The most vulnerable group in society

Vulnerability ain't a one-size-fits-all thing. Folks keep sayin' this group or that group is "the most vulnerable"—pensioners, trans people, the homeless, kids in poverty, you name it. Truth is, anyone can be vulnerable dependin’ on their situation. A poor single mum strugglin' to feed her kid might be worse off than a pensioner with a house and a steady cheque.

Labelin’ whole groups as "vulnerable" can be handy to get support or funding, but it also sets up this weird tug-o-war—like if we help asylum seekers, we’re takin' somethin' away from the disabled, or if we protect pensioners, the young get shafted. That’s not how it works.

Vulnerability shifts—what hits one person hard might not bother another. It’s not always clear-cut, and sometimes people wearin’ the “vulnerable” label might not even see themselves that way. We should stop makin’ it a contest. Folks strugglin’ need help, simple as that, no matter what group they’re in.

I think without doubt that families with a parent who has a very disabling mental illness will be the most vulnerable.

Maybe it comes down to absolute and relative vulnerability, in the same way as poverty is differentiated?

Babies and small children are absolutely vulnerable, in that they would die without someone to care for all their needs. Severely disabled people can come into that category too, but most others would be somewhere on a relative vulnerability scale.

I don't think that transpeople are necessarily vulnerable at all, but in some situations they may be more at risk of attack than others.

Some older people can be vulnerable if they are frail or isolated, and most people reach the point where they would struggle to earn a living, but others are fit, well-connected and financially secure, so as a group I don't see pensioners as vulnerable. Maybe when something like the pandemic hits, or in circumstances where physical strength is required they would share vulnerability with others of all ages who have health issues, but on the whole they are a mixed bag.

Most homeless people are vulnerable, as they are not in charge of their own living arrangements, but there is a huge difference between someone living with loving parents and someone on the streets.

So maybe (many of) the very old and all of the very young are absolutely vulnerable, and for everyone else it depends on a number of factors.

People can be vulnerable to various things, such as catching illnesses or falling into poverty, but perhaps that's slightly different from being vulnerable as a state in itself? Or is that overthinking?

I, too, think it’s babies and children followed by those born with disabilities that prevent them from living an independent lifestyle. Basically, those who are unable to speak for themselves and rely on others to do the right thing by them and for them.

Ilovecheese

I consider small children to be the most vulnerable in society, with absolute conviction.
They have no voice and no power of any kind.

At last! Someone speaking up for the kids! At least it seems someone cares about the children...not just me. I'm probably one of the least vulnerable people I know...

I think “vulnerable” has been confused with ”disadvantaged”.

Groups of people can be shown to be disadvantaged when they are not able to access what others can.

But “vulnerable” is those who are powerless to to protest, seek justice and direct their own lives.

So I agree that small children and babies are the most vulnerable. And also the severely disabled and the very elderly who have lost capacity.

I don’t consider “vulnerable “ any group that has demonstrated its ability and right to protest, demand or present their particular cause or need.

In being able to do so they are no more vulnerable than anyone else.

Thought I'd look up the Oxford Dictionary definition for clarification. (My edition is old - 1999).

vulnerable. adj. exposed to being attacked or harmed, either physically or emotionally.

Ilovecheese

I consider small children to be the most vulnerable in society, with absolute conviction.
They have no voice and no power of any kind.

I agree.

I am with Ilovecheese children are definitely the most vulnerable.

then severely disabled,

then pensioners in poverty,

then people who are in an abusive or coercive relationship,

I think vulnerable is a word bandied around so much nowadays that it’s becoming meaningless.

I heard a person I believe is trans use exactly that phrase this morning, in an attempt to impose their need to be accepted as what they claim to be, rather than what they are, because of their 'vulnerabilty.'

I consider small children to be the most vulnerable in society, with absolute conviction.
They have no voice and no power of any kind.