National Lottery Fund NBTA Mental Health Support

[Arthur Marshall]

9 minutes ago, Rambling Boater said:

 

Just maybe they are suffering as a result of the mental disorder in this world we were brought up in?

 

Wasn't it RD Laing who argued that schizophrenia was a logical response to living in the current world, because our brains hadn't evolved to cope with the pace of change?  And that the family structure was designed to drive you barmy? (Note, neither schizophrenia nor barmy are words currently used in psychiatry....)

However, being bored, unhappy or lonely are not mental disorders, though quite a lot of boat livers may well be one or the other of them. There's a difference between having aching muscles and a broken leg.

[Slow and Steady]

6 minutes ago, Tony1 said:

 

I absolutely agree.

I personally think it is highly likely that in many cases, mental disorders are a direct result of an individual's treatment by parents and by society.

There are many people who would have ended up much more happy and stable if society had been more forward thinking, and kinder to the poor and disadvantaged. And there are lots of those who could now be helped enormously to regain a more stable mental situation, if only the resources were available. 

But support services of this sort were slashed to the bone during the austerity measures after 2010, and the country is now so bankrupt that there is zero chance of those support service being reinstated within the next decade, even if a government got into to power who regarded the NHS as a priority. 

It seems as if the cupboard is bare, and we can look forward to nothing but more poverty and reduced NHS provision for the foreseeable future.

Those who need non-critical mental health support are probably going to face a struggle.

 

 

 

I don't think it's so simple.

When I was younger it seemed like there was a place for everyone, somewhere. Lots of farm labouring, factory work, cheap rent controlled housing, ground worker c/w cottage on some estate, the list goes on. Decent fulfilling simple lives without too much pressure were available to those who can't take what modern society has become. Everything is money, money, money and sod the fallout. There is no place for you if you fit that description now so it's hardly surprising the waterways are a bit of a magnet in that respect.

 

I "burnt out" as they say and my son was starved of oxygen for 8 hours in hospital at 3 months (long story). Canal life even in a marina is our saviour. It's quiet, it's slow - no pressure. Lots of folk like me in this marina bumbling along as best we can. But we don't need or want mental health practitioners interfering thank you very much, even if society would judge we need it to be moulded into "normal" people and I can say for sure my son would judged in need, would be prescribed mind altering drugs and it would be disastrous. If however he could muddle about on some estate or work hard on a farm and live in a damp infested shit hole he'd be perfectly happy but these options are no longer available.

[Rambling Boater]

The problem with an Internet forum is that it's difficult to judge people you've never met in person. We all have 'issues' of some kind or other. Most of us care for someone close to us too.

 

I've met quite a a few NBTA members. I've not had the impression that they are out to take advantage of the system (although as I said, there will always be some in all walks of life who will). They just want to live a simple life on the water but fear a system which is threatening that very life style.

 

For those quick to judge, why not go to one of their meetings, or just wander down the cut or river and chat to a few?

[Arthur Marshall]

2 hours ago, Rambling Boater said:

The problem with an Internet forum is that it's difficult to judge people you've never met in person. We all have 'issues' of some kind or other. Most of us care for someone close to us too.

 

I've met quite a a few NBTA members. I've not had the impression that they are out to take advantage of the system (although as I said, there will always be some in all walks of life who will). They just want to live a simple life on the water but fear a system which is threatening that very life style.

 

For those quick to judge, why not go to one of their meetings, or just wander down the cut or river and chat to a few?

I think the attitude problem to NBTA members may be at least partly because so few of us have met any, as well as objection to the use of the word "traveller", which has both a general and a specific meaning. From what I gather, most are based in London or the K&A (maybe Oxford?) in high boat concentration areas where movement is restricted, partly as a result of the large numbers, and that's where they want to stay. The assumption is that they simply don't want to move and so aren't really "travellers" in any real sense. They aren't ethnic Travellers, so maybe they should have used a different term - it's really a hangover from the "New Age Traveller" label that got hung on the old hippie convoys in an attempt to make them look legitimate rather than wandering freeloaders (not all were, of course), and to try to piggyback on the legal rights of genuine ethnic Travellers.

[Rambling Boater]

1 hour ago, Arthur Marshall said:

in an attempt to make them look legitimate rather than wandering freeloaders (not all were, of course), and to try to piggyback on the legal rights of genuine ethnic Travellers.

 

You seem to suggest some NBTA members aren't legitimate ('look legitimate'), in what respects?

 

If some of what you call 'freeloaders' are 'wandering' then how are they not legitimate?

 

Edited May 13, 2022 by Rambling Boater

[mrsmelly]

12 hours ago, Tony1 said:

 

This topic brings to mind a comment made to me by a very interesting lady boater in her mid 60s who I spoke to last summer, and who had moved to the UK from South Africa a couple of years ago, in order to live on a narrowboat. 

She said that most of the solo liveaboards she had met so far seemed to be 'damaged', which I understood to mean that they were suffering from some degree of unhappiness- and in the worse cases, a clear mental disorder. 

Coming from a person who had lived in a society that had itself gone through years of extreme and deadly violence, it initially struck me as an odd thing to say- but of course she was coming at it as a relative newcomer to UK society, which I think gave her a more objective viewpoint. 

My own response was to say personally, I didnt feel all that damaged- apart from the emotional bruising of a painful relationship breakup a few years ago- and I hadn't then met enough solo boaters to form an opinion. 

But in the year since then, I have met or observed a number of liveaboards who have clearly been suffering from mental disorders. One chap I met a few months ago refused to even admit the existence of covid-19, for example, and he held firmly to the belief that the royal family were alien lizards who had taken human form. 

My response (that any alien lizard clever enough to travel here would have chosen a better-looking human body) went unheeded, and nothing I said could persuade him from his beliefs- many of which had been gathered via youtube and far-right conspiracy theorist websites. 

The sad thing is that if I had pointed this new counselling service out to him, he would almost certainly have refused to use it, so certain was he about these impossibly unlikely beliefs. 

 

 

Did that very interesting ladies name begin with a " J " by any chance?

[Tony1]

3 minutes ago, mrsmelly said:

Did that very interesting ladies name begin with a " J " by any chance?

 

Sadly I dont recall her name, but she was certainly interesting and great fun to talk to.

Hers would make a great story for a youtube video- from the veldt to the shroppie.

 

 

[mrsmelly]

59 minutes ago, Tony1 said:

 

Sadly I dont recall her name, but she was certainly interesting and great fun to talk to.

Hers would make a great story for a youtube video- from the veldt to the shroppie.

 

 

Sounds like Jane. She was interesting, had been successful in business in SA for many years, she has a son living in Oxford. She bought the boat and was clueless. She had an inverter fitted and didnt know how to work it or anything else. She winter moored with us a couple of winters ago and I helped her out with bits and bobs and advice lol. 

Takes bottle for a lady sixty plus to move thousands of miles and into an unknown life on a boat.

[David Mack]

13 hours ago, Tony1 said:

 

But in the year since then, I have met or observed a number of liveaboards who have clearly been suffering from mental disorders.

Is the incidence of mental health problems amongst liveaboard boaters higher than in the general population? And if so, is that because living afloat tends to attract those with mental health issues or do some of the issues around living afloat tend to aggravate any existing mental health conditions more than they would if living on the land? Or are the mental health support services that are out there targeted mainly at land dwellers, so liveaboards are disproportionately unsupported?  

If the last is true then providing some support through NBTA might not be a bad thing.

[Tony1]

9 minutes ago, David Mack said:

Is the incidence of mental health problems amongst liveaboard boaters higher than in the general population? And if so, is that because living afloat tends to attract those with mental health issues or do some of the issues around living afloat tend to aggravate any existing mental health conditions more than they would if living on the land? Or are the mental health support services that are out there targeted mainly at land dwellers, so liveaboards are disproportionately unsupported?  

If the last is true then providing some support through NBTA might not be a bad thing.

 

Personally, I think it is very likely that the lifestyle draws in a number of people who are already 'unsettled' to some degree. Unfortunately I also think that it might not be the best move for people suffering from mental troubles, because it is too easy to become isolated. It may seem to those folks that this is what they want, but I suspect that it doesn't help with their issues. 

But that said, mental support services are harder to obtain anyway these days due to all the cutbacks, so there's no guarantee that if they moved into a house, the affected people would get the help they need to try to make them more mentally healthy.

So in that context, why not become more isolated and more antisocial on the cut? At least they can spend time in a pleasant environment rather than a grey city.  

It's hard to be optimistic given the current circumstances of the NHS and the country. 

 

 

[Rambling Boater]

23 minutes ago, David Mack said:

 

If the last is true then providing some support through NBTA might not be a bad thing.

Maybe some live aboards became such because they just wanted to be left alone by 'society'.

Edited May 13, 2022 by Rambling Boater

[IanD]

5 minutes ago, Rambling Boater said:

Maybe some live aboards became such because they just wanted to be left alone by 'society'.

 

Or by CART, if "being left alone" means "ignoring the mooring and CC rules" -- which does seem to be one of the main aims of the NBTA, which is why many law-abiding boaters on CWDF dislike them... 😉

[Tony1]

3 minutes ago, Rambling Boater said:

Maybe some live aboards became such because they just wanted to be left alone by 'society'.

 

Yes, and I must apologise if I gave the impression that a desire to escape from society always implies some form of mental issue. 

I personally love the fact that for a few days at a time, I can reduce my contact with society at large, and I hope there is nothing seriously 'unsettled' about myself. 

Lets be honest about it, we all need some degree of human contact or company, but society is liberally sprinkled with toxic and hurtful people, or people whose worldview and politics are so different to our own that we simply cannot stand to be in their company for very long.  

My first instinct is to avoid any contact or communication with these people (and that includes online interactions), but I hope that doesnt mean I am suffering from mental issues. I like to think it means I just dont like being around what I view as negative, cruel, trollish or sociopathic people. 

 

 

[Rambling Boater]

5 minutes ago, Tony1 said:

 

Yes, and I must apologise if I gave the impression that a desire to escape from society always implies some form of mental issue. 

I personally love the fact that for a few days at a time, I can reduce my contact with society at large, and I hope there is nothing seriously 'unsettled' about myself. 

Lets be honest about it, we all need some degree of human contact or company, but society is liberally sprinkled with toxic and hurtful people, or people whose worldview and politics are so different to our own that we simply cannot stand to be in their company for very long.  

My first instinct is to avoid any contact or communication with these people (and that includes online interactions), but I hope that doesnt mean I am suffering from mental issues. I like to think it means I just dont like being around what I view as negative, cruel, trollish or sociopathic people. 

 

 

Perhaps we should stay away from this forum then. JOKE!

 

🤣

[Slow and Steady]

27 minutes ago, Tony1 said:

So in that context, why not become more isolated and more antisocial on the cut? At least they can spend time in a pleasant environment rather than a grey city.

Nail on head.

[Mike Todd]

2 hours ago, Rambling Boater said:

 

You seem to suggest some NBTA members aren't legitimate ('look legitimate'), in what respects?

 

If some of what you call 'freeloaders' are 'wandering' then how are they not legitimate?

 

There does seem to be a belief in the more frequent areas for limited compliance that all that a boater has to do is move at least 20 miles in a year. They misheard the comment from CaRT that a total movement of less than 20 miles a year is very unlikely 'to convince the Board' that they are engaging in a genuine navigation.

[Rambling Boater]

4 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

There does seem to be a belief in the more frequent areas for limited compliance that all that a boater has to do is move at least 20 miles in a year. They misheard the comment from CaRT that a total movement of less than 20 miles a year is very unlikely 'to convince the Board' that they are engaging in a genuine navigation.

 

I think the reality is that in very busy areas like London 'the navigation' isn't just a navigation anymore. It is home to thousands of people living on a boat.

 

London is already crammed packed with people, so it's understandable that there is a spill over onto the waterways.

 

C&RT will always have a problem persuading the government that the navigation is more important than homes.

 

There are many major cities around the world which have ghettos, maybe this is where we are heading in London? The navigation might just be the start.

 

 

 

 

[Arthur Marshall]

5 hours ago, Rambling Boater said:

 

You seem to suggest some NBTA members aren't legitimate ('look legitimate'), in what respects?

 

If some of what you call 'freeloaders' are 'wandering' then how are they not legitimate?

 

Travellers with a capital T are a recognised ethnic minority. They generally work for a living as much as any other member of society.

The New Age Travellers generally lived on benefits while maintaining their freedom from society's rules. That's why they were regarded as freeloaders. Ordinary people living on boats are not in the main ethnic Travellers, but, like the New Age bods, hijack the term to equate themselves with the ethnic ones so as to try to benefit from the same protections that the latter have in law. You may think this is legitimate, but you can no more choose to be a Traveller than I can to be Chinese. It demeans the term.

Wandering about doesn't make you a Traveller - if it did, I'd be one. I'm not. Travelling isn't the defining term, oddly enough. Plenty of Travellers live in houses these days, though some don't like it much.  But then, my bloke from China doesn't stop being Chinese because he lives in Surrey, and nor does a bloke from Barking become a Traveller because he lives on a boat.

[Alan de Enfield]

The Government "Department for Children Schools & families" have a clear definition of traveller  and they must fulfill both section A & B :

 

 

 

 

 

 

[IanD]

8 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

The Government "Department for Children Schools & families" have a clear definition of traveller  and they must fulfill both section A & B :

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So boaters who want to stay moored in one place or area to be near their (fixed) place of work (or school) -- which seems to be the case every time the NBTA hit the headlines because CART are trying to make their non-CCing CMing members move on -- are by definition not travellers?

 

In which case, surely the NBTA is mis-named?

[Alan de Enfield]

Just now, IanD said:

In which case, surely the NBTA is mis-named?

 

Depends which name you wish to use - the very accurate name being :

 

"No Boats Travel Anywhere"

 

Then there is :

 

"National Boats Tied up Association"

[IanD]

1 minute ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

Depends which name you wish to use - the very accurate name being :

 

"No Boats Travel Anywhere"

 

Then there is :

 

"National Boats Tied up Association"

 

But apart from the joke names, how does the NBTA justify their use of "Travellers" in their name when it seems likely that it doesn't apply to most of their members (and certainly not to the boaters they've used several times in press campaigns) ?

 

Like some posters on here, they seem to be using a different dictionary to everyone else... 😉

[David Mack]

33 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

The Government "Department for Children Schools & families" have a clear definition of traveller  and they must fulfill both section A & B :

Except that document makes clear that the definition of 'traveller' given is only for the purposes of that advice. So it is not necessarily very helpful in any other context.

[David Mack]

1 hour ago, Arthur Marshall said:

 

The New Age Travellers generally lived on benefits

...

Ordinary people living on boats are not in the main ethnic Travellers, but, like the New Age bods, hijack the term ...

 

Are you suggesting that the majority of liveaboards generally live on benefits?  I would have thought that those who move the least, particularly in and around London, do so because many of them are employed and need to stay reasonably close to their place of work.

 

 

 

[IanD]

25 minutes ago, David Mack said:

Except that document makes clear that the definition of 'traveller' given is only for the purposes of that advice. So it is not necessarily very helpful in any other context.

If you look at all the legal (and generally understood) definitions of "Traveller" (usually linked with "Gypsy") they are either defined by family history (e.g. Romany) or lifestyle (e.g. continuously travelling around to follow work). So a Romany who lives in a fixed caravan can still be a Traveller, as can a non-Romany who is peripatetic and travels round because of work and doesn't have a static home.

 

From what I've seen -- and if I'm wrong, please correct me -- in every single case where the NBTA has hit the headlines neither of these has been the case; the boater families concerned have no Gypsy/Traveller heritage, and far from moving around because of work they want to do exactly the opposite i.e. stay essentially in one place because of work/schools. So they meet neither of the definitions of "Traveller".

 

And the same also seems to apply to everyone who has been putting forward NBTA arguments, including those on this forum.

 

All of which rather suggests that "Traveller" is not an appropriate term to use in the title of the NBTA, doesn't it?

 

18 minutes ago, David Mack said:

 

Are you suggesting that the majority of liveaboards generally live on benefits?  I would have thought that those who move the least, particularly in and around London, do so because many of them are employed and need to stay reasonably close to their place of work.

 

 

Which means they're not "Travellers" -- go and read up the definitions (legal and in general use) of the term... 😉

Edited May 13, 2022 by IanD