Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin
It's a pretty intimate level of exposure. Culture is often a big tool for me in choosing the most compatible services for my clients. For example, if my clients are Latino, I have a number of Latino-focused resources. If they're black, I tend to send them to service providers who are also black. The tribes kind of have their own thing going and YMMV from tribe to tribe, so woriking with NA folks is always interesting. When providers are culturally competent though, the outcomes tend to be better. Not to mention the fact that our service providers can often recognize cultural incompetence with regard to our child welfare workers, which in turn makes life easier for me.
heh.. NONE of my parents have terminal degrees. Some barely speak English. Others are addicts or criminals. They can get IDs. So yes, if they can do it, so can anyone. I work with the real down and out folks. Especially when I'm doing my pro bono work.
|
The fact that you missed my point regarding exposure outside of the legal profession is troublesome. Even still, the people who you say have IDs still do not represent the majority of their socioeconomic, racial, ethnic, and language group. Is everyone else just inept?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin
That seems to be what you're saying...
|
Only you have made this topic about ineptitude. This is not about whether people "suck" versus "don't suck." Social change never happens if groups of people (we aren't just talking about individuals or a couple of people) are led to believe all of their social outcomes are a result of sucking. This topic is about why certain groups have greater access to resources than other groups of people and what can be done so that a larger number of people can gain access. How can you (Kevin) help people in your professional career if you believe everything boils down to ineptitude versus aptitude? Individual consciousness and agency are not the only criteria for desired outcomes.
Hybrid Mode
