or people coming in drunk
Gary: unconscious outside – if someone was having medical issues because of being passed out because we didn’t do anything – don’t want this
Greigh: if people are here passed out inside, this can make people feel uncomfortable – looks bad for donors or kids
Ron: maybe it is a case by case thing; maybe if the back room is available and we can get them in there, we do; seems like all of these various situations would be hard to nail down now – maybe we just realize that it is case by case – we should move towards establishing enforcement;
John: proposing that we use: “Any or all of the following will constitute a one week ban for a first offence, and a one month ban for the second offense. 1) Possession of alcohol (open or closed) or other intoxicants on OCP property; 2) Intoxication that results in open belligerence; or 3) Intoxication that leads to unconsciousness. If a person would like to continue to be part of the OCP community after the one month ban, then he/she will have to appear before membership to make such a request, and the membership will decide the next steps.”; Jared seconds; 9 votes for, 1 vote no, 1 abstain; no block
Matt: sees where we are going with this, and other than AA and the breakfast thing, what will we do with people to help them
Ron: what are positive approaches to dealing with someone struggling with alcohol
Gary: if you’ve been coming here for 4 years, you need to either get to AA, live at the farm, go to the breakfasts, or something; at some point, it has to be on the person;
Philip: there is the farm, celebrate recovery is starting in a few weeks – seems like there are a lot of options, but someone needs to commit – there are options
Ron: we have tried multiple times to offer rides to AA; 12 steps has revolutionized our understanding of recovery; the best thing we could do is recommend AA; there is a Christian recovery program – celebrate recovery; lets brainstorm more ways we can help;
Matt: just for the record, seems like everyone is speaking to Matt – but if you are someone new here, should you have a one week ban if you have a problem with addiction; is a new person just going to get a one week ban without even knowing the rules; are we going to give a person a chance to know what the rules are
Ron: having discussion before a vote happens is very important – lets not take a lot of time with this concept
Heather: positive things that can be done – have we ever sat down with a person who has a drinking problem – actually try to talk to them like they are a real person – let them know we want them to be a part of this community and that they are killing themselves;
Michael: they used to have someone here who participated in the 12 step thing here at OCP
Philip: where are we right now?;
Ron: we are brainstorming about positive approaches
Ron: case by case is a key phrase – staff takes in to consideration someone who has never been here before; hope that this group or the membership will make the rules known to everyone; this is a public place – you cannot go to the library and just pass out;
Sigi: Hannah Love helped work on an orientation group
Gary: there is a medication, that can help someone stop drinking – csb and rmh have things like this – even the person who comes here everyday for 4 years;
Matt: trying to get at the positive side for the newcomer who might be an alcoholic
Ron: alcoholism is a very old problem – no one has been able to figure it out; have spent lots of time talking with alcoholics and very few have gotten sober; if you knew how to get alcoholics sober, you would be rich; very last bullets under teams, we decided to have a recovery/spiritual team who can address this issue from OCP’s perspective – making sure there is an AA book on the shelf, experimenting with AA meetings in the main room, etc; lets set it aside for now, but this team is something we want;
Gary: once an alcoholic, always an alcoholic;
Mark: can we get back on the topic of enforcement – if we continue to get sidetracked
Ron: the next rule is “No guns or brandishing or weapons.”
Matt: sometimes Matt will come from HARTS with a knife in pocket – but this seems ok unless it is being brandished
Ron: seems like our alcohol rule is a little light to apply to a weapon; gut thought: straight to the month
Philip: with a gun – seems like we need to tell the person first; brandishing a weapon seems different – anger and seems scary;
Michael: if someone pulled a knife on someone, would we automatically call the cops or be happy to have someone leave for a month
Matt: seems different if someone pulls out a gun; even a month seems not ok; you can fight someone or restrain someone with a knife, and a gun is a lot more serious; if someone comes in a pulls a knife on someone, there should be a serious response – we don’t even know the person or what they are capable of;
Ron: seems like if someone has a gun to someone’s head, that is a serious issue; we talk softly and call the police to try to get the person arrested;
Sigi: we need to have a very low threshold concerning brandishing a weapon; this seems more serious ;
Heather: agree for the most part with the rule of now; have a knife and was trying to show Christina – is this brandishing?
Philip: maybe we should say for the enforcement piece for these rules, we should assume that people know the rules ahead of time so we don’t need to talk about that each time; seems like the group feels like having a gun or brandishing a weapon both seem like one month offenses;
Ron: you can’t brandish a weapon anywhere, so why do we have to go light on someone who should already know; it is merciful to kick someone out for one month and not call the police
Michael: what if someone brandishes a weapon or actually gets hit and then defends themselves;
Ron: if someone is defending themselves, what about that – get kicked out for a month for defending themselves
Michael: what about someone threatening someone but not actually being physically violent
Alex: the police wouldn’t expect someone just to lay there who is being hit, but we are not the police and we shouldn’t think like the police; if we could come up with better ideas, we would, but we have these rules because we can’t always come up with better results – if someone is up for conflict mediation, that seems like a better response
Ron: seems like Michael’s question is a good one but not addressed through this rule; these are the rules, and Alex’s points seem a little slippery; we are being merciful and willing to let people come back
Heather: heard what Schrag was saying about self defense – there are sometimes when people don’t start a problem and have a problem coming after them;
No comments:
Post a Comment