April 2009

At the end of March I made decision to step down as Director of the charity Talking About Cannabis. I had worked as a volunteer for 2 years, since setting up the Talking About Cannabis Parental Action Group in April 2007, just after publication of the ‘Cannabis Diaries’ in the Guardian and Daily Mail. My aim was to raise awareness of the devastating effects of cannabis on the young and on families. I didn’t seem able to ‘fix’ my own family’s problems with our own son Will, so out of desperation decided to see if together with other affected families we could, as a group, make the changes that I knew needed to take place.

From humble beginnings, the Group began to become well-known, especially thanks to my teaming up with one of the world’s foremost campaigners and experts on cannabis. She had important contacts and years of experience – we made a good team, I with my personal story and she with her scientific expertise about cannabis and her campaigning background. I owe her a great deal.

Other parents, all with children who had been damaged by cannabis, gathered around me too, all feeling the isolation and despair that we had felt as a family. The lobbying began, as did the media campaign, and the launch of ourselves as a charity, and latterly the setting up of a Family Support Line in January 2009.

I began to have doubts about the future of the charity when we were forced to give up our office space at a building near to London Bridge, due to insufficient funds. It was an added strain when I was working 7 days a week, and earning nothing – having put my savings into setting up the web-site and campaign, and then ploughing any earnings from journalism, media appearances or talks back into the business.

I knew that the future of the charity was inextricably linked to proper sustainable funding, yet 8 months on from charitable registration, the sad reality was that not one single application had been submitted despite months of regular meetings between myself and our fund-raiser, who seemed confident that his approach was the right one.

My husband, Guy, reminded me last September that while he supported my voluntary work for TAC wholeheartedly, there was a limit as to how long I could continue on an unpaid basis. We have 2 children to educate; effectively my support from a second income was removed when I started work on TAC in 2007. I promised Guy that if by September 2009, my position as Director was not funded I would recommence paid work. I told the Trustees this, and the Chairman began making plans to apply for funding for a paid post for me. This gave me confidence that I would be able to continue with TAC, which was what I wanted so badly. Leaving in September was unthinkable, we had so much to do.

However, the combination of the increasing commitment of the position of Director within the charity, coupled with the lack of any reasonable sustainable funding in the short term, made me realise that the prospect of the position of Director being remunerated by September 09 was wholly unrealistic. In a sense this was reinforced by our having to give up the premises in February, coupled with the strain and embarrassment this caused me in dealing with the management there. I cleared out the offices single-handedly one weekend.

In January through to March, I appeared on many programmes on radio and tv, often leaving home at anti-social hours and always at short notice. This is something I have been doing for the past 2 years. One of the Trustees wrote to me suggesting that this has been about self-promotion rather than supporting the cause. It was a cruel allegation. As you may know, my son William had begun doing interviews with me, which was amazing considering what we had all been through as a family. Whilst I was celebrating this achievement it seemed others had begun to be resentful of the media attention we were getting.

The Support Line began to receive more calls as our public profile grew. Our volunteer pool was small to begin with, but all were highly motivated and doing a good job. However, few volunteers wanted to work at weekends and we had wanted to provide a 24/7 service. Due to the lack of volunteer help, in addition to the day to day running of the charity I was taking the line at weekends, which meant that I was working at least 6 days a week, normally 7. This began to put a strain on family life, especially as Guy has a pressurised job which also requires weekend commitment.

It seemed the correct thing to do to curtail the hours of the Support Line. Our SL Manager at first agreed and we cut the hours during the week, getting rid of the night shift, but when I suggested we make it Monday – Friday only she did not agree. I was becoming increasingly exhausted, often it would be she and I alone who were manning the lines at the weekend.

The week before I resigned I was on call most of the weekend, the SLM having a well-deserved weekend away. It was all becoming too much and I made the decision to cut the hours down of the Line down to 5 long days. I had been appointed to run the business, which entailed making strategic decisions. I was also aware that I could not keep filling in on the Line at weekends – and more importantly I did not want to. Boundaries are important when your intentions are to support others, without them you can end up being resentful and burnt out – and I was on course for this happening to me. The SLM was not happy with the decision, and was angry that I had gone ahead. I understood her reasons, but knew I could not continue to step in, always at short notice, to cover empty shifts 7 days a week.

The Trustees were clearly disappointed by my decision to resign. One of our educational expert Trustees considered resigning too, he had been unhappy with the Chair of the Trustees for some time – urging me to do something about the problem.

On a positive note, I found someone to take over as Director. Let’s call him James. I had talked to him and his partner by phone before Christmas, they were looking for support with their family situation. James’s second son was deeply entrenched in cannabis use and causing ructions at home. We talked about options and what had worked for our family. Our sons were the same ages, and I could talk from experience about the sort of ‘tough love’ that we had tried. Some weeks later, James offered to help the charity; he had a business development background and was also an affected parent so had the ideal credentials to help us grow the business. He and I met in London to discuss our plans and how he may be able to help us.

When I decided to resign, I asked James if he would consider the Director’s role and he agreed, saying it would be something he would like to try. Knowing I could work with James, alongside him and the Trustees, I was delighted by this and confident that with him at the helm TAC could become a strong oak tree in the field of cannabis prevention and support to families. As Will said when I told him – you began with an acorn and you are now handing the Group a tree! I agreed with him, and liked the analogy. Most of all, concerning James I was relieved that I would not be leaving TAC without anyone at the head. He was willing to work as a volunteer too. I offered for the charity to continue to use the web-site and the name TAC, under the same leasing agreement that we had had in place since late 2008. I intended to work alongside them, as a consultant or in whatever capacity might be appropriate.

I met up with the Trustees to hand over documents, and talk about how James might take over from me. However, there was a coolness of feeling from the start. It seemed to me that the SLM had been badly wounded by my decision about the Line, and had intentions to make my life difficult as recompense. I’d already told her I was resigning and that the decisions about the Line were hers to make. It appeared obvious that she did not want me to leave, but to stay and take my punishment. Without the support from the other Trustees I was not up to taking this on alone.

I was beginning to understand the importance of getting funding in place – if nothing else to ensure that you can hire and pay people, so putting everything on a business footing. Trying to manage volunteers is almost impossible. No one is getting paid, people begin to get resentful, and start to empire-build. This was not my idea of what I ever wanted Talking About Cannabis to be. It was time to leave.

I was wounded by the SLM’s behaviour towards me during that meeting, but understood that she had felt undermined. She had worked so hard to get the Line running, training the volunteers, writing the training literature, counselling families. It had been an extraordinary achievement. I had warned her recently that her health was going to be jeopardised if she continued such a gruelling schedule; I knew mine was. My observation was that she needed autonomy to run the Line how she felt fit, and I was now giving that to her.

The other Trustees closed ranks to some extent, which was understandable, as I was now the common enemy in a way – or at least the one who was leaving the ship without a captain. I had been warned that this may happen, and had dismissed it – not with us, not with what he had all been trying to do, that was not going to happen. Apparently, business ‘divorces’ are usually as acrimonious as emotional ones – it is a dynamic that happens among groups. And it was happening to us, I found this hard to believe but glad I had been warned.

I wrote to the Trustees, to explain my reasons for resigning, as a formal notification and received no acknowledgement. A meeting had been planned later the following week between us and James; but after the unpleasantness of the previous meeting I elected not to be present. I presumed that James would be appointed as Director during that meeting (my belief was that they would be crazy not to grab him with both hands when they had no money, no paid staff and no premises).

After 5 days had elapsed since I’d sent my resignation letter, and with no response from anyone nor word as to the decisions made at the meeting with James, I decided to cut myself loose from the charity altogether and rescind offers of the web-site and name. I was angry and hurt, but most of all exhausted and unwilling to play games. Things got worse from there regarding my relationship with them all, but I was determined to gain my freedom and wanted to regain the purity of intention, and focus, that had given TAC the huge impetus to go out into the world and create the changes we all wanted to see. The TAC web-site reverts to me tomorrow, the non-profit company remains mine too, and I shall continue to do my best to support parents and to speak out about the issue of cannabis and children. These on-line Diaries will continue too. Another parent will be working with me. She had been helping with fund-raising, but was told recently that there was no longer a role for her. I haven’t been told what the plans are for the charity.

I would like to take this opportunity to give heartfelt thanks to all of you who have contacted me over the past 2 years. Without your emails, letters and phone-calls I would never have formed the Action Group; you gave me the knowledge that others were suffering too, it was not just our family. I had a hunch this was the case, but to have it confirmed personally by hundreds of families was the proof that I needed. We helped get the law changed– and for that I celebrate. And to all of you – the TAC committee of parents, drugs experts, MPs – who have given your time and energy to help me, thanks so much. To the press and the media, for helping bring the issue out into the light – without you there would have been no campaign. Thanks to all of you. With best wishes Debra.

Related Posts: