The New York Times reported Saturday that there are roughly 50-65 people on a list maintained by the Department of Homeless Services that have acted aggressively in the past. There are separate lists for transit and above ground. Jordan Neely was on the subway list. When outreach workers encounter a homeless person on the list, the DHS is supposed to expedite their access to services.
I think it would be very helpful when writing about the homeless, mentally ill, or otherwise marginal and ill-represented group, to avoid using the third person.
"The state should coerce the mentally ill into taking psychiatric meds."
"The state should coerce us those of us who are mentally ill into taking psychiatric meds."
This has the added strength of recognizing the marginalized people in your audience. We are NOT talking about some third party. We are talking about US.
Sounds great, but that would make too much sense, of course. Nope, gotta be as utterly patronizing and paternalistic as possible to "those people", because reasons, and that's only when we are not being totally sadistic towards them.
So if a person decides they want to go off their meds (which because we now all understand the importance of body autonomy we recognize they non-negotiably have a constitutional and fundamental human right to do) it's back to homelessness for them?
I worked in a behavioral health unit. Simple acts of kindness work like magic way more often than not.
Indeed. Just like positive reinforcement works better than negative reinforcement.
I think it would be very helpful when writing about the homeless, mentally ill, or otherwise marginal and ill-represented group, to avoid using the third person.
"The state should coerce the mentally ill into taking psychiatric meds."
"The state should coerce us those of us who are mentally ill into taking psychiatric meds."
This has the added strength of recognizing the marginalized people in your audience. We are NOT talking about some third party. We are talking about US.
A better writer would replace "those of us" with "you" or "I" and make it work.
Sounds great, but that would make too much sense, of course. Nope, gotta be as utterly patronizing and paternalistic as possible to "those people", because reasons, and that's only when we are not being totally sadistic towards them.
So if a person decides they want to go off their meds (which because we now all understand the importance of body autonomy we recognize they non-negotiably have a constitutional and fundamental human right to do) it's back to homelessness for them?
Or perhaps just a downgrade to a SRO, or failing that, a shelter until an SRO vacancy opens up.