Introduction themed section care or control? gypsies, travellers and the state

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The history of the state, in relation to its ‘dealings’ with Gypsies and Travellers in Britain and Ireland, has not been one worthy of endorsement, praise or special prizes (Hawes and Perez, 1986; Mayall, 1995). Since the emergence of written records detailing the presence of such groups on these Islands (around the fifteenth Century, according to Fraser, 1995: 111–120) a familiar series of tensions has tended to take shape, tensions that are explored by the articles within this themed section and that we might today discuss in terms of core dichotomies, such as ‘integration and assimilation’, ‘inclusion and exclusion’ and, with a social policy focus, ‘care and control’. Indeed, where objective academic analysis has been conducted of the state's enactment of social policy measures in relation to both nomadic and sedentary communities of Gypsies and Travellers a brightly coloured picture reveals itself, illustrating, on the one hand, a desire to ‘help’ (care) for their well-being, safety and security (Parry et al., 2004; Cemlyn, 2006; Mason et al., 2006) whilst, on the other hand, there is also a strong tendency to monitor, classify and regulate (control) their movement, accommodation, work practices and cultural identity (Clark and Greenfields, 2006; Richardson, 2006; James, 2007, forthcoming). No matter what specific area of interest the researcher might have, whether it is accommodation, education or health, the states’ activities regarding the care and control of its Gypsy and Traveller citizens often appears to be confused, shifting between the punitive and restrictive as well as being ill-informed and lacking any kind of joined-up coherent strategy. As we will see, through the articles within this themed section, the tensions between the state and Gypsies and Travellers show little signs of being resolved, although in the last few years there have been (policy) signs and (practice) signals that all parties recognise the fact that current entrenched positions are damaging and unsustainable.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)65-71
Number of pages7
JournalSocial Policy and Society
Volume7
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2008
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

gipsy
accommodation
fifteenth century
cultural identity
assimilation
Ireland
exclusion
well-being
inclusion
citizen
history
health
community
education
Group
Social Policy

Cite this

@article{ded717fb06b946cfb25a2a211ce86e11,
title = "Introduction themed section care or control?: gypsies, travellers and the state",
abstract = "The history of the state, in relation to its ‘dealings’ with Gypsies and Travellers in Britain and Ireland, has not been one worthy of endorsement, praise or special prizes (Hawes and Perez, 1986; Mayall, 1995). Since the emergence of written records detailing the presence of such groups on these Islands (around the fifteenth Century, according to Fraser, 1995: 111–120) a familiar series of tensions has tended to take shape, tensions that are explored by the articles within this themed section and that we might today discuss in terms of core dichotomies, such as ‘integration and assimilation’, ‘inclusion and exclusion’ and, with a social policy focus, ‘care and control’. Indeed, where objective academic analysis has been conducted of the state's enactment of social policy measures in relation to both nomadic and sedentary communities of Gypsies and Travellers a brightly coloured picture reveals itself, illustrating, on the one hand, a desire to ‘help’ (care) for their well-being, safety and security (Parry et al., 2004; Cemlyn, 2006; Mason et al., 2006) whilst, on the other hand, there is also a strong tendency to monitor, classify and regulate (control) their movement, accommodation, work practices and cultural identity (Clark and Greenfields, 2006; Richardson, 2006; James, 2007, forthcoming). No matter what specific area of interest the researcher might have, whether it is accommodation, education or health, the states’ activities regarding the care and control of its Gypsy and Traveller citizens often appears to be confused, shifting between the punitive and restrictive as well as being ill-informed and lacking any kind of joined-up coherent strategy. As we will see, through the articles within this themed section, the tensions between the state and Gypsies and Travellers show little signs of being resolved, although in the last few years there have been (policy) signs and (practice) signals that all parties recognise the fact that current entrenched positions are damaging and unsustainable.",
author = "Colin Clark",
year = "2008",
doi = "10.1017/S1474746407004010",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
pages = "65--71",
journal = "Social Policy and Society",
issn = "1474-7464",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "1",

}

Introduction themed section care or control? gypsies, travellers and the state. / Clark, Colin.

In: Social Policy and Society, Vol. 7, No. 1, 2008, p. 65-71.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Introduction themed section care or control?

T2 - gypsies, travellers and the state

AU - Clark, Colin

PY - 2008

Y1 - 2008

N2 - The history of the state, in relation to its ‘dealings’ with Gypsies and Travellers in Britain and Ireland, has not been one worthy of endorsement, praise or special prizes (Hawes and Perez, 1986; Mayall, 1995). Since the emergence of written records detailing the presence of such groups on these Islands (around the fifteenth Century, according to Fraser, 1995: 111–120) a familiar series of tensions has tended to take shape, tensions that are explored by the articles within this themed section and that we might today discuss in terms of core dichotomies, such as ‘integration and assimilation’, ‘inclusion and exclusion’ and, with a social policy focus, ‘care and control’. Indeed, where objective academic analysis has been conducted of the state's enactment of social policy measures in relation to both nomadic and sedentary communities of Gypsies and Travellers a brightly coloured picture reveals itself, illustrating, on the one hand, a desire to ‘help’ (care) for their well-being, safety and security (Parry et al., 2004; Cemlyn, 2006; Mason et al., 2006) whilst, on the other hand, there is also a strong tendency to monitor, classify and regulate (control) their movement, accommodation, work practices and cultural identity (Clark and Greenfields, 2006; Richardson, 2006; James, 2007, forthcoming). No matter what specific area of interest the researcher might have, whether it is accommodation, education or health, the states’ activities regarding the care and control of its Gypsy and Traveller citizens often appears to be confused, shifting between the punitive and restrictive as well as being ill-informed and lacking any kind of joined-up coherent strategy. As we will see, through the articles within this themed section, the tensions between the state and Gypsies and Travellers show little signs of being resolved, although in the last few years there have been (policy) signs and (practice) signals that all parties recognise the fact that current entrenched positions are damaging and unsustainable.

AB - The history of the state, in relation to its ‘dealings’ with Gypsies and Travellers in Britain and Ireland, has not been one worthy of endorsement, praise or special prizes (Hawes and Perez, 1986; Mayall, 1995). Since the emergence of written records detailing the presence of such groups on these Islands (around the fifteenth Century, according to Fraser, 1995: 111–120) a familiar series of tensions has tended to take shape, tensions that are explored by the articles within this themed section and that we might today discuss in terms of core dichotomies, such as ‘integration and assimilation’, ‘inclusion and exclusion’ and, with a social policy focus, ‘care and control’. Indeed, where objective academic analysis has been conducted of the state's enactment of social policy measures in relation to both nomadic and sedentary communities of Gypsies and Travellers a brightly coloured picture reveals itself, illustrating, on the one hand, a desire to ‘help’ (care) for their well-being, safety and security (Parry et al., 2004; Cemlyn, 2006; Mason et al., 2006) whilst, on the other hand, there is also a strong tendency to monitor, classify and regulate (control) their movement, accommodation, work practices and cultural identity (Clark and Greenfields, 2006; Richardson, 2006; James, 2007, forthcoming). No matter what specific area of interest the researcher might have, whether it is accommodation, education or health, the states’ activities regarding the care and control of its Gypsy and Traveller citizens often appears to be confused, shifting between the punitive and restrictive as well as being ill-informed and lacking any kind of joined-up coherent strategy. As we will see, through the articles within this themed section, the tensions between the state and Gypsies and Travellers show little signs of being resolved, although in the last few years there have been (policy) signs and (practice) signals that all parties recognise the fact that current entrenched positions are damaging and unsustainable.

U2 - 10.1017/S1474746407004010

DO - 10.1017/S1474746407004010

M3 - Article

VL - 7

SP - 65

EP - 71

JO - Social Policy and Society

JF - Social Policy and Society

SN - 1474-7464

IS - 1

ER -