TREATMENT OF GYPSIES, ROMAS & TRAVELERS Gypsies, Roma & Travellers

In this report, I will be discussing the difficulties of living in society today as Gypsies, Roma's and Travelers such as daily discrimination. To compare them directly to the blacks and Irish of earlier America or discriminated groups elsewhere is by no means an apples to apples comparison, they are some obvious and protracted parallels as well. The treatment of Gypsies, Romas and travelers is far from kind or balance and often becomes hate-filled and extremely bigoted. When speaking of gypsies, Romas and Travelers, the plight they face is mostly around the many corners of Europe including the United Kingdom, Greece and Italy. While most people have eschewed the transient nature of life of the past centuries, the Gypsies, Romas and Travelers still actively embrace it.

The reaction of many people is to treat these groups like lepers and with a nature of treatment that mirrors the racism, sexism and other bigotry of yesteryear. Even so, these groups are travelling because they wish to do so and to suggest that any leper-like treatment is justified by scientific or social banter is less than accurate. The literature reviewed in this report shall prove that and more. The subtopics noted below include medical care, education, treatment by authorities and so forth. While the groups mentioned in this report certainly go against the grain of accepted and expected cultural patterns, this does not mean that transient peoples should be treated as poorly as they are and there should be a middle ground found if at all possible.

Discussion

Education

The transient groups mentioned in this report face high exclusion rates and low attendance rates within the school systems. This is to be expected given the manner in which these groups do not stay in the same place for long. Quite often, these groups move because they are harangued and/or harassed into moving out of the place they are currently in. Regarding assumptions and policies that should be made as it relates to schools, there are a few things that should be identified.

The first recommendation has already been touched upon and that is the idea that Gypsies, Roma and so forth should indeed not be harangued into moving from area to area. Of course, they will tend to move at least somewhat often on their own due to their nature. However, this behavior should not be coerced and/or induced to the detriment of the school-age people in those groups (Shubin, 2011). To that end, areas can be reserved and arranged for these groups so that they can have the space they need while at the same time reducing the need for them to move around. Giving a bit of land for their use with minimal conditions such as people cleaning up after themselves and not engaging in improper activities such as panhandling and so forth can allow Gypsies and such to send their kids to school as they wish. The people that leave near these groups should be stopped immediately if they degrade and defile the Gypsy and Roma peoples just because of the group they inhabit. Bullying and bigotry is what it is when it happens. Granted, there are concerns about hygiene and life practices. However, much of that falls under opinion and lifestyle choices and that is not the decision of anyone to make other than the person or person making the decisions. Indeed, even teenagers in roaming groups can have high aspirations about education and what they will do with their future (Stevenson & Willott, 2007).

Police/Living Conditions

When it comes to the police, there tends to be a policy pattern that likens Gypsies and similar groups to homeless people and that is simply not a fair comparison. Not being nailed down to one location and simply being homeless are not the same thing. It is true that neighbors and other locals will complain. However, as long as the roaming groups are complying with the law, they should be left alone. To be sure, trash collection and upkeep is an important thing, just to name one thing, but proper arrangements can be made to manage all of this. Also, medical care is needed by traveling people as well and this should be allowed for (Andriotti et al., 2013). Presuming that the rules are common-sense and easy to follow, the possibility of compliance is much higher. Enhancing and advancing social segregation is not helpful and should be avoided. The community leadership and the leaders of the roaming communities should have a meeting of the minds and come to agreement. That way, any non-compliance can be pointed to in comparison to what was agreed upon. A top-down approach is not going to work nor is flouting of the law by the roaming groups (Greenfields &...

However, some courts and other legal syndicates have taken up the topic above in earnest (Ziengenfuss, 2011).
Recommendations

In general, both sides need to come together and in their own way. The roaming and transient groups need to understand that it is not acceptable to trash neighborhoods and squat on areas where people are trying to live and protect their property rights. Living in a prepared and equipped camp is all well and good but living illegaly on someone's property or trashing the aforementioned camp is not equitable, right or ethical. On the other hand, the law-writers and law-enforcers should not harass or harangue these roaming groups. Generally, they should be allowed to live and exist without harassment so long as they exist and remain within the guidelines they are supposed to be following. As already noted, a meeting of the minds that is common-sense on both sides and that allows for proper reactions and enforcement when one or both sides steps out of line should be put in place and followed to the letter.

Conclusion

In general, it is safe to say that some roaming group members do not live at a sufficient standard when it comes to hygiene and it is also safe to say that a roaming or transient lifestyle is not the norm anymore and this is for a good reason ("Gypsy & Traveller," 2007). However, personal freedoms dictate that people be allowed to live and exist as they wish so long as they are compliant with the laws. These laws should be basic and simple to follow so as to bring the greatest amount of freedom and happiness to everyone involved. For example, if someone is a Gypsy or Roma and they are unnecessarily harassing people for money or getting drunk/violent in a bar, that is not wrong. However, wrongfully accusing a roamer of doing something wrong is also not fair.

One endemic problem with all of this is that transient people are the antithesis of what is considered normal and acceptable ways of living. Further, they do tend to stick out and annoy people quite easily. Some of this is fair to say while some is conjecture and hyperbole (Taylor, 2011). However, opening up to how they truly exist, feel and live can really upend someone's perspective and worldview (Lidster, 2014; Lynch, 2006). Further, an "acceptable" place can lead to the groups being further marginalized and otherwise being treated wrongly (Bancroft, 2001). One thing that tends to cloud the issue is confusing the term "refugee" and the term "migrant." The latter certainly applies to Gypsies, Romas and such but the former technically does not even if they engage in much of the same behaviors as the rationality and causes involved are different (Franekova, 2002).

In short, the world is getting much darker and meaner towards Gypsies, Romas and such as the wider society goes further and further away from the general standard of life that they follow. On the other hand, the people that write the laws and set societal norms are getting harsher and harsher. This is leading to a rebellion and recoil against the government by the roamers, or at least a general ignorance and ambivalence about what they feel and why. These groups should try to come together or things will just get worse.

References

Andrioti, D., Kotrotsou, C., & Tsakatara, V. (2013). The medical social centres in support of Roma in Greece. Diversity & Equality In Health & Care, 10(2), 95-99.

Bancroft, A. (2001). Closed Spaces, Restricted Places: Marginalisation of Roma in Europe. Space & Polity, 5(2), 145-157. doi:10.1080/13562570120104454

Franekova, A. (2002). Refugees or migrants?. Harvard International Review, 24(1), 8.

Greenfields, M., & Smith, D.M. (2010). Housed Gypsy Travellers, Social Segregation

and the Reconstruction of Communities. Housing Studies, 25(3), 397-412.

doi:10.1080/02673031003711022

Gypsy and Traveller groups have worse health than others. (2007). Nursing

Standard, 21(31), 15.

Lidster, O. (2014). 'It's been life changing'. Nursing Standard, 28(29), 63.

Lynch, E. (2006). TRAVELLERS' TALES. Nursing Standard, 20(41), 20-21.

Shubin, S. (2011). 'Where Can a Gypsy Stop?' Rethinking Mobility in Scotland. Antipode, 43(2), 494-524. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8330.2010.00744.x

Stevenson, J., & Willott, J. (2007). The aspiration and access to higher education of teenage refugees in the UK. Compare: A Journal Of Comparative

Education, 37(5), 671-687. doi:10.1080/03057920701582624

Taylor, B. (2011). A people on the outside. History Today, 61(6), 17-19.

Ziengenfuss, D. (2011). ZINGARI OR…