Should national occupational therapy organizations pick a side between Israelis and Palestinians?

Recently, I came across an open letter written by occupational therapists (OTs) in a high-income country to their national organization. The letter is about their disappointment over their organization’s alleged lack of support for Palestinians in the Israel-Hamas war. As I was reading it, I felt like I wasn’t reading a petition written by thoughtful healthcare workers (HCWs). I thought I was reading the ramblings of Gigi Hadid.

My problem with the petition is NOT that it’s seeking justice for Palestinians. We should advocate for the innocents among Palestinians because they have indeed been victimized by both Israelis and their fellow Arabs. Rather, the letter from those OTs is FASCIST because it’s demanding their national organization to force upon other OTs a particular stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, a complex situation for which OTs are not trained to fully understand. If world leaders are clueless about how to manage the cesspool that the Middle East has become despite their Ivy League degrees and their up-to-date intelligence reports, what makes people think that OTs can? 

Turning OTs Into Ideologues

Take for example the petition in the letter for the occupational therapy organization to demand permanent ceasefire because Israel is allegedly responding disproportionately by razing Gaza. How would OTs know if Israeli soldiers are indeed using disproportionate force when those OTs haven’t seen ALL the validated firsthand evidence about how bad Hamas’ terrorism is? Remember that what complicates this issue is that many Gazan civilians support Hamas due to radicalization. There are even videos of them joining Hamas in the October 7 massacre and rejoicing as the terrorists paraded their victims. If we’re going to show OTs evidence, are they psychologically prepared for the brutality that they will witness? 

Another example is the petition in the letter for OTs to demand the release of all Palestinian prisoners that Israel detained without charge or trial. At first glance, this demand seems absolutely righteous. But for a person to make an accurate judgment on the matter, he must first understand what administrative detentions are and why states are allowed to use it to defend themselves. This will also require OTs to review evidence and intelligence reports about each of the 1000-plus Palestinians that Israel detained before they can decide whether or not those people should indeed be liberated. Who has the time for that? Should we be reviewing those documents instead of attending to our patients? Then there’s the petition for the national organization to demand Israel to allow all non-government organizations (NGOs) to provide aid in Gaza. Unfortunately, not all NGOs are trustworthy. Many of them actually finance terrorists.  

Besides, if they want OTs to join protests to champion oppressed groups (which the letter also demands), then OTs shouldn’t be rallying just for Palestinians. They should also be required to march in the streets for the victims of other injustices. Why is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict supposed to get more attention? The follow-up question to that is, when can therapists see patients if they’re supposed to protest for all those people?

Subverting Occupational Therapy

Giving in to the demands in that petition will set a dangerous precedent, as that can be a basis for penalizing OTs for not aligning with the “official narrative”. If the aforementioned national organization conforms to the American Occupational Therapy Association’s Practice Framework, OTs in that country might lose their licenses for standing up to their leaders’ virtue-signaling. The same will be true if their national association will take on a blind pro-Israel stand despite their constituents’ reservations about Israel’s counter-terrorism efforts. 

Even the occupational therapy students will reap the negative consequences of politicizing the profession. They’ll be brainwashed into believing lies instead of learning to analyze issues by themselves. They might even get slapped with low grades should they dare to express controversial opinions. 

Freeing Palestine from Hamas

Clearly, we must all condemn Hamas for its demonic attacks against civilians. Privileged Hamas supporters living in liberal democracies should be immediately deported to Gaza for them to know what it’s really like to live among extremists. That is, if Hamas will allow them to live. It’s also quite obvious that individual OTs are entitled to express their opinions regarding Israel’s presence in Palestine (which was actually the Land of Israel in the Bible). But it will be wrong for the OTs’ national organization to pick a side and demand that all OTs conform to their biases. This will not only cost OTs their licenses for expressing views that challenge accepted narratives. It will also subvert the purpose of occupational therapy, which is to equip persons with disabilities (PWDs) with independent living skills — not to make judgments on global security matters, and certainly not to unleash terrorists upon the world!

OTs will be able to collectively help Israelis and Palestinians in their capacity as HCWs by first and foremost being good clinicians. They ought to have the expertise to rehabilitate people from both ethnic groups should these patients come to them for therapy. Instead of forcing their beliefs upon their constituents, national organizations should provide OTs with politically neutral frameworks on how to address migrant health at the individual level. They should also encourage universities to require occupational therapy students to take up foreign languages aside from English. In contrast, merely protesting in the streets might just be a cover for doing nothing to help oppressed groups while feeling self-righteous about it.

It is crucial to do these because Islamism will surely displace multitudes, many of whom will have disabilities. Besides, people are now traveling internationally more often. They will most likely seek therapy services in their host countries with cultures that are different from theirs. We OTs should be developing new standardized tests and treatment protocols that are both moral as well as culturally responsive in light of increasing globalization. Forcing political beliefs upon OTs will only distract us from providing those clinical services to PWDs, which is what we’re supposed to do best.