My name is Patricia Ivan and I am the author of Connections, a blog documenting my attempt to file a grievance with Unfettered Mind over Ken McLeod’s behaviour with me and another student. You can read My Story here.
I just received this email today from a woman whom I do not know but who has apparently read my blog. In it she expresses the following concern:
I thought of you today as I see that Ken McLeod is back on the blogging and speaking circuit with both the Interdependence Project and Dharma Punx. I'm very concerned as these groups have a very young membership and both seemed very 'progressive' to me, however now I'm questioning my involvement in supporting them given that there are still many outstanding questions around Ken's behaviour that I'm sure have yet to be resolved.I was very disappointed to learn that Ken was still teaching, even more disappointed to learn that he was doing so under the auspices of your organization.
I read your grievance procedure, and thought you should know that Ken McLeod has violated many of the principles you cherish.
Your grievance procedure states that “Buddhist conflict resolution is not based on right or wrong, blame or guilt, winning or losing, offenders or victims. Rather, it is based on addressing the suffering of all concerned.” Did you know that you are supporting a teacher who has chosen not to address the suffering of two former students who felt harmed by his behavior, and that he has adopted an adversarial and litigious stance toward them? Did you know that, instead of responding to their attempts to talk to him about it, he, first, gave them the silent treatment, then stonewalled them through his organization?
Your procedure also says that you take hurt, fear, and anger seriously through “forums where everyone may speak honestly, safely, and completely about their own direct experiences and feelings.” I embrace your open-minded and open-hearted approach to hearing pain and anger. What would you think of the BOD representing one of your teachers alluding to grievants as “abusive” and calling them "evil" because they dared to speak about the pain and the harm done to them by their teacher?
Finally, your procedure says, “in seeking resolution, Buddhist practice values dialogue over silence, reconciliation over estrangement, forgiveness over resentment, confession over accusation, and atonement over punishment”, and that you support finding resolution which you recognize to be a difficult process.
I need your support and would like to invite you, and Ken, into a conversation that Ken has so far been unwilling to engage (to both of our detriments, in my opinion), a conversation in which we can all “speak honestly, safely, and completely” about our experiences and feelings.
I have been met with silence by many people to whom I have reached out so far. I dare hope that your response will be different, that someone someday may see the value in facilitating a real conversation, difficult though it may be, between Ken and the two grievants who have tried to speak to him about his behaviour.
Like you, I do not believe in or seek punishment or retribution but, if someone repeatedly avoids any meaningful conversation or discussion and even goes so far as to make unethical legal threats against those who have tried to publicly discuss it, I question whether such a person should continue to be invited to teach at events such as the one that will be sponsored by you on January 14th. As things stand now, this calls into question your commitment to the beliefs and values spelled out in your grievance procedure.
Thank you for you consideration,
Patricia Ivan
