My family is not "shielding" a dangerous person and I will not tolerate those who imply otherwise

[JVS]

86. OP made an alert and got denied, so now it begets a new thread.

On Mon May 26, 2014, 10:27 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Any limits are only as good as what the government knows about a person in order to judge
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5000829

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

I signed back into DU just to alert on this post as this implies that my family may have been "shielding" my brother from authorities. My brother is not dangerous, there is nobody shielding him from the authorities. To blame the problem of violence on people with mental illness and suggest that those of us who have mentally ill family members may be shielding them is pure bigotry. I don't feel I should have to respond to this person and defend my family when my family did nothing wrong, my brother is not dangerous nor are most people with schizophrenia and I do not appreciate being told that I am part of the problem based on my brother's disability. This is bigotry and should be hidden.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon May 26, 2014, 10:42 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The idea that you owe the authorities information about your family is wrong, stupid, and about par for the course considering the number of authoritarian stooges running about here these days, but that does not mean that acknowledging that it is possible for a mentally ill person to pose a danger to people is bigotry.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I sympathize with the OP/alerter's struggle to help his brother and sympathize with the battle against stigmatization and prejudice against the mentally ill, but this post is not the source of the problem.

Poster uses the word "if" referring to OP's family, which makes it conditional and can be simply countered in a post just as the alerter does here when he or she says nobody is shielding his brother. The posts statement "your failing to admit" is blunt but not over the top. The poster is NOT blaming violence on people with mental illness because the poster uses the word "many" which does not mean a majority. "Many" can be tens of thousands and out of a couple million people mentally ill in various degrees that might be 1 percent, which is nothing like blaming all mentally ill people.

This is an emotional topic and nerves are raw and it is hard to make reasoned points crystal clear in a perfectly soothing way so some statements are going to seem hurtful to the OP without rising to meet DU standards for hiding.

After having raised the whole topic AND drawn his own family into it, the alerter should not be surprised that his brother is being discussed, and the alerter is best advised to rebut the points in posts.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The post says: And if.....your family has been shielding your brother from the system in any way, not allowing authorities a full and accurate picture of his mental state, you are part of the problem even if your intent it well meaning. To me, the qualifier AND IF is important. The poster does not imply that the family has shielded, the poster states IF the family has shielded. These are hard topics, and I understand the sense of outrage, but to me, there is truth in what the poster is saying.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This issue has to be seen both ways. And I say that from a POV that includes experience of 4 decades of my family dealing with a sibling's schizophrenia.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The poster makes a point. Sorry if it disagrees with the POV of another DUer.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.