Why Do Courts Have Stigma Damages To Property Owners?

In “Disproportionate Siting” author Dorcetta Taylor discusses the common claims of unequal exposure to environmental hazards being due to racial and class discrimination (33). Taylor states, “Proponents of this thesis argue that hazardous facilities are disproportionally located in minority and low-income areas and that these patterns are the result of discrimination” (33). In regards to racial and social class discrimination, she argues that the claim of racism is the more controversial of the two with many scholars arguing on both sides (Taylor, 34). She then delves into different studies that argued that race was a factor in explaining location of and exposure to environmental hazards (Taylor, 35). Taylor then discusses the studies that

The book Toxic Communities examines several theories that are used to explain why hazardous substances and facilities are prevalent in minority communities. A pungent argument in the book is why people in minority communities choose not to move away from places hosting hazardous facilities. In other words, the book identifies reasons why people choose to remain in communities where dangerous facilities are sited. Grounded in practical examples and cases, the book is divided into ten chapters and concluding remarks. The first chapter explores the rise of environmental justice activism as a response to notable cases of toxic exposure in some parts of the United States.

It is important that achieving environmental justice becomes an aim that is universal. This is because minorities and those with a lower socioeconomic status bear the burden of environmental hazards. Environmental hazards can impact the quality of the air, water, and land. Exposure to these environmental hazards can occur through inhalation, ingestion, and absorption. Thus adverse health outcomes may result. Because minorities and those of a lower socioeconomic status typically bear the burden of environmental hazards, they are at an increased risk of adverse health outcomes. This is especially harmful to vulnerable populations including children and the elderly. This is seen in the environmental justice case, Maynas Carijana vs.

Goffman looks at variety of strategies when it comes to stigmatized individuals, especially ones that deal with rejection from others. Stigma: Notes on the Management of a Spoiled Identity was published in 1963 and in the first chapter the book, Goffman determines the three types of stigma; stigma of character traits, physical stigma, and stigma of group identity. Stigma of character traits are “blemishes of individual character perceived as weak will, domineering, or unnatural passions, treacherous and rigid beliefs, and dishonesty, these being inferred from a known record of, for example, mental disorder, imprisonment, addiction, alcoholism, homosexuality, unemployment, suicidal attempts, and radical political behavior” (Goffman, 1963). Physical stigma is the deformities of the body, whereas the stigma of group identity is a stigma that derives from a particular race, nation and/or religion. These three types of stigma have one thing in common, their sociological features: “an individual who might have been received in normal social

“Social stigma is defined as the censure of, or dissatisfaction with, a person due to a

property motivated in whole or in part by an offender’s bias against a race, religion, disability,

The conclusion, stigma, which involves what the public thinks, and how the mental health care treats the

In Rebecca & ‘Zorba’s’ Restaurant case, the main issue is whether negligence exists of the defendant? There are three prerequisites must be present before the tort of negligence can arise: a duty of care must be owed by one person to another; there must be a breach of that duty of care; and damage must have been suffered as a result of the breach of duty. (FoBL, 2005, p70) In addition, another element must be satisfied to prove negligence is the causation. This essay will analysis Rebecca v. ‘Zorba’s’ with these four issues.

Municipal stigmas arise when pervasive stereotypes that individuals with mental illness are dangerous or erratic. These stigmatized characteristic sets the barrier away from each other from the rest of society, bringing with it feelings of embarrassment and seclusion. This stigma in health causes unnecessary anguish, in theory causing a person to refute symptoms, delay treatment and refrain from daily doings.

Often the government, public health officials, and medical community, in general, has a propensity to focus on the “hazard” calculating the probability of the predicted damage based on scientific evidence and severity of the event. Contrary, the public response often is not driven by solid evidence, but rather fueled by emotions and media portrayal (Burgess, Burgess, & Leask, 2006). I wound not need to elaborate on a further explanation of this phenomenon since recent events in Fergusson, Missouri perfectly illustrate this theory.

Hence, those who violate these norms result in exhibiting deviance, or a behavior that violates society’s social standards. A person can gain this deviant behavior by physical or behavioral traits, thus acquiring a negative or positive social stigma. The term stigma is used to categorize the labels a society uses to diminish a definite group of people. Unfortunately, most people are stigmatized by their past acts of deviant behavior that they may not be engaging in, for example an ex-convict or ex- mental patient. Technology and new innovations have also contributed to having an influence in social interactions and standards of behavior. Many of the illegal acts done in the internet including pirating software or music have no social stigma attached to them due the approval of the online community.

Stigma can be defined as a mark of shame or ignominy that sets individuals apart from others. Goffman notes “Society establishes the means of categorizing persons and the complement of attributes felt to be ordinary and natural for members of each of these categories”. (Goffman) Given, when a person is labeled by said illness, disorder, or deviancy they are seen as a part of a stereotyped group and as a result are stigmatized by the “normals”. Moreover, the routines of social interactions in society allow us to create normative expectations and demands for the way ones in said society are expected to

The environmental justice hypothesis as stated by Brown, P. is that “hazards in the physical and chemical environmental disproportionately affect those individuals and households that also face hazards in their social environment. “

Studies that examined public stigma also documented information about self-stigma, defined as the reduction in a person’s self-esteem or sense of worth due to the perception held by the individual that he or she is socially unacceptable (Vogel, Wade, & Haake, 2006). Previous studies have identified self-stigma, defined as the reduction in a person’s self-esteem or sense of worth due to the perception held by the individual that he or she is socially unacceptable (Vogel et al., 2006). Stigma received from the environment, in this sense, becomes internalized since the individuals apply these negative public attitudes to themselves resulting in diminished self efficacy, thus self-stigmatizing themselves (Corrigan & Shapiro,

Like psychiatric injury, pure economic loss is often described as a problematic form of damage. Although floodgates arguments are sometimes encountered in this area, there are other reasons why a duty to take care not to cause foreseeable economic loss to the claimant is not always appropriate.