SFU

Productive collaboration

The Azrieli National Centre for Autism and Neurodevelopment Research team includes, left to right, Dr. Gal Meiri, Prof. Hava Golan, Prof. Ilan Dinstein, Mazal Malka and Prof. Idan Menashe. Dinstein and Menashe will be in Vancouver in May to meet with colleagues from the University of British Columbia. (photo from azrielifoundation.org)

When the International Society for Autism Research convenes in Seattle April 30 for its annual conference, researchers from all over the world will be flying in to learn about and share the latest research on this multifactorial disorder. Two of them, Idan Menashe and Ilan Dinstein, who head up the Azrieli National Centre for Autism and Neurodevelopment Research (ANCAN) at Ben-Gurion University, will be coming from Israel. When the conference wraps up, they will be in Vancouver to continue a three-year collaboration with autism researchers at the University of British Columbia and Simon Fraser University, and meet with various people, including community members.

Menashe and Dinstein were part of a group – that included Dr. Tim Oberlander from UBC’s School of Population and Public Health and Grace Iarocci, director of SFU’s Autism and Developmental Disabilities Laboratory – that published a paper in 2023 on whether oxytocin is associated with an increased risk of autism in offspring.

“Oxytocin is a neuropeptide hormone that plays a key role in social behaviour, stress regulation and mental health,” begins the paper’s abstract. “Synthetic oxytocin administration is a common obstetrical practice and, importantly, previous research has suggested that intrapartum exposure may increase the risk of neurodevelopmental disorders, such as autism spectrum disorder.”

The study supported the conclusion that “induction of labour through oxytocin administration does not increase the risk of autism spectrum disorder in the child.” However, Menashe and Dinstein’s own studies in Israel found an association between autism and the use of general anesthesia during caesarean sections.

“Having a C-section with general anesthetic increases the risk of diagnoses of autism in offspring by 60% compared to natural birth,” Menashe told the Independent. Because general anesthesia in C-section is infrequently used, that risk is low, but consistent, he added.

Menashe, Dinstein, Oberlander and Iarocci are excited to reunite in Vancouver in May because they all have access to population health data that allows them to compare their results. Such comparisons are especially valuable given that autism rates are increasing the world over.

Menashe said the rate of autism is 2% in Israel and Canada, and more than 3% in the United States. “We know a big portion of this increase is due to increased awareness among parents and caregivers, but we don’t know if that explains everything,” he said.

Autism is highly heterogeneous, he continued. “Every child is different and no two children present exactly the same autism symptoms. We believe the causes of autism are also very heterogeneous, and that’s what makes research so complicated, but also so interesting.”

Because of that heterogeneity, research requires collection of data from large populations. At the Azrieli National Foundation for Autism Research, Menashe and Dinstein work with nine clinical centres to collect data.

“A major advantage we have in Israel is our access to families’ medical records,” Menashe explained. “We ask families from those clinics to participate in genetic studies, through which we try to identify the genetic causes of autism.”

Menashe, Dinstein, Oberlander and Iarocci meet monthly by Zoom to discuss their findings. By collaborating, the four researchers can compare Israeli findings to those in British Columbia.

“The comparisons make our research more powerful,” Iarocci said. “They allow us to see what’s the same and what’s different cross-culturally.

“Our goal with autism is early identification, early diagnosis, and offering interventions that are effective,” she continued. “When we collaborate, we can compare very large data sets and, without those comparisons, you can’t really answer these questions meaningfully.”

“We’ve had a very productive collaboration so far, and what makes it especially important is the cross-jurisdictional research we can do,” Oberlander said. “There are few jurisdictions in the world that can do this effectively, but Israel and BC are two of them. It’s a wonderful collaboration, a great model, and we’re looking forward to seeing them in Vancouver in May.”

While here, Menashe and Dinstein will participate in an invite-only parlour meeting on May 4. Those interested in attending should contact David Berson, executive director, BGU Canada, British Columbia & Alberta, at [email protected].

Lauren Kramer, an award-winning writer and editor, lives in Richmond

Reviving civil discourse

Heterodox Academy is a nonprofit organization dedicated to promoting viewpoint diversity, open inquiry and constructive debate in higher education. It works to counter ideological conformity on campuses by providing research, resources and programming that foster an environment where diverse perspectives are welcomed and critically examined.

If that sounds like what a university is intended to be, says one local professor, it’s a commentary on the state of contemporary campuses that such an organization is necessary to encourage the academy to live up to its principles.

Dr. Rachel Altman, associate professor in the statistics and actuarial science department at Simon Fraser University, is one of the campus co-chairs of the Heterodox Academy chapter at SFU.

“Heterodox Academy is an organization that fosters free, open inquiry and free discussion even about controversial issues,” she said. “It’s not just about freedom of speech. It’s also about our conduct, the way we have these conversations. I think that’s what really distinguishes it from the general free speech advocacy groups.”

photo - Dr. Rachel Altman is one of the campus co-chairs of the Heterodox Academy chapter at Simon Fraser University — Dr. Rachel Altman is one of the campus co-chairs of the Heterodox Academy chapter at Simon Fraser University. *(photo from SFU)*

Heterodox Academy provides guidelines that urge interlocutors to present their case with evidence, bring data when possible, assume the best of one’s opponent and be intellectually humble, among other principles.

HxA, as it is shorthanded, offers events, conferences, resources and other materials that “try to teach our society, especially within academia, how to interact in a productive and civilized way, even when we disagree,” she said.

These tools are intended to help bridge the divide between the ideal of a university and the reality of creating a dynamic marketplace of ideas.

“Just because we have it in our head that in the academy we should be able to discuss anything in a civilized way doesn’t mean we actually know how to do it,” she said. “They provide tools and modeling of those tools to actually teach people how to be civilized.”

The HxA chapter at SFU emerged after a group of scholars got together because they were concerned about the state of academic freedom at the university. They founded the SFU Academic Freedom Group.

Within a few months of that group’s founding, Heterodox Academy launched its Campus Community Program, recognizing chapters on individual campuses. Some SFU professors applied and were accepted among the first chapters chartered.

“We hosted a so-called Heterodox Conversation event this past September,” she said. “That’s a model developed by HxA where you invite two people who have different views on a topic and they sit down and have a conversation with the model [called] the Heterodox Way and then the audience gets involved and we have a group discussion.”

The topic of that dialogue was “The purpose of today’s Canadian universities.”

“The timing was perfect because, just the previous week, our president had issued a statement on institutional neutrality,” she said, referring to an announcement by SFU’s president, Joy Johnson, on maintaining an environment where scholarly inquiry remains unbiased by partisan agendas. “For me, I was celebrating like crazy, but there were others on campus who were very unhappy.”

Altman can’t say whether the Heterodox Academy chapter or the SFU Academic Freedom Group deserve credit for the president’s statement or for other recent developments she and her colleagues view as positive.

“I’m a statistician, so I rarely claim causation,” she said wryly. “I’m very conservative that way. But I think so.”

The groups are comparatively small, but they may be having an outsized impact.

“Everybody knows about us,” she said. “The administration clearly knows and it’s just been so gratifying to see the change in the whole tenor of the administration’s approaches over the last couple of years. It’s a clear change.”

Numbers may remain relatively small, Altman suspects, because of a false perception of their group.

“We are consistently being cast as this right-wing, conservative group and it’s not true,” she said. “We have people across the political spectrum in the group. It is a nonpartisan group.”

The idea that academic freedom and institutional neutrality are right-wing positions, she said, is belied, for example, by the gay rights movement, which emerged in the 1960s, in part thanks to the viewpoint diversity of campuses.

It is not a coincidence, Altman believes, that several HxA members, including herself, are Jewish.

“Jews have a long tradition of arguing and debating in a civilized way, the whole ‘two Jews, three opinions’ thing,” she said. “Jews are just a natural fit with the HxA model.”

In contrast, the equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) model that has become increasingly prevalent on North American campuses in recent years is antithetical both to the academic ideal and to Jews, she argued.

“For some Jews like myself, I realized very early on that the EDI ideology that’s become so predominant in academia and elsewhere, that it was terrible for Jews,” she said. “This model of the oppressed and the oppressor, it didn’t work. Jews did not fit into that mold.”

EDI is the opposite of what it claims to be, said Altman.

“I think it’s exclusionary, it discriminates against groups,” she said. “It’s antithetical to everything I believe in because I truly believe in inclusion and anti-discrimination.… I was very unhappy about the rise of the EDI ideology and, in my groups of people who are also similarly concerned about that ideology, I think Jews are overrepresented. That would suggest I’m not the only Jewish person who sees the fundamental conflict, the contradictions in the EDI ideology.”

Altman said few people would openly admit they oppose academic freedom.

“Really, it becomes about the definition of academic freedom,” she said. “When I say I support academic freedom, that’s the end of my sentence. What I look for when I’m talking to people is the ‘but’ that can follow. ‘Of course, I support academic freedom, but … there are limits.’ Things like that.”

In some cases, Altman thinks, this equivocation comes from a lack of understanding around the core principles of academic freedom.

“But then, there are some people who truly want to change the foundation of the term, the concept,” she said. “They truly believe that we should have limits on both our academic freedom and our freedom of expression more generally.”

In addition to the SFU branch, Heterodox Academy has a chapter at the University of British Columbia, Okanagan. While there are some HxA members at the Vancouver campus of UBC, Altman said, there is not yet an official chapter there.

For more information, visit heterodoxacademy.org.

Community milestones … Gutman, Marks Pulver, Doduck & Simpson

Gloria Gutman, PhD, has been honoured with the King Charles III Coronation Medal, which recognizes individuals who have made a significant contribution to Canada, or an outstanding achievement abroad that brings credit to Canada. She will receive the medal in a ceremony March 21.

A research associate and professor emeritus at Simon Fraser University, Gutman founded the Gerontology Research Centre and the department of gerontology at SFU, serving as director of both units from 1982 to 2005. She is the author/editor of 23 books, the most recent (with Claire Robson and Jen Marchbank) titled Elder Abuse in the LGBTQ2SA+ Community (Springer, 2023).

photo - Dr. Gloria Gutman — Dr. Gloria Gutman (photo from SFU)

During her career, Gutman has held many prominent roles, including president of the Canadian Association on Gerontology, president of the International Association of Gerontology and Geriatrics and president of the International Network for Prevention of Elder Abuse. Currently, she is president of the North American chapter of the International Society for Gerontechnology, vice-president of the International Longevity Centre-Canada and a member of the research management committee of the Canadian Frailty Network. Previously, she served on the World Economic Forum’s Council on the Ageing Society, World Health Organization’s expert advisory panel on aging and health, and the CIHR-Institute of Aging advisory board.

“I am grateful to SFU for having nominated me for this award.

Developing the gerontology department and Gerontology Research Centre, serving on boards, organizing conferences, and advocating for seniors in other ways nationally and internationally, has been a privilege and a pleasure,” said Gutman. “It could not have taken place without the strong support of FASS [the faculty of arts and social sciences] and senior administration.”

In 2012, Gutman was awarded a Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal by the Government of Canada and, in 2016, she was appointed to the Order of Canada, the country’s highest civilian honour.

– Courtesy Simon Fraser University

* * *

photo - Lana Marks Pulver — Lana Marks Pulver (photo from Jewish Federation)

Jewish Federation of Greater Vancouver is proud to congratulate its board chair, Lana Marks Pulver, who was honoured by Jewish Federations of North America with the Kipnis-Wilson/Friedland Award for exemplifying the highest standards of philanthropy and volunteerism. Marks Pulver’s selection for this award is a testament to her exceptional dedication and leadership.

– Courtesy Jewish Federation of Greater Vancouver

* * *

The Louis Brier Jewish Aged Foundation is pleased to announce the appointment of long-time volunteer leaders Marie Doduck and Lee Simpson as co-chairs of the 2025/26 campaign. Please join board directors Harry Lipetz, Rick Cohen, Mel Moss, Bernard Pinsky, David Zacks, Michelle Karby and Abbe Chivers, and staff Ayelet Cohen Weil and Wendy Habif in congratulating and thanking them for their tireless commitment to our Jewish elderly.

– Courtesy Louis Brier Jewish Aged Foundation

Inclusion, but not for Jews

Simon Fraser University assistant professor Dr. Lilach Marom gave a lecture May 27 called Where is Antisemitism in EDI Discourses in Canadian Higher Education? How Did We Get Here, And How Can We Move Forward?

Prevailing trends in equity, diversity and inclusion on campuses and elsewhere often exclude Jewish people and discount antisemitism, according to a Simon Fraser University academic.

Despite extensive policies around racism, discrimination and related topics, many universities and academic organizations have no explicit references in policy to antisemitism, says Dr. Lilach Marom, an assistant professor at SFU, who focuses on anti-racism and inclusion in education with a focus on structural and institutional barriers to access.

“When we look at references to antisemitism and Jewish identity across EDI policies and action plans, we see that there is not much reference,” she said during a lecture May 27 that was part of Diverse Approaches to Research in Education, a seminar series co-hosted by Faculty of Education’s Research Hub and the Research Advisory Working Group. For example, resources from the Canadian Association of University Teachers include a self-identification survey, but under the category of race and ethnicity, there is no option to select “Jewish.”

In addition to Jewish identity, the experiences of Jewish people with antisemitism are often not specifically addressed. “Sometimes, it is not named when there are other forms of oppression and racism that are named,” she said.

EDI stands for equity, diversity and inclusion (in the United States, Marom noted, it is reordered as DEI). Equity, she said, is the removal of systemic barriers and enabling all individuals to have equitable opportunity and access to benefit from higher education. Diversity is about the variety of unique dimensions, identities, qualities and characteristics individuals possess along with other identity factors. Inclusion is defined as the practice of ensuring that all individuals are valued and respected for their contributions and are supported equitably.

EDI has become the prevalent framework to address issues of social justice and equity in Canadian higher education, said Marom. Fully 90% of higher educational institutions in Canada reference EDI in their strategic planning and 91% have an EDI task force or are developing one, according to a Universities Canada survey of members in 2022.

photo - Dr. Lilach Marom — Dr. Lilach Marom *(photo courtesy)*

Marom sees a number of reasons why antisemitism is excluded. Antisemitism is often categorized as religious-based discrimination, which reclassifies it outside the realm of anti-racism.

“Jewish people see themselves as a people, which means they have shared culture, language, history, religious texts and rituals,” said Marom. “But, within the North American context, Jewishness is conceptualized as a form of religion.”

This is specifically the case in Canadian law, where antisemitism is categorized under religious discrimination and reported under hate crimes motivated by religion.

This creates a disconnect when it comes to EDI, said Marom. “In most cases, EDI typically does not centre on religious-based discrimination,” she said. “So those things are on the margins, they’re not core to the EDI discourses.”

Settler-colonialism and decolonization are core concepts in EDI discourse, which presents challenges around the way Israel and Palestine are considered.

“I’m worried about the new antisemitism that emerges at the intersection of anti-racism and settler-colonial discourses,” she said. “Both those discourses are insufficient and incomplete to understand Jewishness, the Jewish condition or the situation in Israel-Palestine.… They create this forced binary between Jewish people as the embodiment of white privilege and colonial oppression, and Palestinians as racialized and indigenous. I think this binary is not only inaccurate, it also feeds into new forms of antisemitism.”

Settler-colonialism is a leading framework for analyzing Canadian history, said Marom. Applying that framework to Zionism and the formation of Israel in a simplistic way overlooks the long and complex history of that land and creates a false dichotomy between Jewish people as the embodiment of oppression and Palestinians as indigenous, she said.

These constructions fail to acknowledge the historical, cultural and religious ties of Jews to the land dating back millennia. They also don’t acknowledge that there could be places in which there are coexisting claims to indigeneity in Israel-Palestine.

Meanwhile, the construction of Jews as white and privileged, she said, reflects a “legal and cultural whitening of Jews in North America.”

“This is not to ignore the fact that Jews definitely have gained some privileges from their ability to assimilate and integrate in this mainstream North American culture and those possibilities were not open to members of other racialized groups,” she said. “Jews have definitely gained some privileges from this ability. However, this also feeds into some antisemitic tropes or stereotypes – Jews as a ‘model minority’ or ‘super powerful’ – and have put them in a position that is not really in and not really out. These in-between spaces [mean] they can be targeted on one hand by conspiracies from the right like the Great Replacement Theory, but also pushed against from the left as an embodiment of white privilege.”

The construction of Jews as white overlooks the self-identification of Jewish people, she said, and it doesn’t recognize the diversity of Jewish people. While in North America many Jewish people are Ashkenazi, in places like Israel, the majority of people are from Asian, Middle Eastern and North African backgrounds.

“In critical discourses, we don’t talk about race as skin pigmentation nor as biological constructs,” Marom said. “We talk about it as a form of social construct. If you think about race as a social construct, looking at the history of Jewish people with marginalization, exclusion and genocide, they cannot be put aside from anti-racism discourses and be absorbed into whiteness.”

It is not useful, she said, to participate in “any form of oppression Olympics. But I think we need to acknowledge that antisemitism is not following the typical path of other racialized groups, where hopefully there is less exclusion and more integration with time,” she said. “With Jewish people, many times when they thought they were most integrated and most included, this is when they faced the most extreme forms of exclusion and marginalization.”

Marom clarified that discussion about antisemitism and the protection and safety of Jewish people should not be confused with “protection” from challenging ideas.

“We need to be willing to step into risky discussions,” she said. “But I think what EDI does is really talk about impact. It talks about how can we be engaging in those difficult spaces while still feeling that we are being seen as human, that we are included, that we have space. I speak only on my behalf [but] I think this is the case with many Jewish faculty that I know. I don’t think that this is the way many of us [have felt] since Oct. 7.”

There is a balance to be found between academic freedom and protection of minority communities, said Marom – but the approach to this balance when it comes to Jews and antisemitism seems different than in other cases.

“I just find it very peculiar that a lot of my colleagues who usually are very sensitive toward issues of inclusion and belonging all of a sudden become the strongest supporters of academic freedom when it comes to the issues of antisemitism,” said Marom. “Not that academic freedom is not important – it is really important – I’m just curious to hear how come it becomes so important now when the people in question are Jewish people.”

She also cited a seminar on antisemitism and anti-Zionism that was sponsored by about 40 organizations, most of them Muslim and Middle Eastern academic groups.

“This we would never see on other issues, in which people from the outside explained to people on the inside what they need to know about themselves,” she said. There were some Jewish speakers at the event, she noted, but they came from a very specific ideological perspective.

“I’m not saying that they are not legitimate,” she said. “I’m not even saying that they’re not important and I don’t think that we need to define who is in and who is out to speak on behalf of the Jewish people – there is enough space in the world to speak. But I am worried for the tendencies in progressive circles to adopt those voices and put them in and check the inclusion box, because that is not how we do inclusion in any other circles.”

The principle of “nothing about us without us,” the idea that no approach toward a group should be adopted without the full and direct participation of the affected people, should not be overlooked when it comes to antisemitism, she said.

A video of Marom’s full presentation is available at youtu.be/FQbGiySUetM.

Provincial campuses roiling

On Nov. 1, about 200 Jewish students and their supporters engaged in a low-key demonstration at the University of British Columbia, with many holding posters of kidnapped Israelis. Since the terror attacks of Oct. 7 and the start of the Israel-Hamas war, universities and colleges worldwide have been hotbeds of conflict. (photo by Pat Johnson)

Jewish students and their supporters at the University of British Columbia celebrated a victory last week after the student government overwhelmingly rejected motions that critics say were openly antisemitic.

The Alma Mater Society (AMS), which represents UBC students, voted in the early hours of Feb. 29 not to include a number of referendum questions on the ballot during upcoming student elections.

One proposed question accused Israel of genocide and called for an end to UBC’s exchanges with Israeli institutions. It would have also invited students to vote on whether they believe Hillel BC, the organization that has represented Jewish students, faculty and staff at the university since 1947, should be evicted from campus. (Hillel’s lease is with the university and the AMS has no jurisdiction over whether Hillel does or does not remain on campus.) This question was rejected by a vote of 23 to 2.

A second proposed referendum question would have asked students to massively revamp the governing structure of the AMS, adding dozens of additional elected representatives of marginalized groups. The change would have assigned designated groups representation on student government, including the Social Justice Centre, UBC Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights, UBC Trans Coalition, Black Student Union, Indigenous students, and the Women’s Centre. Explicitly excluded from representation were Jewish students and groups that represent them. This proposal was rejected 25-0.

Referendum questions can be submitted anonymously, so it is not known from which individuals or groups these proposals emerged, though they had support from the Social Justice Centre, which calls itself “a resource group that works toward progressive social change, inclusivity and equity through a survivor-centric, harm-reduction, radical, feminist, decolonial, anti-oppression framework.”

“I was very pleased and relieved that the AMS leadership chose not to include what I would say are very antisemitic referendum questions on the student voting ballots,” Rob Philipp, executive director of Hillel BC, told the Independent. The intention of the proposed ballot question was to intimidate Jewish students and the vote is a reassurance to Jewish students, he said. “It’s surprising that it took them close to five hours to discuss this. But the vote, in the end, was pretty overwhelming to turn it down, so that was very heartening for us.”

A few hours later, across town at Simon Fraser University, referendum results were announced, with an anti-Israel ballot question receiving overwhelming support. The compendious policy, adopted by the Simon Fraser Student Society in 2022, was put to a vote by the broader student population, endorsing the boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign and repeating the boilerplate condemnations of Zionism as “a colonial ideology” bent on “ethnically cleansing the Indigenous population.”

The referendum question passed 1,801-442 and, while the statement of results did not indicate percentage turnout, there are around 40,000 students at SFU. It appears perhaps one in 20 students voted in the elections, in which a new president was elected with a tally of 878 votes.

These are just two of the foremost fires the Jewish community has been attempting to put out on campuses across the province recently. Universities and colleges worldwide have been hotbeds of conflict since the atrocities of Oct. 7 and the beginning of the war between Israel and Hamas. Administrators have struggled to balance preservation of free speech with often dangerously inflammatory, sometimes clearly antisemitic expressions. The presidents of the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard University were forced to resign after their remarks before a congressional hearing late last year were viewed as insufficiently condemnatory of overt calls for violence against Jews.

Philipp emphasized that postsecondary administrators in British Columbia have all been supportive of the Jewish community’s concerns – the administrations are not where the problems are coming from, although they are inevitably placed in the middle of these dramatic conflicts.

At Langara College, a months-long controversy over the fate of Natalie Knight, an English instructor who called the Oct. 7 mass murder of Israeli civilians “an amazing, brilliant offensive,” may not be over. Knight was put on leave while the college undertook an internal investigation. She returned to work, albeit in a non-instructional role, after the investigation determined her comments were “not clearly outside the bounds of protected expression.” She then spoke at a rally on campus, where she declared: “I’ve been reinstated as an instructor with no disciplinary actions, which means we won. It means we won. It means I did nothing wrong.”

Knight was then fired. While not mentioning her by name, the college said that an employee had engaged “in activities contrary to the expectations laid out by the college and as a result this employee is no longer an employee.” Her union has taken up her case.

Philipp commended Langara’s president, Dr. Paula Burns, for her leadership.

At Emily Carr University of Art and Design, some instructors have encouraged students to leave classes to attend pro-Palestinian rallies, and what Philipp calls “very, very aggressive posters” have appeared on campus. Hillel has been in conversation with administrators there.

“They understand the issue and they are in process right now of making changes to help protect the student body,” said Philipp.

“All our relationships are pretty strong,” he said of administrators at the many institutions at which Hillel BC has a presence, adding that he was recently in Victoria and had dinner with the president of the University of Victoria.

“These administrators,” he said, “are encountering very, very challenging situations that are really stressing their organizations at different levels. Nobody’s able to figure out exactly how to handle these very tricky situations.”

Hillel is also dealing with a lawsuit from the Social Justice Centre, about which they are unable to speak publicly except to say that an independent contractor, not acting on behalf of the organization, participated in the distribution of contentious stickers around the UBC campus. Hillel terminated its relationship with the contractor but is facing a case that attempts to hold the organization responsible.

These are not easy times for Jewish students, but, in some cases, individuals are finding resources they did not know they have.

Rachel Seguin, a graduate of Vancouver Talmud Torah elementary and King David High School and a second-year psychology student at UBC, has become an accidental activist.

“Since Oct. 7, I’ve seen a new part of me that I didn’t even know existed – neither did my parents, honestly,” she said. The anti-Israel actions of the Social Justice Centre and the repeated stonewalling by the AMS in response to her complaints have driven Seguin to become a public voice against antisemitism on campus, including addressing the council last week in opposition to the referendum proposals.

“I didn’t imagine myself doing something like that,” she said. The fact that the AMS did what Seguin believes is the right thing was, she said, “really refreshing and satisfying.”

SFU students vote BDS

On April 20, the Simon Fraser Student Society (SFSS) voted in favour of boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against Israel. The motion is in support of Palestinian liberation, which it defines as resistance against Israeli “settler-colonialism” and the occupation of historic Palestine – including the West Bank, Gaza and the present-day state of Israel.

The Hillel chapter at SFU issued a statement on April 20 denouncing the motion.

“Evidently, this motion, and the student council standing in support of it are not concerned with the safety of Jewish students on SFU campus,” reads the statement. “The adoption of the policy, which passed unanimously this evening, and which violates SFU, provincial and federal law, sets a dangerous precedent for Jewish safety, freedom of association and political mobilization on campus.”

The day after the SFSS vote, another campus group also voted on a motion related to debates over Israel.

On April 21, more than 60% of the Queen’s University Faculty Association (QUFA) voted in favour of a motion that opposed the adoption of the working definition of antisemitism from the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA).

The IHRA working definition of antisemitism was adopted in May 2016, and states that antisemitism is “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

The document also lists many examples that could fall into the broader definition of antisemitism. Among the examples are statements about Jewish people and Israel, including “denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a state of Israel is a racist endeavour.”

According to the QUFA motion, this definition threatens academic freedom and intersectional anti-racist and decolonial initiatives.

“The IHRA deﬁnition of antisemitism misconstrues antisemitism to include a broad range of criticism of the state of Israel, particularly targeting

decolonial and anti-racist critiques of the policies, structures and practices of Israel,” the motion reads. “Such targeted attacks, which primarily impact racialized faculty and students, will have a negative effect on the academic freedom of our members in the classroom, in their research and in campus politics more broadly.”

Jordan Morelli, QUFA president, said in an email that the motion was brought forward by individual members of the association, as is their right according to the association’s democratic processes. He also said the vote itself was preceded by a balanced discussion in which everybody who wanted to speak was given the opportunity to do so. Morelli further added that Queen’s recently revised policy on harassment and discrimination defines antisemitism in a manner consistent with the Ontario Human Rights Code policies, and that other faculty organizations at other schools, as well as at federal and provincial levels, have expressed similar concerns with the IHRA definition of antisemitism.

Before the vote, Queen’s Hillel published an open letter signed by more than 1,600 people – current Jewish and non-Jewish students, alumni, family members and community members – asking the faculty to vote against the motion.

“This statement contributes to the erasure of Jewish history, religiosity and values. To exclude the Jewish community from impacted ‘racialized faculty and students’ does harm to multi-racial, long-established Jewish communities. It overwrites our lived reality of centuries of constant displacement, colonization, conquest and migration,” the letter reads.

The letter also says that the fears about restricting criticism of Israel and academic freedom do not follow from a “fair” reading of the definition, as Israel is not mentioned in the definition itself, but only in the follow-up examples of what may constitute antisemitism. The letter also questioned why it does not fall to Jewish groups to define their own oppression.

“It is our understanding that a fundamental principle of anti-oppression work is allowing affected communities to define their own oppression,” reads the letter. “It is not the place of any organization external to our community…. It is the Jewish community, and the Jewish community alone, who get to decide this. This double-standard is antisemitic.”

The Hillel letter did note that some of the faculty who proposed the motion are Jewish, but said their views are out-of-sync with the vast majority of Canadian Jews.

After the motion passed, Queen’s Hillel published a statement that said they were “deeply saddened,” called the vote “an utter disgrace,” especially because no actionable steps were suggested in the motion to combat growing antisemitism on campus. However, the statement also said they were “immensely proud” of the support shown across the community.

At McGill, a similar motion in support of Palestinian solidarity that was passed by more than 70% of the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) was not ratified by SSMU’s board of governors. In a statement published on April 22, the board said they could not adopt the policy because it contravened numerous SSMU governing documents, including its constitution, equity policy and Quebec law.

The original version of this article was published by The CJN. For more national Jewish news, visit thecjn.ca.

Hate not acceptable at SFU

“Antisemitism is hate, and it is not acceptable at SFU,” said Simon Fraser University president and vice-chancellor Joy Johnson. (photo by Jeff Hitchcock / flickr)

The president of Simon Fraser University met with Jewish students recently and issued a statement condemning antisemitism on campus and directing those who experience anti-Jewish racism to appropriate resources.

After meeting with Jewish students, Joy Johnson, Simon Fraser’s president and vice-chancellor, tweeted on July 12: “Their experiences were deeply upsetting.”

“Antisemitism is hate, and it is not acceptable at SFU,” she added. “If you are experiencing discrimination or hate, help is available. Please reach out.”

The university, in consultation with the SFU Multifaith Centre and Hillel BC, created a resource for those who have experienced antisemitism. This includes links to campus chaplains, confidential counseling and critical incident support for significant events.

Like many university campuses, SFU has a history of anti-Israel activism that can often veer into antisemitic imagery and tropes. The latest eruption occurred at the first council meeting of a newly elected Simon Fraser Students Society. Occurring around the time of the most recent conflict between Hamas and Israel, the council meeting passed a resolution endorsing the boycott, divestment and sanction movement against Israel (BDS) in what Jewish students view as a biased and unfair meeting.

The student society’s resolution – titled “SFSS Response to the Israeli Colonization of Palestine” – accused Israel of “disproportionate violence,” claiming “worshippers at the Al-Aqsa Mosque were indiscriminately targeted by Israeli police forces” and condemning “the ongoing persecution of the Palestinian people by the government of Israel.” The resolution endorsed the BDS movement and expressed no parallel concerns about Palestinian terrorism, violence, incitement or human rights abuses. It also accused the United States and Canada of complicity in perceived Israeli misdeeds. The resolution passed unanimously.

The student society brought in Dalya Masri, a Palestinian activist, to provide “expert” testimony before the vote, said Katia Fermon, outreach coordinator for Hillel BC, the Jewish student organization.

“She gave a presentation, which was beyond hurtful for Jewish students,” said Fermon. Masri, she said, compared the First Intifada to the sort of peaceful rallies that happen on the streets of Vancouver.

“My students have family that died in the First and the Second Intifada,” Fermon said. “This is not a strange thing for us, and she just mentioned it like it was a rally.”

The presenter accused Israel of taking over territory in 1967, while eliding the larger facts around the Six Day War and other realities, she said.

Fermon said that, in preparation for the vote, the SFSS consulted with Independent Jewish Voices, but did not consult with Hillel.

“That fact is very hurtful,” she said. “Independent Jewish Voices is not a club on campus, however Hillel Jewish Students Association is. They pay their dues.… We are a part of that union. Those voices were not asked for or heard.”

Hillel BC issued a statement condemning the student society’s approach.

“Instead of supporting an open and extensive dialogue amongst students, the SFSS has chosen to perpetuate the agenda of a movement whose use of harmful terminology fails to address the root causes of the conflict, ignoring centuries of complex history in which power dynamics constantly shifted,” it reads. “This rhetoric further sows hate and division instead of helping work towards a peaceful two-state solution. The SFSS has decided to single out the state of Israel instead of opening a space for adequate dialogue between Jewish, Israeli and Palestinian students on campus wherein we may critique the policies of the state while being mindful of the hate that may result in endorsing certain statements, activists or movements.”

It added that BDS “openly traffics in antisemitic conspiracies and dog whistles” and noted that nearly two decades of BDS activism has not “freed Palestine from violence or oppression. Instead, it has been to stoke aggression and polarization online, in the streets and on campuses.”

In a statement to the Independent, Nico Slobinsky, director of the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, Pacific region, said: “The statement by SFU’s president is an important step in denouncing the rising tide of anti-Jewish hate on campus. CIJA thanks president Dr. Joy Johnson for recognizing that SFU is not immune from antisemitism. Combating anti-Jewish hatred is not only about protecting Jews but also about protecting the very fabric of our society, on and off campus.

“CIJA appreciates the strong friendship and commitment shown by Dr. Johnson to creating a campus that is inclusive, diverse, safe and open to all students,” Slobinsky added. “CIJA looks forward to working with SFU alongside our campus partner, Hillel BC, towards ensuring a healthy campus environment.”

Students have been studying remotely for more than a year and so most of the discussion, which has included a litany of offensive comments, has taken place on official and unofficial online platforms, including the primary undergraduate forum.

One Israeli student, who asked to remain anonymous, said she was one of a few who spoke up in opposition to the prevailing bias in the dialogue.

“I didn’t expect it to go smoothly,” she said. “There was a lot of backlash in the moment and it is still going on.… A lot of comments are being deleted and monitored but there are a lot of hateful comments.”

The statements frequently included slogans such as “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” and other comments promising the annihilation of Israel. Israel was compared with Nazi Germany, Rhodesia, apartheid-era South Africa and plantation-owning slaveholders. Concerns about the safety of Jewish people were dismissed as efforts to “stifle” legitimate criticism of Israel.

“As an Israeli, I don’t want to believe they said them personally to me,” the student said. “I try my best not to take all those comments personally, but sometimes it gets there.”

As she and other students prepare to return to campus this fall for the first time in more than a year, she said she is not concerned for her personal safety, but she is worried about some of her friends.

“I was born in Israel and I have a little bit of Israeli inside of me so, for myself, I’m not that worried,” she said. “Obviously, it’s not a nice experience.” Whether the online threats and vitriol turn into real-time incidents remains to be seen, she said, but some of her Jewish friends are already taking cover.

“They are not wearing their Star of David,” she said. “They never say out publicly that they are Jewish: to not get into a conflict, to avoid any debate on the matter, they just decided not to. I think it’s a shame…. It is a shame that we live in Canada in the 21st century and people are choosing to hide part of their identity. For myself, it’s a big chunk of my identity, so I’m not going to hide it, but I can’t blame people who choose to. I empathize with them.”

What makes people happy?

Simon Fraser University Prof. Lara Aknin (photo from SFU Communications & Marketing)

There are several paths to finding happiness, according to Prof. Laura Aknin. “But a central theme that rises above the rest is that a lot of happiness comes from our relationships with other people, and how we help and give to others.”

Aknin will deliver the talk A Reality Check, for Good: A Talk on Happiness via Zoom on Feb. 22.

“Guest speaker Lara Aknin is a distinguished associate professor of psychology at Simon Fraser University, and director of the Helping and Happiness Social Psychology Lab at SFU,” said Rabbi Yechiel Baitelman, director of Chabad Richmond. Born and educated in Vancouver, Aknin became interested in social psychology and human emotions while studying as an undergrad and graduate student at the University of British Columbia. According to Aknin, “Human emotions colour our existence, and bring meaning to a lot of what we do.”

Among Aknin’s research interests are well-being, happiness, social relationships, prosocial behaviour and altruism. She established the Helping and Happiness Social Psychology Lab, which studies the predictors of happiness and what makes people happy, the emotional consequences of kind and generous behaviour, and the well-being outcomes of specific spending choices. The lab also looks at how people can increase their happiness.

“Happiness is broadly universal, yet religious people tend to report higher levels of happiness,” said Aknin, when asked how happiness relates to Judaism. “One of the major lessons emerging from our helping and happiness lab and our study of well-being is that it’s not just what we do for ourselves, it’s what we do for others. When we help others and give to others, that’s when we find happiness.”

While not overtly connected, it appears that happiness aligns with Judaism’s emphasis on giving tzedakah and doing mitzvot.

“Helping others is a pretty clear and reliable path to experiencing greater well-being,” confirmed Aknin.

While acknowledging that religion is not her specific area of research, Aknin said, “The notion, or central message that giving to others, whether it be G-d or other people in your community or beyond is a meaningful source of finding joy, reward, value and meaning in life, is certainly aligned with the evidence in the literature.”

A fundamental concept in Judaism is the importance of serving G-d with joy.

“The emotional rewards of giving are a psychological universal, not just particular to the Jewish faith, but it might align with many of the teachings of the Jewish faith and others,” said Aknin. “Researchers see this not just in North America, but in rich and poor countries around the globe. We see it in kids under the age of 2 … we see it in ex-offenders. People experience emotional rewards when they engage in kind behaviour. Many religious principles regularly espouse the value and virtue of giving to others … these ideas have been around for centuries, but the evidence is now documenting the importance of this.”

The topic of helping and happiness resonates with people.

“At some level,” said Aknin, “our intuition says that giving to others is emotionally rewarding but, in real life, people are spending more on themselves – out of necessity, for things like paying their bills, [but] we often overlook opportunities [to give] and would be better off spending the money in our pocket on someone else, rather than on an extra coffee.”

Is it always about our own sense of well-being or is happiness a byproduct of something more altruistic? Is it selfish, for example, to donate clothes to a homeless shelter because it makes us feel good? Is it wrong to have a sense of well-being when we give to others?

“Those questions are central to the work that I do,” Aknin said. “It’s important to distinguish what the motives are for giving in the first place, versus how do you feel afterwards. There’s no question that there are emotional benefits for the giver, and that donating one’s time or money to others promotes well-being and increases life satisfaction. Sometimes, people give to feel good but, by and large, people are giving because they think it’s the right thing to do, and they want to help the person in need. Feeling good about it afterwards isn’t a bad thing. On the contrary, I think that’s a beautiful feature of human behaviour. It serves a purpose to help inspire us to do it again. It’s indicative of a care for humanity. Feeling indifference after giving would be more surprising.”

Aknin said happy people tend to have strong social relationships, they tend to be individuals who donate. and they tend to be relatively comfortable with where they are in life, not only financially, but also proud of what they’ve accomplished. Happy people also tend to live in a safe environment, she said, so being able to trust your neighbours is important.

Aknin is working on a commission that’s studying the trends around happiness and physical/mental health. Findings show that, during the COVID-19 pandemic, most people’s physical and mental health has suffered.

“Negative emotions are up, mental distress is up, depression and anxiety are up. Yet, despite all that, there is still some resilience and stability,” she said. The pandemic has given people time to evaluate their lives, and there is still much stability to be seen.

Aknin said some behaviours that are “protective,” such as exercise, make us feel better. “But people still feel better when they’re helping others,” she said.

According to Aknin, most people are happy, because “we’re very adaptive”; even though we think we aren’t, we are.

When asked if she’s happy doing what she’s doing, Aknin replied: “Yes, there’s great meaning and purpose in what I do.”

To register for Aknin’s Feb. 22, 8 p.m., talk, go to chabadrichmond.com/happiness.

Shelley Civkin is a happily retired librarian and communications officer. For 17 years, she wrote a weekly book review column for the Richmond Review. She’s currently a freelance writer and volunteer.

Courage of journalists

Journalists in Canada do not face the sorts of threats – sometimes life-endangering ones – that colleagues in many other countries do. But other factors impinge on the right of Canadians to diverse and thorough reporting of contentious issues, says an academic on the subject.

Robert Hackett, professor emeritus of communication at Simon Fraser University, spoke on the civil courage of journalists as part of the annual Raoul Wallenberg Day in Vancouver. The virtual commemoration, sponsored by the Wallenberg-Sugihara Civil Courage Society Jan. 17, featured a number of recorded events, including the screening of two films.

In recent decades, there has been a return to “partisan media,” said Hackett.

“Media, going back a couple of hundred years, were initially partisan media, reflecting the viewpoint of particular factions or parties,” he said. “We see that returning with a vengeance since the 1980s, with Fox News and so on.”

The internet has lowered attention spans and the “growing entertainment orientation” of the news media has changed the way reporting is done. Contradictory forces have upset the journalism sector in recent decades, he said. On the one hand, concentration and monopoly have placed control of “legacy media” – daily news, for instance – in fewer and fewer hands, reflecting a narrowing of perspectives. On the other hand, digital media and journalism startups have led to a fragmentation of public attention.

As the revenue structures of journalism have become strained due to competition for advertising avenues, resources for newsroom staff have declined, with commensurate impacts on the quality of reporting. Journalists who are expected to pump out several stories a day are unable to do the sort of investigative work common a generation or two ago and so rely on media releases. General reporters have replaced beat reporters with deep contacts and extensive background knowledge in an area of expertise. These structural changes have been accompanied by growing cultural skepticism toward expertise and even the definition of truth, said Hackett.

“It’s a different cognitive world,” he said. “We no longer seem to even have a shared reality.”

Some of Hackett’s recent research, in conjunction with the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, has focused on fossil fuel industries and their influence on Canada’s press. He sees Canada’s largest print media company, Postmedia, as a booster of fossil fuels.

While Canadian journalists are fortunate not to face some of the life-threatening risks of reporters in many other places, there remain serious challenges to the ideal of a free media.

“There is still a certain degree of legal harassment and risk, especially for freelancers who don’t have a big organization behind them,” said Hackett. “The cost of a lawsuit for defamation, even if it’s a spurious lawsuit, is prohibitive. It’s intimidating. I know for a fact that freelancers have said they aren’t proceeding with stories because of fears of being sued.”

In addition, he added: “We don’t have effective shield or whistleblower laws, by and large, that would allow journalists to protect their sources.”

The online event, marking the 16th annual commemoration of Raoul Wallenberg Day in Vancouver, also featured two documentaries.

A Dark Place was produced by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s Representative on Freedom of the Media. It follows female journalists around the world and the threats they receive online in reaction to their reporting on contentious stories. Threats of rape and murder, as well as other forms of intimidation, are almost ubiquitous. One study said that 60% of female journalists have experienced some form of online harassment or threats, according to the film. A panel discussion featured the film’s director, Javier Luque, and Arzu Geybulla, an Azerbaijani journalist who endured harrowing harassment and accusations of being a “traitor” for coverage of conflicts in the Caucasus.

The other documentary, Mohamed Fahmy: Half Free, by filmmaker David Paperny, follows Egyptian-Canadian journalist Mohamed Fahmy, who was jailed in Egypt for his reporting on the Arab Spring uprising in Cairo. Fahmy’s experience is one of many that journalists face daily in conflict zones and under repressive regimes, risking their freedom and their lives to report on events. Fahmy spent 438 days in an Egyptian prison before being pardoned by the country’s president, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. Fahmy is now an adjunct professor at the University of British Columbia.

Alan Le Fevre, a director of the Wallenberg-Sugihara Civil Courage Society, welcomed participants to the annual event, which highlights the Second World War heroism of Raoul Wallenberg and Chiune Sugihara.

Wallenberg, a Swedish diplomat in Hungary, issued “protective passports” that identified bearers as Swedish subjects awaiting repatriation, thereby preventing their deportation from Hungary to death camps in Poland. Wallenberg disappeared in 1945 after the Soviets invaded Hungary. In 1957, the Soviet Union released a statement dated 1947, saying that Wallenberg had died of natural causes that year. Reports that Wallenberg was seen alive after 1947 have added to confusion and controversy around his fate.

Sugihara was vice-consul of the Imperial Japanese legation in Lithuania. At risk to his career and his life, Sugihara issued thousands of transit visas permitting Jews to travel through the Soviet Union to Japan and across the Pacific. Ostensibly, because a destination was required for a transit visa, the holders were destined for Curaçao. Many of those who escaped ended up on the West Coast of North America and there are several Vancouver families who owe their lives to “Sugihara visas.”

Community milestones … Order of Canada, Indspire, SFU Gerontology, JCC Jewish Book Awards

Rabbi Dr. Yosef Wosk speaks at a Vancouver Public Library event in 2017. (photo by Cynthia Ramsay)

The Order of Canada is one of our country’s highest civilian honours. Its companions, officers and members take to heart the motto of the order: “Desiderantes meliorem patriam” (“They desire a better country”).

Created in 1967, the Order of Canada recognizes outstanding achievement, dedication to the community and service to the nation. Appointments are made by the governor general on the recommendation of the Advisory Council for the Order of Canada. This year, among the 114 new appointees, are Vancouver Jewish community members Dr. Carol Herbert and Rabbi Dr. Yosef Wosk. Each recipient will be invited to accept their insignia at a ceremony to be held at a later date.

photo - Dr. Carol Herbert — Dr. Carol Herbert *(photo from schulich.uwo.ca)*

Herbert was appointed a Member of the Order of Canada for her contributions to the fields of clinical and academic medicine, as a family physician, medical educator, researcher and administrator. She and three colleagues were appointed.

“The appointment of Drs. B. Lynn Beattie, Joseph Connors, Carol Herbert and Roger Wong to the Order of Canada is a demonstration of their incredible commitment to the health and well-being of all Canadians,” said Dr. Dermot Kelleher, dean of the University of British Columbia’s faculty of medicine and vice-president, health, at UBC, said in a press release. “We are very proud of each of their contributions, and deeply moved by their passion for improving the lives of patients and families here in B.C., and across the nation.”

Herbert, an adjunct professor in the School of Population and Public Health, “is internationally known for her leadership in primary care research, and for her work in clinical health promotion, patient-physician decision-making, and participatory action research with Indigenous communities, focused on diabetes and on environmental effects on human health,” notes the UBC release. “She was formerly head of the department of family practice, founding head of the division of behavioural medicine and a founder of the UBC Institute of Health Promotion Research.”

This only touches on Herbert’s extensive experience. She also was dean of medicine and dentistry at Western University in London, Ont., from 1999 to 2010, was a practising family physician from 1970 to 2013, and has been involved in medical education since 1971.

Yosef Wosk, PhD, was appointed Officer of the Order of Canada for his far-reaching contributions to his community as a scholar, educator and writer, and for his generous philanthropy. BC Booklook (bcbooklook.com/2020/11/27/41941) cites the governor general: “Yosef Wosk is a Renaissance man of the 21st century. A rabbi, scholar, businessman and art collector, he is a revered educator and community activist who inspired many to become engaged in global issues and local challenges. Former director of interdisciplinary programs in continuing studies at Simon Fraser University, he founded the Philosophers’ Café and the Canadian Academy of Independent Scholars. A poet, explorer and dedicated philanthropist involved with museums, the arts, social services, publishing, nature and heritage conservation, he has endowed hundreds of libraries worldwide.”

Wosk has established more than 400 libraries, including 20 libraries in remote Himalayan villages and 37 in Jewish communities throughout the world. (See jewishindependent.ca/many-milestones-for-wosk-in-2019.) He has supported a range of local building preservation, public garden and other civic enhancement projects. He has helped fund the production of more than 250 books and videos, and has written numerous works, most recently Memories of Jewish Poland: The 1932 Photographs of Nachum Tim Gidal and the forthcoming GIDAL: The Letters of Tim Gidal and Yosef Wosk (Douglas & McIntyre, 2021). He supports several literature, writing, poetry, art and design initiatives, and is founding benefactor of the Dance Centre.

In addition to other honours, Wosk has received the Queen’s Golden and Diamond Jubilee Medals and a Mayor’s Arts Award, as well as the Order of British Columbia.

***

As part of its belief in and commitment to supporting emerging architecture practitioners, the Arthur Erickson Foundation and the Yosef Wosk Family Foundation recently announced a $110,000 donation to Indspire – Canada’s national, award-winning Indigenous registered charity – in support of Indigenous youth in Canada. The donation will fund an awards program focused on increasing Indigenous student success by growing the number of Indigenous architects and landscape architects in Canada.

Central to Arthur Erickson’s work as an architect and theorist was his belief in and commitment to education and research. Having served on the faculties of architecture at the University of Oregon and the University of British Columbia, Erickson understood the need of each generation to contribute to the training of the next. One of the ways the foundation honours Erickson’s belief is by working with donors to develop prizes and scholarships intended to reward and assist students studying architecture and landscape architecture.

“The Arthur Erickson Foundation and Yosef Wosk Family Foundation, along with Indspire, are pleased to announce the establishment of an awards program supporting Indigenous education in architecture and landscape architecture,” said Michael Prokopow, vice-president (East) Arthur Erickson Foundation. “The organizations recognize the profound importance of the shared work of decolonization and reconciliation in Canada for the transformation of society. These awards recognize the deep power of Indigenous thinking and wisdom around the making of habitation and space for well-being across generations and the vitally important stewardship of the natural world.”

Mike DeGagné, president and chief executive officer of Indspire, stated, “This new investment is a significant step in supporting First Nations, Inuit and Métis architecture and landscape architecture students to achieve their potential through education and training. They can in turn enrich their communities and create positive change in Canada. We are grateful for the support of the Arthur Erickson Foundation and the Yosef Wosk Family Foundation for investing in Indigenous achievement and education.”

***

Simon Fraser University Gerontology Research Centre (GRC) founder Dr. Gloria Gutman and her team – Avantika Vashisht, Taranjot Kaur, Mojgan Karbakhsh, Ryan Churchill and Amir Moztarzadeh – received the Best Paper Award at the International Conference on Gerontechnology, held Nov. 25-27. SFUGero tweeted the news Dec. 1, noting that the paper was a “[f]easibility study of a digital screen-based calming device for managing BPSD [behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia] during bathing in a long-term care setting.”

A brief biography for Gutman, PhD, appears on the conference website. She is president of the North American chapter of the International Society for Gerontechnology, vice-president of the International Longevity Centre-Canada, past-president of the Canadian Association on Gerontology and the International Association of Gerontology and Geriatrics. She is co-editor (with Andrew Sixsmith) of Technologies for Active Aging (Springer, 2013) and has published widely on seniors housing, long-term care, health promotion, prevention of elder abuse, and seniors and disasters. She is on the advisory of MindfulGarden Digital Health and is the principal investigator on the first feasibility clinical studies for MindfulGarden, which is a digital treatment of hyperactive dementia in long-term care setting. She established the GRC and department of gerontology at SFU and is recipient of many awards and honours, including the Order of Canada.

***

The third edition of the Western Canada Jewish Book Awards, presented by the Cherie Smith JCC Jewish Book Festival in Vancouver, took place Dec. 6. Daniella Givon, chair of the awards committee, opened the evening on Zoom and the five honours were awarded by five different presenters.

Winning the Nancy Richler Memorial Prize for Fiction was Rhea Tregebov for Rue des Rosiers, in which a young Canadian woman’s search for her own identity brings her to Paris in 1982, and face-to-face with the terror of an age-old enemy. Tregebov (Vancouver) is the author of fiction, poetry and children’s picture books. She is associate professor emerita in the University of British Columbia creative writing program.

The Pinsky Givon Family Prize for nonfiction went to Naomi K. Lewis for Tiny Lights for Travellers. When her marriage suddenly ends, and a diary documenting her beloved Opa’s escape from Nazi-occupied Netherlands in the summer of 1942 is discovered, Lewis decides to retrace his journey to freedom. Lewis (Calgary) is the author of the novel Cricket in a Fist and the short story collection I Know Who You Remind Me Of.

Ellen Schwartz was awarded the Diamond Foundation Prize for children’s and youth literature for The Princess Dolls, a story about friendship between a Jewish girl and a Japanese girl, set against the backdrop of 1942 Vancouver. Schwartz (Burnaby) is the author of 17 children’s books, including Abby’s Birds and Mr. Belinsky’s Bagels.

The Lohn Foundation Prize for poetry was given to Alex Leslie for Vancouver for Beginners. In this collection, the nostalgia of place is dissected through the mapping of a city, where readers are led past surrealist development proposals, post-apocalyptic postcards and childhood landmarks long gone. Leslie (Vancouver) is the author of two short story collections and the winner of the 2015 Dayne Ogilvie Prize for LGBTQ Emerging Writers.

The Kahn Family Foundation Prize for writing about the Holocaust was given to Olga Campbell for A Whisper Across Time, a personal and moving story of her family’s experience of the Holocaust through prose, art and poetry, creating a multi-dimensional snapshot of losses and intergenerational trauma. Campbell is a visual artist whose media include photography, sculpture, mixed media painting and digital photo collage.

The jury for the 2020 Western Canada Jewish Book Awards comprised Shula Banchik, arts and culture manager of the Calgary JCC; Judy Kornfeld, former librarian at Langara College; Els Kushner, author and librarian; Norman Ravvin, writer, critic and Concordia University professor; and Laurie Ricou, professor emeritus of English at UBC.

After short acceptance speeches and readings from the authors, Dana Camil Hewitt, director of the JCC Jewish Book Festival, concluded the evening thanking the sponsors, the judges, the awards committee and the extended virtual audience, and inviting everyone to purchase and enjoy the books.