SDOH Archives

Social Determinants of Health

SDOH@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Social Determinants of Health <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 30 Oct 2005 12:57:28 -0500
Reply-To:
Social Determinants of Health <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
From:
Graeme Bacque <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (58 lines)
Linda Green wrote:
> A chapter that will likely hold interest for some online - 
>
> Surviving Social Inclusion, by Peter Campbell, in which Peter Campbell
> explains the price of social inclusion for some people. Although many of
> us appreciate the general problem of social exclusion and its challenge by
> the social determinants of health approach, I wonder how often we have the
> opportunity to reflect on the fact that social inclusion may not be an
> unproblematic good, or one that works for everyone  equally.
>   

I guess that would depend on the actual social dynamic involved. 
Bringing people together is one thing, but it is impossible to force 
people to like each other and a situation can result that still  
involves exclusion of some individuals (despite the physical proximity 
of others) or even outright abuse.

Introduce someone with a particularly  aggressive ego into the mix, and 
they will often end up engaging in emotionally  parasitic interactions 
at the expense of those around them, in which everyone else involved 
ends up becoming depleted in one way or another. For someone who feels 
awkward in social situations to begin with, this can be very damaging.

The bottom line here is that respect for individual choices about 
association with others needs to be fostered.  I believe there is even a 
clause in Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms dealing with  this.

The problem being, too many people fail to realize that 'freedom of 
association' is actually a two-way street, also meaning that unwanted 
interaction or even physical proximity with specific others (or even 
humanity in general) ought never be forced upon anyone. There are many 
valid reasons why someone may freely choose temporary or even long-term 
solitude. This should never be interfered with.

Graeme

-------------------
Problems/Questions? Send it to Listserv owner: [log in to unmask]


To unsubscribe, send the following message in the text section -- NOT the subject header --  to [log in to unmask]
SIGNOFF SDOH

DO NOT SEND IT BY HITTING THE REPLY BUTTON. THIS SENDS THE MESSAGE TO THE ENTIRE LISTSERV AND STILL DOES NOT REMOVE YOU.

To subscribe to the SDOH list, send the following message to [log in to unmask] in the text section, NOT in the subject header.
SUBSCRIBE SDOH yourfirstname yourlastname

To post a message to all 1000+ subscribers, send it to [log in to unmask]
Include in the Subject, its content, and location and date, if relevant.

For a list of SDOH members, send a request to [log in to unmask]

To receive messages only once a day, send the following message to [log in to unmask]
SET SDOH DIGEST

To view the SDOH archives, go to: https://listserv.yorku.ca/archives/sdoh.html

ATOM RSS1 RSS2