[xmca] "At Risk"

The discussion about the Luke's article and the Stetsenko and Sawshuck has
given me food for thought about the term 'at-risk'. For the funding of
numerous programs in public education and social programs they dollars are
tied to students or clients identified as 'at risk'. "At risk' can mean
what part of a city a person lives in, income level of a family,
nationality, tribal afiliation, etc. On the other had the Center for
Disease Control and Prevention the term is used for those individuals who
are susceptible catching a particular disease or virus. For example,
because of the population of students I work with (severely emotional
disturbed) I have to participate in OSHA regulated blood-borne pathogens.
This definition I believed has transformed from the field of social work
and of course the field of social work is a direct descendent of Mills,
Durkheim and the like. Is it possible to define the term "at risk" from
the dialectic perspective? Is it possible to measure prevention of
disease? Is it possible to measure the increase in quality of life from
the introduction of programs for the 'at risk' populations?

what do others think?
eric

_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
Received on Tue Dec 9 12:29:39 2008