Skip to content

Interview with First, and Only, Woman (Former) Canadian Prime Minister


Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal (Unpublished)

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2018

*Interview in two sessions March 19, 2018 and May 22, 2018.*

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: You require little introduction. In your own words, what was family life for you, e.g., the political conversations arising around the table? Was there influence on personal interest in politics early in life?

Rt. Hon. Kim Campbell: I grew up in a non-political family. My parents both voted. They were good citizens, but neither was involved in a political party. I am a black sheep of the family. I am the first member of the family to become involved in running for public office.

Jacobsen: That is interesting. You were a leader in student politics in high school too. One thing noteworthy in early life. You took on the name “Kim.” I note an independent streak. Someone who speaks and asserts herself.

Campbell: I was always an independent person. I was encouraged by both of my parents to go for if I wanted to do things and to take on challenges. I changed my name at 13 because of the trauma of losing my mother.

She thought of naming me Kim. She named me Avril, so I shared my first name with her in a way that was painful. It was my way of dealing with a great childhood sadness, to take a different name.

Jacobsen: In your earlier political career, some issues were more poignant to women’s progress and empowerment. They relate to issues of women’s reproductive health. Now, I come from a generation building on those successes.

The successes earned in an earlier time. My generation takes these for granted sometimes. What was the early environment in the fight for women’s rights, women’s reproductive health rights and, in particular, the right to abortion in Canada?

Campbell: It is tempting to consider the issue of women’s reproductive rights and access to abortion as resolved issues. In fact, they are not. These touch the heart of a number of issues, e.g., the right of women to have control over their own bodies and to have bodily autonomy.

In Canada, the law was changed in the late 60s to make abortion legal. The issue was accepted by a therapeutic abortion committee in a hospital. In those parts of the country, the woman decided on it.

In Quebec, where most hospitals were Catholic hospitals, no abortion committees were formed. When Dr. Henry Morgentaler created a freestanding abortion clinic in Montréal, there was no other opportunity for a woman to comply with the law.

Eventually, the Supreme Court of Canada struck down the law. They supported Dr. Morgentaler. They said, “You cannot have a provision in the law, which says, ‘Doing X is criminal. Unless, you do Y if Y is not, in fact, available.’”

So, since 1988, the government considered some legislation and a provision in the law about abortion. The law was drafted as extremely liberal. In essence, abortion would be legal if it impeded mental, physical, or psychological health.

It did not pass. Now, we have no law. There are rearguard actions. It shows the difference between Canada and the United States. Religion is a bigger factor in American politics. America is more patriarchal than Canada.

There was interesting research by Environics Research. It has shown the growing divide between our societies. Canada is a much less patriarchal society. There are people in Canada who wish to limit access to abortion. They will work through funding or changing the law.

Stephen Harper had people in his caucus who wanted to restrict abortion. He refused to let the issue come forward. He viewed the court decision as settled law. However, people in today’s generation consider abortion settled law.

There are regional differences. There is access to health services and legal abortions in Canada. However, the issue persists. Your generation cannot pull the covers over your head and say, “We do not have to think about it anymore.” It comes back.

Jacobsen: I would not want to pull the covers over my head either [Laughing]. When it comes to this general fight, it is in an international context. If you take statements from organizations like Human Rights Watch, they firmly state, “Equitable access to safe abortion services is first and foremost a human right.”

If taking the international context, and if taking Canada with the unsettled nature of abortion in the culture, what steps should younger generations take when they apply the international human rights perspective within the Canadian legal tradition?

Campbell: Now, given the decision by the Supreme Court of Canada made in the R v Morgentaler decision, any interference with a woman’s right to abortion is seen to interfere with the life, health, and the rights to life and health of the woman.

There is a strong Charter foundation for the legislation. The debate takes place when people want to elevate the right to life of the foetus over the right of the woman to decide on carrying the foetus or not.

Thus, you or I might make the comment about the right to abortion and reproductive rights; the right to reproductive control as a human right. Others use the same terminology against us.

They say, “What about the right to life of the foetus?” For modern law, it has been the right of the women – of the living person – to decide on carrying the foetus or not. The Supreme Court of Canada recognized the possibility of some rights, which depends on the time of gestation.

In other words, whether the foetus can survive outside of the womb, these are issues to be considered rather than dismissed. You cannot simply say, “It is a human right.” Indeed, it is a human rights issue.

Many important research organizations analyzing social, political, and economic development of countries, including Pew Research, state one of the most important indicators of the social, political, and economic status of the country is the status of its women.

A key part is access to contraception, and safe and accessible abortions. The interesting thing is the rate of abortion declined dramatically over the last couple years.

If people have the right to abortion, it does not necessarily mean more abortions. Often, it will be accompanied by better contraceptive services. So, women will not want to run around terminating pregnancies.

It is a difficult decision for any woman. It depends on the circumstance of the conception. There is a bigger picture. There are ways in which people can control their fertility.

When they have access to those reliable mechanisms, then abortion becomes less necessary, it becomes a last resort in terms of conception and birth.

Jacobsen: Also, I noted this in conversation with major representatives of bigger abortion organizations, e.g. the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada. I wrote on this as well.

You mentioned religion. Also, you mentioned a human rights perspective, which we both take on board. I do note the big split. One is the international secular human rights perspective.

Another is the traditional religious transcendental moral law perspective. It seems like the major divide. So, with respect to the latter position, the transcendental moral law perspective. Those would be “pro-life.”  The former would be “pro-choice.”

How much does religion, within Canada, play into the political and social perspective against the rights of a woman & for the “rights of the foetus”?

Campbell: Canada, in terms of our politics, is a less religious country. Canadians practice religion but are less religious than Americans. Religion is a much less salient factor in Canadian politics and public policymaking.

Different religions have different views. Some religions accept the primacy of the mother – of the woman – to decide whether she continues with the pregnancy. It’s her wishes and needs as always the most important.

Because in some religions, for instance, the Catholic Church takes that view, even in the case of preserving the life of the woman, abortion is unjustified. For many people, it is a repellant view.

Even among religions, there are different views on the lines, which means the rights of the pregnant woman versus the rights of the foetus. Those who follow religious views have a more non-existent or more restricted view of pregnancy termination.

They tend to be the most politically active because they fight against the status quo. There are those who have a religious faith, where the status quo in terms of abortion laws are consistent with their religious beliefs.

Jacobsen: Also, aside from women’s reproductive health rights, you are the only woman prime minister of Canada – the first and only.  You stand out. Also, you are the first woman president in high school of the student body.

You have notable areas, relative to life stage, of standing out as a woman leader. It continued into the present in various domains. One, how does being recognized, nationally and internationally, feel to you? Two, what additional social responsibilities come along with those recognitions?

Campbell: It is a positive thing if people take it as an inspiration to want to replicate the experience, or if people see it as something that inspires them to seek their goals and ambitions. I had an interesting experience in the 2017 International Women’s Day with the Daughters of the Vote.

The program brought young women to Ottawa from every constituency in Canada. They were excited to meet me. When they sat in their seats in Parliament, which belonged to members of Parliament, they see the excitement and the commitment of them.

They would return in their own right. It is important to acknowledge. I am happy to be a vehicle for it. It says, “This is doable.” It is not easy. Because I am the only one. However, it is not unthinkable now.

In the Summer of 1993, according to Gallup, I had the highest approval rating in their polling of any prime minister in 30 years. So, while I was governing, I was popular. However, there is a lesson too.

I have been interested over the past couple of decades in exploring the growing body of research in social and cognitive psychology helping understand why these barriers are difficult to overcome.

Why living in a society where leadership is gendered masculine creates a sense among men and women of an implicit attitude, visceral sense, leadership is male. That is, when a woman comes along in a leadership position, she creates a sense of discomfort, where something is not right.

There is only one way to change it. It is for women in larger numbers to occupy positions of power, influence, and prominence and reprogram people’s expectations. This can create new implicit attitudes, where people feel comfortable with women leaders.

It is a significant challenge. In my own speaking, and work at the leadership college, I acquaint people with the understandings of the difficulties there. Even women are inhospitable, they may exempt themselves from the stereotypes.

However, their visceral response will be negative to somebody who does not sound or look like somebody who has done that job before, even if that somebody looks like them. it is an ongoing challenge.

If my experience can help people understand the reality, and if I can be somebody who shows that first of all there is survival even if you do not succeed in the long run. It inspiring young people, young women, to go for leadership positions, or for young men to support them.

That pleases me. It is the role. I have chosen to play it.

Jacobsen: In a recent conversation with the Rt. Hon. Paul Martin, he took on a different angle. One for post-prime minister duties, which was a focus on Indigenous youth: wellbeing, health, and education outcomes.

The Martin family Initiative examines the entire spectrum of the young person’s life in order to improve outcomes. This may help close the educational and health gap. Indigenous Canadians live 10-15 years shorter. They are a larger portion of the dropouts of the country too.

I noticed something about professional life for you. It is a focus on women. I want to mix those conversations today with a focus on Indigenous women leaders.

What organizations, women, or movements work to advance the Indigenous sub-demographic of women in terms of leadership?

Campbell: I have been in Edmonton. I met with groups of Indigenous women. The program at the college has strong Indigenous content. I have two main themes in professional work. These have been crucial to post-political life for me.

One is the advancement of women. The other is promotion of democracy and democratic values. In my youth, I was a Soviet specialist. I viewed with great alarm the resurgent authoritarianism, supported by Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

I see this gaining influence in countries, where we thought there were successful democratic transitions. I am worried about the state of democracy south of the border. I am passionate about it. Because it is one a precondition to support the advancement of previously non-included people.

When it comes to Indigenous people and Indigenous women, there are different subsets of women who are more disadvantaged than others; for example, more disadvantaged than I might be as a white woman in Canadian society.

Being female was a problem, however, I had other ways. I am in the accepted majority, which is an established group in society. I was out of Canada for about 18 years. I did not address those issues as much with regards to Canada’s Indigenous women.

Certainly, with women around the world in the Horn of Africa and Africa generally, women in many other parts of the world are significantly excluded and disempowered in their own countries.

In Canada, since I have been back, this is part of my broader concern about the empowerment of women. The Daughters of the Vote program took 338 young women to Parliament, which had 70 Indigenous young women as part of the group.

It was a powerful part of the experience. Both for the Indigenous and non-Indigenous women. It was coming to understand the reality of our experiences. Our different experiences of Canadian life and citizenship. It is important.

Of course, the recommendations through the Truth and Reconciliation Commission are something to provide a new agenda for Canadian governments and institutions at all levels. Am I specifically engaged in work to do with Indigenous women?

Not particularly, I include this in the general work for women. Interestingly enough, I was the first woman to be Minister of Justice. Anne McLellan was the second woman.

The current Minister of Justice, Jody Wilson-Raybould, is the third woman and the first First Nations person to be Minister of Justice. I know her. I have strongly encouraged her, to use her perspective to ask new and different questions as the justice minister.

It is an important part of expanding our ability to respond to people with realities, which are not on the agenda when making changes to law and policy.

Jacobsen: In the earlier part of the interview, you noted the empowerment of women was a key indicator of the health of a nation. So, the development and wealth of a nation by implication.

In other words, it becomes not only a moral right thing to do but also an economically correct choice. Also, you mentioned the patriarchal structure of other countries, such as the United States of America, but less so than Canada by comparison.

However, if you look at countries where someone like Vladimir Putin was recently re-elected in a “landslide victory,” apparently [Laughing], you have a way in which the Russian Orthodox Church is being held at the service of the government.

Thus, religion in this case, too, having a macho culture, a patriarchal culture, at the top and, therefore, throughout much of the country.

If we take the research on the empowerment of women, and if we look at a country where there is a patriarchal religion plus patriarchal leadership, it will lead to a lower quality of life with the reduction in the empowerment of women.

I mention Russia because of your speciality in the Soviet Union. What does this spell for Russia and other countries not taking advantage of the other half of the population?

Campbell: For all its size, Russia has a GDP the size of Belgium. It is an underperforming country. There are extraordinary women in Russia. When I spent three months in the Soviet Union in 1972, I was struck by women who carried the burden of the society.

They were excluded from the power structures. Only one woman was ever in the Politburo. In the Soviet Union, it was Yekaterina Furtseva who served briefly during Khrushchev’s time. In terms capacities and intelligence, there are brilliant women there. However, it is not a happy place to be a woman.

Russia is a politically, socially, and economically undeveloped society, even with its natural riches. It is a serious underperformer in its ability to create wealth. Putin creates problems through hybrid warfare. Clever people who commit cyberwarfare.

The sad thing: Putin is seeking power and dominance through hybrid warfare because he doesn’t have the power and dominance as a leading economy, except Russia is a source of fossil fuels and natural gas to external markets.

It is a hugely underdeveloped economy. Even though, it has talented people. It proves the point. This country is underperforming. Women do not have the same equality and opportunities, power, and ability to have influence on the policy of the country.

Because it is not a democracy. It is another huge problem. It is another factor holding Russia back.

Jacobsen: What trends throughout the world give hope? That is, a general trend towards greater equality for women and the traditionally excluded from mainstream society. An increase in general wellbeing over decades and, arguably, centuries, i.e., a trend of positive progress.

Campbell: The level of poverty has dropped dramatically. The level of education around the world and literacy has grown. There are places in the world where those are challenges. Firstly, what concerns me, the resurgence of authoritarianism, which is worrisome.

Typically, it has a kleptocratic underpinning as with Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. Same with some of the other leaders. It worries me. Secondly, it is climate change. Our inability to tackle the challenge of global warming and climate change.

It is about ideas undermining people’s belief and faith in the capacity of democratic governments and institutions. If we do not meet that challenge, if we cannot respond to it and create global will and understanding, we will have a serious problem.

Thirdly, the ability of social media and the internet to become vehicles for massive campaigns of misinformation. It leads people to make judgments on erroneous understandings of the state of the world.

When Donald Trump tweets while campaigning about the terrible crime rate in the United States, crime was at a 40 year low. When you tell lies about when certain people behave in your country or certain movements/happenings, it is difficult.

It is hard for people to make considered decisions and choices in a democratic process, which will create governments able to move ahead with the capacity and stability necessary to protect human rights.

We created a monster. The response of the governments in the United States, Britain, and elsewhere to the role Facebook played in the American election in 2016 and the Brexit election in Great Britain.

The response of their parliaments. The concern they have for the ways in which Facebook and others collaborated with organizations of political campaigns. We may get some legislation and policy responses to this, which may remove those disruptive and negative influences.

However, it worries me. There are many ways in which we have created more effective ways of growing food. We have raised the level of overall wellbeing around the world. We have poverty, but the level of poverty is much lower before. Nonetheless, we have some major challenges.

At the end of the day, governance and the ability of governments to respond to these crises is absolutely fundamental. I see, certainly, south of the border a president trying to undermine people’s confidence in the democratic institutions. The same ones necessary to meet those challenges.

Am I happy about progress? Yes. Am I worried about the future? Yes. When we have those failures, they are accompanied by erosions in the rights of women. Therefore, women have nothing to gain by those failures.

We need to be very, committed to protecting our gains. Not only on our own behalf, but for the rest of the population.

Jacobsen: When it comes to the empowerment of women, it helps to have personal examples. Difficulties can arise, e.g., emotional difficulties, professional obstacles put in place deliberately or inadvertently such as through historical inertia.

When a young woman wants to achieve more in life, e.g., business, politics, trades, or theoretical physics, how can young women break barriers while also keeping in mind the likely difficulties?

Campbell: First, a young woman has more in support of these aspirations, which is good. Because, over the last few decades, we have the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Human Rights Act at the national and provincial level, and various legislation dealing with jobs and opportunities.

We have protections against being discriminated against based on one’s sex. Hence, it is hard for any organization to justify excluding women from having an opportunity to do things. In some cases, you mentioned the trades.

There are some places where trades organizations are seeking and encouraging women to training and join those fields. Because they provide good jobs and women are good at them. Socially, politically, and legally, the landscape is different than 30-40 years ago.

There is more institutional basic support for women’s aspirations. The bigger challenge is less the formal-institutional one and more the social one. It is less problematic compared to when I was a young woman because more women are doing non-prototypical things.

More women in public life, in medicine, in law, and in business. However, there are barriers. With more women, there is a greater sense of this as normal, which becomes part of the social values. The fact something changed over the last 20 years does not change the minds of people who are mature and have their values.

There may be an age difference in how people perceive whether women belong or do not belong in certain circumstances. We are beginning to understand the nature of cognitive bias, of implicit attitudes, of old social attitudes where women are seen as inferior or weaker.

It will vary in the field. Some places will be more difficult than others. The old attitudes die hard. There are generational reasons. Some areas have women better able to compete. However, this does not mean are no barriers.

Jacobsen: When I reflect on common examples, even a personal example, I worked in construction at 15/16. There were not many women there. If a woman wanted to start a construction company in concrete, they would probably have difficulty with the sub-cultural aspect of the particular industry.

The different values people bring forward. They should probably bear in mind the type of business. In medicine, women do not have as many difficulties there. Because there are more role models for the current generation too, as well as more institutional supports.

For those women less academically inclined but more business oriented, if they want to found or co-found a construction company, this can be a difficulty in terms of the interpersonal examples.

How can a woman not demand but command respect in how she conducts herself? While knowing, given the sub-culture based on personal experience, it may be more difficult.

Campbell: You might be surprised. There are a few women in construction. In fact, the Alberta Home Builders’ Association is a woman. She created a company wih her husband. However, he died. Then she became the sole owner.

It happens for women. In particular, when the husband dies, they take the company over. There are many companies started by women. People tend to find they like working with women: reliable and good to work with them.

It varies. There is variation. However, it is important to make visible the ones already doing it. It is not as rare as one might think. The more one can provide profile and visibility to women doing these things. Then the more one can bring down the sense that they do not belong.

I can think of two women in Vancouver. One woman who ran a major engineering company. Another had a major tugboat company. Both inherited the leadership of the companies from the husbands who died.

But they both became titans of business in British Columbia. Once they were doing it, they owned and operated the business, successfully. It is similar to the case with women in technology. You are, of course, aware of the man at Google who wrote women were not suited for technology sectors.

What was offensive about it, many of the modern pioneers in technology have been women. Yet, they have been dropped from the history. It is interesting now. Somebody will tweet a biography of a woman, who was one of the founders of these information technologies.

You ask, “How come I never heard of her?” Because nobody talks about her. Often, I have said, “If you want a more inclusive and diverse future, then you should have a more inclusive and diverse history. We should have a history containing people who we traditionally leave out.”

The representation is men or white men. Often, there is a misapprehension about women demonstrating their capacity, breaking terrible barriers. Sometimes, these outstanding women had allies. One woman’s neighbour encouraged her, even though the father did not want her.

These are the challenges, where the women are not there. First of all, we need to give profile to the women already there. Women have been doing these things for a long time.

Secondly, the interesting thing about business. At the end of the day, performance does count. One of the things that happens to women. Indeed, it happens to anybody seen as an outsider entering into a field.

If people are jealous and fear the newcomer will take their business, it will create sabotage. They will try to drive people out. Many people face this in society. It can be some people who feel entitled to run the shops and be in the fields.

It is having the ultimate protection against the social pushing back. One of the things women encounter. In many societies, in jobs primarily dominated by women, they are both low status and low pay.

Yes, there are more women doctors, but there is lots of sexism. Many male doctors feel that if women come to dominate the field then the field will be less prestigious. It has been traditionally, socially the case.

Many years ago, when I did a review of a book of the Eastern economies during the Soviet time, it was something interesting identified by them. In the Soviet Union, doctors had different ranks. The family doctor, the 5-year postsecondary training, were overwhelmingly women.

It was low pay and low status. People say, “Look at all the women doctors.” But all the specialists were men. There were more women. Often, when people do not let newcomers in, they are afraid the presence of them will lower the economic reward and status of the field.

Same with immigrants and people of color. However, women always faced this. The feminization of an activity will result in the diminution of pay and status.

Jacobsen: You mentioned a supportive husband for some women. Many young women and many young men want to become married and have kids. These are high level life goals for many people.

In terms of professional advancement of a woman through having emotional support with a supportive partner, husband, or civil partner, what qualities should a young woman, if heterosexual, bear in mind about the potential partner?

Campbell: If a partner is not able to rejoice in your success, and to appreciate and value your abilities, it is not a hopeful sign for a relationship. One allowing success for you. In many families, in some cases, some husbands put their own careers on hold.

Because they feel their wife is a superstar, Carly Fiorina. He was going to make this possible for her. There are many other examples of this. Of men willing to step back and looking after the kids, and other things, to permit the wife to succeed, not all men are super-driven for a career.

They want to do other things than play the dominant economic role in the family. It depends. In any relationship, in a sense, if a man feels diminished by the success and capacity of his wife or girlfriend, this becomes a danger sign.

As I say, I have been lucky. I have been comfortable and happy. I succeeded. My second husband was terrified of the implications of being prime minister. He did not want to be in the public eye. However, he did not think I should not do what I was doing.

He thought I was good at it; the right person to do it. The implication of public life concerned him. There are great men out there. If it is an issue, the notion of the issue going away is an illusion. Women should be cautious.

It is not a man being successful too. A woman may say, “You are successful. Why should you be jealous of me? You are leaping tall buildings in a single bound.” It may not have to do with the success of the man.

It may have to do with the rationale or the status of the man. It may have more to do with the sense of what a woman should be, in terms of validating them. The amount of air to breathe at high levels [Laughing].

Jacobsen: [Laughing].

Campbell: This is something women and men have to deal with in life. The female partners relish their success and do not feel threatened by it. It is not always easy either way. However, it seems more common for women to find men having mixed feelings about it.

Jacobsen: Do the sense of mixed feelings come from family and social pressure?

Campbell: I do not know the answer to this question. My husband came from a traditional background. His father doted on his mother. His mother died young. However, his mother was not traditional. Yet, my husband is supportive of everything I do, Scott.

There is no problem at all. It is hard to tell. At the end of the day, research suggests parents do not have as much influence on their children, as much as some parenting books tell us. No matter what parents do, children will become one way rather than another. Love and support help.

My family was not interested in me going into politics or having a public life. The ways in which people form their attitudes is complex. People have a sense of justice at a young age. You do not know the source of it. However, they can see things.

The idea is creating a society where the values are articulated. Our values of respecting the individuality of every person, the capacity of every person, the dignity of every person, and hope this is reflected in relations between the sexes and in the relationships created by them.

I do not know if there is a simple recipe. Sometimes, men who are supportive of women develop with strong female role models, who feel women can do things. It is a complex question. However, people who develop with domestic violence and the casual use of misogynistic language, where women are portrayed as inferior.

It takes strength of character to escape it, to not be affected by it.

Jacobsen: What seems like the greatest emotional struggle in professional life? What can a younger woman take from it?

Campbell: The greatest emotional struggle, I do not see life as a struggle for me as such. It is making judgments of when to dive into the fray and when not to. Sometimes, it can be difficult. My instinct was to dive into it.

Probably, it was not always a good idea to do it. I do not see emotional struggle as capturing things. One the biggest emotional challenges was the defeat of 1993. My deep disappoint; my need to try and find my feet after it.

I was a non-prototypical leader. People wanted to blame me. Men are more likely to be given a second chance. Knowing this meant the end of the political career, it was difficult. I did not have an emotional breakdown. However, I was sad.

I could not do something, which I wanted to do meaningful things. I had to figure out how to do something in life; things valuable and meaningful to me. My sister’s view is the greatest legacy, for me, is the survival.

People say, “You have had the most consequential post-political life of any prime minister.” I am not sure if this is true. People say this to me. It is interesting to me. The way in which they express it.

When I was younger, I did not know how much of a post-prime minister life I had to fill up [Laughing]. It pleases me. I succeeded in overcoming the disappointed and finding ways to live. The bottom line: it is to go back and ask, “What matters to me? What is meaningful work for me?”

When I wrote my memoir, it was interesting how consistent I was in my life. Two things compelled me. One was the state of the world, e.g., politics, democracy, justice, and so on. Although, when I was young, I was not sure how I would integrate this in my life.

I wanted to be the first woman Secretary-General of the UN. It was the experience of seeing the destruction of the Second World War. Because it was recent in my youth. Both of my parents were in uniforms. It was a value. I kept this value.

It continues to be important to me. Another is the advancement of women. I got this value from my mother. The notion women could do anything but this was not a universally accepted proposition. There were barriers. They needed to be broken down.

I found ways of asserting those values. There is always a challenge in dealing with the sense of disappointment and sadness, when one door closes. It was, perhaps, the greatest emotional challenge of life for me.

It was find the equanimity in it. I did not expect to experience a nervous breakdown. However, the idea of feeling bad about something. You grieve a lot. It is not a sign of weakness. It is permission to recognize the loss. Then you can figure out the lessons of it.

One of the things in public life. You see it. [Laughing] Other people see it. They take school tragedies and others. Then they draw value from it. A sibling dies from a disease. Then they become committed to fundraising for a cure.

Our human tendency to build something positive on the foundations of tragedy and loss. It is a positive thing. Many people have to face it. I have to face it. It was an emotional struggle. The need to understand the experience and deal with the sadness.

At the same time, I had to earn a living [Laughing].

Jacobsen: [Laughing].

Campbell: You have to continue. Certainly, you can see people who were hoping for failure. If you thought I did not belong there, then it will be discouraging to you, when I become strong in the case of loss.

This will dispel the view of me, as someone weak. [Laughing]. To the extent of not giving those people the satisfaction, it is a good incentive. If I was not strong, I would not deal with setbacks and disappointments.

However, I am resilient. I am going to lick my wounds. I am going to acknowledge the disappointment and ask the question, “What matters to me?” I can work to pursue those goals. A life without being in elected politics.

Jacobsen: Thank you for the opportunity and your time, Mrs. Campbell.


In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Based on work at


© Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen, or the author(s), and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content. All interviewees and authors copyright their material, as well, and may disseminate for their independent purposes.

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: