Society seeing what it wants to see

RobertKK

The mortality rate for children of Travellers is 4 times higher for what it is elsewhere in society.
Nothing is being done, they are Travellers and society doesn't care, a lot of people would say they wouldn't want to be living next to a Traveller family.

We had a children's referendum and only 30% of the electorate felt the need to vote - it doesn't matter if one voted yes or no, they made an effort to vote, taking into account those abroad through emigration, the sick, people who are too far away maybe with work or education, it was a pitiful amount.

The media decides the narrative, it will concentrate on places that are closed down where children died and where the danger no longer exists - yes a full investigation is needed, the truth needs to be aired and lessons learned.
But then the high death toll in mother and baby homes was discussed in the Dail in the late 1920's and 1930's and nothing was done.

The report that Traveller's children had a 4 times higher mortality rate than the norm is known, there will be no shock and horror, maybe because they are buried and not stuffed into a septic tank as in Tuam, maybe because some in society see Travellers as undesirables and prejudices will make people not want to see or even care about the higher death toll among Traveller children or the fact the lifespan of a Traveller is far shorter than general society.

Will we have campaigns and petitions with people contacting their local representatives to investigate why a Traveller child is 4 times more likely to die than a child in general society, and what will they do about it.
I doubt it.

History has a habit of the same mistakes being made, while the dead of the mother and baby homes needs to be fully investigated, people made accountable and lessons learned.
The question is will society just act all horrified and be asking how could this have been allowed to happen when people knew it was happening back then, while a similar situation in terms of above normal child mortality exists today?

Here is the article that inspired this thread which goes much further than dealing with Travellers. - http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/colette-browne/ireland-didnt-cherish-all-its-children-equally-we-still-dont-30333643.html

Buzz Killington the third

RobertKK wrote: »

Nothing is being done, they are Travellers and society doesn't care, a lot of people would say they wouldn't want to be living next to a Traveller family.

A lot of Travellers wouldn't want to settle, and don't care for the rules that society has!

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

So what? We give people the freedom to vote and then you want to force them to use the freedom?

Oh the ironing!!!

bogwalrus

I did not know they had a much higher mortality rate. I think you need to provide a link to a study or something. I'm here googling to find something scientific and concrete.

Mr. Incognito

Why don't you ask their parents?

Little CuChulainn

The Childrens referendum was pointless. I accomplished nothing at all. Children had the exact same rights before and after it.

Traveler mortality rates are completely down to their chosen culture. I'm not sure what you expect everyone to do about it.

PizzamanIRL

Happenstance.

I Heart Internet

RobertKK wrote: »

The mortality rate for children of Travellers is 4 times higher for what it is elsewhere in society.

That's shocking if true. I wouldn't have expected it to be higher than the general population - perhaps a fraction higher, but not 4 times as high.

SEPT 23 1989

shameful hijacking

miss no stars

The reason there isn't shock and horror is because (if your numbers are true, btw) they choose to live a lifestyle that causes a higher mortality rate. Nobody is forcing them to.

kneemos

miss no stars wrote: »

The reason there isn't shock and horror is because (if your numbers are true, btw) they choose to live a lifestyle that causes a higher mortality rate. Nobody is forcing them to.

What lifestyle?As far as I can see they have the same lifestyle as the rest of us.
Maybe it's down to nutrition or genetics or something?

Banjo String

Tldr.


I'm having a nice piece of fish for dinner later though.

bogwalrus

This explains a fair bit. It says the mortality rate is twice that of the rest of society.

Dravokivich

I must say rather honestly, I thought the issues around children for them were based around the level of education. But your post isn't about adding to that. You aren't trying to high light issue's in other parts of society looking for us to support each other. The tone of your post is entirely about "Yes the Tuam thing is bad, but what about this?" Any issues with terrible mortality rates should be given the same respect and recognition especially when they could be preventable. But you are doing the complete opposite of that and looking to make it a point of contention.

If you truly cared yourself, you would have mentioned this in the other thread, but you are just looking to split people up and pitch'em against eachother.

fúcking disgraceful.

Buzz Killington the third

kneemos wrote: »

What lifestyle?As far as I can see they have the same lifestyle as the rest of us.

Not all of us live in a caravan without any facilities to wash ourselves and like to bate the head off each other in our spare time.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

I'm not trying to be cruel or anything when I ask this but travellers do have a habit of marrying their own family and I'm just wondering how you propose the general population stop this from happening as I'm sure it would lead to children from marriages like that being less healthy if their parents weren't related?

RobertKK

Dravokivich wrote: »

I must say rather honestly, I thought the issues around children for them were based around the level of education. But your post isn't about adding to that. You aren't trying to high light issue's in other parts of society looking for us to support each other. The tone of your post is entirely about "Yes the Tuam thing is bad, but what about this?" Any issues with terrible mortality rates should be given the same respect and recognition especially when they could be preventable. But you are doing the complete opposite of that and looking to make it a point of contention.

Sorry, you are wrong there in your assumption.

http://www.ucd.ie/news/2011/10OCT11/031011-Traveller-infant-mortality-still-higher-than-the-general-population.html

I agree with "terrible mortality rates should be given the same respect and recognition".
The only difference is, one can't save the dead, but we can try and save the living.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Would a small gene pool, people marrying realitives etc have anything to do with shorter lifespan?

RobertKK

Dravokivich wrote: »

If you truly cared yourself, you would have mentioned this in the other thread, but you are just looking to split people up and pitch'em against eachother.

fúcking disgraceful.

I stopped posting in the other thread as some were using that thread to troll and bait me - warnings were handed out and I thought it was best to stop posting in that thread as it was not about me.
This thread is not about me, deal with the issue, not the person.

Little CuChulainn

RobertKK wrote: »

I stopped posting in the other thread as some were using that thread to troll and bait me - warnings were handed out and I thought it was best to stop posting in that thread as it was not about me.
This thread is not about me, deal with the issue, not the person.

So what's your solution?

miss no stars

kneemos wrote: »

What lifestyle?As far as I can see they have the same lifestyle as the rest of us.
Maybe it's down to nutrition or genetics or something?

Heat, protection from damp, well educated parents, plenty of hot clean running water, more space per person in the family dwelling.. All things that reduce childhood mortality. Things you find in most houses/apartments. Not necessarily things associated with caravans :eek: Also, their genetic pool is smaller than that of the wider population. That intrinsically makes them more at risk of certain life threatening illnesses - like how the rate of CF rocketed after the famine due to the reduced population.

SEPT 23 1989

RobertKK wrote: »

Sorry, you are wrong there in your assumption.

http://www.ucd.ie/news/2011/10OCT11/031011-Traveller-infant-mortality-still-higher-than-the-general-population.html

I agree with "terrible mortality rates should be given the same respect and recognition".
The only difference is, one can't save the dead, but we can try and save the living.

How can we save the traveller children Robert?

I Heart Internet

Dravokivich wrote: »

If you truly cared yourself, you would have mentioned this in the other thread, but you are just looking to split people up and pitch'em against eachother.

fúcking disgraceful.

In fairness, if he mentioned it on another thread he would have been accused of whataboutery. Which this nearly is, but it's still important to point out that things aren't rosy for all children in Ireland today either.

SEPT 23 1989

miss no stars wrote: »

Heat, protection from damp, well educated parents, plenty of hot clean running water, more space per person in the family dwelling.. All things that reduce childhood mortality. Things you find in most houses/apartments. Not necessarily things associated with caravans :eek: Also, their genetic pool is smaller than that of the wider population. That intrinsically makes them more at risk of certain life threatening illnesses - like how the rate of CF rocketed after the famine due to the reduced population.

no Traveller in Ireland 2014 lives in a dwelling with no heat and running water

unless they choose to do so

Valetta

The question asked should not be "what are we doing about it?", but rather "What are they (the travellers) doing about it?"

RobertKK

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

So what's your solution?

Update the figures from 2011 to 2014 and see has there been any significant change in mortality rates.
If not investigate why and find the reasons for it, then implement changes based on the findings and try and lower the mortality figure, then see in three years time after changes have been implemented if the mortality rate is reducing.

miss no stars

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

no Traveller in Ireland 2014 lives in a dwelling with no heat and running water

unless they choose to do so

I didn't say they don't have any, I just mean that a caravan doesn't compare to a house in terms of how warm you can get (and keep) a child and I said plenty of hot running water, not running water.

They might seem like trivial small differences, but anyone who grew up before central heating and double glazing knows the difference it can make to have a drier, warmer house. It can be the difference between a sniffle and a bad cold. Which can be the difference between recovery and pneumonia in a child with a weak immune system. Repeat enough and you have a sickly child vs a healthy child.

And I think the OP has a point that there are children at higher risk NOW yet nobody seems to be doing anything, but efforts to do anything seem to be resisted by the travelling community themselves

I Heart Internet

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

no Traveller in Ireland 2014 lives in a dwelling with no heat and running water

unless they choose to do so

Children, very often, do not dictate where their parents live.

RustyNut

RobertKK wrote: »

The mortality rate for children of Travellers is 4 times higher for what it is elsewhere in society.
Nothing is being done, they are Travellers and society doesn't care, a lot of people would say they wouldn't want to be living next to a Traveller family.

We had a children's referendum and only 30% of the electorate felt the need to vote - it doesn't matter if one voted yes or no, they made an effort to vote, taking into account those abroad through emigration, the sick, people who are too far away maybe with work or education, it was a pitiful amount.

The media decides the narrative, it will concentrate on places that are closed down where children died and where the danger no longer exists - yes a full investigation is needed, the truth needs to be aired and lessons learned.
But then the high death toll in mother and baby homes was discussed in the Dail in the late 1920's and 1930's and nothing was done.

The report that Traveller's children had a 4 times higher mortality rate than the norm is known, there will be no shock and horror, maybe because they are buried and not stuffed into a septic tank as in Tuam, maybe because some in society see Travellers as undesirables and prejudices will make people not want to see or even care about the higher death toll among Traveller children or the fact the lifespan of a Traveller is far shorter than general society.

Will we have campaigns and petitions with people contacting their local representatives to investigate why a Traveller child is 4 times more likely to die than a child in general society, and what will they do about it.
I doubt it.

History has a habit of the same mistakes being made, while the dead of the mother and baby homes needs to be fully investigated, people made accountable and lessons learned.
The question is will society just act all horrified and be asking how could this have been allowed to happen when people knew it was happening back then, while a similar situation in terms of above normal child mortality exists today?

Here is the article that inspired this thread which goes much further than dealing with Travellers. - http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/colette-browne/ireland-didnt-cherish-all-its-children-equally-we-still-dont-30333643.html

What do you suggest society (we) do to improve this figure. While travellers are marginalised they have access to the same social and health care services as the rest of us.



One solution might be to take their baby's off them, sell the healthy ones to rich americans and fcuk the rest of them in a septic tank, sure it would be the christian thing to do...

MagicMarker

AH's resident homophobe has found a high horse. Delightful.

JuliusCaesar

I think if you replaced the words 'travellers' with 'unmarried mothers' you'd be close to the attitude to single mothers in the 50s in Ireland.

They were to blame for getting pregnant. They were to blame because they were obviously loose women, who indulged in their nasty, dirty, filthy lusts. They were to blame because they were not 'us' - good, decent, hard-working, and pious Catholics.

They were to blame because they were caught out, unlike us who got married at 4 months pregant, not that we'd ever admit that in a zillion years, our poor mites were born awfully prematurely (even though they were fine big healthy babies for being born premature).

And never ever blame the boyfriend. And never even *think* about rape and incest, because they don't exist in holy Catholic Ireland. No, no, it's all the fault of these "loose women". Phew! And no blame attaches to us, it's all THEIR fault.




BTW, we're still looking for scapegoats for the deaths of those children in the 50s. But in reality, everyone in that society was complicit whether they knew about the details or not.

miss no stars

JuliusCaesar wrote: »

I think if you replaced the words 'travellers' with 'unmarried mothers' you'd be close to the attitude to single mothers in the 50s in Ireland.

They were to blame for getting pregnant. They were to blame because they were obviously loose women, who indulged in their nasty, dirty, filthy lusts. They were to blame because they were not 'us' - good, decent, hard-working, and pious Catholics.

They were to blame because they were caught out, unlike us who got married at 4 months pregant, not that we'd ever admit that in a zillion years, our poor mites were born awfully prematurely (even though they were fine big healthy babies for being born premature).

And never ever blame the boyfriend. And never even *think* about rape and incest, because they don't exist in holy Catholic Ireland. No, no, it's all the fault of these "loose women". Phew! And no blame attaches to us, it's all THEIR fault.




BTW, we're still looking for scapegoats for the deaths of those children in the 50s. But in reality, everyone in that society was complicit whether they knew about the details or not.

I think you're being a bit unfair. No traveller is prevented from getting work and buying a house or apartment or renting a house or apartment or signing on and being provided with same. No traveller is denied an education at any official level. No traveller is denied healthcare. No traveller is interned and used as slave labour. No traveller's child is left to die and thrown into a septic tank.

That travellers choose to live in high density situations with no permenancy, that they choose to make themselves social outcasts, that they choose not to educate their children - that's on them. Oh and that's what they want official protection to be able to do.

kneemos

JuliusCaesar wrote: »

I think if you replaced the words 'travellers' with 'unmarried mothers' you'd be close to the attitude to single mothers in the 50s in Ireland.

They were to blame for getting pregnant. They were to blame because they were obviously loose women, who indulged in their nasty, dirty, filthy lusts. They were to blame because they were not 'us' - good, decent, hard-working, and pious Catholics.

They were to blame because they were caught out, unlike us who got married at 4 months pregant, not that we'd ever admit that in a zillion years, our poor mites were born awfully prematurely (even though they were fine big healthy babies for being born premature).

And never ever blame the boyfriend. And never even *think* about rape and incest, because they don't exist in holy Catholic Ireland. No, no, it's all the fault of these "loose women". Phew! And no blame attaches to us, it's all THEIR fault.




BTW, we're still looking for scapegoats for the deaths of those children in the 50s. But in reality, everyone in that society was complicit whether they knew about the details or not.

People were less or barely educated at the time and less enlightened,the church dictated society and were looked upon for guidance.I wouldn't be too hard on the people of the time.

RobertKK

Here in Kilkenny, we had a Traveller family given a home to live in by the council, to prevent the family living there, someone burnt it down. This came after threats to the family.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/travellers-faced-threats-before-home-set-on-fire-26840694.html

Before the house was burned down the family received a threat telling them their home would be burnt to ashes and he was to take his 'tinker puppies' with him.

It would be hard for anyone to settle down in a home if faced with this type of prejudice.

Dan_Solo

kneemos wrote: »

What lifestyle?As far as I can see they have the same lifestyle as the rest of us.
Maybe it's down to nutrition or genetics or something?

Um, nutrition is their choice too.
If they want to live like gypsies outside the rest of society they sort of have to expect these things no?
What do you want, a doctor at every hard stand? Forced adoption to the settled community?

Dan_Solo

RobertKK wrote: »

Here in Kilkenny, we had a Traveller family given a home to live in by the council, to prevent the family living there, someone burnt it down. This came after threats to the family.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/travellers-faced-threats-before-home-set-on-fire-26840694.html

Before the house was burned down the family received a threat telling them their home would be burnt to ashes and he was to take his 'tinker puppies' with him.

It would be hard for anyone to settle down in a home if faced with this type of prejudice.

Happened here too and not hearsay, saw it myself several times. Turned out the travellers had burned the houses out themselves. Sometimes when the patriarch died which was supposedly the tradition.
I wish someone would hand me a house for nothing.

comongethappy

RobertKK wrote: »

Here in Kilkenny, we had a Traveller family given a home to live in by the council, to prevent the family living there, someone burnt it down. This came after threats to the family.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/travellers-faced-threats-before-home-set-on-fire-26840694.html

Before the house was burned down the family received a threat telling them their home would be burnt to ashes and he was to take his 'tinker puppies' with him.

It would be hard for anyone to settle down in a home if faced with this type of prejudice.

I suppose that family can always purchase/rent a house elsewhere.

comongethappy

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Happened here too and not hearsay, saw it myself several times. I wish someone would hand me a house for nothing.

Put me down for 2.

Dan_Solo

I Heart Internet wrote: »

Children, very often, do not dictate where their parents live.

So your answer is?

Little CuChulainn

RobertKK wrote: »

Here in Kilkenny, we had a Traveller family given a home to live in by the council, to prevent the family living there, someone burnt it down. This came after threats to the family.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/travellers-faced-threats-before-home-set-on-fire-26840694.html

Before the house was burned down the family received a threat telling them their home would be burnt to ashes and he was to take his 'tinker puppies' with him.

It would be hard for anyone to settle down in a home if faced with this type of prejudice.

That's one family, and if i recall correctly they had a checkered history. In most of Ireland, travellers get land, homes and bays. They get whole estates to themselves. There is no lack of opportunity for them.

Even your own linked report highlights some issues. Higher than normal respiratory issues and 250 times less likely to be breast fed. These are choices. I'm not sure if you've ever been to a halting site but they aren't clean places. And it's not from lack of government intervention. They get free bin collection and regular clean ups. The reality is that many traveler kids live in squalor and suffer from health problems because of the choices of their parents. Until this is accepted nothing will be done.

kneemos

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

That's one family, and if i recall correctly they had a checkered history. In most of Ireland, travellers get land, homes and bays. They get whole estates to themselves. There is no lack of opportunity for them.

Even your own linked report highlights some issues. Higher than normal respiratory issues and 250 times less likely to be breast fed. These are choices. I'm not sure if you've ever been to a halting site but they aren't clean places. And it's not from lack of government intervention. They get free bin collection and regular clean ups. The reality is that many traveler kids live in squalor and suffer from health problems because of the choices of their parents. Until this is accepted nothing will be done.

Sounds like the same attitude that led to 800 babies in a septic tank.Dunno if anything can be done or not but it's a defeatist attitude.

Dan_Solo

kneemos wrote: »

Sounds like the same attitude that led to 800 babies in a septic tank.Dunno if anything can be done or not but it's a defeatist attitude.

I'd equate the travellers to the church here, not general society. Society eventually had to fight, and is still fighting, against the church.

Little CuChulainn

kneemos wrote: »

Sounds like the same attitude that led to 800 babies in a septic tank.Dunno if anything can be done or not but it's a defeatist attitude.

How exactly is it the same attitude?

Grayson

I have to agree with RobertKK to an extent. It is horrible that in a first world country, in the 21st century, there is a segment of our population that has a child mortality rate that is so high. It should also be mentioned that the mortality rate for travellers in general is worse than the general population. They die younger from diseases that are a product of lifestyle.

This is their own fault a lot of the time. We cannot remove the responsibility they have for their actions. I've known travellers who did not fall into that trap and educated themselves. They became solicitors and doctors. Most won't and it is to a large extent their fault.

that doesn't mean that we don't have a responsibility to do something. We need to make sure that all traveller families have access to the full range of services everyone else has. Especially healthcare and education. Education is the greatest tool society has at removing inequality. It is the greatest cause of social mobility. It may be too hard or too late to help adults, but we can do out best to make sure their children grow up educated with options that their parents never had.

The difference between this and the septic tank is that travellers are not marginalised the way unmarried mothers were. No-one is taking their children away and locking up the mothers. additionally travellers are not under the direct care and direct responsibility of the state/church.

Pumpkinseeds

kneemos wrote: »

Sounds like the same attitude that led to 800 babies in a septic tank.Dunno if anything can be done or not but it's a defeatist attitude.

Utter rubbish

kneemos

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

How exactly is it the same attitude?

It's their own fault,let them suffer.

Dan_Solo

Pumpkinseeds wrote: »

Utter rubbish

Pedophile/murderer apologists seem to have been pushing this line in unison all week: criticism of the church is hate, pedophilia/murder is also hate, therefore hating the church is as bad as pedophilia/murder.
It's complete desperate tripe.

Little CuChulainn

kneemos wrote: »

It's their own fault,let them suffer.

Not their own fault, their own choice. You do understand the difference between been forced to do something and choosing to do something don't you?

Dan_Solo

kneemos wrote: »

It's their own fault,let them suffer.

Who was saying it was the mother's or baby's fault? That was THE CHURCH not society!

kingchess

it is hard for the kids to go to school if the family keeps moving whenever they feel like it,the point of being a traveller is that you move around as that is their culture, when they do get a house they have a habit of thrashing it,but not to worry as they will be given another one..if they changed their lifestyle their health and education would improve.

kneemos

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Not their own fault, their own choice. You do understand the difference between been forced to do something and choosing to do something don't you?

It's the attitude we were talking about.You seem to have gone astray.No matter.