erfahren.info | Home


## excerpt from 'A Sociology of Mental Health and Illness' (3rd edition) page 14

    by Anne Rogers (Author), David Pilgrim (Contributor)                                          

Those emphasizing labelling do not concur as to who are the significant labellers. For Scheff (1966) it is psychiatrists; for Goffman (1961) it is the family plus professionals plus the total institution. However, there is an agreement that, once labelled, this significantly alters the person‘s social status. Once a person is seen to have lost their reason, then they will never be quite the same again in the eyes of others (Garfinkel 1956). They are stripped of their old identity and a new one takes its place in what Goffman calls a ‘status degradation ceremony‘. Part of such a process then leads to the labelled person internalizing the new identity ascribed to them.
Thus, according to the societal reaction position, the psychiatric patient's role is then maintained by a new set of role expectations. The person in the patient role plays at being a patient and those looking on construe all of the person‘s conduct in terms of the patient role. The pseudo-patients in Rosenhan‘s study logged their ward experiences, and the clinical notes on them recorded that they indulged in ‘excessive writing behaviour': a mutually reinforcing process then keeps the person locked into their deviant role. However, this can be disrupted by new contingencies emerging - hence the findings alluded to in Chapter 2 when discussing social causation about the improvements of patients who can gain employment.

Copyright (C) Anne Rogers and David Pilgrim
'A Sociology of Mental Health and Illness' (2rd edition)
(Excerpt reprinted for human rights advocacy.)

[Professor Anne E Rogers SRN, BSc (Hons)](https://www.southampton.ac.uk/healthsciences/about/staff/aer1f11.page "Professor Anne E Rogers SRN, BSc (Hons) | southampton.ac.uk"), 
MSc (Econ) Sociology Applied to Medicine, 
PHD (Sociology & Social Policy); 
Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences, 
Emeritus NIHR Senior Investigator 

[A Sociology of Mental Health and Illness 6th revised edition](https://www.amazon.com/Sociology-Mental-Health-Illness-dp-0335248489/dp/0335248489/ "A Sociology of Mental Health and Illness 6th edition")

![excerpt on labeling](/images/labeling-pg14-2nd-edition.jpg)

excerpt from 'A Sociology of Mental Health and Illness' — Labeling


## excerpt from 'A Sociology of Mental Health and Illness' (3rd edition) page 153

    by Anne Rogers (Author), David Pilgrim (Contributor) 
  
> Who is psychiatry's client?                                             

One of the ambiguities surrounding psychiatric work is whether or not the identified patient is the actual client of the service. Clearly, some party other than the patient is being served under those sections of the Mental Health Act which empower professionals to remove a person's liberty and/or impose treatment interventions against the patient's will. Coulter's work (described in Chapter 6) on decision making about madness in the lay area traces such a process. Professionals are summoned in order to resolve a distressing drama to those around the patient. Similarly, when members of the public contact the police about a person acting bizarrely in the street it is clear that the client of the police-psychiatrist 'disposal' is not the patient, although quite who psychiatry is serving in this instance is ambiguous. Is it the distressed and perplexed member of public making the first police contact, is it the police themselves, or is it both?

Clearly, if a person is detained without trial, and they are interfered with without consent, then it is difficult to conceptualize them as 'customers' or 'clients' of psychiatry. Instead, the terminology favoured by the psychiatric service users' movement would seem to be more appropriate, of 'recipients' or 'survivors' (see Chapter 11). On the other hand, if a person chooses freely to make contact with a mental health worker, to seek help with a personal difficulty, in this instance they would seem to have a genuine 'client' status.
However, even with this voluntary contact there is still a sense in which the  client does not enjoy the same rights and privileges as other types of customers accessing a service industry.

Copyright (C) Anne Rogers and David Pilgrim 2005
'A Sociology of Mental Health and Illness' (3rd edition)
ISBN 10: 0335215831 / ISBN 13: 9780335215836
(Excerpt reprinted for human rights advocacy.)

[Professor Anne E Rogers SRN, BSc (Hons)](https://www.southampton.ac.uk/healthsciences/about/staff/aer1f11.page "Professor Anne E Rogers SRN, BSc (Hons) | southampton.ac.uk"), 
MSc (Econ) Sociology Applied to Medicine, 
PHD (Sociology & Social Policy); 
Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences, 
Emeritus NIHR Senior Investigator 

[A Sociology of Mental Health and Illness 6th revised edition](https://www.amazon.com/Sociology-Mental-Health-Illness-dp-0335248489/dp/0335248489/ "A Sociology of Mental Health and Illness 6th edition")

![excerpt of 'real clients'](/images/ASociologyofMentalHealthandIllness-real-clients-153-3rd-edition.jpg)


excerpt from 'A Sociology of Mental Health and Illness'

About


## Barack on non-binary...

![Barack on podcast show](/images/07-17-2025-full-panel-imo-thumb.png)

> The video clip at bottom of page is of a podcast type show of Michelle Obama's where controversial topic was _skirted_ by (in)conveniently editing it out. 

**The end of Barack's (guided) monologue was cropped off — must've been patriarchial (or _whitey_) hubris (or whatever) — but he went on talking about a gay professor of his who was influential for him.**

***Author's note:***

I took issue with Donald Trump with his use of word [lynching](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching_in_the_United_States "Wikipedia's article about 'Lynching' where there is a quote of Senator Holly Mitchell's") and so I wouldn't vote for him. That was prior to the time when transgender experimentation surgeries were more in public attention. President Trump hasn't waivered on his stance on the latter issue and he's realistic on that point.


It's asinine to continue speaking about ideas like "non-binary people" and [colonization of Mars](https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/10/11/497523766/president-obama-really-wants-people-to-live-on-mars "President Obama Really Wants People To Live On Mars : The Two-Way : NPR")  (there, Barack — people ain't living in underwater colonies in the ocean & why not? hmmm...). 


I have to take the positions I do for my own personal integrity, regardless of possible stigma. I have a website that is [documenting evidence of life-threatening abuse of a young woman](https://scapegoated.info "Miki Manigault's Proof of Life Request | scapegoated.info") who was caught up in that entrapment of sadistic liberalism and she suffered as result! (Ignorance is bliss.)


What's important here too is the overall message that if a parent says something that doesn't make sense, and even if regarding a subject that is effectively _life & death_ level of seriousness, then they can pretend like it was never said. All the stigma surrounding "mentall illness" & nobody stops to think that a child's parents (or family) may be so complicit in their role that the child is abused (by somebody) and they can flat out act like it's all in the child's head. _& then the family (as well as others) can laugh and ridicule the child to teach them that is how this world supposedly works_.


---

***A related issue brought up in local city Meta post.***


The controversy of what's known as "_gender affirmation_" or transgender experimentation (as I phrase the topic) has the associated activism on the behalf of the victims (as I'll describe them here) to inform the public of the difficulties of stigma, discrimination and violence the people encounter. I don't doubt or really disagree with any of that but my point is that at same time there exists the ongoing atheist agenda to promote continued experimentation. The idealogy is that with increased population in the demographic and puplic awareness the people can become more accepted and as result, there'd be decreased violence against them. The issue is now, however, that there's also tendancy by activists to insist that any unexplained death of a transgender person, where the person is found alone somewhere for example, has got to be as result of someone else's involvement. The narrative is that the transgender person was happy and outgoing and fun, etc., and anyone who'd believe there was self-harm involved, or circumstances where the transgender person provoked attack against them then the dissenters are labeled as transphobic ("_ad hominem_", or [_kafka-trapped_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kafkatrapping "Wikipedia's article about 'Kafkatrapping'"); or scapegoated). There becomes an obvious desire of activists to engage anybody in discussion who isn't in complete agreement with them. The "_complete agreement_" is the true issue since _a)_ There is really underlying misandrism present and noticeable (which in and of itself isn't such an issue since it can be understandable) but _b)_ There is defensiveness of parents and practicians too and sympathy for the former isn't entirely unwarranted (don't get me wrong), but defensiveness of medical personnel who make money from destroying people's lives isn't so palatable.         


In regards to parents of transgender people though, defending them isn't acceptable since they are the first and most critical influence for a person in regards to the a child's physicological health. I'm not out here to imply that there is some standard that can always be relied on to resolve the issue once and for all since myriad individual circumstances exist but when activists won't acknowledge the parental abuse, insisting that they were completely innocent, and then labeling anyone who doesn't go with the idealogy as "_transphobic_" and implication is that the dissenters are capable of the very violence that is subject of discussion when in reality there's misdirection, scapegoating, since there was violence committed against the transgender person when they were first operated on or administered medicine to facilitate gender modification. There is goal to silence any opposition and then (of course) the lack of outcry is construed as consensus. 


The debate on the local city's post and subsequent argument with me when I pointed out that Charlize Theron adopted a boy and a girl and now she as two daughters made me realize though that the example given is perfect since I was insulted and condescended, patronized (enough to prove the point, anyway) but here I am who, by people's accounts who are college educated and work in human services field themselves, I've been a victim of violent crime in myself. The trauma I experienced prior to meeting those people were the reason I was there and I appreciated their help. My reputation in regards to my advocacy is important and it extends to other areas. I'm insightful and respectful and all that (so I've been told). I have information about my advocacy work in my profile on Facebook but it's ignored and people will troll me with quips implying that I'm just stupid, bigoted, or what-have-you depending on topic. The point is here that in most cases, or subjects (like immigration), I mainly consider that as irritating and often people will let up. In this particular topic though, the badgering me is really hypocritical since if the discussion is about stigma and discrimination, etc. against _people_ then the example set is dismissing a person's experience (mine), ignoring it in the midst of accusing me of ignoring the plight of transgender people. I presented (only) one example to be brief and that was used against me and then of course when I provide more I'm ignored and there's hundreds of comments at that point.   


The goal gets to be about luring others in and throwing them under the bus, so to speak. Many people understand that and the agenda is ongoing to destroy people's lives who might off-chance be in proximity of someone who is distressed due to jealously because of their lack of intimacy with other people. Everybody is responsible for themselves (their physical self), as I'll put that here, but with the idealogy I'm describing there is implication that other people are (going to be held) responsible for a transgender person's acceptance of their own physical self. Again, what I'm stating here isn't anything new or unknown. The annoyance gets to be that there is more to this world but people want to get others wrapped up in the most rudimentary controversy there is.


> This is a reply to a comment I made on a local official city group on social media. The person is local to me and celebrates a wealthy woman who destroyed a child's life.   

***The plain text and screencapture(s):***

***Suzie McMillian***

> The actress. Charlize Theron, adopted a boy and a girl, Ashley Stires, now she has two daughters. What are the odds of that? If there is high mortality rate with people receiving "gender affirming care" then it's society's fault, right? How exactly?


***Shari Glassgow***

> Suzie McMillian so a single example proves there's no mortality in any other population? Seriously? I'm happy that Charlize Theron is trans-positive with her kids, but that does not negate the rate at which trans kids are disowned, bullied, and murdered. Let's not deflect.

---

![reply to a comment I made](/images/2025-11-21-ng1.png)
 
***

> The negligence is established by the liability, not the liability by the negligence. ~ An Introduction to the Philosophy of Law - Roscoe Pound 
He also states (which is pertinent too since it's discussion of nihilism philosophy): "But note that the negligence here is a dogmatic fiction."

---

<video controls autoplay> 
   <source src="https://freequakers.net/bo/07-17-2025-obama-nonbinary-editedout.mp4" type="video/mp4" />
Your browser does not support the video element.
</video>


Barack on non-binary


> We want and are entitled to the basic rights and opportunities of American citizens: The right to earn a living at work for which we are fitted by training and ability; equal opportunities in education, health, recreation, and similar public services; the right to vote; equality before the law; some of the same courtesy and good manners that we ourselves bring to all human relations.

(Dr.) Martin Luther King, Jr. from August 6, 1946 letter to editor of Atlanta newspaper.

date: 1946-08-06

![MLK_mugshot_birmingham.jpg](/images/MLK_mugshot_birmingham.jpg)


(Dr.) Martin Luther King, Jr. from August 6, 1946 letter to editor of Atlanta newspaper.

(Dr.) Martin Luther King, Jr. quote


## Plato - Republic - BOOK VII

![330px-Plato_Silanion_Musei_Capitolini_MC1377.jpg](/images/500px-Plato_Silanion_Musei_Capitolini_MC1377.jpg)

And now I will describe in a figure the enlightenment or unenlightenment of our nature:—Imagine human beings living in an underground den which is open towards the light; they have been there from childhood, having their necks and legs chained, and can only see into the den. At a distance there is a fire, and between the fire and the prisoners a raised way, and a low wall is built along the way, like the screen over which marionette players show their puppets. Behind the wall appear moving figures, who hold in their hands various works of art, and among them images of men and animals, wood and stone, and some of the passers-by are talking and others silent.

A strange parable,&quot; he said, &quot;and strange captives.&quot; They are ourselves, I replied; and they see only the shadows of the images which the fire throws on the wall of the den; to these they give names, and if we add an echo which returns from the wall, the voices of the passengers will seem to proceed from the shadows. Suppose now that you suddenly turn them round and make them look with pain and grief to themselves at the real images; will they believe them to be real? Will not their eyes be dazzled, and will they not try to get away from the light to something which they are able to behold without blinking? And suppose further, that they are dragged up a steep and rugged ascent into the presence of the sun himself, will not their sight be darkened with the excess of light? Some time will pass before they get the habit of perceiving at all; and at first they will be able to perceive only shadows and reflections in the water; then they will recognize the moon and the stars, and will at length behold the sun in his own proper place as he is. Last of all they will conclude:—This is he who gives us the year and the seasons, and is the author of all that we see. How will they rejoice in passing from darkness to light! How worthless to them will seem the honours and glories of the den!

But now imagine further, that they descend into their old habitations;—in that underground dwelling they will not see as well as their fellows, and will not be able to compete with them in the measurement of the shadows on the wall; there will be many jokes about the man who went on a visit to the sun and lost his eyes, and if they find anybody trying to set free and enlighten one of their number, they will put him to death, if they can catch him.

Now the cave or den is the world of sight, the fire is the sun, the way upwards is the way to knowledge, and in the world of knowledge the idea of good is last seen and with difficulty, but when seen is inferred to be the author of good and right—parent of the lord of light in this world, and of truth and understanding in the other. He who attains to the beatific vision is always going upwards; he is unwilling to descend into political assemblies and courts of law; for his eyes are apt to blink at the images or shadows of images which they behold in them—he cannot enter into the ideas of those who have never in their lives understood the relation of the shadow to the substance. But blindness is of two kinds, and may be caused either by passing out of darkness into light or out of light into darkness, and a man of sense will distinguish between them, and will not laugh equally at both of them, but the blindness which arises from fulness of light he will deem blessed, and pity the other; or if he laugh at the puzzled soul looking at the sun, he will have more reason to laugh than the inhabitants of the den at those who descend from above.

There is a further lesson taught by this parable of ours. Some persons fancy that instruction is like giving eyes to the blind, but we say that the faculty of sight was always there, and that the soul only requires to be turned round towards the light. And this is conversion; other virtues are almost like bodily habits, and may be acquired in the same manner, but intelligence has a diviner life, and is indestructible, turning either to good or evil according to the direction given. Did you never observe how the mind of a clever rogue peers out of his eyes, and the more clearly he sees, the more evil he does? Now if you take such an one, and cut away from him those leaden weights of pleasure and desire which bind his soul to earth, his intelligence will be turned round, and he will behold the truth as clearly as he now discerns his meaner ends.

And have we not decided that our rulers must neither be so uneducated as to have no fixed rule of life, nor so over-educated as to be unwilling to leave their paradise for the business of the world? We must choose out therefore the natures who are most likely to ascend to the light and knowledge of the good; but we must not allow them to remain in the region of light; they must be forced down again among the captives in the den to partake of their labours and honours. &quot;Will they not think this a hardship?&quot; You should remember that our purpose in framing the State was not that our citizens should do what they like, but that they should serve the State for the common good of all. May we not fairly say to our philosopher,—Friend, we do you no wrong; for in other States philosophy grows wild, and a wild plant owes nothing to the gardener, but you have been trained by us to be the rulers and kings of our hive, and therefore we must insist on your descending into the den. You must, each of you, take your turn, and become able to use your eyes in the dark, and with a little practice you will see far better than those who quarrel about the shadows, whose knowledge is a dream only, whilst yours is a waking reality. It may be that the saint or philosopher who is best fitted, may also be the least inclined to rule, but necessity is laid upon him, and he must no longer live in the heaven of ideas. And this will be the salvation of the State.

For those who rule must not be those who are desirous to rule; and, if you can offer to our citizens a better life than that of rulers generally is, there will be a chance that the rich, not only in this world’s goods, but in virtue and wisdom, may bear rule. And the only life which is better than the life of political ambition is that of philosophy, which is also the best preparation for the government of a State. 

> [The Republic, by Plato - Project Gutenberg](https://www.gutenberg.org/files/1497/1497-h/1497-h.htm "The Republic, by Plato - Project Gutenberg")

***

[back to main page](../)

excerpt from 'A Sociology of Mental Health and Illness' — Labeling

excerpt from 'A Sociology of Mental Health and Illness'

About

Barack on non-binary

(Dr.) Martin Luther King, Jr. quote

excerpt of Plato - Republic - BOOK VII