I hope Walter’s insights and personal experiences allowed you to further appreciate the issue of reentry within the broader framework of moral exclusion and scope of justice. I’d like for us to talk a little more about Opotow’s framework* as it's broadly applicable to many of the social justice issues we care about and grapple with. For this week’s blog I’d like for you to share how Opotow's framework applies to the population your agency serves. How are these individuals morally excluded, and what are some of the processes of exclusion? A few examples in the reading are: biased evaluation of groups, double standards and blaming the victim. Also, what are some strategies or solutions to counteract this exclusion?
For instance, at my agency, the individuals served by the Pathways Project are deemed unworthy of public funding for their higher education needs because of their “criminal” status that further dehumanizes them. Many college-in-prison programs, like the one run by Walter, recruit volunteers for learning exchanges in prison, which has the effect of humanizing incarcerated individuals in the eyes of the public.
Looking forward to reading your comments!
*Click here for the link to the reading.
10 comments:
Thanks Gina for wonderful class and for introducing us to your very intelligent guest.
In the beginning, I would like to remind you (and you know that:)) that I am not working with any population at my internship. However, my research introduced me to many ways in which people with mental health needs are excluded from society. It is extremely hard to address the needs of somebody when these needs are not recognized.
First of all, people with mental health needs want to hide their issues due to the stigma attached to mental health illness. Accordingly, that is the lack of proper support and the lack of mechanisms that let us to identify mental illness.
Another way to exclude people with mental illness at re-entry period is the lack of supporting programs. The majority of people in prisons do have mental needs. It is much harder to support people with mental health needs at re-entry because their support is not limited to providing housing and job.
As my research demonstrates, many of them commit non-violent crimes. The reasons for that crime is psychological and connected with stigma.
Again, stigma, in general, is the reason why re-entry is co complicated process.
SUMH identifies the needs of people with mental health illness and provides assessment of existing services in order to identify better ways to address the problem.
The best solution that I have noticed so far is the holistic approach to advocacy. This approach includes the presumption that defender has to follow up with the person after he/she is released from prison in order to make sure that the problem that brought him to prison will not come back to the life of that person.
Can not wait to hear about other experiences.
Have the best weekend.
First, I would love to thank Walter for his insights into the mechanics of reentry. It was very enlightening and defintely reinforced my beliefs in the need for reform in this area.
As for my agency, I believe CJA has positives and negatives in relation to Opotow's framework. For example, the interview we conduct is establishing the individual is a functioning member of the community and is giving back, which relates greatly to Opotow's discussion of individuals who are morally included.
However, the interview could also be detrimental. For example, if an individual was unable to make it to their last court appearance for a previous case (many times the individuals are working and cannot afford to miss a day), they are automatically labeled as "flight risks." I believe instead of automatically labeling someone as a flight risk and morally excluding them because of a missed appearance, I think we should inquire further as to why the individual missed this appearance and verify this as well. This would allow CJA to consider the individual's situational factors for their missed appearance and not designate all of the blame on the individual's disposition.
I loved Walter ! He provided so much insight. He really blew my mind and changed my perspective about so many things !
At Safe Horizon, the clients we serve are definitely morally excluded. They are part of the immigrant population who are often undocumented and receive no recognition under the law. They are labeled as illegal aliens and consequently deprived of their humanity. They are not eligible for social programs, financial aid for tuition regardless of income, and are often fearful of the law and therefore fail to report crimes committed against them. Even when trafficked, abused, neglected, and abandoned, undocumented immigrants refuse to seek help because living under poor conditions out-weights the risk of being deported. Some of the solutions will definitely be a comprehensive immigration reform that does not exclude immigrants who are already here and have no path to legalization. Also, clear explanations in the media that reporting crimes will not affect the victim is crucial. Immigrants depend a lot on Spanish speaking channels, if they were to have reliable information about actions to take if they suffer abuse, they would be more prone to reporting violence.
Walter was AWESOME! Super insightful and totally enlightening. I'm really grateful we got to hear him!
In regards to my agency the participants are all juveniles that have been system involved. They're labeled "delinquents', 'criminals', 'at risk youth' and all these rally negative labels that they have to fight to escape. They are excluded from so many things and opportunities based on their records and it takes support and encourage these young kid who have entire lives in front of them.
As Walter said a support network that includes both academic and personal connections is needed in order for these kids to succeed and make as much progress and reach their potential
It's a matter of having the resources that these young people could benefit from. Organizations such as CASES focus on getting these resources and pushing these kids and being an active agent in the process of their success.
Walter was AWESOME! Super insightful and totally enlightening. I'm really grateful we got to hear him!
In regards to my agency the participants are all juveniles that have been system involved. They're labeled "delinquents', 'criminals', 'at risk youth' and all these rally negative labels that they have to fight to escape. They are excluded from so many things and opportunities based on their records and it takes support and encourage these young kid who have entire lives in front of them.
As Walter said a support network that includes both academic and personal connections is needed in order for these kids to succeed and make as much progress and reach their potential
It's a matter of having the resources that these young people could benefit from. Organizations such as CASES focus on getting these resources and pushing these kids and being an active agent in the process of their success.
Thank You Walter! Also I loved that shirt he had on!
Exclusion is a huge problem in the lives of people with DD. People is this population are often excluded from even the most basic civil rights. Many are deemed incapable of making decisions in their own lives. They are seen as uneducated and unable to learn. They are constantly excluded from activities, jobs, conversations, and movements. I will admit though in general the exclusion is not a moral exclusion, and there is very little victim blaming involved in the exclusion of people with DD. The stigma surrounding DD has more to do with dehumanizing with out the demonetization of individuals. Though as pointed out in class by Walter, there is a large overlap of the DD population and formerly incarcerated individuals.
Thank you Gina for bringing up this topic. This was a great class.
Participants at my placement are usually seemed, by outsiders, as incompetent and not worth a second change. Staff members at CEO do their best to prepare participants to secure a job. However, some employers would prefer to hire an inexperienced person without a conviction than a formerly incarcerated person with experience.
To counteract this exclusion, organization that work with formerly incarcerated participants have to gather the data that shows who participants who get the opportunity to work perform as well ( and better) than any other person who did not go through the program. A good way to change employers’ minds is to show them what they are missing by not hiring the participants who go through the post-incarceration program.
Another strategy would be to advocate for a change in the law, banning the box that asks for criminal convictions.
Good Job Gina! Your class was very interesting.
Based on Opotow’s theory, participant at Common Justice are not morally excluded. Instead, they are morally included. Meaning, that they are seen as valuable members of the community. The mission statement is designed around serving this population by making sure that they are in the right position to easily integrate society. Using Walter’s language, Common Justice serves as the support to most young men to meet the some of the needs that they would’ve probably not been able to acquire in their own family or neighborhood. For example, each client is assigned a caseworker with whom they work very close with in ensuring that the client is being provided with the necessary services.
Great class Gina! I truly enjoyed the readings and Walter as the special guest. He has influenced my way of thinking regarding social issues.
Referring to the questions, at Fedcap I work with various populations who experience various social barriers. Most of them live in shelters, possess a criminal background and if referred from Wildcat then they have been diagnosed with a mental disability. Therefore, many of these individuals experience a lot of stigma. The account managers at my placement have been great resources regarding job searches that do not rely so much on background checks. The negative thing I would mention regarding my placement is the segregation between the individuals. There are seperate classrooms that never completed GED or equivalency, and those with criminal backgroounds. I feel these subtle things constantly remind the individuals of their background or history which may be bad. I do feel that FedCap has done a wonderful job in acknowledging the social barriers these individuals face.
Great comments everyone! I really enjoyed reading them. Also glad you all liked hearing from Walter. I appreciated how each of you identified stigma, labelling and dehumanization as processes of moral exclusion with regards to the population your agencies serve. With this framework it becomes easier to understand why certain social groups are deprived of the rights and resources that others are granted. I also like that you described how the mission and work of your agencies are examples of moral inclusion.
Post a Comment