COMING SOON: A 12-PART SERIES ON VANCOUVER CITY HALL

 🤪 COMING SOON: A 12-PART SERIES ON VANCOUVER CITY HALL

There are a lot of questions being raised about transparency, accountability, public money, senior staff departures, development, public land and access to information at Vancouver City Hall.

Rather than make sweeping accusations, we're going to slow down and follow the paper trail.

Over the next 12 posts, we're going to examine what we can actually document — what we know, what we don't know, what City officials say, what independent investigations have found, and what questions remain unanswered.

🔎 THE SERIES

1. The $6 Million Question
Vancouver's extraordinary 2025 severance payments. Who received them, why, and what can the public actually find out?

2. Goodbye, QuickFind
An aging public employee directory disappeared in 2024. Was it simply obsolete? Probably. But why wasn't a modern replacement created?

3. Where Did All the Senior Officials Go?
A timeline of major departures from City Hall and what has — and hasn't — been publicly explained.

4. Who Watches the Watchers?
The City Clerk, Deputy City Clerk and their statutory responsibilities — and why their departures raised questions among councillors.

5. The Chief Building Official & The Single-Stair Debate
Building safety, development pressure, Space Efficient Stairs and the chronology surrounding the departure of Saul Schwebs.

6. 601 Beach Crescent: Follow the Money
The Auditor General's findings on one Vancouver land transaction — including the nearly $13-million calculation error and $12.1-million CAC issue.

7. The $26 Million Interest Question
What the Auditor General actually found about delayed land payments — and why calling it "$26 million lost" isn't quite accurate.

8. Vancouver's Public Land
How the City sells and manages public property, what the Auditor General found, and why this matters to every Vancouver taxpayer.

9. Warnings That Went Unheeded
Recommendations dating back to 2016 and 2018 — and the uncomfortable question of why problems identified years ago weren't fully addressed.

10. Transparency: Promise vs. Reality
What was promised during the 2022 election — and what the public can actually see four years later.

11. The Bigger Picture
Do the individual stories form a pattern? We'll look at the evidence without pretending that correlation automatically proves causation.

12. Who Is Watching City Hall?
The final piece: what does democratic accountability look like when citizens have difficulty seeing who is making decisions, who is leaving, how public money is being handled, and why?

🧐 AND WE WANT YOU TO JOIN US

Don't just take our word for it.

Read the documents. Check the sources. Follow the links. Look at Council minutes. Read the Auditor General's reports. Search the FOI releases. Ask questions.

If you find something we've missed — tell us.

If you disagree with our interpretation — tell us why.

If you have primary documents, firsthand knowledge or information that can be independently verified — share it.

The goal isn't to tell you what to think.

The goal is to make it possible for more people to see what is happening and decide for themselves.

Because City Hall belongs to the public.

And in a democracy, we are not just spectators. We are witnesses. 👀🏛️

#Vancouver #CityHall #Transparency #Accountability #CivicPolitics #FollowTheMoney

Before We Knew Its Name: My Story of the Beginning of COVID

 Before We Knew Its Name: My Story of the Beginning of COVID

There is something I have wanted to write down for a long time.

Not because I can prove that I knew COVID was coming.

I couldn't.

Not because I can prove that I had COVID before it was officially recognized.

I can't.

But because I was there before we knew what was happening, and I remember what that felt like.

And I worry that children who were very young during the pandemic will grow up knowing the history without understanding the experience.

So this is my little piece of that history.

October 2019

I was working in Tofino.

There were bad coughs going around, and then I became really sick myself.

I went to the doctor on October 3, 2019.

I recently found the actual medical note.

It says:

Sore throat. Cough. Sinus infection. Facial pain. Longer than six days. Sinusitis.

There was no swab.

I remember the cough being really bad.

The doctor gave me medication, and eventually I recovered.

At the time, there was nothing particularly mysterious about it. It was an illness. People got sick. We didn't have COVID in our vocabulary.

But looking back now, I sometimes wonder.

Was it COVID?

I don't know.

There is no test result waiting for me in an old file that can answer that question.

And I don't want to pretend that my memory is scientific evidence.

It isn't.

But the illness happened.

The medical visit happened.

And I remember how sick I was.

Back to Vancouver

I left Tofino sick and returned to Vancouver.

I saw my child.

Then other people became sick.

I sometimes wonder whether I passed whatever I had to them, and whether it went further from there.

But again, I don't know.

That is the uncomfortable part of looking backward.

We can reconstruct dates.

We can find old medical records.

We can remember where we travelled.

But we can't necessarily reconstruct which virus moved from one person to another.

And at the time, none of us were thinking that way.

There were no masks on people coughing in public.

There were no COVID signs.

There was no social distancing.

There was no pandemic vocabulary.

Life was still normal.

Mexico

I went to Mexico.

People from all over the world travelled to places like Zipolite. International visitors came and went constantly.

I recovered.

Life continued.

And then came January 2020.

Suddenly, people seemed to be getting sick everywhere.

We thought it was a bad cold.

What else would we have thought?

We didn't yet understand what was happening.

Then my friend, who taught ESL online, started talking about what was happening in Italy.

Something was very wrong.

People weren't simply getting ordinary winter colds.

Hospitals were becoming overwhelmed.

The news became increasingly frightening.

I remember thinking:

Maybe I should go home.

But I had plans.

I had a ticket for the end of March.

I had a big trip around Mexico planned.

I wasn't ready for my life to suddenly change.

None of us were.

Then everything happened at once

One flight was cancelled.

I had to buy another ticket with WestJet.

It cost me around $600.

Suddenly people were frightened.

Airports felt different.

The atmosphere changed.

The world seemed to be holding its breath.

I came home.

And even though I wasn't sick anymore, I isolated myself.

I didn't know what was happening.

I didn't want to infect anyone.

I didn't want to be part of the problem.

I remember thinking that I was doing the responsible thing.

Meanwhile, people were still going to work.

We were all trying to figure out what the rules were while the rules themselves seemed to change every day.

The announcement

Then Justin Trudeau told Canadians that they should apply for emergency financial assistance.

I applied the same day.

That moment is burned into my memory because it was the beginning of something much bigger for me.

The pandemic didn't simply become a public-health event.

It changed my life.

My finances.

My work.

My housing situation.

My sense of security.

Things I had taken for granted suddenly weren't secure anymore.

And the effects didn't simply disappear when the emergency was over.

Some of them stayed.

What I don't know

I don't know whether I had COVID in October 2019.

I don't know whether the people around me had it.

I don't know whether anything I encountered in Tofino, Vancouver or Mexico was connected to what would later become the pandemic.

And I don't want to invent answers.

There is already enough misinformation surrounding COVID.

What I do know is what I experienced.

I was seriously sick in October 2019.

I have the doctor's note.

No swab was taken.

I travelled.

People around me became sick.

Then, by early 2020, the world began changing.

And suddenly the thing that had seemed impossible became reality.

Why am I writing this now?

Because memories disappear.

Because children who were five, six or seven years old in 2020 may remember masks and empty streets but not understand why everyone was so frightened.

Because young people born during the pandemic will grow up hearing arguments about it without necessarily knowing what ordinary life felt like.

And because history isn't only made by presidents, prime ministers, scientists and governments.

History is also made by ordinary people who suddenly find themselves living through something nobody expected.

I don't know whether my October 2019 illness was COVID.

Maybe it was.

Maybe it wasn't.

I may never know.

But I know I was there.

I remember Tofino.

I remember being sick.

I remember coming home.

I remember Mexico.

I remember hearing about Italy.

I remember the cancelled flight.

I remember buying another ticket.

I remember isolating even though I wasn't sick anymore.

And I remember the moment when ordinary life stopped feeling ordinary.

Maybe that is what I really want to preserve.

Not a theory.

Not an accusation.

A memory.

Because someday, the children who lived through COVID will be the ones telling their own children what happened.

And I hope they remember that before the history books were written, there were millions of ordinary people standing in the middle of it, wondering:

What the hell is happening?

Reflective questions:

1. What do you remember about the world before COVID had a name?

2. When did you first realize that something much bigger was happening?

3. What memories from those early months do you hope future generations never forget?

#BeforeWeKnewItsName #COVID19Memories #PandemicHistory #Remembering2020 #PersonalHistory #LivedExperience #NeverForget #HistoryThroughOurEyes

The Winnipeg Lab Story We Almost Forgot

 The Winnipeg Lab Story We Almost Forgot

There are some stories from the beginning of COVID-19 that disappeared beneath the enormous amount of information, misinformation, fear and political fighting that followed.

This is one I don't want forgotten.

It is not a story about proving where COVID-19 came from. It is a story about two scientists, Canada's highest-security infectious-disease laboratory, China, virus research, national security concerns — and a government that kept Canadians waiting for answers.

The scientists were Dr. Xiangguo Qiu and her husband, Keding Cheng, both Canadian citizens originally from China. Qiu was a highly regarded scientist at Canada's National Microbiology Laboratory (NML) in Winnipeg, a facility capable of working with some of the world's most dangerous pathogens. Cheng also worked there.

In July 2019 — months before the first recognized COVID-19 outbreak — the RCMP escorted both scientists out of the Winnipeg laboratory. Their security clearances were eventually revoked, and in January 2021 they were terminated by the Public Health Agency of Canada.

For a long time, Canadians were given very few details about why.

Then there was Wuhan

One of the facts that made the story particularly difficult to ignore was that the Winnipeg laboratory had established scientific relationships with institutions in China.

On March 31, 2019, the Winnipeg NML transferred live samples of Ebola and Henipah viruses to the Wuhan National Biosafety Laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

That transfer was documented by Parliament. It was not evidence that COVID-19 was transferred from Canada, and it is important not to turn that fact into something it does not prove.

But the timing is remarkable.

Three months later, Qiu and Cheng were escorted from Canada's highest-security microbiology laboratory.

And then, several months after that, the world would hear the name Wuhan in an entirely different and terrifying context.

What were they actually accused of?

This is where the story became much more serious than the rumours circulating on Facebook in 2020.

Canadian parliamentary documents released years later describe concerns involving security procedures, intellectual property, undisclosed relationships with Chinese institutions and the handling of sensitive scientific information.

According to CSIS assessments summarized in the parliamentary record, investigators concluded that Qiu had transferred scientific knowledge and materials to China and that her activities created a national-security concern.

There were also concerns about Cheng's activities and his knowledge of Qiu's relationships and conduct.

The parliamentary record says CSIS had assessed that, if the two were returned to the Winnipeg laboratory, they could potentially disclose sensitive or classified information without authorization.

Their security clearances were revoked.

They were eventually fired.

These are not claims taken from a Facebook meme. They appear in Canadian parliamentary records and government documents.

And yet, there is something we still cannot honestly say

We cannot say that these scientists created COVID-19.

We cannot say that SARS-CoV-2 was transferred from Winnipeg to Wuhan.

We cannot say that their removal from the laboratory proves a connection to the pandemic.

The evidence does not establish those things.

That distinction matters.

But the opposite claim — that there was “nothing unusual” happening — doesn't fit the documentary record either.

There were investigations.

There were security concerns.

There were relationships with Chinese institutions.

There was the transfer of live Ebola and Henipah viruses to Wuhan.

There were concerns about intellectual property and information security.

There was an RCMP removal from the laboratory.

There were revoked security clearances.

And there was a long fight in Parliament over access to the government's documents.

Why didn't Canadians know all of this in 2020?

This may be the part I find most troubling.

During the first years of COVID-19, Canadians were trying to understand an unprecedented pandemic while governments around the world were making enormous decisions affecting our lives.

Meanwhile, the details surrounding the Winnipeg laboratory case were largely unavailable.

In 2021, the House of Commons Special Committee on Canada-China Relations demanded documents concerning the transfer of Ebola and Henipah viruses to Wuhan and the subsequent termination of Qiu and Cheng.

The government initially provided heavily redacted material, and Parliament continued fighting for access to the underlying documents.

It wasn't until February 2024 that a large collection of documents was finally tabled in Parliament.

That means some of the information Canadians were arguing about on social media during the pandemic was information that the public simply didn't have access to yet.

So what should we remember?

Not a conspiracy.

Not a convenient political story.

Not a claim that has never been proven.

Remember the documented facts.

Canada operated one of the world's most sophisticated high-containment laboratories in Winnipeg.

Two scientists working there developed extensive relationships with Chinese scientific institutions.

Live Ebola and Henipah virus samples were transferred from Canada to the Wuhan Institute of Virology in March 2019.

The scientists were removed from the Winnipeg laboratory only months later.

Canadian security agencies investigated them.

Their security clearances were revoked.

They were eventually fired.

And Canadians spent years trying to obtain the government's explanation.

That is already an extraordinary story.

And perhaps the most important lesson is this:

When governments keep information secret during a crisis, people fill the empty space with rumours.

Some rumours will be ridiculous.

Some will be wrong.

But secrecy makes it much harder for ordinary people to know which is which.

I didn't write much during the early COVID years. There was so much fear, so much conflicting information and so many claims flying around that it was difficult to know what could actually be trusted.

Now, years later, some of the documents are finally public.

So I'm looking back.

Not to rewrite history.

Not to claim we know more than we do.

But because history has a way of disappearing when we stop asking questions.

And this is one Canadian story I don't think we should forget.

10 reflective questions

1. Why were these scientists removed from Canada's highest-security laboratory months before the COVID-19 pandemic began?

2. Why did Canadians have to wait years to learn more about the investigations?

3. What should governments disclose during a public-health crisis, even when national security is involved?

4. How does secrecy affect public trust?

5. Can we separate legitimate scientific collaboration from legitimate national-security concerns?

6. Why were live Ebola and Henipah virus samples transferred to Wuhan in 2019?

7. What did Canadian officials know in 2019 that the public did not?

8. How should we evaluate information when facts are released years after an event?

9. What questions about the Winnipeg laboratory still remain unanswered?

10. How much of our understanding of COVID's early history may change as more records become public?

#WinnipegLab #XiangguoQiu #KedingCheng #WuhanInstituteOfVirology #Ebola #HenipahVirus #NationalSecurity #GovernmentTransparency #COVID19History #AskQuestions

Before We Call It a Giveaway: My Songhees Ancestor, the Douglas Treaties, and Listening to History

 Before We Call It a Giveaway: My Songhees Ancestor, the Douglas Treaties, and Listening to History

By Tina Winterlik aka Zipolita

Sometimes history stops being something you read about and becomes something you realize is sitting inside your own family tree.

That happened to me when I began researching my great-great-grandmother, Theresa Eliza, a Songhees woman who lived on Vancouver Island in the 19th century.

And then there was another branch of the family tree:

My great-great-grandfather, João Ignacio d'Almada, came from the Azores, the Portuguese islands in the Atlantic.

Somewhere in colonial British Columbia, these two worlds met.

A Songhees woman.

A Portuguese immigrant from the Azores.

Their descendants became part of my family.

That makes today's conversations about treaties, land and reconciliation more than an abstract political argument for me.

It makes me want to slow down and listen.

I am not speaking for Songhees Nation

I want to be very clear about something.

I am not speaking for the Songhees Nation.

I have not reached out to Songhees Nation to tell them what they should think or do.

My ancestry does not make me an authority on Songhees history, culture or governance.

The Songhees people speak for themselves.

What I can do is tell my own family story, acknowledge where my ancestors lived, and listen respectfully when Songhees people explain their history and their position today.

Recently, I read an opinion piece by Ron Sam, Songhees Nation Chief and Chief Negotiator for the Te'mexw Treaty Association, responding to criticism of the modern treaty negotiations.

His central message stayed with me:

A treaty should not automatically be described as a giveaway.

That made me think about something we sometimes forget when talking about land.

We are looking at the present.

Our ancestors lived through the beginning of this story.

My great-great-grandmother was alive when Victoria was changing

Theresa Eliza was born around 1836.

That means she was already alive when Fort Victoria was established in 1843.

She was alive when the colonial settlement expanded.

She lived through the devastating smallpox epidemic of 1862.

And she was an adult when the Douglas Treaties were negotiated in 1850.

The dates matter.

They put a human being inside a history that can otherwise become nothing more than names on a government website.

The Douglas Treaties involving the Songhees were signed in April 1850. Federal historical records identify Douglas Treaty No. 1 with the Teechamitsa (Songhees) on April 29, followed the next day by Treaties 2 through 6 involving several Songhees groups and Esquimalt.

These agreements are part of the complicated history underlying today's relationships between First Nations and governments in British Columbia.

And there is something I think every British Columbian should understand:

Those treaties did not happen in an empty landscape.

They happened in Indigenous territories where Indigenous peoples already lived.

What were the Douglas Treaties?

The historical record tells us that James Douglas negotiated agreements with Indigenous Nations around what is now southern Vancouver Island.

The agreements involved land, reserves, compensation and continuing rights to hunt and fish on unoccupied lands.

The historical record is also stark about the material compensation associated with the Songhees agreement. One federal historical account says the Songhees surrendered their title to the District of Victoria in return for 371 blankets and a cap, along with reserve lands and certain continuing rights.

Reading that today, I have questions.

What did the people negotiating understand the agreement to mean?

What did the written English document mean to colonial officials?

What did the Indigenous signatories understand they were agreeing to?

How were concepts of land ownership understood across completely different legal and cultural systems?

And what happened afterward?

Those aren't unreasonable questions.

In fact, they are exactly the questions we should be asking if we want to understand reconciliation honestly.

Then came the Indian Act

My great-great-grandmother Theresa Eliza later married my Portuguese/Azorean ancestor.

Her marriage happened in 1876—the same year the federal Indian Act was enacted.

That coincidence stopped me in my tracks.

I began wondering what the law meant for women like her.

The Indian Act created a federal system for regulating First Nations people and reserve lands, and its status provisions contained serious gender discrimination.

Indigenous women who married non-status men could lose their legal status, while the rules historically treated Indigenous men who married non-status women very differently.

In other words, a woman's marriage could become a government decision about whether she remained legally recognized as an Indigenous person.

Imagine that.

A woman is born into a Nation.

She belongs to her family.

She carries her history.

She marries someone from another background.

And a government says her legal identity has changed.

That is not simply genealogy.

That is the power of legislation reaching directly into families.

And my family became a bridge between worlds

My ancestor Theresa was Songhees.

My ancestor João came from the Azores.

Their descendants carried both histories forward.

Portuguese.

Songhees.

Coast Salish territory.

Colonial British Columbia.

Catholic records.

Indigenous family history.

And generations later, here I am trying to piece together what happened.

Genealogy has taught me something important:

History is rarely as tidy as the categories we put on paper.

People married.

People moved.

Languages changed.

Children adapted.

Families survived.

And sometimes government paperwork recorded only a fraction of the lives people were actually living.

So when I hear the word "giveaway"...

I pause.

Not because I think every treaty proposal should be beyond criticism.

It shouldn't.

People have legitimate questions about land, access, governance, development, environmental protection and relationships between neighbouring Nations.

Those questions deserve answers.

But I don't think we should begin with the assumption that reconciliation is a government gift being handed to people who simply showed up and asked for something.

The Te'mexw treaty negotiations have been underway since 1995. They involve Songhees and four other First Nations, Canada and British Columbia, and the process has taken decades. B.C. describes the current agreements as modern treaties intended to establish long-term relationships, governance arrangements, treaty lands and certainty around rights and responsibilities.

That is not an overnight transaction.

It is the latest chapter of a much longer history.

A history that includes the Douglas Treaties.

A history that includes colonial expansion.

A history that includes the Indian Act.

A history that includes Indigenous resistance, survival and adaptation.

And a history that includes families like mine.

We don't have to agree on everything to listen

I don't expect everyone to have the same opinion about the Te'mexw treaties.

I don't.

I think people should read the agreements.

Look at the maps.

Ask questions.

Listen to neighbouring Nations.

Understand public-access provisions.

Understand governance.

Understand what land is actually being discussed.

And then form an opinion.

But there is a difference between questioning a treaty and questioning whether Indigenous people belong here.

The first is democracy.

The second erases history.

B.C.'s current information about the Te'mexw negotiations says treaty lands would be located within the respective Nations' territories and that, in the proposed arrangements, public access and recreational opportunities would continue in the provincial park lands proposed as treaty lands for Songhees and T'Sou-ke, while conservation values would be maintained.

Those details matter.

Facts matter.

And Indigenous voices matter.

I keep thinking about my grandmother's grandmother

I don't know everything about Theresa Eliza.

I don't know what she thought about the arrival of settlers.

I don't know what she thought about the Douglas Treaties.

I don't know what she thought about the church.

I don't know what she told her child about being Songhees.

And I certainly don't want to invent those answers.

What I know is that she lived.

She survived enormous change.

She raised a child.

She married a man whose family came from the Azores.

And her descendants continued.

Her story survived even when much of the surrounding history became buried beneath colonial records and changing identities.

That is why I am listening now.

Maybe reconciliation begins with changing the question

Instead of asking:

"What are they getting?"

Perhaps we should ask:

"What happened here?"

Instead of:

"Why are we giving them land?"

Perhaps:

"What were the original agreements, what happened to them, and what relationship are governments and First Nations trying to establish now?"

Instead of:

"What will they do with it?"

Perhaps:

"What does the proposed treaty actually say?"

Those are very different questions.

They don't require blind agreement.

They require curiosity.

And respect.

My family story is not a claim to speak for anyone

My great-great-grandmother being Songhees does not give me permission to speak for the Songhees Nation.

It gives me a responsibility to be careful with her story.

My great-great-grandfather coming from the Azores doesn't erase her Indigenous ancestry.

And her Songhees ancestry doesn't erase his Portuguese story.

Both are part of the complicated family history that eventually became mine.

Maybe that is one of the lessons genealogy can offer Canada.

Our histories are intertwined.

The Indigenous history of this place did not disappear when settlers arrived.

Portuguese immigrants became part of British Columbia.

Indigenous women married newcomers.

Children crossed cultural worlds.

Families adapted.

And the descendants are still here.

So I am listening

I am listening to Songhees voices.

I am learning about the Douglas Treaties.

I am learning about the Indian Act and what it did to Indigenous families.

I am trying to understand the Te'mexw negotiations without reducing them to slogans.

And I am remembering my great-great-grandmother.

Not as a political talking point.

Not as a convenient ancestry claim.

But as a woman who lived through a period of extraordinary change.

She was here before Canada became the country we know today.

Her descendants are still here.

And that is why, when I hear the word "giveaway," I think we need to be very careful.

Because before we decide that something is being given away, we should learn what happened to it in the first place.

Sometimes reconciliation begins not with having the loudest opinion—but with finally listening to the people whose history we were never taught properly.

🌿

By Tina Winterlik aka Zipolita

This is a personal reflection based on my family-history research. I do not speak for the Songhees Nation or any other First Nation. Where historical records are incomplete or uncertain, I have tried to distinguish documented facts from questions that remain unanswered.

#SongheesNation #DouglasTreaties #TemexwTreaty #IndigenousAncestry #IndianAct #Reconciliation #FirstNations #IndigenousHistory #AzoreanAncestry #BCHistory

Research 20

 

Research 20: Human History of Drugs, Trauma, and Society

⚠️ RESEARCH & CONTENT WARNING

This research post discusses historical and contemporary drug use, addiction, overdose deaths, suicide, war trauma, PTSD, prescription opioids, and the deaths of public figures. Some descriptions may be disturbing.

This is intended for education, historical discussion, and critical thinking — not medical advice or encouragement to use drugs.

Important: This is not a complete history of drugs, trauma, addiction, medicine, or human society. It is a research overview intended to identify historical patterns and raise questions for further study. Some historical accounts are incomplete, disputed, or interpreted differently by researchers. Specific causes of death and individual circumstances should be checked against reputable medical, historical, and primary sources.

Ancient and Prehistoric Drug Use

Humans have used psychoactive plants and substances for thousands of years. Archaeological and historical evidence shows that substances including alcohol, cannabis, opium, mushrooms, and medicinal plants were used in different societies for medicine, pain relief, ritual, spiritual practices, and other purposes.

Plants such as mandrake contain powerful alkaloids that can have sedative and pain-relieving effects but can also be highly toxic. Historical knowledge of medicinal plants was often passed through traditional healing systems, including women's knowledge of childbirth, menstruation, pain management, and reproductive health.

Some forms of traditional medicine were later condemned as “witchcraft” or superstition, particularly in societies where authorities attempted to control who could practice medicine and possess certain forms of knowledge.

This raises an important historical question:

When does medicine become considered a drug — and who gets to decide?

Drugs, War, Trauma, and Dependence

War has repeatedly created conditions in which people experience severe pain, injury, exhaustion, fear, grief, and psychological trauma.

19th Century Wars

During the Napoleonic era and later colonial conflicts, soldiers commonly had access to alcohol and, increasingly, opium-based medicines. Medical knowledge and pain treatment were very different from what exists today.

American Civil War — 1861–1865

Morphine was widely used to treat battlefield injuries and pain. Some soldiers subsequently developed morphine dependence. The term “soldier's disease” was historically associated with this phenomenon.

This is an important reminder that addiction cannot always be understood simply as a matter of personal weakness or morality.

World War I and World War II

Morphine, alcohol and stimulants were used in different military contexts. Some substances were prescribed or distributed to help soldiers remain awake, manage pain, or continue functioning under extreme conditions.

For some veterans, the consequences continued after the wars ended.

Korean War — 1950–1953

Alcohol and stimulants were used among military personnel, while soldiers faced extreme physical and psychological stress.

Vietnam War — 1955–1975

Drug use among American troops became a major public concern. Heroin, marijuana, amphetamines and other substances were used by some service members.

Researchers have examined the relationship between combat trauma, stress, drug availability, military culture, and later substance-use problems.

Afghanistan and Iraq

Modern veterans have faced traumatic injuries, chronic pain, combat exposure and psychological trauma. Alcohol, prescription medications and illicit substances can become part of complicated patterns of coping and dependence.

However, PTSD should never be understood as something that should be self-treated with drugs. Trauma and substance-use disorders can occur together, but effective treatment requires appropriate medical and psychological care.

A Historical Pattern

Across different periods, one pattern repeatedly appears:

Pain + trauma + access to substances + inadequate treatment can create conditions in which dependence develops.

That does not remove individual responsibility, but it does raise another question:

Are we addressing the causes of suffering, or only punishing the people who suffer?

Celebrity Deaths and Public Awareness

The deaths of famous people have often brought drug-related risks into public attention.

However, celebrity deaths also demonstrate why careful research matters. Causes of death should not be simplified or repeated from popular culture when official records tell a more complicated story.

For example:

• Marilyn Monroe (1962): Her death was officially ruled a probable suicide from a barbiturate overdose, although numerous conspiracy theories have persisted.
• Jimi Hendrix (1970): His death was associated with barbiturate intoxication and aspiration of vomit. It should not simply be described as a heroin overdose.
• Janis Joplin (1970): Died from an accidental heroin overdose.
• Jim Morrison (1971): His official cause of death was listed as heart failure. No autopsy was performed, and many later claims about drugs remain speculative.
• John Belushi (1982): Died from acute intoxication involving cocaine and heroin.
• River Phoenix (1993): Died from acute multiple-drug intoxication involving cocaine and heroin.
• Kurt Cobain (1994): Died by suicide involving a firearm. Heroin was also present, but his death should not be described simply as a heroin overdose.
• Heath Ledger (2008): Died from accidental intoxication involving multiple prescription medications.
• Michael Jackson (2009): Died from acute propofol intoxication, with other sedatives contributing.
• Whitney Houston (2012): Died from accidental drowning, with cocaine use and heart disease identified as contributing factors.
• Prince (2016): Died from an accidental fentanyl overdose.
• Tom Petty (2017): Died from accidental multiple-drug intoxication, including fentanyl and other medications.
• Mac Miller (2018): Died from accidental mixed-drug toxicity involving fentanyl, cocaine and alcohol.

The lesson is not simply that “celebrities take drugs.”

The deeper lesson is that addiction, accidental poisoning, mental-health struggles, trauma, prescription medications, illicit drug markets, and social pressures can intersect in complicated ways.

The Opioid Crisis and Big Pharma

The modern opioid crisis demonstrates another chapter in the history of pain treatment.

Prescription opioids can be medically useful for severe pain, but they can also cause dependence and overdose. During the late 20th and early 21st centuries, aggressive opioid marketing and prescribing practices contributed to widespread dependence and addiction in North America.

The crisis also raises questions about corporate responsibility, medical regulation, prescribing practices, healthcare systems, pain treatment, and individual responsibility.

It is too simple to say that one group or one industry caused everything.

It is more useful to ask:

How did medical practice, pharmaceutical marketing, regulation, economic incentives, social conditions, trauma and individual circumstances interact to create such a large crisis?

What This History Can Teach Us

1. Addiction is not new.

Humans have sought relief from pain, fear, exhaustion, illness and emotional suffering for thousands of years.

2. Drugs are not one single category.

Some substances have been medicines, religious sacraments, recreational substances, poisons, or all of these depending on the culture and historical period.

3. Criminalization and stigma have changed over time.

Substances that were once medicines can become illegal. Substances that were once condemned can later become accepted medical treatments.

4. Trauma matters.

War, violence, poverty, grief, chronic pain and psychological suffering can contribute to substance-use problems.

That does not mean everyone experiencing trauma develops addiction.

5. History is complicated.

There are no simple timelines such as:

“People used one drug, then another drug replaced it.”

Different substances have existed simultaneously across different countries, cultures and communities.

6. Research matters.

Popular stories about drugs and famous deaths are often repeated until they become accepted as fact.

Research means checking the evidence, questioning assumptions, comparing sources, and acknowledging uncertainty.

A Message for Teens

Understanding drug history does not mean approving of drug use.

It means learning how societies, medicine, war, trauma, economics, culture and human behaviour interact.

Instead of simply asking:

“Why did this person use drugs?”

we can also ask:

“What happened to this person?”

“What substances were available?”

“What did society understand about addiction at the time?”

“Was effective treatment available?”

“Who benefited financially?”

“Who was blamed?”

And perhaps most importantly:

“What could have prevented the suffering?”

This is Research 20 — a starting point, not a complete history.

The purpose of research is not to have every answer.

It is to learn how to ask better questions.

Research 18

Women, Healing, and the Criminalization of Knowledge

Introduction

For thousands of years, women in many societies played important roles as midwives, caregivers, herbalists and traditional healers.

Knowledge about plants and medicines was often passed from generation to generation through families and communities. Plants such as mandrake, mugwort and pennyroyal appear in historical sources associated with medicine, menstruation, fertility and reproductive practices.

However, many of these plants were powerful and potentially poisonous. Historical use does not mean that a substance was safe by modern medical standards.

This distinction is important:

A plant can have medicinal properties and still be dangerous.

Conflict With Authority

As professional medicine, religious institutions and legal systems developed, traditional healing practices sometimes came into conflict with established authorities.

Some women accused of witchcraft were healers or practitioners of traditional medicine. However, the history is complicated, and it would be inaccurate to suggest that witch trials were simply a campaign against female herbalists.

Accusations of witchcraft could involve many different factors, including religion, superstition, social conflict, fear, gender, politics and local disputes.

Nevertheless, the history raises an important question:

Who gets to decide which forms of healing are legitimate — and which are considered dangerous, immoral or criminal?

Reproductive Knowledge

Historical knowledge about menstruation, childbirth and fertility was particularly significant because women often had to manage reproductive health in societies where modern medical care did not exist.

Some traditional substances were used in attempts to influence menstruation or pregnancy. But historical accounts should not be interpreted as evidence that these methods were medically safe.

Understanding this history means recognizing both sides:

Traditional knowledge can contain valuable observations, while some traditional treatments can also be dangerous.

That is why historical research and modern medical evidence need to be considered together.

Continuity Across Time

The relationship between medicine, drugs, authority and social judgment has continued to change.

Today, people who develop substance-use disorders may be judged as morally weak or irresponsible, while larger factors such as:

• trauma
• chronic pain
• poverty
• stress
• overwork
• homelessness
• mental-health struggles
• pharmaceutical marketing
• medical overprescribing
• availability of illicit drugs

can receive less attention.

This does not mean individuals have no responsibility for their actions.

It means that understanding the circumstances surrounding drug use can help society design better prevention, treatment and public-health policies.

Reflection Questions

1. How has society's understanding of who should have access to medicines and drugs changed over time?

2. What can the history of women's healing practices teach us about the relationship between medical knowledge and authority?

3. How should we distinguish between respecting traditional knowledge and recognizing that some traditional remedies can be dangerous?

4. What similarities — and important differences — exist between historical stigma surrounding women's healing practices and modern stigma surrounding addiction?

5. When someone develops an addiction, should society focus only on the individual's behaviour, or also investigate the conditions that contributed to it?

6. How might understanding this history change the way we think about addiction, healthcare, reproductive health and public policy?

Research Principle

History should not be used to romanticize the past or condemn the present.

It should help us understand how knowledge, medicine, power, fear and social attitudes have changed — and how they continue to shape the way society responds to human suffering.

Research 19

 Famous People Who Died From Drug Overdoses or Related Causes

⚠️ RESEARCH & CONTENT WARNING

This section discusses accidental overdoses, substance use, addiction, suicide and the deaths of well-known people. Some accounts involve disputed or incomplete information.

This is not a complete list and is not intended to reduce complex human lives to the circumstances of their deaths. Where official records are available, they should take priority over rumours, biographies, documentaries or popular cultural narratives.

1960s–1970s: Heroin, Barbiturates and the Counterculture Era

Marilyn Monroe — 1962

Marilyn Monroe died from an overdose of barbiturates. Her death was officially classified as a probable suicide.

Her death has generated decades of speculation and conspiracy theories. What can be established is that she was living under enormous personal and professional pressures and had access to powerful prescription medications.

Research question: How did attitudes toward prescription drugs, mental health and women's healthcare affect people during this period?

Jimi Hendrix — 1970

Hendrix died after barbiturate intoxication and aspiration of vomit. His death is sometimes inaccurately described simply as a heroin overdose.

His death became closely associated with the mythology surrounding the 1960s counterculture, but the medical circumstances were more specific.

Janis Joplin — 1970

Joplin died from an accidental heroin overdose.

Her death became one of the most recognizable tragedies associated with the late-1960s music scene and helped demonstrate the potentially fatal risks of heroin use.

Jim Morrison — 1971

Morrison died in Paris at age 27. His official death certificate listed heart failure, and no autopsy was performed.

Because of the circumstances and Morrison's history of substance use, heroin-related explanations have circulated for decades. However, a heroin overdose should not be presented as an established cause of death.

His death later became part of the popular “27 Club” narrative.

---

1980s–1990s: Cocaine, Heroin and Speedballs

John Belushi — 1982

Belushi died from acute intoxication involving cocaine and heroin.

His death became a major warning about the drug-heavy party culture surrounding parts of the entertainment industry.

River Phoenix — 1993

Phoenix died from acute multiple-drug intoxication involving cocaine and heroin outside the Viper Room in Los Angeles.

His death shocked the public partly because of his age and reputation as a talented young actor.

It also raised questions about the pressures surrounding young performers and the accessibility of drugs within entertainment culture.

Kurt Cobain — 1994

Cobain died by suicide involving a firearm.

Heroin was present in his system, and he had a documented history of heroin dependence. However, his death should not be described as a heroin overdose.

His story demonstrates why addiction, mental-health struggles and suicide should not be collapsed into one explanation.

---

2000s: Prescription Drugs and Medical Anesthetics

Heath Ledger — 2008

Ledger died from accidental intoxication involving multiple prescription medications, including painkillers, anti-anxiety medications and sleep medications.

His death demonstrated the dangers that can arise when several central-nervous-system medications are combined, even when individual medications have legitimate medical uses.

Michael Jackson — 2009

Jackson died from acute propofol intoxication, with benzodiazepines also contributing.

Propofol is a powerful anesthetic normally used under controlled medical supervision. Jackson's death resulted in major scrutiny of his physician and the medical circumstances surrounding his treatment.

This case raised important questions about medical responsibility, patient safety, professional boundaries and the dangers of inappropriate medication use.

---

2010s: Prescription Drugs, Opioids and Fentanyl

Whitney Houston — 2012

Houston died from accidental drowning, with cocaine use and heart disease identified as contributing factors.

Her death illustrates how substance use can interact with underlying health conditions and other circumstances rather than fitting neatly into the category of “overdose.”

Prince — 2016

Prince died from an accidental fentanyl overdose.

His death occurred during a period when fentanyl was becoming an increasingly significant part of the North American overdose crisis.

It also raised questions about chronic pain, prescription medications, illicit drug markets and the difficulty of identifying the contents of counterfeit or illegally obtained pills.

Tom Petty — 2017

Petty died from accidental multiple-drug toxicity involving fentanyl, oxycodone and other medications.

His death demonstrated the dangers of combining multiple substances, particularly opioids and other medications that can depress the central nervous system.

Mac Miller — 2018

Miller died from accidental mixed-drug toxicity involving fentanyl, cocaine and alcohol.

His death became another example of the changing overdose crisis, in which fentanyl can appear unexpectedly in illicit drug supplies.

---

Key Themes for This Chapter

Generational Patterns

These categories are useful for studying changing drug markets, but they should not be treated as rigid eras:

1960s–70s: Heroin, barbiturates and other sedatives

1980s–90s: Cocaine, heroin and combinations such as speedballs

2000s: Prescription medications and powerful anesthetics

2010s–present: Increasing prominence of synthetic opioids, particularly fentanyl

Different substances existed during all of these periods. The categories simply help us examine changing patterns.

What These Deaths Can Teach Us

Each death represents a human being, not merely a statistic or a cautionary tale.

Together, these cases can help us examine:

• addiction and dependence
• accidental poisoning and overdose
• mental-health struggles
• suicide
• chronic pain
• prescription medications
• pharmaceutical practices
• illicit drug markets
• trauma and stress
• celebrity and entertainment culture
• media sensationalism
• stigma and moral judgment
• medical responsibility
• changing drug supplies

Continuity With Human History

Human beings have used psychoactive and medicinal substances for thousands of years.

But the substances, cultures, laws, medical knowledge and risks have changed dramatically.

That is why history matters.

The question isn't simply: “Why do people take drugs?”

It is also:

What pain were they trying to manage?

What did medicine know at the time?

What substances were available?

Who controlled access to them?

What warnings existed?

What treatment was available?

And what could society have done differently?

Research Principle

A famous person's death should never become entertainment, mythology or gossip at the expense of the truth.

Research means separating what is documented, what is disputed, and what remains unknown.

That distinction is especially important when writing about people who can no longer speak for themselves.

The Writing on the Wall: Vancouver’s Drug Debate Is Becoming an Election Strategy

 The Writing on the Wall: Vancouver’s Drug Debate Is Becoming an Election Strategy

By Tina Winterlik aka Zipolita
📍 Vancouver | August 2026

There is something written between the lines of Vancouver’s latest political drama.

You just have to look closely.

Mayor Ken Sim says Vancouver has reached a “tipping point” on mental health, addiction and public drug use. His ABC Vancouver party has now pushed for a public-safety plebiscite to be held alongside October’s municipal election, including questions about public drug use and the creation of a major treatment facility.

The subject is serious.

The politics surrounding it may be even more interesting.

Because when Premier David Eby was asked whether his government would consider Sim’s old St. Paul’s Hospital proposal if Vancouver voters supported it, his response was strikingly understated.

He said he was surprised the matter was being put to a public vote because the provincial government already agrees Vancouver needs this kind of facility.

In other words:

Why are we voting on whether something needs to happen when we already agree that it needs to happen?

That may be the writing on the wall.

Fear is powerful at election time

Nobody wants to see people smoking drugs on the sidewalk.

Nobody wants children exposed to open drug use.

Nobody wants their neighbourhood to feel unsafe.

And nobody should be expected to pretend that Vancouver's addiction and mental-health crisis isn't real.

But there is a difference between acknowledging a crisis and turning fear of that crisis into an election strategy.

Sim's proposed plebiscite gives voters an opportunity to express their frustration. That frustration is legitimate.

But what happens after the votes are counted?

Where are the beds?

Where are the doctors, nurses, psychiatrists, counsellors and support workers?

Where is the long-term housing?

Where is the follow-up care?

Where is the evidence that the proposed approach will actually reduce homelessness, overdose deaths, street disorder and repeated hospital or police encounters?

Those are the questions voters deserve answers to.

And then there is the uncomfortable “not in my backyard” question

Vancouver needs treatment.

But Vancouver also has neighbourhoods.

And we all know what happens when governments announce a major facility:

People support the idea in principle—until they discover where it is going.

That is not uniquely Vancouver. It is human nature.

But if we genuinely believe people suffering from severe addiction and mental illness need somewhere to go, then somebody has to be willing to say:

This facility has to exist somewhere.

We cannot solve homelessness, addiction and mental illness simply by moving suffering from one neighbourhood to another.

Nor can we solve it by pretending that every person living on the street is simply making a lifestyle choice.

Watch the political language

This is where I think Vancouver voters should pay attention.

When politicians start talking about a “tipping point,” “public safety,” drugs in public spaces and giving voters a chance to finally have their say, those words carry enormous emotional weight.

And emotion moves voters.

But policy requires something else:

Details.

How many beds?

How much will it cost?

Who pays?

Where will it be?

Who qualifies?

What happens when someone leaves?

What happens when treatment fails?

What happens when someone refuses treatment?

What legal safeguards exist?

And perhaps most importantly:

What will success actually look like?

The province has already announced plans for additional involuntary-care capacity, while Sim has demanded at least 100 involuntary-care beds specifically for Vancouver.

So this isn't simply a question of whether politicians recognize the problem.

They do.

The battle is increasingly about who gets credit for solving it—and who gets blamed if it doesn't work.

The writing on the wall

There is another reason I am watching this carefully.

Recent polling suggests Sim remains competitive, but his position is hardly untouchable. Research Co. reported that only 39% of likely Vancouver voters held favourable views of him, while 26% were still undecided about the mayoral race.

That means October is wide open enough for every political decision to matter.

And that is why voters should be cautious.

A plebiscite can tell politicians what people are angry about.

It cannot, by itself, build a treatment centre.

It cannot train a psychiatrist.

It cannot create supportive housing.

It cannot guarantee that involuntary treatment will be lawful, humane, effective and properly supervised.

And it certainly cannot replace a comprehensive mental-health and addiction strategy.

Vancouver needs solutions—not just slogans.

We need politicians who can look beyond the next election and tell us what happens five years after the cameras leave.

Because the writing on the wall isn't simply about Ken Sim.

It is about Vancouver.

And if politicians truly believe we have reached a tipping point, then perhaps it is time to stop asking voters whether they are angry.

We already know they are.

Now show us the plan.

#Vancouver #KenSim #DavidEby #PublicSafety #AddictionTreatment #MentalHealth #InvoluntaryCare #Homelessness #VancouverPolitics #BCPolitics

 

🌊 HURRICANE SEASON 2026: DON'T WAIT FOR THE WARNING

By Tina Winterlik aka Zipolita
📍 August 2026 | #ClimateJustice | #Preparedness | #ScienceMatters

The season is here. Are we ready?

Last year, I wrote about the devastating Texas floods and raised a question that I still believe we need to ask:

What happens when the systems designed to warn us are weakened?

Now it is August 2026.

Hurricane season is already underway, and we are entering the months when Atlantic tropical activity typically reaches its peak.

That doesn't mean a major hurricane is coming to your community.

It means this is not the time to assume we're safe because today's forecast looks quiet.

NOAA's latest outlook actually calls for a below-normal Atlantic season overall: 8–14 named storms, 3–6 hurricanes and 1–3 major hurricanes. But NOAA makes an extremely important point: a seasonal outlook cannot tell us where a storm will make landfall.

It only takes one.

And Canada knows that too. Environment and Climate Change Canada says that, on average, three or four tropical cyclone events affect Canada each hurricane season, with one or two making an impact on Canadian soil. August and September are particularly important months.

So let's talk about preparedness.

🚨 DON'T WAIT UNTIL THE SKY TURNS DARK

A hurricane is not just wind.

It can mean:

🌊 Storm surge
🌧️ Torrential rainfall
🏠 Flooding
🌲 Falling trees and debris
⚡ Power outages
🛣️ Washed-out roads
📡 Communications failures
⛰️ Landslides
🚨 Evacuations
💧 Contaminated water

And the effects can travel far beyond the place where a storm first makes landfall.

The remnants of tropical systems can bring dangerous rainfall and flooding into parts of central and eastern Canada. Rarely, tropical cyclone remnants can even affect British Columbia.

📱 YOUR PHONE IS NOT YOUR ONLY WARNING SYSTEM

This is something I really want people to think about.

What happens if the power goes out?

What happens if the cell towers go down?

What happens if your internet disappears?

What happens if you're asleep when an alert arrives?

Don't depend on one technology.

Know where your local emergency information comes from.

Keep a battery-powered or hand-crank radio if you can.

Keep your phone charged.

Know how to receive official weather alerts.

Know your evacuation routes.

And make sure the people you care about know what the plan is.

Canada's emergency-preparedness guidance specifically recommends emergency kits, household emergency plans and multiple ways of receiving weather information, including WeatherCAN, local broadcasts and Canada's Alert Ready system.

🧳 HAVE A GO-BAG BEFORE YOU NEED ONE

Don't wait for an evacuation order to start wondering where your medications, identification, important documents, flashlight, charger, food, water and pet supplies are.

Put the essentials together now.

If you have pets, include them in the plan.

If you have elderly family members, children, neighbours who live alone, or anyone who may need extra assistance, think about them before an emergency happens.

Preparedness isn't panic.

Preparedness is love.

🌎 AND THIS IS BIGGER THAN HURRICANES

We are living through a period when communities are being challenged by wildfire, extreme heat, floods, storms and other rapidly changing hazards.

I've watched wildfire situations in British Columbia this summer.

I've watched communities elsewhere face floods and evacuations.

And I've learned something from all of it:

You don't get to choose the disaster.

But you can choose whether you're prepared.

That's why I will continue to defend science, meteorologists, emergency planners, first responders and the people whose job it is to watch the skies, oceans and changing conditions.

These people aren't an unnecessary expense.

They are part of our safety infrastructure.

🕊️ PLEASE TAKE THE WARNING SERIOUSLY

I'm not writing this to frighten people.

I'm writing it because I would much rather see someone prepare unnecessarily than discover during an emergency that they didn't have a plan.

Check on your family.

Check your emergency supplies.

Know your local alerts.

Know where you would go if you had to leave.

Don't ignore an evacuation order.

And don't assume that because a hurricane isn't headed directly toward you, you have nothing to worry about.

Weather doesn't care about political boundaries.

Water doesn't care about property lines.

Wind doesn't care whether we're ready.

Listen to the scientists. Listen to the warnings. Prepare early.

Because the best emergency response is the one that begins before the emergency.

🌊 Stay safe.
🕊️ Stay informed.
❤️ Take care of one another.

— Tina Winterlik aka Zipolita

#HurricaneSeason2026 #ClimateJustice #ScienceMatters #EmergencyPreparedness #WeatherWarnings #DisasterPreparedness #ClimateResilience #HurricaneSafety #ListenToScientists #StaySafe

What if we gave them the key?

 What if we gave them the key?

I read about a Houston teacher who discovered that some of his 17- and 18-year-old students were struggling to read and write.

It made me think about what comes next.

How do we bring them up to speed?

I have an idea.

There is already technology that allows a person to tap a word with a special pen and hear it spoken aloud. You can read the sentence, tap the word you don't know, hear it, and keep reading.

Now imagine creating that specifically for teenagers and young adults who are struggling with literacy.

Not children's books.

Books about the world they actually live in.

Climate change.
Politics.
Justice.
Human rights.
AI.
Housing.
Money.
Employment.
The environment.
Social change.

Because we don't learn to read simply so we can say, “I can read.”

We learn to read because we want to know something, understand something, imagine something, question something, participate in the world, seek justice and fix things.

Reading is the key.

So here's my challenge to teachers, educators, employers, universities—and especially students:

Why don't we let the kids invent it?

Have a hackathon.

Bring together high school students, college and university students, teachers, programmers, designers, writers, publishers and employers.

Let the students who understand technology build the technology.

Let the education students figure out how it should teach.

Let the artists and designers make it beautiful.

Let the young people who struggle with reading tell us what would make them actually want to use it.

And let employers ask themselves:

What could we do to help create the next generation of capable, confident workers?

This doesn't have to be about remediation.

It can be about possibility.

Give a young person a book about something they care about.

Give them a tool that quietly helps when they get stuck.

Let them read along.

Let them learn.

Let them discover that they can do it.

And then keep opening doors.

We don't need to leave anyone behind.

We have the technology.

We have the students.

We have the educators.

We have the ideas.

Now let's put them together.

Time to lift everyone up. 🔑📚

#Literacy #Education #YouthEmpowerment #Reading #EdTech #InclusiveEducation #Innovation #StudentInnovation #Hackathon #LiftEveryoneUp

Who Can Afford to Live Here?

 Who Can Afford to Live Here?

Yesterday, walking home after a 1½-hour bus commute from cleaning a house, I had one of those bizarre Vancouver moments.

I'm still unhoused. I was hungry. And I walked past the Bentley store.

In the windows: $650,000. $350,000. $180,000.

Beautiful cars sitting behind glass while I wondered: who can actually afford to live here anymore?

I kept thinking about young people — the kids and young adults who carried us through COVID. They worked in grocery stores, restaurants, healthcare, delivery, cleaning and retail while many of us stayed home.

Now many are working low-paying jobs and spending $200+ a month just getting to work.

And we're told, "Take transit."

But what if your commute is over an hour each way?

"Ride a bike."

Okay, but what if you're working shifts and your job is nowhere near home? You could spend half your shift getting there and back.

We tell young people to work hard. They are.

But housing is unaffordable. Groceries are expensive. Transportation is expensive. And somehow we're surprised they're struggling.

Yesterday, I walked past hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of luxury cars and then walked home hungry.

That's the Vancouver contradiction.

Eventually, I'm heading back to Mexico.

And honestly, I keep wondering:

Who is Vancouver for anymore?

10 questions to think about

1. What did we ask of young people during COVID that we haven't really acknowledged since?

2. How many kids were genuinely afraid that getting close to their parents or grandparents could kill them?

3. How many families lost hugs, visits, birthdays and ordinary moments that they can never get back?

4. How many young people are still carrying fear, isolation and anxiety from those years?

5. Did we ever stop to ask what isolation was doing to children's relationships with their families?

6. What happened to the young people who missed school, graduation, friendships and those important years of growing up?

7. How can we expect that generation to thrive when many are now working low-paying jobs just to survive?

8. Why does getting to work cost hundreds of dollars a month when wages don't keep up with the cost of living?

9. Are we really listening to young people when they tell us the system isn't working for them?

10. And perhaps most importantly: what are we going to do to make sure the next generation doesn't inherit the same mess?

Keywords: COVID generation, young people, family separation, isolation, mental health, cost of living, low wages, transportation, housing crisis, Vancouver

Hashtags:

#COVIDGeneration #YoungPeople #Family #Isolation #CostOfLiving #HousingCrisis #LowWages #PublicTransit #Vancouver #LetsThinkAboutIt

The Part We Don't Talk About Enough: Why Some Families Are Afraid to Ask for Help

 The Part We Don't Talk About Enough: Why Some Families Are Afraid to Ask for Help

There is another side to this story that we cannot ignore.

We often tell families:

“If you're struggling, ask for help.”

But what if the family is afraid of the system they are being told to ask?

That fear did not come from nowhere.

British Columbia has a long and painful history of separating Indigenous children from their families and communities. The residential-school system was one part of that history. The child-welfare system became another.

And Indigenous children remain dramatically over-represented in Canada's child-welfare system.

This matters.

It means that when an Indigenous mother hears:

“Just tell the school you're struggling.”

she may not hear:

“Someone will bring you a food hamper.”

She may hear:

“Someone may start looking into my family.”

That fear can be passed from one generation to another.

And it isn't something we should dismiss by saying:

“Don't worry. They won't take your kids.”

We should be honest about what the system is, what it can do, what its responsibilities are, and what a family can expect when they ask for help.

---

Birth alerts showed exactly why trust matters

British Columbia officially ended the practice known as hospital or birth alerts in September 2019.

A birth alert involved notifying child-welfare authorities and hospital staff when an expectant parent was considered to be at risk of having their newborn apprehended.

The practice was particularly controversial because of its impact on Indigenous families.

Government records later reported that in 2018, 58% of parents subjected to birth alerts in B.C. were Indigenous, and infants were apprehended in 28% of birth-alert cases.

B.C. eventually ended the practice.

That history matters because it tells us something very simple:

Trust cannot be ordered into existence.

If a government institution has previously frightened families, separated families or treated some communities differently, telling those families to simply trust the system isn't enough.

Trust has to be earned.

---

But fear can also leave children without help

This is the terrible trap.

A parent may be frightened that asking for help will bring unwanted attention.

So they don't ask.

The children still need food.

The rent still has to be paid.

The apartment still costs too much.

The family still needs help.

And eventually the situation can become much worse.

That is why the answer cannot be:

“Just trust the system.”

But it also cannot be:

“Never tell anyone.”

The answer has to be informed help, transparency and choice wherever the law allows it.

---

Families deserve to know what happens before they disclose everything

If you are a parent who is afraid to ask for help, you can start by asking questions.

You can say:

“We need help with food and housing. Before I tell you personal details, can you explain what information you are required to report and what happens when someone asks for assistance?”

Ask:

• Who will receive the information?
• What information is confidential?
• What are you legally required to report?
• What happens after a concern is reported?
• What housing and food resources are available without involving child welfare?
• Can we speak with a family-support worker or advocate?
• Can I have someone with me when I speak to a worker?

You don't have to pretend you aren't afraid.

You can say that you are afraid.

---

And children should not be put in the middle

There is another danger here.

A frightened parent may tell a child:

“Don't tell anyone. They'll take you away.”

That fear is understandable.

But it can put an enormous burden on the child.

The child may become terrified that telling a teacher about hunger or homelessness will destroy their family.

They may stop asking for food.

They may hide problems.

They may lie about where they live.

They may become responsible for protecting their parent from the system.

That isn't fair to the child either.

A child should never have to choose between getting help and protecting their family.

---

We need a different kind of safety net

Imagine a family could walk into a school and say:

“We cannot afford our rent and we're running out of food.”

The first response should not be suspicion.

It should be:

“Let's figure out what support your family needs.”

A family should be able to access food.

Housing assistance.

Income supports.

Counselling.

Childcare.

Transportation.

Help with applications.

Legal information.

And, where appropriate, culturally safe Indigenous family services.

The system should be designed to keep families safely together whenever possible, not wait until a crisis becomes so severe that separation becomes the response.

B.C. itself now describes its changing child-welfare system as moving toward keeping Indigenous children and families together and connected to their communities and cultures.

But policies on paper are not enough.

Families have to believe they can safely walk through the door.

---

The question we should really be asking

Instead of asking:

“Why don't these families ask for help?”

we should ask:

“What happened that made them afraid to ask?”

And then:

“What would we have to change so that asking for help feels safer than suffering in silence?”

Because a child shouldn't have to go hungry because their mother is afraid.

A mother shouldn't have to choose between asking for help and fearing the loss of her child.

And Indigenous families should not have to forget generations of experience before governments will listen to their concerns.

A safety net only works when people trust that it will catch them.

And if people are afraid to reach for it, then the responsibility isn't simply on them.

The system has to ask why.

#ChildWelfare #IndigenousChildren #BritishColumbia #BirthAlerts #ResidentialSchools

#FamilySeparation #HousingInsecurity #PovertyAndChildWelfare #SocialServices #KeepFamiliesTogether

If You're the Kid Whose Family Can't Afford to Live

 If You're the Kid Whose Family Can't Afford to Live

A letter to the smart kid who already knows something is wrong

Maybe you're 10.

Maybe you're 12.

Maybe you're older.

You're smart. Really smart.

You've probably figured out things that adults don't think you understand.

You know when Mum opens the fridge and there isn't much inside.

You know when she says, "We can't afford that," even when it's something you really need.

You notice when the rent is due.

You notice when Mum is worried.

You notice when there are no new shoes, no new clothes, no money for the things other kids seem to get without thinking about it.

Maybe your dad died.

Maybe he died from a fentanyl overdose.

Maybe your family disappeared when things got difficult, and now it's just you and Mum trying to figure everything out.

And maybe you have started thinking:

Is this our fault?

It isn't.

Not yours.

And not necessarily your mother's either.

You are living inside a problem that is much bigger than your family.

---

First, I want you to understand something about the rent

You may hear adults talking about Canada having apartments that cost only a few hundred dollars a month.

You might hear someone say:

"CMHC says the average rent is $471!"

You might quite reasonably wonder:

"Then why can't my family find one?"

That's a really good question.

The answer is that the $471 number is not the normal price of an apartment in Vancouver.

CMHC was talking about a special group of social and affordable housing units — housing that is subsidized or supported by governments and other public organizations.

There are nearly 591,000 of these units in the survey, but they represent only about 4% of Canada's housing stock.

And 85% of those units use something called rent-geared-to-income.

That means the rent is connected to how much money the household has.

So a family with very little money may pay much less than someone renting the same kind of home on the private market.

That's what makes it affordable.

It doesn't mean Vancouver is full of $471 apartments.

---

So why is Mum paying so much?

Because your family may be stuck looking at the private rental market.

In Vancouver, a small apartment can cost around $2,000 a month or more.

That's an enormous amount of money.

Now imagine your family doesn't have $2,000 left after paying for food, transportation, clothing, school things and everything else.

Imagine you have almost no money left at all.

You can't fix that by becoming better at budgeting.

You can't coupon your way out of it.

And you certainly can't work your way out of it when you're a child.

The numbers simply don't work.

That is why governments have social housing and income supports.

They are supposed to help families whose incomes are too low to survive the private market.

---

And here's something very important:

You are allowed to tell an adult that your family needs help.

You don't have to wait until you are homeless.

You don't have to wait until there is no food.

You don't have to wait until Mum is crying.

You don't have to prove that your family is "poor enough."

If you are worried about having a home, food, clothing or a safe place to live, tell someone.

---

Start at school

If you are a child reading this, your school may be one of the safest places to start.

Find an adult you trust.

It could be:

• your teacher;
• the school counsellor;
• a principal or vice-principal;
• a school social worker;
• a youth worker;
• a special education/support staff member;
• the school nurse;
• another teacher you trust.

You don't have to know what program your family needs.

That's the adult's job.

You can simply say:

"My family is having trouble paying for food and housing. I'm worried we're going to lose our home. Can you help us find someone who can help my mom?"

That's enough.

If talking is difficult, write it down.

Put it on a piece of paper and hand it to the teacher.

You can even say:

"I don't know what to do, but things at home are really hard and I need help."

That is enough too.

---

Ask specifically about food

You don't have to be embarrassed about needing food.

Food is not a reward for having enough money.

Children need food in order to grow, learn, concentrate and stay healthy.

B.C.'s Feeding Futures program supports school food programs, and almost 90% of B.C. schools now have some form of accessible school food program. In 2024, more than 162,000 students were accessing breakfast, lunch and/or snack programs.

So ask.

You can say:

"Is there a breakfast or lunch program at school?"

Or:

"Can you help my family find a food program?"

You don't have to tell the whole class.

You can tell one adult privately.

---

Ask for help with housing too

This part is especially important.

Don't just tell the school:

"We're poor."

Tell them exactly what is happening.

For example:

"My mom is receiving assistance and we can't afford our rent."

"We're worried we won't be able to stay in our apartment."

"We don't have enough money for food after paying rent."

"My mom doesn't have family who can help us."

The clearer you are, the easier it is for the adult to understand that this isn't simply a family that needs a little budgeting advice.

This is a housing and food-security problem.

Ask the school to help your mother connect with the appropriate housing and social-service workers.

And ask for help applying for every benefit and housing program your family may qualify for.

You don't have to figure out the forms yourself.

---

If Mum is overwhelmed, you can help — but you are still the child

This is really important.

A smart child can become the person who knows all the bills, watches the younger children, worries about rent and tries to make Mum feel better.

You may even become very good at pretending you're okay.

But you are not supposed to become the parent.

You can help Mum find information.

You can sit beside her while she makes a phone call.

You can tell a teacher what's happening.

You can help make a list.

But adults and governments have responsibilities too.

You deserve to be a kid.

---

What if Dad died from fentanyl?

If that happened to your family, you may have feelings that don't seem to make sense.

You might love him.

You might be angry at him.

You might miss him.

You might be embarrassed.

You might be afraid that people will judge your family.

You might even wonder whether you could have done something.

You couldn't.

A child cannot cause an adult's addiction, and a child cannot be responsible for saving an adult from it.

His death was not your fault.

And your mother's struggle afterward isn't something you caused either.

You have already lost something enormous.

You should not have to carry the family's financial problems on top of that.

---

What if Mum's family won't help?

Families sometimes fail people.

It is painful, but it happens.

Your mother may feel ashamed or rejected.

You may feel angry that other relatives aren't helping.

But your family doesn't have to solve this entirely through relatives.

There are systems outside the family.

Schools.

Housing providers.

Food programs.

Social workers.

Community organizations.

Government benefits.

Counsellors.

People whose actual job is to help families who are struggling.

The fact that your relatives won't help does not mean there is nowhere else to go.

---

Here's the plan

If I could sit beside you, this is what I'd tell you to do.

1. Tell one safe adult at school.

Don't wait.

Say:

"My family needs help with food and housing."

2. Ask for the school counsellor or another support person.

Tell them the truth.

You don't need to make the story sound worse.

You don't need to make it sound better.

Just tell the truth.

3. Ask specifically about food.

Ask about breakfast, lunch, snacks and other food programs.

4. Ask specifically about housing.

Tell them you're worried about losing your home or that your rent is taking too much of your family's money.

Ask them to help your mother connect with housing and social-service resources.

5. Ask about financial benefits.

Your mother may be eligible for supports she isn't receiving.

An adult who understands the system can help her check.

6. If Mum has trouble making the calls, ask whether someone can help her.

Sometimes the hardest part isn't knowing that help exists.

It's navigating all the paperwork.

7. Keep telling adults if the situation gets worse.

If there is no food, you might be embarrassed to say so.

Say it anyway.

If you're going to lose your home, say it.

If you're sleeping somewhere unsafe, say it.

If you're frightened, say it.

If you're worried about your mother's safety, say it.

You don't have to protect adults from the truth.

---

And if the first adult doesn't help?

Try another one.

This is important.

Sometimes a child finally finds the courage to speak and the adult doesn't understand how serious things are.

That doesn't mean you were wrong to ask.

Tell another teacher.

Tell the counsellor.

Tell the principal.

Tell another trusted adult.

Keep going until somebody listens.

You are not being difficult.

You are asking for help.

---

What should Canada be doing?

Now let's step outside the child's bedroom and look at the adults.

Because this child should never have to become an expert in the housing system.

We need a system where a family can say:

"We cannot afford our home and we don't have enough money for food."

And instead of being handed a pile of forms and told to figure it out, that family gets a person who helps them navigate the entire system.

We need:

More deeply affordable housing

Not simply housing that is cheaper than luxury housing.

Housing that a person living on a very low income can actually afford.

Faster access to subsidized housing

A vacant social-housing unit shouldn't sit empty while families wait indefinitely for housing.

Stronger income supports

If a family's income is too low to pay for basic necessities, the support system has to recognize the actual cost of living.

Food security

No child should have to wonder whether there will be dinner.

School food programs are important, but families need enough income to feed themselves at home too.

Schools as gateways to support

Schools already know which children are showing up hungry, exhausted, worried or without basic necessities.

They should be funded and equipped to connect families with housing, food, counselling and financial support.

B.C. is already investing in school food and student supports; the province says almost 90% of schools now have school food programs and Budget 2026 includes additional funding for teachers, counsellors and student services.

But the goal should be bigger:

No child should have to become homeless before the system decides they qualify for help.

---

And maybe the smartest thing we can teach children is this:

You are not poor because you failed.

Your mother is not a bad mother because she needs assistance.

Needing help is not a character flaw.

Your father's addiction was not your fault.

Your family's circumstances are not your identity.

You are still you.

You are still intelligent.

You are still capable.

You still have a future.

And you are allowed to ask for help before everything falls apart.

---

If you are that child right now

Look at the adult closest to you.

A teacher.

A counsellor.

A coach.

A school support worker.

Someone you trust.

And say just four words:

"My family needs help."

You don't need to know the answer.

You only need to start the conversation.

Then let the adults do their job.

Because a 10-year-old should be thinking about friends, school, dinosaurs, music, art, soccer, books, board games, trees, oceans, dreams and what they might become.

Not whether Mum can pay the rent.

Not whether there will be dinner.

Not whether the family will have a home tomorrow.

That is not a child's job.

It is ours.

Research 17

 

Here is a simple conceptual line drawing layout for your mural idea. It shows:

• Earth in the center as the big circle with basic continents.
• Five smaller circles arranged around Earth, each symbolizing a key theme:
  1. Early humans with plants and fire (origin in Africa)
  2. Migration paths with moving human figures
  3. Ancient medicine with a midwife and herbs
  4. Colonial impact with pills and hospital bed
  5. Reclamation with joined hands, cedar, and salmon

The design is minimalist and clear so you can use it as a base to develop your style, add details, and explore the imagery further.

Would you like me to send it now or add any labels or notes directly on the drawing?

Research 16

 

Exactly — that’s a beautiful and powerful visual concept! Centering Earth with surrounding circles representing key scenes and elements creates a dynamic, layered story of life, healing, and birth across time and cultures.

---

Visual Breakdown of Your Mural Idea

Centerpiece:

• Earth — vibrant, alive, swirling with green forests, deep blue oceans, and rich earth tones.
• A newborn baby emerging into the world, cradled by strong, gentle hands—symbolizing birth, hope, and connection.
• The mother nursing the baby, highlighting natural, nurturing care.

Surrounding Circles (Scenes/Elements):

• Origins Circle: Early humans in Africa using plants, fire, and hands for healing.
• Migration Circle: Diverse peoples moving across lands and waters, carrying knowledge and traditions.
• Ancient Medicine Circle: Maya midwives, surgical tools, herbal remedies; Coast Salish cedar, salmon, and orca motifs.
• Colonial Impact Circle: Symbols of disruption—hospital beds, pills, machinery, fading natural elements.
• Reclamation Circle: Women and communities reclaiming traditional healing, midwives teaching, hands joined in solidarity.

Background:

• A swirling mix of forest, jungle, and ocean elements—rich greens and blues blending together.
• Subtle planetary shapes, stars, and cosmic elements woven in to connect human life to the universe’s vastness.
• Statistical or symbolic text could be integrated tastefully along the edges or within the circles, grounding the story in real-world context.

---

Artistic Style Suggestions

• Use layered textures and vibrant colors to echo artists like Emily Carr and Monet, blending natural landscapes with human stories.
• Incorporate symbolic Coast Salish formline shapes with fluid, organic lines for salmon, orca, and cedar.
• Integrate bold, expressive figures inspired by Frida Kahlo and Diego Rivera to give emotional depth and narrative.
• Use light and shadow dynamically like Van Gogh to bring movement and life.

---

If you want, I can help you write a detailed scene-by-scene mural layout or even suggest how to compose the design on a large wall space.

Your vision truly captures the cycle of life, history, and healing in a universal, breathtaking way!

Research 15

 

Got it — a timeless, layered mural honoring childbirth, motherhood, and healing across cultures and ages, without tying it to one specific time or place. A “scene of scenes” that flows together beautifully.

Here’s a respectful concept statement tailored to that vision, plus some ideas for your mural structure:

---

Timeless Ode to Birth, Motherhood & Healing

Concept Statement:

This mural is a celebration of childbirth, motherhood, and the healers who have supported life’s sacred journey from time immemorial. It honors the universal spirit of nurturing, resilience, and renewal that connects all peoples across history and cultures—especially Indigenous traditions such as the Coast Salish, alongside the wisdom of women everywhere.

Rather than depicting one moment or culture, the mural weaves together multiple “scenes of scenes” — showing birth and healing as a continuous, living story. Elements like cedar, salmon, orca, ancient stone circles, midwives, mothers, herbs, and sacred fire flow together to create a vibrant tapestry of life, strength, and sacred care.

The artwork respects cultural boundaries, focusing on shared human experience and the sacredness of motherhood while acknowledging the deep roots of Indigenous knowledge and healing.

---

Ideas for Mural Structure (Scene of Scenes)

• Central Flow: A river or spiral connecting each scene, symbolizing the flow of life and time.
• Scenes to Include:
  • A mother gently holding her newborn with skin-to-skin contact.
  • A group of midwives or healers supporting a laboring woman with herbs and touch.
  • Natural elements: cedar branches reaching across the mural, salmon swimming upstream, orca silhouettes swimming in water.
  • Ancient symbols like stone circles or pyramids subtly integrated to honor the past.
  • Scenes of community: women gathered, storytelling, passing down wisdom.
  • Celestial elements: sun, moon, stars to connect birth with the cosmos.
• Art Style: Blend vibrant, expressive brushstrokes with symbolic forms inspired by Coast Salish and other Indigenous artistic traditions, balanced with abstract and impressionistic touches reflecting your artistic influences.

---

Would you like help drafting a detailed layout or symbolic guide for each scene? I can help craft imagery descriptions or suggestions for how to flow from one scene to another seamlessly!