社会分类和社区服务中对罪犯的排斥

IF 3 2区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY Social Problems Pub Date : 2023-07-15 DOI:10.1093/socpro/spad035
Marianne Quirouette
{"title":"社会分类和社区服务中对罪犯的排斥","authors":"Marianne Quirouette","doi":"10.1093/socpro/spad035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article examines perspectives and practices related to social triage and the exclusion of criminalized and marginalized individuals in community services such as shelters, mental health, substance use, and court supports. Based on two years of fieldwork and interviews with 105 practitioners, I analyze narratives and practices related to working with people described as having (or being) complex, high-needs, or high-risk. I show that individual factors, such as risk, need, or responsivity, are but one type of factor considered when practitioners make decisions about triage or service eligibility. Building from theory about the governance of “risk” and “risky people,” I examine how organizational and systemic factors shape individualized understandings of and responses to risk. I argue that given current practices in under-resourced community supports, triage and resulting exclusions exacerbate social problems and contribute to punitive exclusions, especially for those who seek services, supports, or housing but have records of sexual offense, fire setting, drug use, violence, self-harm or so-called non-compliance. Examining these dynamics bolsters claims that we should shift the responsibilizing gaze upwards to pressure institutional and state bodies who could transform the landscape for practitioners and their clients.","PeriodicalId":48307,"journal":{"name":"Social Problems","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Social Triage and Exclusions in Community Services for the Criminalized\",\"authors\":\"Marianne Quirouette\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/socpro/spad035\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This article examines perspectives and practices related to social triage and the exclusion of criminalized and marginalized individuals in community services such as shelters, mental health, substance use, and court supports. Based on two years of fieldwork and interviews with 105 practitioners, I analyze narratives and practices related to working with people described as having (or being) complex, high-needs, or high-risk. I show that individual factors, such as risk, need, or responsivity, are but one type of factor considered when practitioners make decisions about triage or service eligibility. Building from theory about the governance of “risk” and “risky people,” I examine how organizational and systemic factors shape individualized understandings of and responses to risk. I argue that given current practices in under-resourced community supports, triage and resulting exclusions exacerbate social problems and contribute to punitive exclusions, especially for those who seek services, supports, or housing but have records of sexual offense, fire setting, drug use, violence, self-harm or so-called non-compliance. Examining these dynamics bolsters claims that we should shift the responsibilizing gaze upwards to pressure institutional and state bodies who could transform the landscape for practitioners and their clients.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48307,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Problems\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Problems\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spad035\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Problems","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spad035","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了与社会分类以及在社区服务(如庇护所、精神健康、物质使用和法院支持)中排斥犯罪和边缘化个人相关的观点和实践。基于两年的实地考察和对105名从业人员的采访,我分析了与被描述为具有(或正在)复杂、高需求或高风险的人一起工作的叙述和实践。我表明,个体因素,如风险,需求,或响应,只是一种类型的因素考虑当从业者作出决定时,分流或服务资格。从“风险”和“有风险的人”的治理理论出发,我研究了组织和系统因素如何塑造个人对风险的理解和反应。我认为,鉴于目前资源不足的社区支持的做法,分诊和由此产生的排斥加剧了社会问题,并导致了惩罚性的排斥,特别是对那些寻求服务、支持或住房但有性侵犯、纵火、吸毒、暴力、自残或所谓不遵守规定记录的人。对这些动态的研究支持了这样一种说法,即我们应该将负责任的目光向上转移,向能够为从业者及其客户改变环境的机构和国家机构施加压力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Social Triage and Exclusions in Community Services for the Criminalized
This article examines perspectives and practices related to social triage and the exclusion of criminalized and marginalized individuals in community services such as shelters, mental health, substance use, and court supports. Based on two years of fieldwork and interviews with 105 practitioners, I analyze narratives and practices related to working with people described as having (or being) complex, high-needs, or high-risk. I show that individual factors, such as risk, need, or responsivity, are but one type of factor considered when practitioners make decisions about triage or service eligibility. Building from theory about the governance of “risk” and “risky people,” I examine how organizational and systemic factors shape individualized understandings of and responses to risk. I argue that given current practices in under-resourced community supports, triage and resulting exclusions exacerbate social problems and contribute to punitive exclusions, especially for those who seek services, supports, or housing but have records of sexual offense, fire setting, drug use, violence, self-harm or so-called non-compliance. Examining these dynamics bolsters claims that we should shift the responsibilizing gaze upwards to pressure institutional and state bodies who could transform the landscape for practitioners and their clients.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Social Problems
Social Problems SOCIOLOGY-
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
6.20%
发文量
56
期刊介绍: Social Problems brings to the fore influential sociological findings and theories that have the ability to help us both better understand--and better deal with--our complex social environment. Some of the areas covered by the journal include: •Conflict, Social Action, and Change •Crime and Juvenile Delinquency •Drinking and Drugs •Health, Health Policy, and Health Services •Mental Health •Poverty, Class, and Inequality •Racial and Ethnic Minorities •Sexual Behavior, Politics, and Communities •Youth, Aging, and the Life Course
期刊最新文献
Why LGBTQ Adults Keep Ambivalent Ties with Parents: Theorizing "Solidarity Rationales". Asian Americans’ Racialized Incorporation into the Political Field Does Workplace Discrimination Contribute to Sex Work for Trans and Nonbinary Workers? Digital Platforms and the Maintenance of the Urban Order Genetic Racialization: Ancestry Tests and the Reification of Race
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1