How stigmatization may be of use in some situations: Exploring the silver lining.
While stigmatization is bad in almost all situations, we cannot pretend that, directly or indirectly, it is not responsible for positive changes among the many unacceptable behaviors in the community. Yeah, i agree with the government and public health law on the issue of not enforcing stigmatization as a tool because it would shoot out of hand and do harm than good, but a little regulated sidelining of people with harmful behaviors is really welcome.
No, look into Bayer’s conclusion: there may be circumstances when public health efforts that unavoidably or even intentionally stigmatize are morally defensible. Whether it would be wise to do so in a particular case should be a matter of debate, one that should be framed by evidence and the utilitarian ethics that underpin the mission of public health.
Stigmatization, segregation, sidelining or some kind of bad remarking about certain behaviors that are harmful to one's health and that of the public is really welcome. Also, it can create havoc if stigmatization is recognized as a helpful tool in public health interventions; people must practice it ‘illegally’ so it remains under control.
The question that remains is one: Which behaviors are wrong or harmful so they can be discriminated? And on what basis should we judge that behavior A or B is unacceptable? And what level of stigmatization or sidelining is not harmful? Maybe these are some of the haunting questions that make us avoid stigmatization altogether.
The Complete You Ministry,