France’s CAF Algorithm: Targeting the Vulnerable Under the Guise of Fraud Prevention

 

As the World Day for Overcoming Extreme Poverty approaches, 15 civil society organizations are taking legal action against the algorithm used by the French Family Allowance Funds (CAF) for rating recipients. They are doing so in the name of data protection rights and non-discrimination, marking a first-of-its-kind lawsuit against a public service body’s algorithmic targeting. This lawsuit highlights the pressing need to examine the CAF’s practices, which unfairly target the most vulnerable members of society.

How the CAF Algorithm Works

The CAF algorithm assigns each recipient a suspicion score, determining the likelihood of a welfare audit. Higher scores increase the probability of being targeted for a control. The algorithm analyzes the personal data of over 32 million people each month, calculating more than 13 million scores. Individuals with low incomes, those receiving unemployment benefits, or those on welfare programs like the Revenu de Solidarité Active (RSA) or the Adult Disability Allowance (AAH) are particularly vulnerable to increased scores. This system disproportionately targets individuals who are already facing financial hardships, placing them under excessive scrutiny compared to others.

Discrimination by Design

Our coalition’s legal challenge addresses both the broad scope of this surveillance and the discriminatory impact of the algorithm on already marginalized people. The algorithm equates poverty with fraud, perpetuating stigmatization and institutional mistreatment of the most vulnerable. These controls are not just intrusive—they often result in the suspension of benefits and unjustified repayment demands. In the most severe cases, recipients are left without any financial support, an illegal act in itself. Furthermore, navigating the appeals process is often complicated and inaccessible.

The underlying issue lies in the way the algorithm reinforces systemic biases. It is designed to flag individuals with specific characteristics, many of which are indicators of financial difficulty. Low income, unemployment, and residence in disadvantaged areas all increase one’s risk score, compounding the burden on those who are least equipped to handle it.

Wider Implications of Algorithmic Targeting

The use of algorithms for social benefit control is not limited to France. Similar systems have been deployed in other countries, with disastrous consequences. In the Netherlands, for example, a discriminatory algorithm used to detect welfare fraud plunged thousands of families into debt and poverty. Amnesty International’s Secretary General Agnès Callamard warns that France could face a similar outcome unless urgent action is taken.

The expansion of such technologies within social security systems has grave implications. The CAF algorithm, which was revealed in 2023 by La Quadrature du Net and other investigative bodies, is just one example of how digital tools can deepen existing inequalities. Without transparency or accountability, these algorithms effectively criminalize poverty and trap the vulnerable in cycles of scrutiny and punishment.

The Fight for Justice

Our coalition of 15 organizations, led by La Quadrature du Net, aims to put a stop to these practices and to shed light on the violence embedded in so-called “anti-fraud” policies. The use of such discriminatory algorithms is not just a technical issue—it is a profound social and ethical challenge that threatens the rights and dignity of millions of people. By bringing this case before France’s highest administrative court, we hope to dismantle a system that weaponizes technology against the poor.

Conclusion

As governments increasingly turn to automated tools for decision-making, it is crucial to ensure that these systems do not perpetuate injustice. The CAF algorithm is a stark reminder of the risks posed by unchecked data collection and algorithmic discrimination. Our fight is for a fairer, more transparent welfare system that supports, rather than punishes, those in need.

CAF Definition

The CAF (Caisse d'Allocations Familiales) is a public agency in France responsible for managing various social benefits. It provides financial assistance to families, individuals in precarious situations, and those with children or dependents. Key services offered by the CAF include:

• Family allowances for households with children,
• Housing assistance (APL) to support tenants or homeowners,
• RSA (Active Solidarity Income), which assists individuals without jobs or with very low incomes,
• Additional support for people with disabilities and for educational expenses related to children.

Similar agencies exist in other countries under different names. For instance, in the United Kingdom, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) offers comparable benefits. In the United States, this role is partly fulfilled by the Social Security Administration (SSA) and other agencies, depending on the type of social assistance.

Saisi

The Enduring Conflicts of Our Time: Israel, Hamas, and the Role of Global Powers

 

The conflict between Israel and Hamas, most recently highlighted by the devastating attack on October 7th, 2023, reflects not only a deep-rooted historical and religious dispute but also a broader struggle for power, control, and influence in the region. As Israel continues its military campaign against Hamas in Gaza and targets Hezbollah forces in Lebanon, the question arises: Why do Jews, Israelites, and Arabs continue to fight over this small piece of land when the world is so vast? And why do global powers, particularly the United States, consistently intervene in these conflicts as well as in others, such as the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine?

To explore these questions, we must not only look at the history of the region but also at the geopolitical, economic, and environmental forces at play on the global stage.

Why Do Jews, Israelites, and Arabs Continue to Fight?

The conflict over the land of Israel and Palestine is as much about history, religion, and identity as it is about geography. The land holds immense religious significance for Jews, Christians, and Muslims alike, making it more than just territory; it is a symbol of faith, identity, and belonging.

1.     Religious Significance: For Jews, the land of Israel is their ancestral home, promised to them in their religious texts. For Muslims, Jerusalem is the third holiest site in Islam, and many Palestinians view the land as an integral part of their cultural and national identity. This clash of religious and historical narratives fuels the ongoing tension, making compromise difficult.

2.   Historical Grievances: The displacement of Palestinians during the establishment of Israel in 1948, and the subsequent wars, have left deep wounds on both sides. Israelis fear for their security in a region where they are often surrounded by hostile neighbors, while Palestinians seek recognition of their rights and the establishment of a state. These grievances have been passed down through generations, ensuring that the conflict continues.

3.   Geopolitical Interests: While the land itself is small, its location is strategic. Israel sits at the crossroads of the Middle East, a region rich in resources like oil and gas and with key maritime routes. Control over this region has long been of interest to global powers, adding an additional layer of complexity to the conflict.

The Role of the United States: Why Do They Keep Intervening?

The United States has been a central player in global conflicts, from the Middle East to Eastern Europe. But why do they intervene so consistently, whether in Israel and Palestine, or in the war between Russia and Ukraine?

1.     Geopolitical Power: The U.S. has long sought to maintain its influence on the global stage. By intervening in conflicts, they aim to shape the outcome in ways that align with their strategic interests. In the Middle East, maintaining a strong alliance with Israel is crucial for ensuring stability and influence in a region that is key to global energy supplies.

2.   Economic Interests: Some argue that many conflicts today are driven not by ideology or religion but by economic interests. Wars disrupt markets, drive up the price of commodities like oil and natural gas, and create opportunities for the arms industry and other sectors. The U.S., as a major economic power, benefits indirectly from these dynamics, whether through controlling resources or maintaining dominance in global markets.

3.   The War in Ukraine: In the case of the Russia-Ukraine war, the U.S. views Russia’s aggression as a threat to the post-World War II order that they helped establish. Ukraine represents the front line in a broader struggle between democratic nations and authoritarian regimes. By supporting Ukraine, the U.S. is not only defending a sovereign nation but also asserting its role as the guarantor of a global order built on rules and norms.

Is It About Religion, or Something More?

While religion and identity are certainly central to many conflicts, including the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, it is becoming increasingly clear that economic and geopolitical factors often play a more decisive role in driving wars. The global economy is intricately connected to these conflicts, as wars create shifts in markets, disrupt trade, and open opportunities for profit.

However, we cannot overlook another critical issue: the growing climate crisis. The devastation caused by climate change is directly linked to the actions of a few who prioritize profit over the planet. The wealthiest individuals and corporations, driven by greed, contribute disproportionately to environmental degradation, while the world’s poorest bear the brunt of its effects. Climate change is the result of decisions made by the excessively rich, who continue to exploit natural resources without considering the long-term consequences for the planet and humanity.

The Role of Climate Change in Global Instability

The consequences of climate change exacerbate existing global tensions. In regions like the Middle East, where water and arable land are already scarce, climate change intensifies competition over resources, leading to more conflict. Additionally, climate-related disasters, such as droughts, floods, and extreme heat, displace millions of people, creating new waves of refugees and increasing instability in already volatile regions.

In this context, the question arises: Are the conflicts we see today really about religious differences, or are they symptoms of a deeper, systemic issue rooted in greed and the quest for power?

Many believe that global elites and corporations are more interested in maintaining their wealth and control than in addressing the root causes of war, poverty, and environmental destruction. These powerful actors shape the world according to their interests, leaving the rest of society to deal with the consequences, whether through war, economic inequality, or environmental collapse.

A New Era: Could 2026 Be a Turning Point?

As the world faces these interconnected challenges, many hope that 2026 could mark the beginning of a global shift. There is growing awareness among people worldwide that the current system is unsustainable, and a change is needed to break the cycle of injustice that has long dominated society. This shift may come through grassroots movements, technological innovation, or a broader cultural awakening that prioritizes sustainability, equity, and peace over profit.

As people become more aware of the climate crisis and the role of the ultra-wealthy in perpetuating these conflicts, there is a growing sense that a reckoning is coming. In 2026, we may see a societal transformation, as the world demands a fairer, more just system that puts people and the planet above the interests of a small elite.

The World Pays for the Mistakes of the Few

In many ways, the global community continues to pay the price for the decisions of a few powerful leaders and elites. Whether it’s the U.S. intervening in yet another war, or billionaires profiting from global instability, it seems that ordinary people are the ones who suffer most. Resources that could be used to improve education, healthcare, and the environment are instead funneled into military budgets and reconstruction efforts after wars that never seem to end.

This cycle raises an important question: Are these wars truly about protecting religious identity or national sovereignty? Or are they, at their core, about maintaining control over resources, money, and power?

Conclusion: A Call for Reflection and Understanding

The ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, like many of today’s wars, reflects not just a struggle over land, but a broader battle for influence, control, and, increasingly, the sustainability of our planet. The role of global powers, especially the United States, is pivotal in shaping the outcomes of these conflicts. However, as we reflect on the history of the region and the current state of world affairs, it’s clear that the global population, particularly the most vulnerable, often pay the highest price.

As wars continue and economies shift, climate change looms as an existential threat that could exacerbate global instability if not addressed. The actions of the few — driven by profit and power — have created a world where both conflict and environmental collapse seem inevitable, but 2026 might be a turning point. It could mark the beginning of a global awakening, where people worldwide demand an end to the cycle of injustice and begin building a fairer, more sustainable future.

Saisi

Did you know that the CAF "notes" the recipients?

 

A very interesting article from La Quadrature du Net on the CAF algorithm used to "predict" who is likely or not to cheat among the beneficiaries (!).

Thus, CAF employees are no longer subject to moods when they have to deal with fraud: it is the algorithm that tells them who they should target.

Except that, as La Quadrature du Net rightly points out, the algorithm only processes data according to the program with which it was designed by human beings. So there is no such thing as a neutral, impartial, objective algorithm....

“This algorithm is interesting from this point of view since it was trained 'in the rules of the art', see the references above, starting from a database resulting from random checks. there is therefore no sampling bias a priori, as in the case of facial recognition algorithms. That being said, the algorithm repeats the human biases linked to the checks carried out on these randomly selected files (severity with people on social minima, difficulty in identifying complex fraud…) But above all, as explained in the article, it reflects the complexity of the rules for access to social benefits, which is a purely political subject that the algorithm only reveals.

La Quadrature du Net purely and simply requests the withdrawal of this discriminating algorithm from the CAF.

If you want to know more, you can contact La Quadrature du Net directly (which always does excellent, very serious work) here: contact@laquadrature.net

CAF: digital at the service of exclusion and harassment of the most precarious

Posted on October 19, 2022

For almost a year now, we have been fighting within the collective “Stop Controls” in order to oppose the effects of dematerialization and the use of digital technology by administrations for the purposes of social control. After having discussed the situation at Pôle Emploi, we are interested here in the case of the Family Allowance Funds (CAF). We will soon come back to the consequences of this fight in which we wish to fully engage in the coming months.

"Between CAF and you, there is only one click". This is what we could read on a CAF poster at the start of the year. And the subtitle leaves you dreaming: “Access to all CAF services 24 hours a day”. Vain promise of a digital facilitating access to social benefits, at any time of the day and night. Sinister slogan masking the reality of excessive computerization, a vector of calculated social exclusion.

While the generalization of online procedures is accompanied above all by a reduction in physical reception capacities, a mode of contact that is essential for people in precarious situations2, it is to an algorithm that the CAF leaves the care of predict which recipients would be “(un)trustworthy” and need to be checked3. Responsible for giving a score to each beneficiary, supposed to represent the “risk” that they benefit unduly from social assistance, this scoring algorithm serves a policy of institutional harassment of the most precarious

The Shame Algorithm

Fed with hundreds of data that CAF has on each beneficiary5, the algorithm continuously assesses their situation in order to classify and sort them, via the assignment of a score (“risk score”). This note, updated monthly, is then used by the teams of CAF controllers to select those to be subject to in-depth control6.

The little information available reveals that the algorithm deliberately discriminates against the precarious. Thus, among the elements that the algorithm associates with a high risk of abuse, and therefore negatively impacting the score of a beneficiary, we find the fact7:

– To have low income,

– To be unemployed or not to have a stable job,

– To be a single parent (80% of single parents are women)8,

– To dedicate a significant part of its income to housing,

– To have many contacts with CAF (for those who would dare to ask for help).

Other parameters such as place of residence, type of housing (social, etc.), mode of contact with CAF (telephone, email, etc.) or being born outside the European Union are used without that we do not know precisely how they affect this note9. But it is easy to imagine the fate reserved for a foreign person living in a disadvantaged suburb. This is how, since 2011, CAF has been organizing a veritable digital hunt for the most disadvantaged, the consequence of which is a massive over-control of poor people, foreigners and women raising a child alone.

Worse, CAF brags about it. Its director qualifies this algorithm as being part of a "constant and proactive policy of modernizing tools to fight against fraudsters and crooks". The institution, and its algorithm, are also regularly presented at the state level as a model to follow in the fight against "social fraud", a theme imposed by the right and the far right in the early 2000s.

How can such a profoundly discriminatory device be publicly defended, moreover by a social administration? It is here that the computerization of social control takes on a particularly dangerous character, through the technical alibi it offers to political leaders.

A technical alibi for an iniquitous policy

First of all, the use of the algorithm allows CAF to mask the social reality of the sorting organized by its control policy. Exit the references to the targeting of social minima recipients in the “annual control plans”. The latter now report “datamining targets”, without ever explaining the criteria associated with the calculation of “risk scores”. As a CAF controller said: “Today it is true that data makes things easier for us. I do not have to say that I will select 500 RSA beneficiaries. It's not me who does it, it's the system that says it! (Laughs). »12

The notion of “risk score” is also used to individualize the targeting process and deny its discriminatory nature. A CAF control officer thus declared in front of deputies that “More than populations at risk, we are talking about profiles of beneficiaries at risk, in connection with data mining”13. In other words, CAF argues that its algorithm does not target the poor as a social category but as individuals. A large part of the "risk factors" used to target recipients are, however, socio-demographic criteria associated with precarious situations (low income, unstable professional situation, etc.). This rhetorical game is therefore statistical nonsense, as the Defender of Rights reminds us:14 "More than a targeting of 'presumed risks', the practice of data mining forces the designation of populations at risk and, in doing so, leads to instil the idea that certain categories of users are more inclined to cheat”.

Finally, the use of the algorithm is used by CAF leaders to shirk responsibility for choosing the criteria for targeting the people to be controlled. They transform this choice into a purely technical problem (predicting which files are most likely to present irregularities) whose resolution is the responsibility of the institution's teams of statisticians. The only thing that counts then is the effectiveness of the proposed solution (the quality of the prediction), the internal workings of the algorithm (the targeting criteria) becoming a simple technical detail that does not concern politicians15. A director of CAF can thus say publicly: “We [CAF] do not draw up the typical profile of the fraudster. With datamining, we don't draw conclusions,” simply omitting to say that CAF delegates this task to its algorithm.

Early over-control of the most precarious

This is our response to officials who deny the political nature of this algorithm: the algorithm has only learned to detect what you have decided to target. The over-control of the most precarious is neither a coincidence nor the unexpected result of complex statistical operations. It is the result of a political choice of which you knew, even before the deployment of the algorithm, the consequences for the precarious.

This choice is as follows16. Despite CAF's communication about its new "fight against fraud" tool (see for example here, here or here), the algorithm was designed not to detect fraud, which is intentional, but indus (overpayments) in the broad sense17, the vast majority of which result from involuntary declarative errors18.

However, CAF knew that the risk of error is particularly high for people in precarious situations, due to the complexity of the rules for calculating social benefits concerning them. Thus, as early as 200619, a former director of the fight against fraud at the CAF explained that "the undus are explained […] by the complexity of the services", which is "all the more true for the services linked to precariousness (hear the social minima). He added that this is due to taking into account “numerous elements of the user’s situation which are very variable over time, and therefore very unstable”. Concerning isolated women, he already recognized the “difficulty of grasping the notion of “marital life””, a difficulty in turn generating errors.

Asking the algorithm to predict the risk of undue payment therefore amounts to asking it to learn to identify who, among the recipients, is dependent on social minima or is a victim of the conjugalization20 of social assistance. In other words, CAF officials knew, from the start of the targeting automation project, what would be the “risk profiles” that the algorithm was going to identify.

Nothing is therefore more false than to declare, as this institution did in response to the Defender of Rights' criticisms, that "the controls to be carried out" are "selected by a neutral algorithm" which obeys "no presupposition »21. Or that “the controls […] resulting from datamining […] leave no room for arbitrariness”.

Discriminate to profit

Why favor the detection of errors rather than that of fraud? Errors being more numerous and easier to detect than situations of fraud, which require the establishment of an intentional character, this makes it possible to maximize the amounts recovered from the beneficiaries and thus to increase the "yield" of controls.

To quote a former head of CAF's anti-fraud department: "We CAF, quite honestly, on these very big frauds, we can't be the leader because the stakes are beyond us, in a way." And to point out a little further on his satisfaction that in the last "objective and management agreement", a contract binding CAF to the State and defining a certain number of objectives,22 there is a "distinction between the rate recovery of undue fraud and undue non-fraud […] because the efficiency; is still more important on non-fraud industrials which, by definition, are of lesser importance”.

This algorithm is therefore only a tool used to increase the profitability of the controls carried out by CAF in order to feed a communication policy where, throughout activity reports and public communications, the harassment of the most precarious becomes a evidence of "good management" of the institution

Dehumanization and digital exposure

But digital has also profoundly changed the control itself, now turned towards the analysis of the personal data of the beneficiaries, whose right of access given to the controllers has become sprawling. Access to bank accounts, data held by energy suppliers, telephone operators, employers, traders and of course other institutions (employment center, taxes, national social security funds …)24: control has turned into a real digital stripping.

These thousands of digital traces are mobilized to feed a control where the burden of proof is reversed. Much more than the interview, personal data now forms the basis of the controllers' judgement. As a CAF controller said: “Before, the interview was very important. […] Now the control of information upstream of the interview takes on much more importance. »25. Or even, “a controller when he prepares his file, just by going to see the partner portals, before meeting the beneficiary, he has a very good idea of ​​what he will be able to find”.

Refusing to submit to this transparency is prohibited under penalty of suspension of benefits. The “right to digital silence” does not exist: opposition to total transparency is equated with obstruction. And for the most reluctant, CAF reserves the right to request this information directly from the third parties who hold it.

The control then becomes a session of humiliation where everyone must agree to justify the smallest detail of their life, as this beneficiary testifies: “The interview […] with the CAF agent was a humiliation. He had my bank accounts in front of him and went through every line. Did I really need an Internet subscription? What had I spent these 20 euros drawn in cash on? »26.

The score assigned by the algorithm acts in particular as proof of guilt. Contrary to what the CAF wants to believe, which reminds anyone who wants to listen that the algorithm is only a "decision-making tool", a degraded risk score generates suspicion and severity during controls . It is up to the beneficiary to answer for the algorithmic judgment. To prove that the algorithm is wrong. This influence of algorithmic scoring on control teams, a recognized fact referred to as "automation bias", is even better explained here by a controller: "Given the fact that we are going to control a situation strongly scored, some told me that, well, there is a kind of – even unconsciously – not an obligation of results but to say to themselves: if I am there, it is because there is something so it is necessary that I find »

Dramatic human consequences

These practices are all the more revolting as the human consequences can be very serious. Psychological distress, loss of housing, depression28: the control leaves significant traces in the lives of all controlled. As a director of social action explains29: “You have to imagine that the undue payment is almost worse than non-recourse”. And to add: “You are in a mechanism for recovering undue payments and administrations which can also decide to cut you off all access to social benefits for a period of six months. Really, you find yourself in a black situation, that is to say that you made a mistake but you pay extremely dearly for it and this is where an extremely strong degradation situation begins which is very difficult behind to recover ” .

Requests for undue reimbursement can represent an untenable burden for people in financial difficulty, especially when they are due to errors or omissions that cover a long period. Added to this is the fact that overpayments can be recovered via deductions from all social benefits.

Worse, the numerous testimonies30 collected by the Defender of Rights and the Stop Control and Changer de Cap collectives report numerous illegal practices on the part of CAF (non-compliance with adversarial proceedings, difficulty of appeal, abusive suspension of aid, failure to provide the report investigation, no access to findings) and abusive re-qualifications of situations of involuntary error as fraud. These improper qualifications then lead to the filing of recipients identified as fraudsters31, filing reinforcing à in turn their stigmatization during future interactions with CAF and whose consequences may extend beyond this institution if this information is transferred to other administrations

Digital, bureaucracy and social control

Admittedly, digital technologies are not the root cause of CAF practices. As the “social” side of the digital control of public space by the police institution that we document in our Technopolice campaign, they are the reflection of policies centered around logics of sorting, surveillance and general administration of our lives32.

The practice of scoring that we denounce at CAF is not specific to this institution. A pioneer, the CAF was the first social administration to set up such an algorithm, it has now become the "good student", to use the words of a LREM MP33, which should inspire other administrations. Today it is thus Pôle emploi, health insurance, old-age insurance or even taxes which, under the impetus of the Court of Auditors and the National Delegation for the Fight against Fraud34, are working to develop their own scoring algorithms.

At a time when, as Vincent Dubois35 says, our social system is always tending towards "fewer social rights granted unconditionally [...] and more aid [...] conditional on individual situations", which "logically calls for more control », it seems legitimate to question the major projects for the automation of social assistance, such as that of « solidarity at the source » proposed by the President of the Republic. Because this automation can only be achieved at the cost of an ever-increasing scrutiny of the population and will require the establishment of digital infrastructures which, in turn, will confer ever more power on the State and its administrations.

Fight

Faced with this observation, we ask that the use of the scoring algorithm by CAF be put to an end. The search for undus, the vast majority of which are of the order of a few hundred euros36, can in no way justify such practices which, by their nature, have the effect of throwing precarious people into situations of immense distress.

To the remark of a CAF director saying that he could not "answer precisely as to the biases" that his algorithm could contain - thus implying that the algorithm could be improved -, we answer that the problem is not technical, but political. Since it simply cannot exist without inducing discriminatory vetting practices, it is the scoring algorithm itself that must be abandoned.

We will soon come back to the actions we want to take to fight, at our level, against these policies. Until then, we will continue to document the use of scoring algorithms in all French administrations and invite those who wish, and can, to organize and mobilize locally, like the Technopolice campaign run by La Quadrature. In Paris, you can find us and come and discuss this fight within the framework of the general meetings of the Stop Controls collective, whose press releases we relay via our website.

This fight can only benefit from exchanges with those who, at CAF or elsewhere, have information on this algorithm (the details of the criteria used, the internal dissensions that its implementation may have provoked, etc.) and want us to help combat such practices. We encourage these people to contact us at contact@laquadrature.net. You can also drop documents anonymously on our SecureDrop (see our help page here).

Finally, we would like to denounce the police surveillance to which the Stop Controls collective is subject. Making telephone contacts on the part of the intelligence services, allusions to the actions of the collective with some of its members in the context of other militant actions and over-presence of the police during simple towing operations in front of CAF agencies: as many of police measures aimed at the intimidation and repression of a social movement that is both legitimate and necessary.

Saisi

Do illnesses have a meaning? Conscious healing

 

Relationship to Societal Disease

CC = Advisory Committee

PTI = Vise à s'assurer de la cohérence et de la bonne articulation des politiques publiques et initiatives conduites par le Conseil départemental et ses partenaires

CEP = Multidisciplinary Team Council

This work was done between 2019 and 2022 by 13 people who belong to the CC, PTI and CEP of Hérault, France

 

In summary:

It would be for the CC to develop the frame of a workshop to be tested internally first, then to export it to the other CCs, then more widely to other interested structures.

The purpose of this workshop would be to get people to express themselves on their relationship to the disease and to seek together how to get out of conditioning and beliefs, in order to acquire more autonomy. Simultaneously, to bring to light the structural problems in society that induces conflict that can result in illness, such as endemic unemployment, the deterioration of human relations within employment, etc.

The main idea is that our health is first of all our responsibility, individual and collective. But to be able to take on this responsibility, collective work is needed to change the common cultural narrative. (as we did for "work")

This approach is not “against” or “on the sidelines” of medicine and health practitioners. It aims, on the contrary, to relieve them of the enormous burden which consists in having to manage what should be managed by the patient: the “taking charge” of his own internal conflicts and of the conflicts induced by the social organization. The doctor can only really "help" the one who helps himself first, and he cannot resolve socially induced conflicts and illnesses on his own.

Starting from observations of the lived reality, made both by recipients and by social workers, the CC of Béziers proposes to broaden its reflection and its proposals (2018-2022) on "work vs employment and representations" to the dimension of the physical and mental health of recipients in particular, and of people in precarious situations in general.

Indeed, the problem of "health" is generally approached by the institutions, within the framework of integration, "from the angle of the difficulty or the obstacle to employment, as a strictly medical problem calling for a response curative care. (PTI 2017-2021 ) The discussions during the work of the PTI 2017-2021 have changed this trend and given rise to a different orientation: "The reflections undertaken within the ad hoc groups have led to a change of posture, which now consists to apprehend the person in the process of integration as a whole, taking into account his environment, and to rely on his abilities and skills to promote his development, within the framework of social progression. (PTI 2021-2025)

• Findings

The current social organization around employment, and the representations resulting from it, contribute to precipitating more and more people into precariousness (even while having a job), into unemployment or into the RSA system.

The responses at the national institutional level are based more on increased control and repression vis-à-vis recipients than on proposals for new ways or permanent solutions to avoid non-employment.

Recipients suffer from both isolation and a lack of social recognition. Not everyone has the same capacity for resilience in the face of these two problems. Many are then forced to find in the status of “sick” a means of escaping both the pressure exerted by institutions and the pressure they impose on themselves to acquire a recognized social status. They don't fake it: they develop real illnesses. The status of "sick" justifies not being able to respond to pressure from outside, in the eyes of the institution which then releases the pressure, and in the eyes of the recipient who can attribute the reason to his illness. The inability to register in employment (= a recognized social status) which he encounters and thus discharge his feeling of guilt. The disease then constitutes a shield of protection essential to the psyche to resist: it is then necessary and useful.

The statistics of state organizations that monitor health are also formal: the unemployed and precarious have a life expectancy much lower than the national average age:

“Not only have scientists discovered that unemployed people have a higher suicide mortality rate than working people, but also that the loss of work promotes the onset of cardiovascular pathologies. The unemployed thus have a risk of stroke and heart attack increased by 80% compared to the assets. They are also more likely to die of cancer. The finding is the same for women and men. » (..)

“there is a specific effect associated with unemployment independent of other risk factors,” emphasizes Pierre Meneton, public health researcher at Inserm. An excess mortality that is not well explained, probably linked to the psychological dimension of unemployment, with phenomena such as depression or lack of sleep." As the epidemiologists write, in conclusion of their study, " Killing jobs means killing people, figuratively and literally."

Paradoxically, while the demand for care is increasing, we are simultaneously witnessing the dismantling of the health service in France, particularly in rural areas where the medical deserts are widening, and the hospitals - which must consequently absorb more patients - are increasingly deprived of means and personnel.

Being sick therefore becomes a “luxury” that soon few will be able to afford.

Consequently, dealing with the question of the disease appeared to us to be essential. Our role is NOT to assume its individual medical dimension (role of doctors and psychologists), it is the collective cultural dimension of health and illness that concerns us.

• What does the “collective dimension” of health and illness mean?

We are conditioned, in our Western culture, to think that illness is individual, and therefore to treat individuals. At a certain level of reality this is quite true: if Mr X develops diabetes, the whole collective does not have diabetes. But at another level of reality, Mr X's diabetes, Mr Y's cancer, Mr Z's alcoholism, etc... are possibly linked to a common factor which may be, for example, anxiety and the loss of a recognized social identity, due to unemployment.

Similarly, many diseases are caused by the consumption of junk food, itself caused by common factors, industrial agriculture, precariousness, or by inherited cultural habits.

Another common cultural heritage is a fear-based relationship to illness and death. Decades of efficient social security and health care systems in France have led the French to question themselves less and less about the intimate relationship they have in the face of illness and death. When you were sick, you just had to go see the doctor or go to the hospital to be “taken care of”, while being reimbursed. As these systems break down and are being privatized, this total “ownership” is more and more lacking. This means that the most precarious will often have to face their illnesses alone. Learning to manage fear will therefore not be superfluous.

The “collective dimension” of health and disease therefore concerns both the identification of the systemic processes that induce disease and the development of a new individual and collective culture of responsibility and autonomy.

• What does this mean concretely?

Any culture is first based on a common “narrative”. Any transformation requires a change of narrative. Any change of story goes through meetings, to form the new story, then writings, videos, etc... by all means of dissemination. This change also involves experimenting with the new narrative and feedback.

The current bases that the CC can provide to initiate this narrative are questions and reflections around:

 

• A social system based strictly on employment (see previous works) inevitably generates suffering and disease on a large scale.

• Since it is not possible for individuals, at their level, to change the system, what can they change to suffer less and not get sick?

• It is in their individual power to change what they think and feel, and to share this with others.

• It is in their power to explore their individual capacity to stay healthy and to take care of their minor ailments themselves.

• It is in their individual power not to harbor the fear of disease and death

• It is in their individual power to regain self-confidence and not to “need” the disease to “have the right” to exist socially.

•        Etc...

Nous pensons que la mise en commun de ces interrogations et réflexions pourrait déboucher sur l'organisation d'un groupe chargé d'animer des rencontres locales vers les publics chômeurs/RSA/précaires afin de tisser une culture de la responsabilité et de l'autonomie indispensable en temps de crise.

Work support

Ken Loach's film "Me, Daniel Blake" (2016) can serve as a support for opening a discussion.

https://www.allocine.fr/video/player_gen_cmedia=19564084&cfilm=241697.html

Synopsis: For the first time in his life, Daniel Blake, a 59-year-old English carpenter, is forced to call on social assistance following heart problems. However, although his doctor forbade him to work, he was told by the job center (equivalent to Pôle Emploi) that he had to look for a job under penalty of punishment. During his regular appointments at the job center, Daniel will cross paths with Rachel, a single mother of two children who has been forced to accept a job 450 km from her home.

Daniel Blake has completely identified with his paid job, which he has held since his youth: he “is” this man who earns his living by his own activity.

The serious illness comes to crash into this identity by obliging him, since he no longer has a salary, to ask for social assistance. A situation that will lead him to confront the representation that institutions have of unemployed people. He is not treated as a sick person whose job has been withdrawn, but as a person to be put back on the "right path" of employment. As if he was a delinquent in rehabilitation. But Daniel Blake is 59 years old, that is to say that he has passed the expiration date of employability. However, he will be subjected with renewed violence to paradoxical injunctions imposed without mercy by employees of the job center: to look for a job when his doctor tells him to rest, to find a job when there is no offers available, etc.

This systemic institutional violence does not only affect job seekers. It is exercised in the same way on the employees who work within the institution through the precepts and methods of new management in application since the 2000s. The employees only reproduce it on job seekers. These methods induce the psychic disintegration of the individuals who undergo them, and the psychic disintegration always leads to barbarism. As Voltaire wrote, “Those who can make you believe nonsense can make you commit atrocities. »

All employees within companies and institutions (and even the “self-employed”) and all recipients of social minima (unemployment, RSA, etc.) can testify to the trauma experienced and the paths of resilience in the face of this trauma. On both sides, illness is one of these paths. When the psychic pressure is intolerable, the body says “stop”, one way or another.

Recognizing institutional violence as such, learning to identify the phenomena of psychic disintegration and their consequences, recognizing the trauma experienced, accepting illness as a way of resilience, are individual steps that are essential to the recomposition of living collectives.

Physical and mental health does not only depend on medicine: it also depends on the collective need to rebuild society. It also depends on the ability of each person to have a sense of continuity and meaning in their existence, and on the degree of awareness: when the conflict is made aware, it is less costly psychically for the subject; if, on the other hand, he remains unconscious, the cost to health can be high.

RSA recipients who are still alive have, through their experience, knowledge and know-how to overcome the psychic disintegration that threatens the whole of society.

SAISI