Limiting MH support to certain cultural areas?

[Mindcultural]

I have today received this message below from a mental health support service for young people.

AIBU to think it’s completely wrong to offer support based on cultural diversity and would like to know how they decide who fits this criteria?

Hi,

I’m getting touch as you have recently made a referral to our Youth In Mind services on behalf of a child or young person.

Unfortunately, we are having to reduce the size of the team for funding reasons, so we now only have funding to support young people from culturally diverse communities, if this is relevant for the individual you referred to us, please can I ask that you complete this form forms.office.com and we will be back in touch accordingly.

If we are now no longer able to offer support to the individual you have made a referral for, please accept our apologies for this. Please feel free to keep an eye on our website for updated information regarding available services as we are always looking for new funding opportunities to allow us to reach more children and young people.

Got you, it wasn’t immediately obvious that you meant building as in an actual building.

I agree, building on green space to train gardeners who then have to go somewhere else to find green space is mad.

The sheer entitlement displayed on this thread is quite something.

Well, you should have asked them, because there would have been a justification, defensible in court. Examples: boosting representation of an underrepresented group in a particular sphere (legal); helping people who are disadvantaged by virtue of belonging to that group (also legal).

You would have preferred to help deprived or disabled people, and that's fine, because that's always legal and requires no justification. But the funders in the OP decided to help minority communities and that's OK too.

Apparently ethnic minorities are underrepresented in gardening. That is probably true across the country as a whole. However I would argue that local inner city kids are underrepresented in gardening, regardless of ethnic background. It is therefore unfair to prioritise one local group of young people over another equally needy group.

The bloody museum probably thought using 'ethnic minority' sounded better: that it would appeal to funders and therefore to neighbours. I dislike the idea that, say, two friends who live next door to each other, go to school together etc, then find that only one would have access to the scheme.

Anyway after some sneaky 'community consultation' and some local protest around the loss of green space the idea seems to have been abandoned.

You should also consider what the charity are saying (took mea while to get my head around it myself). At the moment they are closed to ALL referrals due to lack of funding. However, because they got (ringfenced) funding to support a specific group, they can still support those specific individuals. If they used it for everyone, they’d lose the funding and be in a precarious legal position. If they used it for no one, the same. What exactly are they supposed to do?

Go back and talk to the funders?

There is an uncomfortable message at service user level that some young people should be advantaged over the others on the basis of ethnicity not of need. That has to be wrong.

But the point is if they had said we have this money to support this specific identifiable group then fine but they don’t say that- they said ‘culturally diverse’ groups which if it doesn’t expressly mean non-white - what does it mean? I am white but come from a very diverse mixed European heritage. I can’t imagine that they would be talking about someone like me or are they?

They will have accepted the funding on the basis that it was for a particular purpose. Some funders will allow reallocation of funds but mostly this will be refused because the grant will have been agreed by the funder at board level and will align with their strategic objectives or reason for existing.

You’re taking a message that isn’t being transmitted. This charity is only able to provide a service to young people from culturally diverse communities who have experienced trauma - that is, on the basis of need. They are not prioritised because of their ethnicity but because of their need. They’re hardly swimming in advantage are they?

The reason you assume it means ‘not white’ is entirely on you - that hasn’t been said by the organisation. In my experience white ethnic groups who are socio-economically disadvantaged are included in these kinds of projects, because their socio-economic disadvantage informs the need. So eastern European, Traveller/Gypsy or Roma young people would be included, but that has changed over time. Irish young people used to be disadvantaged and experience racism, so you have charities dedicated to supporting the Irish diaspora in the UK. We don’t know what this particular charity means by the phrase, so you’ve chosen to assume something that aligns with your prejudice.

Maybe we are reading it differently then. I read it as

‘support young people from culturally diverse communities’

So basically all people from culturally diverse communities and not specific groups. So as long as you fit the definition of culturally diverse you get funding.

you seem to think the funding will have an underlying criteria of specific groups under that umbrella. If that so the case I don’t know why they didn’t just say that.

No, I have no additional information on the meaning of culturally diverse communities in this instance, I’m simply giving examples I’ve seen elsewhere.

On face value, it’s anyone from culturally diverse communities. That could mean heritage, religion or where they live.

Hi Rupert, I do know about those things. I’m saying they are not in play here for reasons I have already provided.

It seems they are unaware of their own criteria, and what it actually means in reality.

I was responding to PPs rather fanciful scenario of a Banglasdeshi group of grannies (or something) approaching MIND and offering them money with some white racist strings attached. Some people are so determined to condone racism as long as it is against white kids, they are making up ever more imaginative stories to justify it.

At least as a trustee I know that we have to fulfill our charitable objectives and not start excluding people on arbitrary grounds that if it was any other group being excluded would have attracted howls of “racism” from the people in this thread.

I do hope your child/young person can find the help he or she needs.

I’m going to fave a lie down to process the level of determination if done to justify their exclusion on such spurious grounds.

If a charity with a national footprint and government funding was to restrict services to non ‘culturally diverse’ kids only, imagine the howls of outrage!!

If the first of that was true, you'd be aware the second was not.

No more fanciful than the ever more elaborate scenarios PPs have dreamt up to justify excluding a child on the basis of not being ‘culturally diverse’ enough.

We’ve had Bangladeshi grannies and reams if nonsense about restricted funding streams but no one has explained why a charity would apply for funding that makes them work against their charitable objectives. We are not talking about a charity providing EXTRA help to a specific community where need has been identified while maintaining a level of service to ALL (those pesky charitable objectives), we are talking don’t NO service to a group chosen in a completely arbitrary grounds and clinical need being ignored.

Eh? Sorry you must be tired. I suggest a cup of tea and a lie down.

One example, traveller children.

Ok Then if you can define who falls into the umbrella of culturally diverse. Who falls under the umbrella of culturally non-diverse?

Surely for example Brixton is a culturally and racially diverse area. If a service is being offered to residents of Brixton then residents of a culturally diverse area of any race can apply.
If a charity sets itself up as the Brixton disabled black womens mental health charity then that charity can only provide services to said clientele.

It’s a shame they can’t just post the criteria but I can imagine if a load of randoms have contacted them off the back of the thread then they are in crisis mode. Your asking the question is fair enough, but some of the replies on here have been pretty grim, who knows whether people might have contacted them directly.

A friend of mine is involved with a refugee charity and they regularly get death threats and horrendous abuse emailed to them. They’ve taken photographs and drop in times off the website.

Likewise a person can say make a donation to the Llaregub rnli station and specify that the money only is used by the Llaregib rnli station , not the rnli as a whole.

I assume that would be clarified by the extra form OP was asked to fill in. She might want to post screenshots/clarify whether you’re right and it’s about “non white “ children. I actually made an enquiry myself as I want to know, not just assume. I’ll let you know if I hear back from them.

Honestly posts like this make me yearn for a block function. It’s been explained multiple times how restricted funding works and how this particular programme works, but you are determined to misunderstand. No-one can answer your questions because you won’t accept the answers. You want to see unlawful and ill intent, so you will.