minority has been the Muslim population of West Thrace. ... that diversify the attitudes of healthy people towards people with disabilities, lies education, .... majority of the participants answered that they would keep company with everybody, ...
Minorities and Disabilities: Same or Different?
Tsilingiris Alexios, M.Ed. Student, Department of Primary Education, University of Ioannina Iatroudis Kleanthis, M.Ed. Student, Department of Primary Education, University of Ioannina Tsiouris Christos, M.Ed. Student, Department of Primary Education, University of Ioannina Petropoulou Olga, M.Ed. Student, Department of Primary Education, University of Ioannina Preza Vasiliki, M.Ed. Student, Department of Primary Education, University of Ioannina Soulis Spyridon-Georgios, Assistant Professor, Department of Primary Education, University of Ioannina
Abstract In the course of time, many different ethnic, religious, language and other minority groups have been recorded in Greece. A major minority has been the Muslim population of West Thrace. Another major group is the Romani population located in different parts of Greece. Other minorities include emigrants from Balkans and former USSR. Apparently, individuals with disabilities due to developmental or acquired handicaps, also form minority groups. These are often stigmatized and excluded from society. The present pilot study investigates attitudes of ethnic, religious or language minorities towards individuals with disabilities. Additionally, the beliefs of each minority group (religious, racial, national) about the rest are recorded. For the purpose of the study, a questionnaire that included quantitative and qualitative questions was employed. The study group numbered 280 people, 70 Muslims from Western Thrace, 70 Romani, 70 foreigners and 70 native Greeks. Statistical analysis revealed that the positive attitudes towards disability are related with one's social group, educational attainment and religion. Qualitative questions revealed that all the minorities are willing to interact with the rest, while the most negative attitudes were recorded towards Romani people. Socially excluded Romani were the only among the minorities that felt that they should be a state priority, contrary to the rest which answered that all should be equally helped without exception. The study illustrates the necessity to develop more efficient integration policies, that will lead to a democratic, multicultural Society for All. Key words: minorities, disabilities, Muslims of Western Thrace, Roma, immigrants, inclusion, Greece
Introduction Despite the fact that, historically, Greece has never been single-cultural, its multicultural character during the recent years is as striking as never before. In the shaping of today's reality, the inflow of numerous immigrants, which further diversify the existing linguistic, religious and national minorities which inhabit Greece, has resulted in a multicultural mosaic. Such a religious minority is the Muslim Minority of Western Thrace, which is the only recognized minority. They number 90.000 to 135.000 people (Anagnostou & Triantafyllidou 2007) divided to 3 subgroups: Turkophones, Slavophone Pomaks and Romani. The Muslims of Western Thrace were exempt from the population exchange between Greece and Turkey, as declared in the Treaty of Lausanne (1923), which ended the Greco-Turkish conflict. They have been living within Greek borders up to the present days, settled mainly in the broad area of Rhodope and Xanthi (Figgou & Condor 2007). According to Anagnostou & Triantafyllidou (2006), their complete integration with Greek society is deemed unsuccessful, while efforts to complete it appear to be occasional and timid, despite the formal recognition by the Greek state and the international treaties. Another important minority is the Romani community, which shapes the most numerous minority in the EU, and recently they have become an important population factor that cannot be omitted (Enache 2013). In Greece, for example, live 250.000 to 300.000 Romani (UN 2009), scattered throughout the country. The majority of them lead a nomadic or semi-nomadic lifestyle, (Gouva et al. 2014), while only few of them are integrated. They are severely afflicted by poverty, their participation in education is very low and the discrimination against them leads to social exclusion (Foloştinǎ et al. 2014). Except for religious and racial reasons, minorities have also been created by the factor of immigration. Immigration is an important issue all over the world and has become a significant social leverage that triggers change (Hatziprokopiou 2004). Geopolitical changes in
Europe have caused an immigration movement (King 2002) by which Greece has been severely affected. Since 90’s it has been receiving immigrant waves from Balkan countries, Central and Eastern Europe, and recently from Asia and Africa. The State administration however, was unprepared for this immigration inflow (Lazaridis 1996). This is attributed to the fact that, during the 60s, Greece was a country that “exported” immigrants (Loizou et al. 2014) and now it has become one of the main destinations of immigrants, mainly illegal ones (Kiprianos et al. 2003). Of course, the financial crisis has made Greeks resorting to migration since 2007. The main chunk of incoming immigrants are from neighboring Albania, while former USSR Balkan countries follow (Rovolis & Tragaki 2006). The immigrants, despite the feeble state attempts for integration, face xenophobia and racism in their daily life (Chtouris et al. 2014˙ Hatziprokopiou 2004). In other words, it could be possible that the Greek state has failed to apply an effective integration, while many efforts were hesitant and tarred by dilemma (Kiprianos et al. 2003). Apart from the aforementioned minorities, in Greece and everywhere else in the world, there is an extra minority which is socially structured: people with disabilities. The idea of the social construction of disability lies on the view that society, denying to understand the unique and special culture of people with disabilities, leads them to social exclusion, turning their special condition into a problem. Thus, the society, unwilling to overcome their entrenched bias, labels and marginalizes them. It is known that the views of people on “disability”, are shaped and diversified according to the social and cultural context within which they live. (Peters 2000). Among the factors that diversify the attitudes of healthy people towards people with disabilities, lies education, the socioeconomic level (Reid-Cunningham 2009), as well as the form of contact with people with disabilities might play a significant role (Shields & Taylor 2014). It is evident that linguistic, religious and racial minorities as well as people with disabilities are grouped based on the traits that the dominant (in terms of population) groups assigns to them. Still, the following questions remain: How does each minority view disability? Do they view people with disabilities as a minority? Also, how friendly is a social group towards another? Can social groups interact and to what extent? Within the context of the aforementioned facts, the purpose of this study is the detection of the attitudes adopted by the various minorities towards disability. Also, an attempt to illustrate the beliefs and the attitude of each social group towards the others is made. Specifically, the aims of this study are: • The illustration of the attitudes of each minority towards people with disabilities. • The detection of the factors that shape their personal beliefs. • An estimation of how willing is each minority to approach the others. • The identification of the minority group that needs greater care by the Greek state.
Method Participants The current study group consisted of 280 people (150 male and 130 female). Specifically, the participants were 70 people that belong to the Muslim Minority of Western Thrace, 70 Romani (36 of which lived in camps and 34 who were socially integrated) and 70 foreigners (51 of which come from Albania and 19 form former USSR). Additionally, 70 Greeks participated, who structured the control group. All of the participants are adults, aged 18 to 70, and had an average age of 39. The participants were habitats of Xanthi and Serres.
Instrument The participants were given a questionnaire of 26 questions. Specifically, the 6 first questions referred to the demographic factors (gender, age, education, religion, social group, disability or relation to it). The next 18 questions examined the attitudes of the study group towards disability. For the scoring of the questionnaire, a 6-point Likert scale was utilized, in which 3 items signify disagreement with the sentence (0= ‘strongly disagree’, 1= ‘disagree’ α 2= ‘moderately disagree’) and 3 signify agreement (3= ‘moderately agree’, 4= ‘agree’, 5= ‘strongly agree’). Also, there were 2 qualitative questions. Precisely, the first question to be answered was “Is there a minority (Muslim of Western Thrace, Romani, foreigners, people with disabilities) with members of which you would not socialize during a fest, and why?” The other question was “Which minority or minorities (Muslim, Romani, foreigners, people with disabilities) should be a priority of the state and why? Reliability control showed that the reliability coefficient of Cronbach alpha is 0,75, so reliability is satisfactory. The scale mean was 63,10, variance was 127,68 and standard deviation was 11,29.
Procedure
Given that the study group was composed of linguistic minorities, as questionnaire collectors were used bilingual individuals who spoke Greek alongside their dialect. The collectors were briefed about the questionnaire and were ready to explain whatever was not understood by the study group.
Results Data Analysis The analysis of the independent variables was based on the descriptive method (Descriptive Statistics). To check for statistically significant differences in the means of the scale to the various levels of the independent variables (gender, age, education, religion, social group, relation to disability) One Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was implemented. Additionally, the Welch or Brown-Forshythe test was used whenever the case of ANOVA criteria were not met. The case of constant variance was checked through Levene's test. Wherever there were differences and if the variable under investigation had more than two options, multiple comparisons were applied following the LSD or Scheffe method. When the case of equal variances was not met, Tamhane method was implemented.
Findings Social Group Levene test (p=0,021) revealed that the variances of the 5 groups (Muslims of Western Thrace, Romani, foreigners, people with disabilities, native Greeks) are not equal. Welch test showed that there is statistically important deviation in the mean of the scale concerning the social group (p=0,000). Specifically, according to Tamhane method, it was revealed that Greeks have more positive attitudes towards disability (Μ=3,94) than foreigners (Μ=3,43) (p=0.000). Also, integrated Romani (Μ=3,94) have more positive attitudes towards disability than foreigners (Μ=3,43) (p=0.002) (Tables 1,2).
Table 1: Attitudes of the social groups towards disability N Mean Std. Minimum Deviation Native Greeks 70 3,94 ,61 2,24
Maximum 5,00
Muslims of Western Thrace
67
3,67
,56
2,35
4,76
Romani who live in camps
32
3,72
,71
2,00
4,71
Integrated Romani
29
3,94
,49
2,71
5,00
Foreigners (Albania and former USSR)
64
3,43
,75
1,53
4,71
Levene Sig. ,021
Welch Sig. ,000
Table 2:Tamhane test for the investigation of the social groups’ attitudes towards disability (I) In which social (J) In which social Mean Sig. group do you belong? group do you belong? Difference (I-J) Tamhane foreigners (Albania Native Greeks -,51* ,000 and former USSR) * Romani (integrated) -,52 ,002 Education Levene test (p=0,054) revealed that the variances of the three choices (Illiterate/elementary school graduate, junior high school/high school graduate, College/university graduate) are equal. Statistical analysis showed that academic level influences attitudes towards
disability (p=0,000). Furthermore, Scheffe method revealed that those who have received college or university education have more positive attitudes towards disability (Μ=4,10) than those who have received elementary or no education at all (Μ=3,56) (p=0.000) and than those who have received junior high school/high school education (Μ= 3,64) (p=0.000) (Tables 3,4).
Table 3: Investigation of participants' attitudes towards disability according to education
Illiterate-
N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Minimum
Maximum
83
3,56
,66
1,53
4,88
120
3,64
,67
1,71
5,00
59
4,10
,50
2,82
5,00
Levene Sig. ,054
ANOVA Sig. ,000
elementary school graduates Junior high school/High school graduates College/university graduates
Table 4: LSD post hoc test for the investigation of participants' attitudes towards disability according to education (I) What is your (J) What is your Mean educational attainment? educational attainment? Difference (I-J) LSD Illiterate-elementary ,54* College/University school graduates Graduates Junior high school/High ,46* school graduates
Sig.
,000 ,000
Religion Levene test (p=0,751) revealed that the variances of the two study groups (Christians, Muslims) are equal. As far as religion was concerned, it was shown that there is statistically significant difference (p=0,004). Christians have more positive attitudes towards disability (Μ=3,81) than Muslims (Μ=3,56) (Table 5).
Table 5: Investigation of participants' attitudes towards disability according to religion N Mean Std. Minimum Maximum Levene ANOVA Deviation Sig. Sig. ,751 ,004 Christians 163 ,67 1,53 5,00 3,81 Muslims
94
3,56
,63
1,71
4,76
Gender (p=0.367), age (p=0.866) and relationship with individuals with disabilities (p=0.44), were not found to affect the attitudes of the participants towards disability.
Discussion During the investigation of the attitudes of the various minorities (religious, racial, national, social) towards disability, it was found that integrated with Greek society Romani and native Greeks have the most positive attitudes towards individuals with disabilities, while the
least positive attitudes are demonstrated by foreigners who live in Greece. This is possibly related to the tendency of immigrants in Greece to strongly identify solely with their own integration problems, something that makes it hard for them to become aware of and understand disability related issues. Apart from the influence of the social group of the participants on the shaping of attitudes towards disability, these attitudes seem to be influenced by other factors as well. Specifically, educational attainment is directly linked to the attitudes, since those who have accomplished a higher level of education are more positive towards disability regardless of social group. Educational attainment has been found in similar studies to be related to more positive attitudes towards disability. Specifically, advanced educational attainment was linked to positive views about people with mental retardation (Page & Islam 2015˙ Yazbeck et al. 2004), as well as to more positive attitudes concerning the sexuality of people with learning difficulties (Karellou 2003). Furthermore, the attitudes of the participants were correlated with their religions. Christians showed more positive attitudes, in other words they were friendlier towards people with disabilities compared to Muslims. This result is also explained by studies that have been conducted in Muslim countries, where parents of children with disabilities consider their disability to be a punishment or curse by Allah to themselves and their family (Miles 2002˙Hadidi 199κ). Furthermore, many Muslim parents of children with disabilities deny accepting the disability of their child to avoid social stigma and repercussions on their child. (Al Aoufi et al. 2012). Similarly, Arab citizens in Israel are less positive towards people with disabilities than Jewish citizens (Florian & Katz 1983). However, in Islamic scripture, a positive attitude towards disability is noted (Schuelka 2012) which is often misconstrued by Muslims due to the dominance of traditional Muslim beliefs that are related with various superstitions regarding the meaning and causes of disability (Watters 2010). In the first qualitative question “Is there a minority (Muslim of Western Thrace, Romani, foreigners, people with disabilities) with members of which you would not socialize during a fest, and why?” those who received the most negative comments were the Romani. Many did not hesitate to label them as “thieves”, “beggars”, “uncivilized”, and consider them to be a social problem. The answer of a 40year-old Greek was striking: “I would not keep company with the Gypsies, because they are something else! They let their children running shoeless around and do not mind. They make their children look for things in the trash and steal, so they can make a living. Something has to be done to stop their mentality of filth, pauperization and unscrupulousness. They are uncivilized.” Similarly, the research of Fontanella et al. (2015) showed that Romani are perceived to be a dysfunction of civilization and a source of fear. Many times they are perceived to be a threat, and in this way the existing phobias towards them are enhanced (Romaphobia) (Ljujic 2011). However, it is a very optimistic fact that few of the participants were negative regarding socializing with individuals with disabilities. The majority of the participants answered that they would keep company with everybody, appearing to be untroubled by the possibility of socializing with any minority. The answer of a Muslim student was of great interest: “I cannot say anything about a group of people. However, we usually avoid all these groups because were taught that away at home. We live in a society where difference divides and does not unite. I would try, therefore, to socialize with anyone, regardless of their particular traits and social group. A kind nature and a smile to offer will suffice”. The only social group that stated that they would not associate with people with disabilities are Romani who live in camps. They were of the opinion that the Greek state has to do something for Romani first, and then for any other minority since, as they stated: “We live in poverty, we have many children and if we receive aid we will be able to offer more to the society”. Of course this is not surprising as Romani who are not socially integrated are an extremely poor social group and have many difficulties. They struggle for survival under conditions of extreme poverty. After all, in poor societies where people fight to survive, disability is not a priority (Coleridge 2000). Of course, the other minorities in Greece have problems as well, but not as acute as Romani have. And when someone without access to basic social goods daily struggles for survival, it is not possible to be interested in humanitarian issues. In any case, the different beliefs of Romani who are not socially integrated are of great interest and should be further examined. Contrary to the answers of the socially non integrated Romani who live in camps, the majority of the participants answered that the group of people with disabilities ought to be a priority of the Greek state. However, the participants justified their answers saying about people with disabilities: “the disabled are weaker”, “the disabled cannot work and make a living”, “the disabled have insurmountable problems”. Such a way of thinking, however, does not take into account the source of the problem, which is the malfunctions of the state as well as of the society on how to face the difference and the special culture of people with disabilities. The same applies to the problems that religious, linguistic, national or other minorities face, which are not the product of their particular traits, but finally, of a disabled society (Montesino 2012). However, there were many that answered that all the minorities must be helped without exception, each of them for different reasons. Specifically, a female teacher answered that:
“The state has to care for all these people because each of them is an integral part of social viability. Disabled people have proven that they can succeed (special Olympics etc), but state support is lacking, there is only some private effort. The state has to provide all the other groups with education, health and finally integrate them”. Indeed, the Greek state has to take initiative at last. A common trait of all the minorities, regardless of their particular characteristics, is their difficulty to become part of the society. This difficulty will exist in the future unless our society becomes a Society for All. Segregation, and therefore social exclusion, that are based on particular traits (religious, linguistic, racial, physical, mental) have to be replaced by acceptance, protection and strengthening of diversity. But to build a Society for All, there is a need – in the context of intercultural education - to found the School for All, in which any diversity will not be a cause of social exclusion but will be recognized and promoted as an important factor.
References Al Aoufi, H., Al-Zyoud, N. and Shahminan, N. (2012). Islam and the cultural conceptualisation of disability. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 17(4), 205-219. Anagnostou, D. and Triantafyllidou, A. (2007). Regions, Minorities and European Integration: A Case Study on Muslims in Western Thrace, Greece. Romanian Journal of Political Science, 7(1). 100-125. Anagnostou, D. and Triantafyllidou, A. (2006). Regions, Minorities and European Integration: A Case Study on Muslims in Western Thrace, Greece. Athens: ELIAMEP. Coleridge, P. (2000). Disability and Culture. In: M. & T. M. Thomas, ed. Selected Readings in Community Based Rehabilitation. Disability and Rehabilitation issues in South Asia. s.l.: Asia Pacific Disability Rehabilitation Journal, pp. 21-38. Chtouris, S., Zissi A., Stalidis, G., Rontos, K. (2014). Understanding Xenophobia in Greece: A Correspondence Analysis. European Journal of Sociology, 55(1), 107-133. Enache, R. (2014). Identity shift: the case of Roma people in the European Union. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 163, 240246. Figgou, L. and Condor, S. (2007). Categorizing Category Labels in Interview Accounts about the ‘Muslim Minority’ in Greece. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 33(3), 439-459. Florian, V. & Katz, S. (1983). The impact of cultural, ethnic, and national variables on attitudes toward the disabled in Israel. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 7, 167–179. Foloştinǎ, R., Mitrescu, I. & Duţǎ, N. V. (2014). Emotional traits of the Roma minority teenagers: Implications for Educational Sciences. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 3400-3404. Fontanella, L., Villano, P. and Di Donato M. (2015). Attitudes towards Roma people and migrants: a comparison through a Bayesian multidimensional IRT model. Quality and Quantity. Gouva, M., Mentis, M., Kotrotsiou, S., Paralikas, T. H and Kotrotsiou, E. (2014). Shame and Anxiety Feelings of Roma Population in Greece. Journal of Immigrant Minority Health. Hadidi, M. (1998). Educational programs for children with special needs in Jordan. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 23(2), 147–154. Hatziprokopiou, P. (2004). Balkan Immigrants in the Greek city of Thessaloniki: local processes of incorporation in an international perspective. European Union and Regional Studies, 11(4), 321-338. Karellou, J. (2003). Laypeople’s attitudes towards the sexuality of people with learning disabilities in Greece. Sexuality and Disability, 21(1), 65-84. King, R. (2002). Towards a New Map of European Migration. International Journal of Population Geography, 8, 89-106. Kiprianos, P., Balias, S. & Passas, V. (2003). Greek policy towards Immigration and Immigrants. Social Policy & Administration, 37(2), 148-164. Lazaridis, G. (1996). Immigration to Greece: A critical evaluation of Greek policy. New Community, 22(2), 335-348. Ljujic, V. (2011). Feel threatened being prejudiced: the role of past experience and proximal threat in shaping adolescents’ Romaphobia. Intercultural Education, 22(6), 521-527. Loizou, E., Michailidis, A. & Karasavvoglou, A. (2014). Return migration: Evidence from a reception country with a short migration history. European Urban Regional Studies, 21(2), 161-174. Miles, M. (2002). Disability in an Eastern religious context. Journal of Religion, Disability & Health, 6(2–3), 53–76. Montesino, N. (2012). Social disability: Roma and refugees in Swedish welfare. International Journal of Migration, Health and Social Care, 8(3), 134 – 145. Page, S. L. & Islam, M. R. (2015). The role of personality variables in predicting attitudes toward people with intellectual disabilities: an Australian perspective. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 1-5. Peters, S. (2000). ‘Is There a Disability Culture? A Syncretisation of Three Possible World Views. Disability & Society, 15 (4), 583-601. Reid-Cunningham, A.,R. (2009). Anthropological theories of disability. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 19(1), 99111.
Rovolis, A. and Tragaki, A. (2006). Ethnic Characteristics and Geographical Distribution of Immigrants in Greece. European Urban and Regional Studies, 13(2), 99-111. Schuelka., M., J. (2012). A faith in humanness: disability, religion and development. Disability and Society, 28(4), 500-513. Shields, N. & Taylor N. (2014). Contact with young adults with disability led to a positive change in attitudes to disability among physiotherapy students. Physiotherapy Canada, 66, 298-305. United Nations. (2009). Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to development report of the independent expert on minority issues. General Assembly, (A/HRC/10/11/Add.3). Watters, E. (2010). Crazy like us: The globalization of the American psyche. New York: Free Press. Yazbeck , M., McVilly, K. and Parmenter, R. T. (2004). Attitudes Toward People with Intellectual Disabilities: an Australian Perspective. Journal of Disability policy studies, 15(2), 97-111.
