Pelton and Responses

This first blog post addresses Pelton's article and it's responses.
 Before reading these articles, I always thought, and still think, that being in a group gives a human a sense of identity and belonging.  That it is not something that could be overall harmful to the situation.  However, he raises the idea that this focus on groups, takes away from the focus on helping individuals in society.
Pelton also addressed that the level of care between groups is not 'just.'  While some people in need recieve welfare, other's are lacking what they need in order to maintain their lives, such as veterans and the aging population.  In my opinion this is obvious when you hear stories of people 'abusint the system' while there are other people out there who actually need the help.
One specific example he used while discussing groups was the child welfare system.  Parents who's children are taken away are often labeled 'abusers and neglecters.'  When in actuality it may be due to other problems, such as not having their financial needs met to care for their children.
Jumping right into the subject after a long break from class  proved to be more difficult than I expected.  The reading was somewhat hard to wrap my head around, but I have to say that I agree with a few points that Scanlon made in his response to Pelton. 
Scanlon wrote that some group based practices are necessary in order to achieve a common goal.  The example he gave was gay and lesbian groups fighting for their equal rights (marriage and adoption.)  I also enjoyed the point he threw in about John Rawls 'Justice as Fairness,'  which includes the fairness principle and the principle of equal opportunity.  Social workers, and others, strive for equality for all members of society, whether in individual or group levels.  But is it really possible for everyone to be treated equally in all aspects of life?