Allocating mental health resources based on racial assumptions

Charities rely on funding though. And if they haven't secured a contract or grant to serve the wider group they were originally set up for, but they still have funding for a small specific group, what should they do, close?

@Sassiskt I'm struggling to follow your point to be honest. I only mentioned 'preferential treatment' because you gave not declaring because you didn't want preferential treatment. Which isn't what the boxes are for and you wouldn't have been given anyway. You might have been offered different treatment but only to ensure that things were equal, not to give you a 'leg up'. And I'm still unsure what that has to do with why you think the mental health charity is wrong for providing services according to what they've secured funding for, until they can get more funding.

The charity in question was set up for all young people with MH issues and not specifically for "culturally diverse" young people yet they are specifically discriminating against children who don't fit their new unwritten criteria which they can't even explain themselves. Thats different from a charity that was set up for a specific ethnic subset of young people with MH problems.

Ok, but I don't think it changes the point that wanting to be seen as a whole person and not 'just' as a woman doesn't mean it's not also important to provide some services and funding that are specific for women. Just the same as there will be needs that are specific, or need to be more specialised, for people in relation to race and culture.

Gender isn't a protected characteristic. Sex is. And gender reassignment is, but not gender.

Ticking those boxes wouldn't give you preferential treatment though. It means as a wider group people can be disadvantaged, because if say one person tries to challenge that the organisation isn't doing enough to support employees who have disabilities, the organisation can say 'as far as we understand we don't have many people to support so we're doing fine'. Which is pretty much what happened in our organisation recently!

Having a protected characteristic doesn't mean you're only defined by that characteristic, but it's very naive to say that it could never be relevant. Gender is a protected characteristic. I can't imagine many women would say that 'being a women' is the only relevant thing about them or how they want to be defined, but it doesn't mean that they shouldn't have specific services, such as for pregnancy or menopause. Do you think we should get rid of women's aid because it's only providing to women and not men?

It also can't be a one size fits all service. A friend of mine follows a particular faith, and provides counselling and CBT to women of the same faith. She set it up as a private practice after finding services she tried to use just didn't work for her when she needed them. From hearing her talk about her own experiences I can totally understand why there's a need. The NHS and local counselling available for her at the time technically accepted her referral but they may as well have only been funded for white British atheists, given the lack of understanding of the cultural context to mental health that she experienced.

The issue is that the core NHS services have been dismantled, meaning that the charity sector is left to pick up the pieces and isn't in a position to cover all bases. It was never intended for that.

Well, I think it’s okay for charities to have specific remits where they focus their resources. There are plenty of charities specific to women’s health or men’s health. Or gay men’s health. There’s an amazing mental health charity near me set up by the family of a woman who sadly took her life. You have to be 25 and under to access their services. I’m part of a health charity that only serves people 20-49.

I think there is a difference with being racist and providing culturally appropriate services to specific groups. I mean, everyone seems to love when charities will only serve biological women. Is it really different to say that a charity is only serving the South Asian community?

Very upsetting- especially to read about the teenagers trying so hard to help each other. Then the killer going on to attack another victim, an older chap.
Tragic waste of lives and shouldn't have happened.
Their poor families

The Calocane case is so upsetting. Those beautiful young adults, and treasured dad, murdered on the streets. I often think about them and their families and feel so angry at the injustice.

Back to your point, YANBU. Race should NEVER play a part in things like this. It’s absolutely ridiculous.