Having problems with message search?
----- Original Message -----
From: L. D. Misek-Falkoff
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 10:04 AM
Subject: Re: [DisabilityConvention] article on jail
Dear Tina and All:
This timely post & commentary on jail seems to map well onto discussion of certain aspects of the Article on Liberty for the International "Treaty" respective to Persons with Disabilities we are concerned with here, discussion of which you are facilitating with expertise for AdHoc 4 NGO participation upcoming.
Elsewhere, we have discussed how distinctions can per se either accommodate or disaccommdate. Can support or segregate. A flavor perhaps of "hard to live with em and hard to live without em" which seems to come with definging, identifying, classifying - in the end putting labels on things (ncluding events as things) in the world in order to coexist with it productively.
Thanks much for this particular *heads up*
When and if you have time, your good thoughts on the separation of persons having or perceived as having disabilities - in the courts even before consideration of confinement - and possibly itself a confinement or segregation needing examination as to human rights - would be much appreciated. Realizing this is off topic, still the general principles might be set forth here as you have elsewhere regarding all types of open or covert force.
Best wishes, LindaMF.
----- Original Message -----
From: "tina minkowitz" <tminkowitz@...>
Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 7:27 AM
Subject: Re: [DisabilityConvention] article on jail
>
> the article is really about separating groups of people but keeping both
> groups in jail - the only difference is what kind of jail.
>
> what kind of "mental health treatment" will they get in the psychiatric
> jail? drugs, electroshock, whether they want it or not, seclusion,
> restraint, etc.
>
> the article reflects reactionary policy advocacy that is going on in the
> u.s. and elsewhere to re-define people labeled with a mental illness as "in
> need" of institutionalization - segregation from society and control by
> others.
>
> a person labeled with mental illness who is in jail has committed a crime -
> if jails have a hard time with their behavior, the issue is one of
> accessibility and accommodation, looking at what are the real needs of these
> people, should they be in jail at all (*any* locked place, including a psych
> facility) or what can be done so that the jail can accommodate them?
>
> as the U.S. ADA and court decisions interpreting it have said, the answer to
> disability and disabled people's needs is not segregation, it's
> accommodation.
>
> the article wants to separate "mentally ill" people from "criminals" as if
> these are two mutually exclusive groups who both deserve to be locked away
> from society for different reasons. it's saying that all "mentally ill"
> people belong in the place that is assigned to them (apartheid and
> eugenics). the mis-labeling of the psychiatric jail as "treatment" makes
> society feel good about this apartheid, but doesn't change what it is.
>
> tina minkowitz
>
>
Offline 
Send Email