Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2021

The Current Transcript for March 12, 2021

Host: Matt Galloway

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

MATT GALLOWAY: This pandemic, has brought many changes to how health care is delivered across this country. And those visits with loved ones in difficult times are among the most pronounced. In 30 minutes, Dr. Brian Goldman is here to talk about what he sees on the front lines, a move away from patient-centred care and why that's so troubling. Also, this morning, some European countries have temporarily suspended the rollout of the AstraZeneca vaccine, but not Canada. We will discuss why. Plus,.

WOMAN: The audit look like, oh, no, this is going to be a mental health disaster. And then, this incredible thing happened, which is that people bounced back. People found ways to be happy.

MATT GALLOWAY: How happy are we these days? You might be surprised with what the research shows. And later, 12 months after everything changed, we asked Halifax's former poet laureate, El Jones, to write something on the year that was. Trust me, you will want to stick around to hear her poem, "Glass Hands". We begin, though, with the Canadian military, a culture change long overdue and hard questions about why that hasn't happened already? Good morning. I'm Matt Galloway. And this is "The Current".

[Music: Theme]

Advocates call for better support for survivors of military sexual trauma

Guests: Christine Wood, Stéfanie von Hlatky

WOMAN: The prime minister admitted to knowing about the allegations of sexual harassment against General Vance, allegations he and his minister refused to act on. We need to ensure women who serve can do so equally. Will the prime minister apologize to women in the armed forces for failing them and allowing this toxic and dangerous sexualized culture to continue?

MATT GALLOWAY: Who knew what when? That is what many were asking in the House of Commons yesterday, as a new acting chief of defence staff stepped into the role, the third one since January. Canada's military is embroiled in scandal. And while there is a crisis of leadership currently, there is an ongoing crisis of sexual misconduct allegations and investigations, one that female members of the Canadian Armed Forces say is cultural and institutional. Christine Wood enrolled as an Air Force reservist in Canada's armed forces in 2010. She is now an advocate for better support for survivors of military sexual trauma. Christine, good morning.

CHRISTINE WOOD: Good morning.

MATT GALLOWAY: When you enlisted in the military, you were following in the footsteps of your father and grandfather. This is something that members of your family had done over time. What were your initial experiences like in the military?

CHRISTINE WOOD: Initially, it was... it was wonderful. It was life-changing. I was immediately welcomed into what they call Canada's largest family. And I felt a really intense feeling of belonging and purpose. Unfortunately, that was... that was short-lived. Eighteen months after joining, I was sexually assaulted. And it just... [00:03:23]everything fell apart after that. [1.3s]

MATT GALLOWAY: I know that you have agreed to... to talk about what happened. This is incredibly personal. And so, I mean, really just say as much as you're comfortable with. What can you tell us about what happened in 2011?

CHRISTINE WOOD: I'd been at a function at the officers' mess. And I don't remember anything from the night. I woke up the next morning. There was blood on my sheets. [slight chuckle] I didn't feel right. And I went to a doctor. I thought, if anything, that I had made a mistake, that I had drank too much or something. But a week later, I was told that I'd tested positive for a Rohypnol substance, and I had contracted an STI. At that point, the base doctor gave them some guidance and encouraged me to think about whether I wanted to report the rape or not. Because he said it often follows a member of around and members see reprisals for the rest of their career. And so I thought about it for 24 hours, and I decided it was just so wrong. And so I pursued the reporting process.

MATT GALLOWAY: So sorry, just to be clear. The doctor that you reported this to said that if you were to file a further report and go through with an investigation, that that could follow you around?

CHRISTINE WOOD: Yeah, and that's a story that I've heard shared by hundreds of women through the course of my... my work with this. It's 700 over the last five years. It's not uncommon.

MATT GALLOWAY: What went through your mind when you heard that?

CHRISTINE WOOD: [00:05:21]I was incredibly betrayed and confused [2.7s] because if we have a police service, is this not exactly what the police are for? So, yeah, it was... it was really confusing and... and it was a betrayal.

MATT GALLOWAY: You ultimately went through with the investigation. What happened with that investigation?

CHRISTINE WOOD: I did. I.. I showed up. I told them I'd been assaulted. I needed military police. And was placed in a room. I waited for about two hours for a member of Canada's National Investigation Service to come. It was all men in the room. And they, I believe, videotaped the interview. And that interview lasted for close to two hours. I produced the bed sheets from my bed. And they accepted that into evidence. [00:06:24]The investigation went on for two years, maybe a little longer, and they were not able to identify the individual. [10.8s] They did find DNA evidence, but they were unable to... to ever locate the person. And [00:06:44]to this day, I don't know who raped me. [2.4s]

MATT GALLOWAY: I'm sorry for what you went through.

CHRISTINE WOOD: Thank you.

MATT GALLOWAY: And for the way that that unfolded in terms of the investigation. Given even at the beginning of it, what had happened? Did you feel as though you were supported by the system as that investigation unfolded?

CHRISTINE WOOD: At different levels of the system, yes. And at other levels, no. This incident happened while I was on a training course. And the staff members there at the base teaching the course were very supportive of me. They knew what was going on. But when I returned to to my base after training, three-and-a-half weeks later, the very first doctor appointment I had, [00:07:30]I said I simply don't know how to feel safe. And the doctor suggested that I should consider a medical release because the armed forces aren't for everyone. [10.9s]

MATT GALLOWAY: The armed forces aren't for everyone!

CHRISTINE WOOD: Yes, [00:07:45]as though I should accept sexual assault as part of my job description. And that was truely my breaking point. [7.5s]

MATT GALLOWAY: The former Supreme Court Justice, Marie Deschamps, did a report in 2015 about the culture of the military. And described, in her words, a sexualized culture that is hostile to women. Is that how you would characterise what you went through?

CHRISTINE WOOD: At times. At times, I felt completely respected as a person, but [00:08:17]sexual harassment, I mean, it's it's everywhere. For me, it was it was everywhere in the armed forces. That sexualized culture is a real thing. It's not just men. A lot of women contribute to it, too. [14.0s] And I say all this acknowledging that the majority of people that I ever knew or came into contact with were wonderful, honourable people. And my best friends to this day remain the people that I met in my brief period of time serving.

MATT GALLOWAY: But as you say, a life-changing experience in terms of when you signed up, you... you felt as though this was where you belonged. And then [00:09:00]ultimately, you had to leave? [2.0s]

CHRISTINE WOOD: Yeah, and I went through a grieving process over that. I felt I lost out big, yes. I do have a wonderful family now, and marriage, and so many great things have happened since then. And my... my main focus now is to advocate for survivors and to help them access the supports that they need.

MATT GALLOWAY: Stay with us, Christine. I want to bring somebody else into our conversation. Stefanie von Hlatky is the Canada research chair on gender security and the armed forces director of the Centre for International and Defence Policy and an associate professor of political studies at Queen's University. Stefanie, good morning to you.

STEFANIE VON HLATKY: Good morning, Matt. Good morning, Christine.

MATT GALLOWAY: As you listen to Christine's story, what goes through your mind?

STEFANIE VON HLATKY: Well, first of all, I just want to thank Christine for sharing her story. I think it's very powerful, especially in this moment, and I have tremendous admiration for her translating her experience into advocacy to help others.

CHRISTINE WOOD: Thank you.

MATT GALLOWAY: Why is this issue so pernicious within the military? It's been five years since that investigation that resulted in the military launching Operation Honour, which has been aimed at eliminating sexual misconduct. Why is it so difficult to do that?

STEFANIE VON HLATKY: I'm glad you brought up the Deschamps report because I think that's an important turning point. And certainly, it revealed some aspects of military culture that are problematic. You alluded to the culture as sexualized and hostile to women. [00:10:42]What I'd like to add here in terms of describing that military culture is that it's a culture that's really geared towards operational success. And for operational success, you need tight group cohesion. You need rigid hierarchies and obedience. That's what's important when you're on the battlefield. But that culture also has some unintended consequence. And I think it's led to a more permissive environment for sexual misconduct. It's an environment where it's inherently difficult for victims and survivors to come forward and to speak out. [34.2s] There's this fear of social ostracization or maybe professional reprisals or repercussions. That's something that Christine alluded to earlier. And it makes it also harder for peers and others to speak out and maybe blow the whistle. And [00:11:36]the other thing is it can be exploited by perpetrators through abuses of power. You know, really using that rigid hierarchy to hide their behaviour. [9.3s] So those are aspects of the culture that I think we need to take a deeper look at to make sure that we can prevent and eradicate sexual misconduct in the armed forces.

MATT GALLOWAY: There have been reports this week that an independent watchdog to help investigate sexual misconduct in the military is in the works. We asked the prime minister's office about that yesterday, and they said this is not something that's happening at the moment. But it is something, if I'm not mistaken, Stefanie, that... That Justice Deschamps recommended in 2015. Would that help - an independent watchdog there?

STEFANIE VON HLATKY: Absolutely. I [00:12:19]think this is a necessary next step. [1.8s] And Deschamps had underscored the importance of an independent system, someone that would sit outside of the chain of command. And what was set up doesn't go quite far enough. What was set up is a sexual misconduct response centre, and that's a system of support for survivors that sits outside of the chain of command. And that's important for victims and survivors to disclose incidents and to get some information and advice on what to do next without triggering a formal process. But here, what we're talking about in terms of creating something new is a truly independent system of reporting and investigation. So I hope that we can look to other models, maybe similar systems that have been set up in other countries and learn from those best practices as we consider designing another model. And then something else that will be important is setting up an oversight mechanism, an external oversight mechanism, to more closely monitor the journey of cultural change. Because I don't think we can ask the military to self-police and to do their own tracking of that change. We really need an oversight body that is external that can monitor progress over time.

MATT GALLOWAY: The military has appointed several women to new roles, including naming its first female vice chief of the defence staff, Lieutenant General Frances Allen. What do you make of those appointments, Stefanie? I mean, is part of a culture change changing who is in leadership roles, or does that go far enough?

STEFANIE VON HLATKY: Yes, [00:13:56]we definitely need more diversity in terms of military leadership. [4.2s] And I just want to say that Lieutenant General Allen, she's a three-star general and a fantastic leader, and this is no fast-track promotion in the moment. She deserves to be there. And I think having someone like General Allen in this role really increases the visibility of women within the armed forces, and normalizes having women in those types of roles. And it also serves as a very powerful role models for other women coming up in the organization. And then when we consider the cadre of military leaders right now, you now have a bit more diversity in terms of who's making the important decisions at that table. So I think that's an incredibly positive step. And there have been other notable appointments announced recently, like Brigadier-General Lise Bourgon, who will be the commandant of the Royal Military College of Canada right here in Kingston, where I am. So for the cadets, for the next generation of military leaders, I think that also is an incredibly powerful message.

MATT GALLOWAY: There are also real questions around political leadership. The prime minister has been questioned intensely on this, as has the defence minister, Harjit Sajjan. We asked the defence minister's office for comment on these issues. And the statement that they send us reads in part, "We will do absolutely everything in our power to make the changes that need to be made to eliminate the scourge of sexual misconduct from the Canadian Armed Forces and the Department of National Defence. There are toxic elements of masculinity that have risen to the fore on numerous occasions. To bring about a complete and total culture change, we need to acknowledge this and tackle this head-on." Christine Wood, how do you address those toxic elements in a meaningful way? What do you want to hear from political leaders?

CHRISTINE WOOD: [chuckle] First of all, I want to... to second the vote of confidence in the new VCDS, Lieutenant General Frances Allen. I think she is a ray of hope for women in the forces. And I see it as a positive step towards being a more diverse force that represents our diverse Canadian population. In terms of a watchdog group or an independent oversight, I completely support that. I feel the military justice system is not designed to hold senior leadership accountable. I know militaries around the world resist that effort. But the most important thing for me right now is to get the supports in place that we've been asking for for six years. And to be specific on that, we are asking for a national platform for peer support. We are asking for inpatient and outpatient therapy and group therapy available across Canada in both languages that is geared specifically towards survivors of military sexual trauma. We have none of this right now. And we need it.

MATT GALLOWAY: The minister, Stefanie, has been accused of not addressing allegations of misconduct outside the military. Do you think there's political will within government to fix the systemic problems, to make the... what Christine is looking for, to make that a reality?

STEFANIE VON HLATKY: There are a lot of questions about accountability right now. And I definitely think we have important lessons to learn about that. But what I... who I'd like to hear from also in this moment are the military leaders themselves because I think right now is an important moment to communicate to the Canadian Armed Forces, which is an incredibly large organization, we're talking about 100,000 people on the regular force and the reserves. And I think that instead of holding military leaders back in this moment, we need to hear from them in terms of communicating the importance of the journey of culture change that lays ahead, and talking about care and how they're going to put people first moving forward. So, yes, I think politicians have a lot of work to do in this moment. But I also think that this is a time for military leaders to step up.

MATT GALLOWAY: Christine, what would you want to hear from those military leaders to Stephanie's point?

CHRISTINE WOOD: Oh, I have thought about this, and I... I seriously think that it would be hard-pressed to find a new CDS or multiple male senior leadership officials who don't have some kind of experience with sexual misconduct in their past. They all came up through the ranks in the 70s and the 80s and the 90s when the culture around sexual assault and sexual harassment was just not taken as seriously as it is now. And standards are higher now, which is a good thing. But trust has been broken. And I think for trust to be re-established, the leaders, the senior leaders, need to own up to their past. I believe they need to share what they may have experienced or done in their past, what was wrong, why it was wrong, what they've learned from it. And how they've evolved as a person to be able to lead a modern, diverse force that really represents the Canadian public.

MATT GALLOWAY: So not just speak about change in the abstract, but speak about their own change?

CHRISTINE WOOD: Yes, a full mea culpa! That's the only way. Trust is so hard to build and so easy to break. And at this point, we need complete honesty and transparency.

MATT GALLOWAY: Just finally, before I let you both go, we just have about a minute left, Christine, are you confident, given what you've been talking about, that this change will be possible?

CHRISTINE WOOD: I'm confident it's possible. I don't know how long it will take. I see things moving incrementally. It's frustrating, but I do believe that it is possible because there are so many honourable men and women who serve in the forces.

MATT GALLOWAY: And Stefanie, briefly from you, is that change likely or possible?

STEFANIE VON HLATKY: Yes, I believe change is possible. And some things can be done in the short-term to improve the system, like a better vetting process for the selection of military leaders. And then some things will take a bit more time. When we're talking about culture change, that obviously doesn't happen overnight. And we've witnessed this in the last five years since the publication of the Deschamps report. So there's a long game there, but I am hopeful that with sustained attention on the issue, that change can happen.

MATT GALLOWAY: Christine, it's really important to hear from you. I'm sure that it's not easy, but I really do appreciate you being willing to speak about your own experience and the work that you're doing. Thank you very much.

CHRISTINE WOOD: Oh, it's been my pleasure. Thank you for having me.

MATT GALLOWAY: And Stefanie, thank you so much for your perspective.

STEFANIE VON HLATKY: Thank you.

MATT GALLOWAY: Stefanie von Hlatky is the Canada research chair on gender security and the armed forces and associate professor of political studies at Queen's University. Christine Wood was medically released in 2014 after being diagnosed with PTSD. She's part of the organization It's Just 700. The CBC News is next. And then,.

WOMAN: I understand that staff are very, very stressed out because of COVID. I wonder if we can talk about that a little bit more with patients?

MATT GALLOWAY: It has been a difficult time for hospitals, patients and the families and staff as well. And some are worried that changes because of COVID will mean a real setback when it comes to patient-centred care. Dr. Brian Goldman will be here coming up in six minutes to talk more about that. I'm Matt Galloway. This is "The Current" on CBC Radio One.

[Music: Theme]

Dr. Brian Goldman on one year in the pandemic

Guest: Brian Goldman

MATT GALLOWAY: Good morning. I'm Matt Galloway. And you're listening to "The Current".

[Music: Theme]

MATT GALLOWAY: Still to come, happiness researcher Elizabeth Dunn on finding light within the cracks of darkness. And stay with us, you'll want to hear El Jones and her moving poem, "Glass Hands", the eulogy on an anniversary of the pandemic. But first, patient care during a pandemic.

[Music: Theme]

MATT GALLOWAY: Chances are you've been to a hospital when a loved one has been sick. Maybe you were there after an operation, sitting in a hospital room, holding their hand, or with an elderly parent advocating for the best treatment possible. With the arrival of COVID-19 in Canada, though, that has all changed. And now, we are on the outside, sitting in the hospital parking lot waiting for news. Or, if you're lucky, inside, masked one at a time. Patient-and-family-centred care was becoming the gold standard for care in this country. But this past year, that approach has taken a backseat. Dr. Brian Goldman is an emergency room physician at a Toronto hospital, and of course, the host of "White Coat, Black Art" and "The Dose" here at CBC. Brian, good morning.

BRIAN GOLDMAN: Good morning, Matt.

MATT GALLOWAY: Remind us, for people who don't know that term, what is patient-and-family-centred care?

BRIAN GOLDMAN: It does sound a little bit like jargon, doesn't it? Patient-and-family-centred care has been around for maybe 10 to 15 years. The core message can be summed up in this phrase, nothing about us without us. So, in theory, anything that a hospital does that has anything to do with patient care, whether it's purchasing a new MRI or changing the menu in the cafeteria or dealing with visiting hours, should have input from a patient, a former patient, a family member of a former patient to get that perspective in there so that you're not simply ignoring it.

MATT GALLOWAY: What does that actually look like on the ground? I mean, and I ask this to you as somebody who works in a hospital.

BRIAN GOLDMAN: Yeah. So it depends on... on... on where you where you work, and... and what hospital if you're a patient or family member you... you... you go to. So in... in some places it might be more of a token where... where, you know, there... you might read signs that say we take... you know, in an elevator saying that we take the patient's perspective very seriously, all the way up to the model at Kingston General Hospital. You know, long before COVID, they... they went into patient-and-family centred care in a big way. In every... you know, they put... they actually put former patients and family members of former patients on committees in the hospital. And... and they had some... some early, great successes. For instance, they have low rates of handwashing by doctors and nurses. So they asked their patient, they call them patient experience advisors, what to do about it? And so what the patient experience... the former patients told them to do was do secret audits and post handwashing rates at the front entrance to the wards. And rates of handwashing went up dramatically and stayed up. And, you know, you saw dramatic changes in visiting hours. They went from visiting hours to just visiting. In other words, allowing family members, loved ones to visit 24/7.

MATT GALLOWAY: And is this approach to patient care, is it common across this country?

BRIAN GOLDMAN: Not in the way that Kingston General Hospital did it. You know, we don't have figures. I dare say, you know, I'm guessing here that every hospital has committed to getting input from patients. But on the other hand, you have doubters. And the doubters believe that a fair number of hospitals pay lip service to patient-and-family-centred care or use it for marketing purposes. That certainly is something that they talk about in the United States, where they're actually competing for patients. So very few hospitals have adopted it in the way that Kingston General Hospital did, where they recruited lots of former patients to put them on committees, put family members on committees in every aspect of everything that they did. For instance, they drilled down to the point that if they were interviewing a new nurse to hire, they would actually put a former patient or a family member of a former patient on the interviewing committee.

MATT GALLOWAY: Wow, that's fascinating!

BRIAN GOLDMAN: That is fascinating.

MATT GALLOWAY: Everything has changed, as we keep saying, during this pandemic. And that's certainly the case in terms of how health care is delivered. How has that patient-centred model, the patient-and-family-centred model, changed during the pandemic?

BRIAN GOLDMAN: Well, it depends, of course, on who you talk to. But if we're... if we're going to if we're going to take this from the patient perspective and family members perspective, they would say that it's changed utterly. You know, and the only people who are going to know how much it's changed from that perspective are the people who have been hospitalized, have been in and out of hospital before the pandemic... since the pandemic and the family and their loved ones. And, you know, as we know, the pandemic has put an immediate hold on essential family members visiting loved ones. That's what happened a year ago. We know that that's changed to some extent, as you already said in your in your introduction, that... that... that, you know, you're allowed in. But you have to gown up, of course, for... for... for safety and infection control reasons. If loved ones were permitted to hospital... in hospital, then patient experience advisers, certainly, you know, if loved ones haven't been permitted to hospital, then patient experience advisers haven't either. So... so, you know, I remember early on visiting a hospital for a story that we did on "White Coat, Black Art", and they said, unfortunately, they had to disallow the patient experience advisors from... from coming to the hospital because of the pandemic. Patient-and-family-centred care has become a much lower priority during the pandemic. There's no question about that. And there have been lots of stories. And I... and I want to tell you about one.

MATT GALLOWAY: Please!

BRIAN GOLDMAN: Kendyl and Lonny Terris live in New Brunswick. They've been married for 60 years. Kendyl has dementia. He's been hospitalized at the Moncton Hospital, waiting for a long-term care bed for several months. Lonny has been permitted to visit and has been told that she can't hold Kendyl's hand. You know, every once in a while, she does. So their daughter, Kim Crevatin, also lives in New Brunswick. She's on our show this weekend. She was able to visit her dad, Kendyl, in the hospital just days before her mother had a very different experience.

KIM CREVATIN: I went in on Christmas Day, and I was quite emotional seeing him on Christmas Day. I went in by myself because you're only allowed to go in one person at a time. And I was just kind of had a thought in my head that this might be the very last Christmas I could spend with him because he's gone downhill quite a bit. I just kind of thought in my head, you know, I'm... I don't care. I'm going to go, and I'm going to sit with him, and I'm going to hold his hand. I'm going to try to have a nice visit with him on Christmas. And the nurses that were on duty that day were very, you know, understanding. And nobody said a word to me. I sat on his bed the whole time I was there. We listened to Christmas music. I had a really nice two-hour visit with him. And two days later, that's when my mother was in, and she got escorted out of the hospital for being [chuckling] too close to him. So it was... it's very mixed signals.

MATT GALLOWAY: Escorted out of the hospital. What happened when Lonny Terris was asked to leave?

BRIAN GOLDMAN: So.. so, first of all, she was asked to leave in front of patients and their families. And so... so it was a humiliating experience. But I want you to listen to Kim describing what sounds like a very traumatic experience that her mother went through.

KIM CREVATIN: It was really embarrassing for her and very emotional. And she cried the whole way down. And I think one of the security guards felt really sorry for her, and just kind of said, you know, I'm... I'm really sorry. Like, I'm just I'm just doing my job. Just so you know, it's I don't necessarily agree with having to escort you out of the hospital. And the screeners that are there at the doors of the hospital, most of them, a lot of them, know my mother because she was going every day to visit my dad. And so one of them saw her and just went up to her and gave her a card for the patient advocate just to say, you know, maybe you should call this person.

MATT GALLOWAY: What's a patient advocate?

BRIAN GOLDMAN: Well, that's a really good question. And you'd have to ask every hospital. It really depends on the hospital. It's often the hospital employee who handles patient complaints. Some hospitals call it the office of the patient experience, on the other hand. You know, so... so in some hospitals, it might be the person who handles patient-and-family-centred care, but in other hospitals, it might be the one who handles complaints. Kim's family filed a complaint with the Moncton Hospital. "White Coat, Black Art" received a statement from the hospital that COVID-19 has presented unprecedented challenges for staff as the hospital has strived to strike an appropriate balance between compassion and limiting the risk of COVID transmission. That's certainly the dichotomy that... that you hear, safety or more consultations.

MATT GALLOWAY: If a hospital says we are committed to a patient-and-family-centred care model, whose job is it to actually maintain that practice and ensure that that's not just I think you use the phrase lip service earlier?

BRIAN GOLDMAN: That's... yeah, exactly. Well, that's the thing. And during the pandemic, you know, if you're... if you're trying to bring the patient experience, the patient perspective in, you have to talk to patients or former patients, family members. So during the pandemic, the very people who would carry that torch aren't even allowed in the hospital. When you allow family members liberal access to patients, you can deputize family members to be part of that process, and it just happens organically because they're there. When you exclude them, as we're doing during COVID, it's the hospital's responsibility, though, you can see that that kind of falls apart during a pandemic.

MATT GALLOWAY: Are these stories common? I mean, stories like Kim's?

BRIAN GOLDMAN: Oh, unfortunately, they are very common. And... and the... you know, unfortunately, that's the case. And I want to tell you about another story that we heard about. Guy Cormier died in a New Brunswick hospital from cancer on February the 7th. His ageing mother was in the same hospital a few doors down, in the early stages of dementia, recovering from a fall. She was not allowed to see her son before he died. Charlene Cormier is married to his brother, Danny, and here she is talking to CBC's information morning at Moncton.

CHARLENE CORMIER: He said his brother was in room 4D, and he checked on his mother. His mother was in 4A. So he asked if instead of him to go in, if they could get his mother [breaking down into tears] so his mother could be with her son. They said no because of COVID.

BRIAN GOLDMAN: I get kind of choked up listening to that.

MATT GALLOWAY: Absolutely.

BRIAN GOLDMAN: And you know, again, a statement from the hospital says they're trying to strike a balance between compassion and safety and that it can be, quote, heartbreaking for staff to enforce COVID rules. And you know what? And that's the case. And this, I'm sure, is contributing to the burnout and moral distress that we've been hearing among... among frontline workers.

MATT GALLOWAY: But also the families... I mean, the families, if they have no way of staying involved, if they can't be there, you wonder where this leaves them?

BRIAN GOLDMAN: Yeah, exactly. So... so not only is their loved one feeling lonely and... and palpably not being taken care of as well as they would be if the family were there, they're not getting as much nutrition because it takes a lot more time to feed them than... than... than staff may have time to do. They're not getting helping them get up and walk around. So... so... so you can see all of the compounding factors. And then, of course, if there's grief, as there was in this case, it's unrequited grief. It's unresolved grief because... because you didn't get an opportunity to... to grieve in the way that you ordinarily would were this pandemic out at not here. I want to bring another perspective into our discussion right now. I want you to meet Sue Robbins. She lives in Vancouver. She was the patient experience guru, the true-blue patient experience guru, by the way, at two pediatric hospitals. Not lip service all. They're in western Canada. She heard lots of stories like the two that... that we just talked about. Her son, Aaron, has Down syndrome. She also has breast cancer herself. And I want you to hear Sue talk about her own experience in the past year from the standpoint of a patient.

SUE ROBBINS: Even from my own experience, you know, having to go to the cancer hospital to get a follow-up mammogram and an ultrasound and, you know, having to deal with the screener at the door, who obviously wasn't trained in patient-and-family-centred care at all. By the time I got upstairs, I was in tears. But you're not allowed to bring anybody with you. And so I had to phone my husband, who was, you know, waiting in the car outside in the dark and the rain because we live in Vancouver. And I just realized, I understand that staff are very, very stressed out because of COVID. And I wonder if we can talk about that a little bit more with patients?

MATT GALLOWAY: I mean, emotionally, you can understand what patients would need and what they would get from that patient-centred model. But medically, what are the benefits to the patient-and-family-centred care model?

BRIAN GOLDMAN: There are many. Their outcomes are better. So... so they're more likely to get out of hospital. They're more likely to... to recover more fully. They're better... they have better nutrition. If they need to be mobilized to walk around, they walk around better. They're more likely to stick with medications. There's evidence the care is safer when you involve the family because they form a safety check. You know, we're about to... to change an antibiotic to a different one, and a daughter says, Mmm, I think my dad's allergic to that. Ooop, whoops! So that kind of thing can happen. And when patients need follow-up appointments and good care at home, it is extremely advantageous to involve family members with discharge planning because you need to... you know, very often the patient themselves may not... may be too frail, they may have dementia, and it may be difficult for them to organize their own follow-up.

MATT GALLOWAY: Why, then, would hospital administrators and health care providers be reluctant to embrace this model?

BRIAN GOLDMAN: There is an unfortunate perception that this adds to the time and complexity of caring for patients without adding tangible benefits. That's a false dichotomy, but that's unfortunately what we sometimes hear.

MATT GALLOWAY: What about from doctors? I mean, when you speak with other doctors, what do they tell you?

BRIAN GOLDMAN: I've heard some critical care doctors and nurses say that COVID has simplified their job somewhat because they don't have lots of family members around who can catch their eye, and then... and then they end up having a conversation. I've also heard that cutting back on in-person family meetings saves time. But to be perfectly fair, for some health care providers, especially during the early days of the pandemic, there has been this blanket notion of erring on the side of caution, which means strict and I mean really strict infection control. And I want you to listen to Dr. Samir Sinha speaking to Willow Smith from "White Coat, Black Art" Samir, of course, very, very well-known geriatrician. He's the director of geriatrics at Mount Sinai Health System and University Health Network in Toronto.

SAMIR SINHA I think really what underpins this is just fear in doing the wrong thing. If you understand the psyche of a professional when it's burned into your mind, do no harm. And I think when you have a virus that, frankly, has been full of surprises, has been a lot different than other traditional beasts out there, and has left a massive death toll across Canada and around the world, the last thing you want to do when you're scared, and you're worried is to do something that actually causes harm. So sometimes it's just safer to say, just don't touch because we're not sure. You know, and what happens if I was, you know, that nurse, that doctor who made the wrong call and caused even more harm?

BRIAN GOLDMAN: So, you know, in fairness, on the other hand, I have met many frontline, you know, critical care doctors and nurses who have been deeply traumatized by these kinds of experiences. And I've... and I've also heard from from many who have bent over backwards to treat families with compassion and to be inclusive.

MATT GALLOWAY: Part of this is about, I guess, imagining yourself in that role. What does it take for a doctor or a nurse to... to put themselves in the shoes of a family member?

BRIAN GOLDMAN: As... as... as I've said before, it was only when my parents were admitted to hospital, like, I think a dozen times between the two of them and long-term care retirement homes that I finally understood what my patients were going through years before. And it's interesting that medical culture discourages doctors from using their personal experience. You know, if a patient asks, what would you do if it were your mother? We're supposed to deflect the question. On the other hand, our life experience should make it easier for us to empathise with families, to imagine what it's like to be them, not have that control, but at least inform our responses.

MATT GALLOWAY: So if you think of someone like Kim, what role do people like Kim want to have in the care of their family members?

BRIAN GOLDMAN: Want... need to! Kim says that there should always be an essential family member present. And, you know, if that... if that loved one that they need to be there for is frail or has dementia, that, you know, that's intuitively obvious how the rules need to be different for family members to advocate for loved ones and to provide essential care. Don't call them visitors. You know, Julie Drewry said that to me, and said that to me many times. We're talking about essential family caregivers to be there to help with feeding, as well as to provide emotional support and the human touch. I want you to hear Kim explaining some of the changes she'd like to see.

KIM CREVATIN: My hope is that the rules could be re-evaluated with some added compassion put in place so that we could have at least one designated person, my mother or whatever, that could go and visit my father, wear whatever, a full face-shield, whatever they require, and sit by his bed, and hold his hand.

MATT GALLOWAY: When the risk goes down, and when we're out of this moment that we're in right now, what would it take for patient-centred care to become a priority again if it has has slipped for a bunch of different reasons over the course of the pandemic?

BRIAN GOLDMAN: Well, you know, this is a crisis point in the history of patient-and-family-centred care in the hospital system. And I want you to listen again to Sue Robbins, the patient and family care advocate. She says the pandemic, you know, has kicked it to the curb, but it could be an opportunity to reframe a model that, frankly, hasn't been working.

SUE ROBBINS: If we're going to burn it to the ground [chuckle] and we're going to rebuild. Like this is a chance for the phoenix rising. And... and really about reframing it. Obviously, it wasn't that strong, to begin with. Like, there's a huge fragility to it. So maybe this is an opportunity for us to rebuild together.

MATT GALLOWAY: So that's interesting. We often hear about people saying, oh, I can't wait till we go back to what we were in before. But this is an opportunity not just to go back to where we were, but to envision a new future.

BRIAN GOLDMAN: It is. AnD, you know, frankly, you know, you have to once... Once you realize the benefits of having patients... the patient perspective, having... having family members... having their perspective around you, you can't unthink it. You can't go back the other way. The danger here is that if we keep this kind of pandemic, this fear of resurgence, third wave, fourth wave, that... that... that's going to be the temptation to kind of to kind of say, you know what, we'll get back to patient-and-family-centred care when things are a little less dangerous.

MATT GALLOWAY: You know, this is a side note, but in some ways it I think, applies the idea of thinking about how the patient or their families are living right now. We're going to be talking in a few minutes about the roll out of the AstraZeneca vaccine, and some of the concerns that have been raised abroad, not here in Canada, but we know that even talking about those concerns can have an impact on vaccine hesitancy. This is something that you have discussed often. And I know that you have been talking about it on social media as well. How much vaccine hesitancy is there among those in the health care world?

BRIAN GOLDMAN: It depends on... on... on who you're talking about. I think for most hospital employees, people who work in hospitals, who see COVID every day, there's there's little to no vaccine hesitancy. We tend to see it more in long-term care amongst some frontline workers. There are some long-term care facilities where as many as 50 per cent of the frontline workers are hesitant about getting the vaccine.

MATT GALLOWAY: Do you have a sense as to why?

BRIAN GOLDMAN: I think there's a number of reasons for it. You know, some of it is... is an echo of the annual discussion about mandatory seasonal flu shots. So don't make it mandatory. My body, my choice. Of course, seasonal flu is very different. Seasonal flu shots are not as effective as the COVID vaccines, which are like upwards of 90 to 95 per cent effective. I think some frontline health care workers refusing the vaccine come from disadvantaged and racialized communities. There may be a history of being guinea pigs that gives some pause for concern. It may be that they're not receiving the information in a way that's culturally sensitive, that's language sensitive, and those are things that need to be addressed because there's a risk.

MATT GALLOWAY: I was going to say, what's the message that it sends to the general public? There's a risk, but there's also telegraphing of something more broadly.

BRIAN GOLDMAN: Yeah, it's telegraphing the idea that... that... that you're not sure. That maybe you want to wait for more data to see if it's safe because we don't know about the long-term safety, which is true. But, you know, what we know so far is, is that these vaccines are all safe, notwithstanding what you're going to talk about with the AstraZeneca vaccine. And... and... but that could be sending a message to to patients and family members saying, well, they're not taking it. Should I? That is always the risk. Although I'm not seeing that, Matt. I'm seeing a clamouring for the vaccine. I'm seeing 80-somethings celebrating that they're... that they're finally getting their appointments. My mother-in-law got her first shot. And... and and I know some others who have. So... so... so I'm not sure that that's... that's a true argument. But... but certainly this... this cohort who has been reluctant to get the vaccine among frontline workers is something we need to address.

MATT GALLOWAY: Can I just spend the last few minutes that we have speaking about where we're at in this pandemic? I often will go back to a conversation that you and I had about a year ago when this was starting and we were trying to figure out where this was going to go. And I said, we're... like, what is this going to look like? And you said to me on this program, we are in the first sentence, on the first page of this novel. A year into this, [Brian laughs] are we in the final chapter of COVID-19? [both laugh] I think about that because it was chilling in many ways. And it did suggest that this is... we're going to be in this for for a little while. Where are we now? Are we in the last chapter?

BRIAN GOLDMAN: Let's start, Matt, by saying that a year's a long time. I mean, I... I could not have envisioned having a conversation with you today in which we're still in the middle... like a year ago, in which we're still in the midst of this... of this pandemic. The... the... you know, the outlines of the end of the story are forming. And the end of the story is... is, you know, recurring variants of concern, of hopefully lesser and lesser severity, because the vaccines seem to be providing overall general protection. They've certainly been keeping people from dying and ending up in hospital on a ventilator. And so that's all good news. I think we have the outlines of an end. We also have, you know, the one thing that I couldn't have told you about a year ago, I could have hoped, is... is human adaptability. A year ago was Rudy Gobert, and... and the NBA, and the end of all professional sports. And here we are watching our favourite hockey teams and spring training. And we're actually going to see some people in the stands, at least in the United States. So... so... so, let's not forget human ingenuity. And, you know, I'm heartened by the fact that the... that the vaccines, that the vaccine manufacturers did it in a really incredibly short period of time, which none of us could have... could have expected, we could have hoped a year ago. That gives me great hope. And it seems as if the boosters of the various vaccines will be able to cover off the variance of concern as they arise. So I think we are going to get back to some form of normal in the next six months. It will not look the same as it did the day before the pandemic was declared, probably.

MATT GALLOWAY: What a difference a year makes. You were sitting here in the studio, I think, when we had that conversation.

BRIAN GOLDMAN: Yeah!

MATT GALLOWAY: And these things are not possible, but they will be again in future. Dr. Brian Goldman, it is always a pleasure to talk to you. Thank you.

BRIAN GOLDMAN: You're welcome.

MATT GALLOWAY: Dr. Brian Goldman, an emergency room physician at a hospital in Toronto, also the host of "White Coat, Black Art" and "The Dose" on CBC. And tomorrow, you can hear more about the issue of patient-centred-care on "White Coat, Black Art" Saturday, 1:00 p.m. Sunday evening at 6:30 p.m. And of course, through your "CBC Listen" app. Coming up after your regional update, we mentioned the concerns over the AstraZeneca vaccine. We will address those concerns. And, it hasn't been all doom and gloom over the past year. As we heard yesterday on our phone-in, and this was really lovely, in the midst of what's been a tough year, many of you have found new joy. When we return, happiness in the time of a pandemic. I'm Matt Galloway. This is "The Current". Back in 90 seconds. Stay with us.

[Music: Theme]

AstraZeneca; happiness; El Jones

Guests: Lisa Barrett, Elizabeth Dunn, El Jones

MATT GALLOWAY: Hi, I'm Matt Galloway, you're listening to "The Current". As concerns about COVID-19 and a third wave increase, we know that vaccines are one of our biggest weapons in the fight to end this pandemic. But yesterday, several EU countries suspended the AstraZeneca vaccine either from specific batches or more broadly over safety concerns. Thirty people across the European continent reported having blood clots, resulting in one death in Denmark. This was after receiving the vaccine. To help us understand all of this, I'm joined by Dr. Lisa Barrett, infectious disease doctor at Dalhousie University in Halifax. Dr. Good morning.

LISA BARRETT: Good morning.

MATT GALLOWAY: Can you just walk us through what's happening in these European countries when it comes to the suspension of the AstraZeneca vaccine?

LISA BARRETT: Sure, when we have a vaccine or any other medication, particularly those that are new to market, there is a great deal of time, and attention in all of our countries spent on making sure that if there are any adverse events or serious medical complications that occur afterwards, that we look at them, we investigate them, we figure out if they might or might not be related to a medication or vaccine. And that's exactly what's happening in the European countries at the moment. There were some cases of serious medical issues, in this case, blood clots that were found in various folks. And at one point, it looked like it might be in one area. So they wondered about one batch of a particular vaccine in that country. This all gets reported to a centralized set of agencies whose job it is to explicitly look at the safety of medications and vaccines. They did that. They are doing that. And right now, what they are doing is assessing whether or not the frequency of these particular events, these blood clots of various types and kinds are likely or not likely related to vaccine. And, of course, as you may have heard, it is looking much less... less likely that this is related to vaccine, which is an important key take-home message.

MATT GALLOWAY: Is there, at this point, any causal link between this vaccine and these cases of blood clots?

LISA BARRETT: There isn't, although I will say that, you know, causality is very difficult to determine in terms of these types of databases. However, what I think is really compelling and important information is that the number of blood clots in over five million people has not exceeded the number of blood clots you would see in five million other people in those regions who did not receive vaccines. So blood clots do happen for a variety of reasons. And the rate of those blood clots at this point does not look to be different than the unvaccinated expected number of blood clots over that time period in the same number of people. So does it send up a red flag that would change what I would expect us to be doing here in this country? Not at this point around this product. This is the AstraZeneca product, which is the one that's being used in Europe in certain batches, not necessarily what we have here in Canada.

MATT GALLOWAY: So on that point, I mean, there are a couple of questions. One is Canadian health authorities have reiterated that the vaccine, the AstraZeneca vaccine, is safe. Should Canadians be concerned by what they're reading about what's happening in Europe?

LISA BARRETT: Yes, I think I think Canadians should always be mindful and want to see that there are bodies of people with expertise looking very, very, very carefully at reports like this. And as both a Canadian and as a scientist, I feel good about the fact that this process exists. The system is working, looking to define any other conditions that might be of concern. But at this point, I would not suggest that there is anything here from a scientific perspective that makes me concerned about the use of this vaccine for Canadians or the similar product that's being used in Canada.

MATT GALLOWAY: I guess the other question would be if somebody has a history of blood clots, is there... is there different guidance, perhaps?

LISA BARRETT: Only if it looked like there was an increased rate of blood clots in people with a previous history of blood clots, which again, that does not appear to be the case at the moment, at all. But that is something that people assess about. Go back and look to see if there seems to be an increased risk in people who have previous blood clots with one particular product? And they will also compare to different vaccines that are being given at the same time and the risk of blood clots with those that are biologically slightly different. And at this point, there doesn't seem to be any of that indication. This does seem to be a population level number of blood clots that would be expected probably due to other medical conditions and not related to vaccine, although it's not completely closed as an investigation and will all keep an eye on it. I have no concerns about continuing to or adding AstraZeneca vaccine to what we're doing in Canada and the products that we have related to AstraZeneca.

MATT GALLOWAY: How does a story like this affect people's confidence in vaccines? I mean, we were talking earlier with Brian Goodman about the issue of vaccine hesitancy. When you hear a story like this, and there's.... there's... there's nuance, and there's detail to it, how does that affect people's confidence in the vaccines more broadly?

LISA BARRETT: Yeah, I think it can be a challenge. However, I think, you know, transparency is really important. We do have a very high standard for safety. I think that's the first thing that people should remember. There's a huge standard for safe with vaccines because you give them not to sick people, but to well people. and we're so, so very careful about making sure that there's no side effects, that sometimes people take it to mean that they're not safe. The two aren't linked. I hope what people take from this is that we are being transparent about any possibilities of issues and resolving them one way or the other as we go forward. So hopefully, this message if provided properly, gives people reassurance about the rigorous and robust nature of looking for danger signals and that there are really great ways of resolving that in terms of whether or not a vaccine is safe. So, yes, I think if the messaging is not done properly, that's a problem. But would I prefer that we not tell people about these things? Absolutely not. Canadians are smart, and I think they want information. And hopefully, people hear the first part and the second part, which is this is an amazingly robust system. We're working really hard to look for any signals. And if we say there isn't one, then that's a very, very good indicator of continued safety.

MATT GALLOWAY: This has been really helpful. Dr., thank you so much.

LISA BARRETT: Thank you.

MATT GALLOWAY: Dr. Lisa Barrett is an infectious disease specialist and a researcher at Dalhousie University in Halifax.

[Music: Ambient]

MATT GALLOWAY: You're listening to The Current on CBC Radio One, my name is Matt Galloway.

WOMAN: Well, I think we've learned a lot over the last year. I think we've learned, you know, personally what's important to us, what we really need in life in order to be happy, what we value and what we care about.

MATT GALLOWAY: Despite the hardships of this past year, or maybe because of those hardships, it seems to have been a year to reflect on what makes us happy. When we opened the phone lines yesterday across this country, it was uplifting, sort of surprising as well, maybe in some ways, to hear how many of you had found the positives in life, even in really difficult circumstances, whether that was through a break-up or maybe a job loss. People generally, in the conversations that we were having yesterday, were finding the glass half full. It echoes in many ways the latest research on happiness. Elizabeth Dunn is a psychology professor at the University of British Columbia. She studies happiness, has been tracking it, along with researchers around the world, to find out the impact of this pandemic on our well-being. Elizabeth Dunn, good morning.

ELIZABETH DUNN: Good morning.

MATT GALLOWAY: How are you doing?

ELIZABETH DUNN: You know, I'm doing OK. I'm optimistic that we are pulling out of this. And I am looking forward to a more normal summer.

MATT GALLOWAY: You and me both. More broadly, how are we doing a year into this?

ELIZABETH DUNN: So, as a happiness researcher, I've honestly just been blown away by the resilience people in Canada and around the world have shown. You know, there was this initial spike in mental health concerns early on in the pandemic, but people have done an incredible job of maintaining their well-being over the past very challenging year.

MATT GALLOWAY: What does that mean? Resilience? I mean, we use that word a lot, but what does that really mean right now?

ELIZABETH DUNN: What it means is that although we have seen a decline in well-being over the course of the pandemic, it's been relatively small. And, you know, people got hit hard initially, right? So early on, it looked like, oh, no, this is going to be a mental health disaster. And then, this incredible thing happened, which is that people bounced back. People found ways to be happy, such that we saw only about a sort of two per cent decline in people's day-to-day positive and negative emotions throughout a good chunk of the pandemic.

MATT GALLOWAY: I could imagine that there are a lot of people listening whose eyebrows have raised in hearing that. And I would say, really? Is that really the case? I think of how I'm doing, and I'm fine one day, and I'm not fine the next day. And a lot of us a year into this feel pretty beaten down and pretty ground down. So are we really doing that well?

ELIZABETH DUNN: Well, of course, this is looking at large samples across the population. And so everybody has bad days. And there are people... we see these people in our data who had a really tough time, right? Their well-being has declined dramatically. But the really fascinating thing is that there are other people whose well-being has actually gone up during the pandemic. And like you said, all of us have sort of our good days and bad days. Our days were really frustrated with it, and then our days where we're like, hey, you know, it's sunny, the cherry blossoms are coming out. I'm doing OK.

MATT GALLOWAY: And so, I mean, I asked you to define resilience. As somebody who is... is studying happiness, how do we in this context define what happiness is?

ELIZABETH DUNN: So we can look at people's day-to-day positive emotion. So are you feeling cheerful and positive on a given day? How much negative emotion are you feeling? Are you feeling sad, down, frustrated? And what we want to see is that people are feeling more positive emotions than negative emotions. We can also look at life satisfaction, people's sort of broad evaluations of how their life is going. And it looks to me like life satisfaction has taking a little bit more of a hit than those day-to-day positive and negative emotions.

MATT GALLOWAY: Why broadly do you think, despite all the hardships that people have gone through, that people, according to the research, generally are as happy as they were before this kicked off?

ELIZABETH DUNN: Humans are just remarkably capable of adapting to whatever life throws us. You know, this is probably the biggest lesson from research on human happiness is that we are much better at adapting to new situations than we ourselves realize. So, honestly, I never would have guessed that people would have done as well as they have in terms of maintaining their wellbeing, even being a happiness researcher. But it's just that we're incredibly good at finding what we need from daily life, even if our whole lives feel like they've been completely upended.

MATT GALLOWAY: What does that adaptation look like?

ELIZABETH DUNN: You know, maybe you don't get to see your friends or some of your other loved ones, but you find other ways to kind of cope and find a sense of connection. So whether that's reaching out to people on Zoom. You know, talking to some neighbours as you pass them at a safe distance outside. You know, people are finding these alternate sources of social connection. And I think that helps to explain why, for the most part, across the population, we see people kind of doing OK, hanging in there.

MATT GALLOWAY: Are you surprised by that?

ELIZABETH DUNN: I'm very surprised. I mean, personally, as somebody who studied social connection and happiness, I would have expected to see people's feelings of loneliness really skyrocketing over the course of the pandemic. And the truth is in the data, that has not happened. People have found other ways to connect.

MATT GALLOWAY: We asked some Canadians about adjusting to the more subtle changes in day-to-day life, the ways that... that some of the small parts of our lives have changed. We know the big parts, but there are small changes as well. Take a listen to Alex, who's in Vancouver.

ALEX: The little casual interactions you have with people all day long. So when you work in an office, right, you have your buddies, people you talk to over the coffee machine, you know, you're... you're out and about. You're encountering people. Let's say you meet someone you know in the neighbourhood in the restaurant, like, all those interactions are so greatly reduced now. I don't think when you had those interactions on a day-to-day level, you don't think, wow, that was great. It's sort of something you don't even register as a thing that was particularly good or bad. You said hello to someone, you had a little chit-chat, and then you move on. You don't even think, wow, that was really nice! But then when I guess cumulatively over months and months and months, you don't see those people anymore, that's... that's something I really miss.

MATT GALLOWAY: People have called this weak ties. They're not close friends, but they're the ties that we have to the community that we live in, whether it's a big community or a small community. How valuable are those casual relationships that we have in our lives?

ELIZABETH DUNN: In our own research from before the pandemic, what we've seen is that these seemingly trivial, casual social interactions do make a difference for people's day-to-day feelings of connection and happiness. So we actually conducted a study where we had people carry around these clickers and click every time they interacted with weak tie. They clicked a different clicker when they interacted with a strong tie. And what we saw was that both types of interactions contributed to people's overall feelings of connection and happiness on a typical day.

MATT GALLOWAY: What do those weak ties do for us?

ELIZABETH DUNN: Well, when we have these casual social interactions, we're likely to smile, put our best face forward, just be kind of a nice, pleasant version of ourselves. And my research has shown that just kind of putting our best face forward with other people that we don't know very well can leave us in a better mood. So just sort of that pleasant chit-chat that we do. You know, you can't do it in a dour way, right? You have to do it in sort of a positive, upbeat way. And that leaves people walking away feeling a bit happier. And it also just gives us the sense of being connected to our communities, right? When we're chatting with the people in our neighbourhood or the barista at the coffee shop, it just gives us the sense that we belong.

MATT GALLOWAY: We were talking about this on our program a while back, and our guest referred to it some ways as a muscle that atrophies. I just wonder we'll get out of this at some point in time. How do we start to go about rebuilding that relationship muscle so that those weak ties aren't gone forever?

ELIZABETH DUNN: Yeah, I mean, I think these muscles will come back really quickly. The big lesson, I think, from the pandemic is... is that we as humans are capable of adapting to pretty much whatever life throws at us. And so when life throws us the opportunity to reconnect with everybody, I think we're going to bounce back quickly and get into it. We will remember how to engage with others because this is a fundamental human capacity and a fundamental human need. And I predict that it's not going to take us long at all to, you know, rebuild that muscle.

MATT GALLOWAY: So we haven't all become even more introverts because of the situation that we find ourselves in?

ELIZABETH DUNN: I mean, we've acted more introverted for sure during the pandemic, but we have not lost our social skills. Interacting with other humans is like riding a bike. It really is. It's something that we... a skill we've developed throughout our lives that's going to come back quickly as soon as we have the opportunity to use it.

MATT GALLOWAY: One of the skills that many of us have focussed on over the course of this year is being very present and thinking about what's happening now, not thinking about what might happen in the future but that's inevitable. I mean, you start to think about what the future's going to look like? And there's a lot of uncertainty around that. Take a listen again to Alex in Vancouver.

ALEX: I'm used to my life being contingent on being able to go places at some point, something to look forward to. Those things sort of create the landmarks of my kind of upcoming life. And without any of those, everything feels a little futile. So I'm hoping that once we start being able to do that again, that'll start kind of bringing some normalcy back. You know, you've got a little plan for your short-term, a plan for your medium-term and a plan for the long-term. And not having that, it's turns out, is really difficult for me. Right now, it's pretty much the next couple of days. And everything beyond that, I mean, is anybody's guess.

MATT GALLOWAY: How does planning and anticipation help us get through a difficult time?

ELIZABETH DUNN: Yeah, so anticipation is a wonderful form of pleasure because it's basically free. And it doesn't necessarily depend on the future turning out the way we expect. So, you know, right now we've been given this expectation that by July most of us should be vaccinated. And so I am starting to plan for the summer. And I am getting so much pleasure from thinking about all of this fun stuff that I'll get to do this summer. And then getting that pleasure right now in the moment. And so we can really start to consume some of the experiences that will have in the post-pandemic future. And anticipation is awesome because we can imagine a perfect future. And who knows what the future will really turn out like, but I can enjoy imagining that perfect future now.

MATT GALLOWAY: What do you think, just finally, people say that, you know, we're in a tunnel, and you can see the light at the end of the tunnel. When we get out of this dark tunnel, what will whatever is waiting for us on the other side mean for our happiness? People are predicting that, you know, the celebrations at the end of a war or at the end of a depression were something, wait until we get out of this pandemic. What is that going to mean in terms of our happiness?

ELIZABETH DUNN: So I predict that there will be a spike in happiness after the pandemic as all of the wonderful experiences and social interactions that we've been deprived of, you know, we're suddenly able to indulge in. But you know, that human capacity for adaptation that has served us so well in the challenges of the pandemic isn't going anywhere. You know, it's still going to be present, and we will pretty quickly adapt to all of that, you know, experiences and connections and stuff that we're able to have. And I think we'll see happiness levels kind of return to their stable pre-pandemic levels pretty quickly after the pandemic. If there's one thing we know about humans, it's that we're capable of adapting to whatever life throws us, whether for better or for worse.

MATT GALLOWAY: Elizabeth, great to talk to you. Thank you very much.

ELIZABETH DUNN: My pleasure. Thanks for having me.

MATT GALLOWAY: Bye-bye.

ELIZABETH DUNN: Bye.

MATT GALLOWAY: Elizabeth Dunn is a psychology professor at UBC. Your thoughts on this would be welcome, particularly on what we might get out when we get out of this, what we might be experiencing. There's that whole idea of, you know, the roaring 20s, and wild celebrations. But also, those weak ties that we miss. Again, whether it's friends at the office, people that you run into on the street, the person who pours you a cup of coffee in the morning, do you miss those? And are they important in terms of re-establishing some sense of normalcy once we are through this? You can email us: thecurrent@cbc.ca.

[Music: Rock]

MATT GALLOWAY: This is "The Current". My name is Matt Galloway. And this week, we have marked one year of the pandemic with our series "COVID in Canada, One Year and Counting". As Brian Goldman saying earlier, humans are resilient, and we can figure out ways to adapt. But for all of us, this has been a year of upheaval and of change. And for tens of thousands of Canadians, it's been a year of unbearable loss of grieving for a loved one. More than 22,000 Canadians have died during this year of the pandemic. El Jones is a poet in Halifax, writer in residence at U of T Scarborough this semester. And so, to conclude our special coverage this week, she has written a new poem for us. This is El Jones with "Glass hands". A eulogy on the anniversary of the pandemic.

EL JONES: [reading] Hands pressed to glass. On the fence across from the long-term care home, families leave memorials for Auntie, Cookham, Baba. Ink runs in the rain and half-mast flags. A table set with no guests to ask. Like bells ringing in classrooms calling eternal recess. Bless those who grieve. Unable to even leave kisses on foreheads. Bless the nurses, as they move from bed to bed. We've scrubbed our hands until they cracked and bled. We read page after page of death announcements in the newspapers. Our elders, repositories of wisdom, went first. But then the rest of us. Living and dying through this curse. Coughs in lungs and final gasps. Some days feel like we are the last on earth. Too fast, we say, too fast. We didn't even have goodbye. And the wind blows over winter grass, my mother's mantra, this too shall pass. Ours is not a funeral mass. We learn to mourn on Zoom. Christmas spent in empty rooms. We'll meet when the pandemic is through. But month after month, and still the cases rise. In gloom, loneliness intensifies. I no longer know your face behind the mask, so I learned to know your eyes, but it's not enough. And we try to bring to mind our last conversation. Amid the devastation, we find hidden seams of human kindness. Bless the grocery bringers to quarantine. The minimum wage labourers who clean. The developers of the vaccine. The bus drivers. And hospital workers at hour 16 of their shift. Bless those who believe they will not be missed. It's the vulnerable ones most likely to be lost unseen. This is a lesson for we who have too long turned our heads at inequality. Believed in austerity. Now, we understand the severity of policies that leave too many behind. Oh, now, we have learned to cry together. Let us forever remember those who cannot come in from the cold. We should never again allow the deaths in shelters, in cellblocks, at home alone. No, let us make a promise in the now for the future beyond this. May we never again value people less than profits. Let us speak our love before the coffins. Let us pause not seldom, but often. May our hearts soften. Let us visit those living in isolation. Let clean water flow from the taps of First Nations. We can relearn how to care for each other. We can relearn how to share with each other. Let us honour the dead by committing to the living, let us honour the dead by committing to giving. We are not broken, though we are diminished. We still have time. And this is not the finish. There is faith. And hope. And it's within us.

MATT GALLOWAY: That was El Jones, and a poem of "Glass hands", a eulogy on the anniversary of the pandemic. You can see a video of El Jones reciting that poem on our website, or our social media feeds. Just look for The Current on Facebook or Twitter. We're listening to the Montreal Symphony Orchestra under the direction of Kent Nagano, performing "Yesterday" for the National Day of Remembrance for the victims of COVID-19. And that music will take us out for today and for this week. That's "The Current" for what has been a big week, and a week in which we remember this past year. Coming up next on CBC Radio One, it's "q". Devery Jacobs, who defended the book "johnny Appleseed", will join the author Joshua Whitehead to talk about winning Canada reads. And why this is the book in this moment that we all need to read. You'll hear that conversation coming up in just a moment on CBC Radio One. I'm Matt Galloway. Thanks for listening to The Current. We'll talk to you on Monday.

["Yesterday" by the Montreal Symphony Orchestra]

March 12, 2021 Episode Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode