JISCMail - MINORITY-ETHNIC-HEALTH Archives

David,

This is my take:

1. I think most people do recognize ‘race’ as used in general commonsense as a biologically and scientifically invalid notion – i.e. one that it is socially constructed but with a long history, that resonates with the historic events that epitomize racism such as colonialism and slavery. The term racial minorities and ‘b/Black minorities’ are used to emphasize this fact – the fact that racism exists and must be named and faced up to. In other words, ‘race’ (often without the quotes) is used because racism – especially skin-colour racism - is a powerful force in Britain and just avoiding using the word ‘race’ is like a cop-out The alternative name / category may be ‘minorities affected by racism’ – but this is cumbersome and has the added strategic disadvantage that the reality of racism is too upfront. Sometimes we go further than ‘racial minorities’ in an effort to not be too upfront and refer to ‘ethnic minorities’ bringing in a bit of ‘culture’, religion etc into play. I.E., talking of racial minorities (or B/black minorities) enables services to address (hopefully!) racism. North America too seems to follows this line I think – sometimes ‘people of color’ being used instead of racial minorities or sometimes reference to ‘racialized minorities’ to include people affected by a type of racism that is not specifically skin-color-based. (Could be Spanish-speaking – ‘Hispanics’ I suppose)

2. Refugees and asylum seekers do indeed get disadvantaged (in the way you suggest) by our use of ‘race’ and ‘racial’. They are often considered as being not within the black part of the BME classification, although strictly speaking most of them should be. I think most people who work with refugees and asylum seekers recognize that racism is a major issue for them too, and perhaps that is where the pressure should be – to include them (or most of them) within the BME category. ‘Racialized minorities’ has not caught on but that is an alternative path in this categorization journey.

3. Categorization is for a purpose – a tool for researchers and for service providers monitoring and remedying exclusion / discrimination - and not an end in itself. Ethnicity (that carries within it a ‘race’ dimension without actually saying so) is OK I think for the time being. If racism worsens (as seems to be happening in UK and possibly in Netherlands), we may have to re-think. If racism diminishes (any signs of that anywhere?) may be we could drop ethnic / racial/ and even cultural classifications for we would then be near having achieved an equal and just society.

Best wishes,

Suman

Suman Fernando
<http://www.sumanfernando.com>

Hon. Senior Lecturer in Mental Health
European Centre for Migration & Social Care (MASC)
University of Kent at Canterbury, Kent CT2 7LZ
Visiting Professor in the Department of Applied Social Sciences
London Metropolitan University

From: Health of minority ethnic communities in the UK [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ingleby, J.D. (David)
Sent: 30 October 2009 14:12
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Black/black

Two questions occur to me in response to recent postings:

1. When a term such as "Black and other racial minorities" is adopted by a public body, has any thought been paid to the danger that using such terminology will actually encourage racism?

There is a striking contrast between the way people in the UK and in the rest of Europe relate to the term "race". In the UK the term seems to be perfectly acceptable - but on the other side of the Channel, jaws drop and eyebrows shoot up if you ever give the impression of taking it seriously. The term is strongly associated with nazism, and neo-nazis are the only people who use it in earnest. It is also regarded as scientifically useless, certainly in the way it is commonly used. Even people with a biological orientation - especially such people - regard it is a worthless notion. ("Racism", on the other hand, is an extremely important and valuable term.) Can someone explain to me why public bodies in the UK are still encouraging the use of the term "race"?

2. Similarly, has any thought been paid to the groups which are excluded when actions to improve health are confined to "racial minorities" ? This links up with my earlier remark about asylum seekers and undocumented migrants. These people come from all corners of the globe - they are not defined by their ethnicity or nationality or "race", but by their legal status and their position in society. My point was that restricting attention to "ethnic minorities" excludes these groups in theory and encourages their exclusion in practice. Restricting attention to "racial minorities" is even more selective, because it suggests that only "non-white" people are socially vulnerable.

3. Just to put the cat among the pigeons before we all knock off for the weekend, I'd like to go further and suggest that the whole emphasis on "ethnicity" is badly in need of rethinking. It was useful in the days when there were a small number of large, clearly identifiable ethnic groups present in most countries. Today there are over 200 languages spoken by children at London schools. Should we extend ethnicity research to over 200 categories, or should we instead start looking for other possible indicators of social exclusion and vulnerability? Why is there so little attention to religion, for example, in epidemiological research? By not being responsive to social change, even the most "progressive" research traditions and policy paradigms can become powerful mechanisms of social exclusion.

Over to you!

David

Van: Health of minority ethnic communities in the UK namens Qassim Taher
Verzonden: vr 30-10-2009 13:07
Aan: [log in to unmask]
Onderwerp: Re: Black/black

When was this decision made in the Liverpool PCT and by whom to change it from BRM to BME? The term BRM is locally agreed and supported by Liverpool First. Hence we have the BRM joint action plan supported by Liverpool First Partnership.

Taher Ali Qassim MBE

Liverpool PCT

Public Health Neighbourhood Manager

1st Floor

1 Arthouse Square

61-69 Seel Street

Liverpool

L1 4AZ

Direct Tel: 0151 296 7794

Switchboard: 0151 296 7000

Fax: 0151 296 7676

Other email: [log in to unmask]

From: Health of minority ethnic communities in the UK [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ndebele Melusi
Sent: 29 October 2009 09:14
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Black/black

How very refreshing!

Coming to work in Liverpool two and half years ago, I was told that local people did not like the ‘ethnic’ bit so the term to use was ‘Black and other racial minorities’ (BRM).

In September 2009, the PCT decided it is going to be BME and nothing else.

I guess the debate will go on but for me this is a very refreshing perspective.

Melusi

From: Health of minority ethnic communities in the UK [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ingleby, J.D. (David)
Sent: 28 October 2009 19:16
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Black/black

Dear Jane,

The term "Black and minority ethnic" does indeed cause raised eyebrows in what you refer to as Europe (by which I suppose you mean continental Europe; last time I looked, the UK was geographically and politically part of Europe!) I understand the historical reasons why the term "BME" was invented, but all the same I hope it will be phased out one day. Apart from suggesting a contrast between Black and other minority ethnic groups, it is a quite inadequate term to use for asylum seekers, who are not an ethnic group (unless Home-Office-Land is a country of origin) and often have no chance to belong to an ethnic group in the UK. The same applies to undocumented migrants, who constitute approximately 10% of all migrants. In fact, I think the popularity of the term "BME" has a lot to do with the neglect of the rights of asylum seekers and undocumented migrants in the UK - though which is cause and which is effect, I'm not sure.

It's true that we "Europeans" on the other side of the Channel do tend to talk a lot about "migrants", but that reflects a deliberate choice for a different theoretical perspective. I don't understand how you can call it "just plain wrong". Referring to "second generation migrants" is a contradiction in terms, I admit; but ignoring the difference between members of an ethnic group who were born overseas and those who were born in the host country - which is what you do if you only look at "ethnicity" - is not very helpful either. Can't we just agree to study "migrants and ethnic minorities"?

As for what constitutes an "minority ethnic group", I'd like to challenge the apparent assumption of many UK researchers that whenever you have a group of people coming from a certain country, you have an "ethnic community". Very often, "community" is just a feel-good term that doesn't correspond to anything real. The only way to find out whether people coming from a particular country form a community - i.e. identify with that country, maintain contact with each other, and so on - is to get out there and ask them. My hunch is that many of them don't. Especially when the country in question is a big one, regions, cities, religions or tribes may be far more important.

For example: in the Netherlands, Moroccans are treated as an ethnic group (and how!) However, if you ask them, you learn that many never thought of themselves as "Moroccans" when they arrived. In particular, Berber- and Arabic-speaking Moroccans felt they had little in common with each other. However, when the Dutch media and intellectuals started to tar them all with the same brush, they suddenly did - and so an ethnic group was born.....

Glad to see these issues aired at last!

Best wishes,

David

Utrecht,

The Netherlands,

Europe,

The World,

The Solar System,

etc.

Van: Jane Fountain [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Verzonden: wo 28-10-2009 09:05
Aan: Ingleby, J.D. (David); [log in to unmask]
Onderwerp: Black/black

I agree with Mark (below) on this one. At ISCRI, we use the following to explain:

"We are very conscious that various terms are used to refer to the many diverse communities in the UK. We use ‘Black and minority ethnic communities/populations.’ This reflects that our concern is not only with those for whom 'Black' is a political term, denoting those who identify around a basis of skin colour distinction or who may face discrimination because of this or their culture: 'Black and minority ethnic' also acknowledges the diversity that exists within these communities, and includes a wider range of those who may not consider their identity to be ‘Black,’ but who nevertheless constitute a distinct ethnic group, such as White Irish people."

This goes down like a ton of bricks in Europe, though, where the 'and' in 'Black and minority ethnic' is taken to mean that 'Black' people are not 'minority ethnic' people.

Throughout Europe, the term most often used is 'migrants' which I think is totally inadequate and just plain wrong, but I fear I am fighting a losing battle!

I too have had problems with journals who decapitalise my 'Black' even when I add the paragraph above explaining it.

My main concern as a researcher, however, whatever people choose to call themselves, with a capital or not, is that data are collected and presented at least according to the 2001 census (or is it Census?) categories. Many publications (including government ones) present data on ethnicity collapsed into the categories of 'Black, White, Asian, Mixed, Chinese and other', which is useless for most purposes.

Jane

From: Health of minority ethnic communities in the UK [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of M & M Johnson
Sent: 26 October 2009 17:10
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Black - capital B or not

Guardian style book reduces nearly all Capitals except proper names to lower case

In my experience (i.e. 'according to Johnson')

Black vs black is like Deaf versus deaf: Politically defined as an identity or used as an adjective (roughly speaking) i.e., the Deaf community use D to indicate an identity and political message, others use as an adjective indicating loss of auditory ability.

similarly with Black used as an inclusive term and/or shorthand for BME or BAME (and there's some room there for manoeuvre on what the A stands for - asylum seekers, asian and And.)

you choose....

Mark R D Johnson
Moderator, Minority-Ethnic-Health Discussion List
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/minority-ethnic-health

Others - please comment - this could be an interesting discussion!