|
|
|
|
|
by slg
1654 days ago
|
|
>Plenty do, and plenty die while they're in prison. This is not a rational justification for what happened to Schwartz (and looks to me like victim-blaming) It is not attempting to be a justification for what happened to him. It is demonstrating that Swartz was not acting rationally. You shouldn't blame someone for triggering an irrational response by another person. And it isn't victim-blaming to say someone is dead because of their mental illness anymore than it is victim-blaming to say someone is dead because they had cancer. >Blaming mental illness is an utterly weak response here. Many, many people struggle with mental health and don't commit suicide; the assumption that mental health issues == suicide is reductive and harmful. You are the one being reductive and equating all mental health issues to suicide. I am talking about one specific person with mental health issues. Talking about Swartz's mental health history is important. If he got the help he needed at the right time he might still be alive. Talking about that aspect of the story can help save the lives of people who feel similarly trapped as he felt. |
|
http://bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/01/15/humanity-deficit/bj8...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Swartz
Multiple prosecutors (Ortiz, Heymann), the judge (Gorton), and institutions (MIT, JSTOR) wantonly pursued an extreme perversion of justice in full knowledge of Swartz's mental state.