SACS by Social Welfare Department

First of all, the Government starts to create labeling the SACS recipient for reducing t Eire expenditure or other purposes. In 1998, there Is a review on SACS was done by Social welfare Department. [ 1 | The review is full of “Having a Job is better than none”, “Low wage is better than no wage”,”SACS should be the last choice” and these kinds of statements against the SACS recipients. Actually, those negative and misleading messages are continuous spreading to the public by the government by different means from the past to now.

Thus, the public have an image that there were many people abusing SACS, “SACS feeds the lazy As we all know, Hong Congers believed on self alliance. When the Government implies that SACS feeds the lazy, Hong Kong people would have negative feeling on SACS recipient s as their act was against the beliefs of Hong Kong people-cleanliness. Secondly, the Mass Media had helped the labeling act. The reports done by the media a about the SACS recipients are mostly negative, e. G. Buses of SACS, crimes of the SACS recall .NET, the increasing expenditure of SACS which claimed because of the abuse of SACS, From the attitude of media, we can see that the SACS recipients were treated as offend deer. The SACS recipients are considered as lazy and abusing SACS. Due to the rule create d and applied by the society, the action of applying SACS became a deviant behavior and pee pole labeled the SACS recipients as outsiders. The public had misunderstanding and no idea on the situation of the abuse of SACS.

Most of them are affected by the media, thus they label the SACS recipients as the media did. From a survey on public views on SACS recipients[2], 82% of interviewees got the information of SACS from the media. 50. 6% of them agreed that “SACS feeds the lazy’. In fact the reapportion of unemployed SACS recipients among all the SACS Recipient is Just ABA UT 10% recently. It is better to say that “SACS is feeding the needs” but not lazy. Most of the labeling act in the public was due to misunderstanding and stereotyping.

In fact, there are Just a small proportional of unemployed SACS recipients among all the CSS recipients. “SACS feeds the lazy’ is not support by the fact. That matches what outside theory said,” Some people may be labeled deviant who in fact have not broken a rule. Furthermore, social exclusion is another effect of labeling. Form a survey on psychology kcal conditions of children of the SACS Recipients[4] and a survey on SACS recipients’ self images, we can notice that labeling could badly affect the psychological conditions an d the self images of the people being labeling.

These people felt negative on themselves. A bout 70 % of them thought that there were less and fewer friends that they could talk with an d their friends would make discrimination against them. More than half of them thought that t their friends would look down on them. Also, 70% of them are afraid of being known by 10th errs that they are SACS recipient. These made them don’t want to contact with the others. As a result, they isolated themselves from the others.

They don’t want to contact with their friends, their family or even the society. Finally lead to social exclusion. They were bee Eng excluded from the society. To conclude, the government and the media help to give a meaning of applying SACS alleged abuse and laziness (labeling). That leads to the problem of misunderstanding of the public and the social exclusion. In fact, applying SACS is not a bad behavior as most o f the SACS recipients need it to support their basic needs.