The topic of “inappropriate” body language” comes up regularly in my conversations with First Voices in my community. And I have addressed it in multiple BLOGs in the past.
Those conversations focus on similar stories: a member of the marginalised community is confronted in a public space by a private security guard and accused of exhibiting “inappropriate” behaviour. Even if the individual is simply minding their own business and not causing any trouble, they may be directed to leave the property in a manner that is both unfair and often humiliating.
I most recently addressed this issue in a March BLOG but I have been reporting on it for years, even from my days writing for the Nova Scotia Advocate such as this 2017 article when I first addressed it for readers.
Continued complaints from First Voices about such treatment prompted me in 2023 to write an open letter to private security companies in an effort to give them a better understanding of such incidents and how these might be more sensitively handled by their staff. Perhaps not surprisingly, I never received a formal response to that letter.
Readers then encouraged me to follow up with our elected representatives which I did in this this BLOG post. I made the case that the province should strengthen licensing and training requirements for private security firms to ensure that these people both know the law and understand the rights of ordinary people.
I followed this up with a conversation with an actual security guard, who suggested that the process of “moving people along” from public spaces is usually framed as a violation of a “no loitering” rule. As I discussed in that BLOG, these rules are not usually municipal bylaws that are being violated, but more likely rules proclaimed by the owners or managers of the property. There are clearly some different understandings of what constitutes “loitering”. All the First Voices I spoke with insisted that they had business to undertake in the property in question and were certainly not causing any trouble when they were approached (harassed?) and asked to leave.
The Case of Marvin:
Marvin is one of the First Voices I speak with about issues facing our community. In terms of government benefits, Marvin (not his real name) receives the Standard Household rate of $1,005 plus the $318 Disability Supplement and a $40 telephone allowance. His current rent is $1000 and he has already been notified that once the rent cap is lifted, his rent will be increased overnight to $1500 a month.
Needless to say, Marvin’s day-to-day life holds a lot of stress and frustration. On occasion these stresses can cause Marvin to twitch or fidget in public, which has resulted in members of the public complaining to security that he is making them uncomfortable and is possibly drunk. Marvin has even been stopped by police while walking down the street (on his way to a meal at Soul’s Harbour!), accused of making others uncomfortable or even scared. More recently, he was stopped by security guards while heading to a dentist appointment.
Marvin tells me that whenever he is stopped in this manner, he responds assertively to the security guard or police that he is simply minding his own business and not causing any trouble. To which the officers usually respond that members of the public are within their rights to make those complaints. On one occasion, the police even insisted that Marvin undergo a breathalyzer test to confirm that he had not been drinking.
From my many conversations with other people in our community, I can assure readers that Marvin is NOT the only one being harassed in this manner.
So, what is the SOLUTION?
I have already proposed different steps toward a solution, most notably improved training of security guards and police that will ensure greater sensitivity towards members of the public and particularly those who may be living with disabilities or issues related to mental health.
Another suggestion was to provide vulnerable members of the public with letters from their doctors or case workers, which can be shared with security officers to explain the nature of their situation or condition. However, that approach has not proven to be effective: either the concerned professionals do not agree to provide such a letter, or the security guards simply disregard it when there is an incident.
A third possibility would be to mobilize a peer support program by which Income Assistance recipients and others needing support can access companions who will accompany them on key visits into public spaces. Clearly this would not be feasible for each and every personal outing, but perhaps it could apply to formal appointments with doctors, social workers, etc.
In my opinion, this last suggestion is EXACTLY the type of support service that could and should be provided by a Social Prescribing Organization, as I have been promoting here in multiple BLOGS over the past year. An accessible friendship / peer support service could make a real difference in the lives of many in my community.
The time for action is NOW!
Kendall Worth is an award-winning anti-poverty activist who lives with disabilities and tries to make ends meet on income assistance.
Comments
Post a Comment