Photo: Girl in Cairo- December 2007.I recently heard a programme on BBC Radio 4, on the issue of incorporation of Muslims in UK versus France which I thought was very relevant to the issues faced in autism. The programme discussed the outcome of a study that compared 2 systems of inclusion of Islamic minorities in UK and France. The first is accommodationist and the second is integrative. The study compares the outcomes of these modes of integration.
In the UK, Muslims are able to live in their communities, allowing full expression of their religious beliefs, with the wearing of religious clothing such as a head scarf for example. The approach to its Muslims has been accommodationist, bringing senior Muslims into policymaking and passing anti-hate laws on religion. In France by comparison, wearing a head scarf is not encouraged, it is even prohibited in schools. French integration theory and policy are based on a strong definition of 'Frenchness' as a political not an ethnic concept. Becoming French requires accepting French values (notably secularism) and wherever possible relegating expressions of difference to the private sphere.
Two standards were used to judge of the incorporation of Muslims in these countries: economic (how people are doing in terms of earnings and employment); and attitudinal (how people feel).
In both France and the United Kingdom, Muslims' economic integration were reported to be poor. In both, unemployment is high (above 20% and sometimes approaching 40%) among Pakistanis, Bangladeshis and North Africans. Earnings are also weak: According to 2000 data, male Bangladeshis were earning about three-quarters the average wage.
As regards to public attitudes, a more complex picture emerged:
Non-Muslim French: Most French people were particularly positive toward French Muslims, viewing them as generous and honest; a large minority saw them as tolerant.
Non-Muslim Britons: Attitudes toward U.K. Muslims were less positive, but better than among many other Europeans: most Britons viewed Muslims as honest, although only a minority saw them as generous and tolerant.
French Muslims: Most French Muslims viewed non-Muslims in France as respectful of women, generous, tolerant and honest (but not devout); only a minority viewed them as arrogant, violent, greedy, immoral or fanatical. Equally importantly, almost 80% of French Muslims support secularism, one of the Republic's intellectual cornerstones.
U.K. Muslims: Attitudes toward non-Muslim Britons were thoroughly negative: Clear majorities viewed them as selfish, arrogant, violent, greedy and immoral, and a substantial minority as fanatical. Only a minority of U.K. Muslims viewed their fellow citizens as respectful of women, tolerant, honest or devout. However, a majority thought non-Muslim Britons were generous.
Islam and modernity: Finally, U.K. Muslims were the most likely in Europe to see a basic conflict between Islam and modernity--47%. The figure for French Muslims was 28%.
Other issues were found to be radically different, for example homosexuality was seen by French Muslims as being acceptable in 1/3 of the sampled population whereas very few UK Muslims accept homosexuality. A similar trend of greater acceptance was seen towards sexuality outside marriage. But perhaps more importantly, when French Muslims were asked to rate the quality of their life they often rated it as more enjoyable than UK Muslims even though both populations do not significantly differ in term of economical status.
Where a common, non-religious identity unites Muslims and non-Muslims, the result is better public attitudes and a shared sense of a national project. Where religious divisions are emphasized, the result is mistrust. However, cultural integration is only one part of the equation. Economic integration, whereby Muslims enter work, earn wages and pay taxes just like their fellow citizens, is equally important; in this, both the United Kingdom and France have failed.
How relevant are these findings to the issues of incorporation of people with autism? Should we favor a model of accommodation or a model of integration even if these integration signify a greater loss of identity?
Posts
Doesn't it depend on where the Muslims come from in the first place?
ReplyDeleteMost British Muslims come from the subcontinent (India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh) and the Arab world (especially Saudi Arabia).
And the French Muslims come from Africa, especially Algeria and Egypt.
Also it depends on the Commonwealth and the French equivalent of the Commonwealth (the Francophone/colonialist links).
(note that I didn't mention south-east Asia here, especially Indonesia and Malaysia).
Generosity really is an important virtue.
I do not sufficiently know about Islam to answer this question, but this issue was not mentioned as potential confounding factor in the study. Having traveled in North Africa a little (where more Islamic people who live in France originate from), Iit seems that the waste majority is not in agreement with sexuality outside marriage, or homosexuality and follow a very strict religious code of conduct throughout the day in their country of origin. The potential confounding factor that was mentioned in the study was the length of time since immigrations of these communities have begun and there was no significant difference reported between France and UK.
ReplyDeleteWhilst we would argue that of course autism/or a disability in general is not like a cultural minority, the approach to inclusion can be seen as being fundamentally similar, though autism requires much more support and accomodation.
Being a Muslism is not a disability, though one could easily be a disabled Musilm.
ReplyDeleteI suppose this comparison works with the super-high functioning Asperger's crowd, but for those more severely effected it doesn't hold.
How can you possibly provide enough accomodation for a severely disabled person to live among others in society? And how can a severely disabled person be successfully integrated? Integration can work if it begins early; accomidaton often doesn't work because the person eventually can no longer cope or be provided for; a person needs to be TAUGHT i.e. integrated in order to be truly successful.
What if that person doesn't want to be in the community?
People forget that in the more severe forms of autism many of them wish to be left alone and may only communicate with people through the internet, if even that.
I will have to look at the study a bit more then.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting that the length of immigration was mentioned as a confounding factor. Time changes places, and places are changed by time. Therefore they should be looked at together. And when they are intimately involved with people and decisions. It could also be to do with generational factors which may play into the reason people migrate (eg: for economy or to practice their religion more freely).
Disability is a minority numerically, and it is the one minority that doesn't discriminate. Actually people talk about religious disabilities in the law, particularly in the history of religion in the UK. And these seem very 'social'/'administrative' model in practice.
I would say that being Muslim (or any other religion) is not a handicap.
I appreciate that Islamic people are not disabled and that the fundamental reasons for them being a minority after emigrating to new countries like France or the UK is not directly comparable to being in an autistic minority. I do not underestimate the support needed to people with autism and the natures of their difficulties. None the less, if people of a cultural minority feel better about their lives and there is a great mutual respect and trust between them and others in situations of greater integration, surely this would suggest that efforts should be made towards that type of inclusion. Therefore, this study in my mind gives weight to the argument that alleviating the core difficulties seen in autism (i.e. socialization, communication and behavior) should be a priority over simply providing an accommodating community.
ReplyDeleteI also appreciate also that some people with autism might wish to remain alone and isolated and therefore their inclusion will remain limited. However, if this is as a result of their choice, it’s totally OK. My impression is that many wish to be included more but do not really know how to achieve this.
Adelaide: What I said earlier was that the study considered the length of immigration as a POTENTIAL confounding factor, but it was NOT found to be relevant upon consideration.