Demographic pioneers point the way - new report puts spotlight on older Jews in the UK
|
At a time when issues surrounding the ageing of the UK population have come to the fore
- including challenges relating to increasing life expectancy, a crisis in pensions funding and the closure of care homes
- JPR has published the first-ever examination of care for older Jewish people in the UK. Some 270 pages in length,
Facing the future: The provision of long-term care facilities for older Jewish people in the United Kingdom is the largest and most comprehensive study of how the UK Jewish community cares for its older people.
A key document for policy planners, practitioners and consumers alike, Facing
the Future breaks new ground in offering a three-dimensional look at the care of
older people by one of the UK's oldest ethnic and religious communities. |
|
It covers all the critical areas: UK and Jewish demographic projections, the impact of social care legislation and initiatives, how people choose a care home, and strategies for the future of long-term care. A crucial area is costs and financing. It reports on interviews with social care professionals and users of services across the UK, as well as on the views of 1,500 households in Leeds who responded to questionnaires sent last summer.
Some demographic realities
Almost a quarter of UK Jews are aged 65 or over, compared to 16 per cent nationally. Similarly, approximately 14 per cent of British Jews are aged 75 or over, as opposed to 7 per cent for the general population. Jews also tend to live longer and on average have a higher socio-economic status than in the UK as a whole. Across the UK there is predicted to be an increase in the proportion of older people, a rise in socio-economic status and increased longevity.
According to the report's author, JPR Research Fellow Dr Oliver Valins, "this means that the report can serve as a valuable test case. Issues currently being faced by the Jewish community are likely to be experienced by the rest of society in ten to twenty years' time. In this sense UK Jews are 'demographic pioneers' for the rest of society." In particular, the findings have relevance for other ethnic and religious minority communities whose services are not yet as well-developed and whose age profile is, for the moment, younger than that of the Jewish community.
Meeting the costs of care
Caring for older people is extremely expensive. In the UK Jewish community, some £135 million of government and community money goes towards paying for older people's long-term care needs, the vast majority of which goes into residential and nursing care homes.
Many of the UK's care organizations-some of which date back to the 19th century-are under massive financial pressures, caused by a shortfall in the amounts local authorities are willing to pay for the costs of care within residential and nursing homes. According to Dr Valins, 'as government regulations and societal expectations enforce ever higher standards of care, the financial responsibilities of who should pay for these developments (and how) are being ignored'.
Specific issues for the Jewish sector
While many of the issues facing older British Jews belong to larger national trends, there are several critical areas of concern that apply to the Jewish sector, including:
Provision of places: The number of Jews aged 90 and over is expected to increase by 50 per cent over the next ten years. Given the financial pressures on care organizations, accommodating this increase will be a real challenge.
Human resources: While the UK as a whole is suffering from major problems recruiting and retaining care home staff, the report highlights a particular problem in hiring Jewish staff. Out of more than 2,600 employees working for Jewish residential and nursing homes, only 100 are Jewish. This has major implications for maintaining a Jewish ethos, which is, after all, the reason why so many Jews choose these facilities in the first place.
Focus on institutional care
Rich in details regarding the historical development of social care, demographic changes and the range of services that the Jewish community currently provides, the report focuses on institutional care provision. The report highlights the strengths and weaknesses of Jewish residential and nursing care provision, and the day-to-day realities of living in one of these homes.
Key strategic aims of the report
Facing the future aims to show that:
- The Jewish community's needs and support structures are changing. With an expected decrease in family size, as well as a rise in the incidence of divorce, single-parent families, marriage between Jews and non-Jews, and geographical distance between family members-the ability of Jews in the community to provide informal care support is being compromised. If older people cannot be cared for in their own homes, this inevitably puts increased pressure on formal care services.
- Planners need to assess the changing priorities of their communities. There is a national expectation that people should be cared for in their own homes as far as possible. However, the report suggests that care homes will continue to provide a key role in supporting older people in the future. A debate on the fundamental models of how care is provided-and how this can be tailored to the needs of each individual resident-is urgently required.
- More specialized research needs to be carried out. The report highlights future areas of research, including the need to examine how the 'untapped potential' of communities can be used to improve the day-to-day lives of older people, how different models of care in other countries can be applied to the UK, and the roles that religion, culture and ethnicity play in the care of dementia. It also raises questions from the survey of Leeds, including the fact that older (and indeed younger) Jews report much higher rates of medical conditions such as asthma and diabetes than in the UK as a whole.
The report is the fifth piece of research to be published as part of JPR's four-year project, Long-term Planning for British Jewry, which aims to influence the development of policies and priorities for Jewish charities and other voluntary organizations in the 21st century.
|
Quotes from Facing the future:
On Jewish recruitment and training about Judaism:
There is a big cultural divide between the carers and the cared for. We run a series of lectures, for example on the Holocaust, but many of the staff had either never heard the word 'Holocaust' before, or didn't know what it meant. One staff member thought the Holocaust was a drug for Alzheimer's disease..... (care home manager)
On living in a Jewish voluntary sector care home:
On the need for change:
|
Facing the future was warmly welcomed by professionals in the UK and abroad
Rabbi Julia Neuberger, Chief Executive of the King's Fund:
Leon Smith, Executive Director of Nightingale House: Dr Allen Glicksman, Director of Research & Evaluation Planning at the Philadelphia Corporation for Aging:
Facing the future paints a not altogether happy picture of what is in store for older people in the Jewish community just a few decades from now. Scholarly, balanced and intelligent, the report suggests the need for hard thinking now, and a recognition that the community will need to work in greater partnership with others than hitherto.
It's an excellent document and obviously a huge amount of work has gone into it.
....it is obvious that it is going to be an extremely helpful piece of work both to us and to the community, and I would like to both thank and congratulate you on what you have achieved here.
I found it to be very clear, especially for someone not familiar with aging services in the UK, comprehensive, and very interesting. Most of all, I found it realistic. In general, much of what gets written about services for the Jewish elderly is weak either on the understanding of the Jewish issues or on the realities of providing services to older persons. This report is as competent on the first topic as it is on the second. It really is a model that could benefit much of the planning done in the United States.
Jews in Cyberspace
| At JPR's invitation, Professor Vivian Klaff of the Department of Sociology and Criminal Justice at the University of Delaware, Newark, and Director of its Center for Jewish Studies, came to London in May to give an illustrated lecture and a seminar. The lecture, entitled Jews in Cyberspace: from the Shtetl to the Global Village, was chaired by Lord Mitchell, Chairman of Syscap plc. Professor Klaff took the audience on a multicultural tour of the Internet from a Jewish perspective, showing how the web could contribute to Jewish identity and continuity. The seminar, entitled Jews in cyberspace: social networking models of Jewish community organizations, was held at JPR for communal professionals, who included senior representatives from British ORT, AJR, the United Synagogue, Leo Baeck College and the Board of Deputies. |
|
Introducing the seminar, Vivian Klaff explained that, as a sociologist and demographer, he was drawn to examine the role of the Internet in its social context, as well as its impact on society. Its primary impact, he maintained, was as a means of communication, instantaneously linking Jews seeking Jewish connections.
This was in marked contrast to the world of his father, he said, who was raised in a Lithuanian shtetl before emigrating to South Africa, in the days when communication was a long, drawn-out process reliant on letters carried by sea and over land. It took nine months for Klaff's father to learn that the rest of his family had been driven out of his village. It took him 18 months to locate his siblings after the First World War. For his father, whom he called a 'Jew by force', Jewish identity was imposed from without by the times and circumstances in which he lived.
Today, the Internet and email have transformed the way Jews interact both personally and as a group. By comparison, his own children, educated in the United States, grew up in a free market of religious identification. In this sense, he said, all Jews today were 'Jews by choice', faced with a range of Jewish options more numerous than at any other point in history.
Cyberspace presents Jews with a virtual 'salad bar' of choices. As an example, when Professor Klaff keyed in the words 'Jewish organization' on an Internet search, some 436,000 websites emerged. Similar searches yielded 122,000 entries for Protestants, 232,00 entries for Baptists, 242,000 entries for Muslims and 527,000 for Catholics. As the smallest of these groups and amounting to only 0.2 per cent of the world's population, Jews clearly exploit the possibilities of the Internet disproportionately to their size.
Professor Klaff divided Jewish websites into several categories. Among the most popular, he observed, were 'generic sites' that had the ability to develop transnational identities and enable Diaspora Jews to link back to the nation state. An example was the Aish HaTorah's 'Window on the Wall' site, which allows users, for a fee, to post their petitions on the Kotel. More typically, other sites provide the Jewish world with instantaneous news about Israel or dating services.
Creating a virtual global Jewish village
Other categories included 'central sites' (such as those of the Israeli Government, Zionist and national communal bodies) and
'peripheral sites' (such as Jews for Bush, HalfJews.com, Jewsnotzionists.org, orthogays.com, Jews for the preservation of firearms ownership, and a host of other unlikely examples.) He referred to a CyberSeder, which was instrumental in encouraging a woman to convert to Judaism, and to sites offering a ten-minute spiritual workout each morning. All these sites compete on an equal playing field, he observed, and have created a virtual Jewish global village. However, less positive features have emerged as well. One is what Professor Klaff called the Internet's ability to foster
'transitional identities', which can lead to the 'Balkanization' of the community, creating a surfeit of narrow and isolated Jewish interest groups with little connection to the wider Jewish world.
Yet Klaff warned against viewing this social dynamic as antithetical to the classic social network 'magnet' model, whose endgame is Jewish continuity. Under that model, with Israel, communal organizations or synagogues acting as the centre, Jews who choose different 'magnets' are deemed peripheral. A more multi-polar, multifaceted approach to Jewish identity needed to be considered.
The Internet - a force for good or evil?
As an indication of the Internet's uneven acceptance in the traditional Jewish world, Vivian Klaff noted that 29 rabbinical sages had assembled in Jerusalem to condemn the Internet as a menace, while organizations such as Chabad made excellent use of this tool in their outreach programmes.
In summing up, Professor Barry Kosmin remarked that while the capacity of the Internet was infinite, time was finite. The Internet was merely an extra tool in addition to all pre-existing forms of communication, and it must inevitably have encroached on other forms of activities or media. The sheer volume of Jewish websites was revealing in itself and told us much about the Jewish world: its fragmentation, its phenomenal energy, and its relative affluence and high standards of education.
Will you still need me, will you still feed me...?
| British society as a whole and the Jewish community in particular are facing a new demographic future. Two hundred years ago women on average could expect to live to 50, and men to 48 years of age. Today, the average life expectancy for women is almost 80 and around 75 years for men. Moreover, in the Jewish population life expectancies are even higher; women can expect to live to 82 and men to 79. In the UK as a whole, the number of people aged 90 or over is expected to increase fourfold over the course of the next century. In the Jewish population this growth is, in the short-term at least, predicted to be even faster, with the number of people aged 90 or over expected to rise by 50 per cent over the course of this decade. This ageing raises crucial policy questions - in particular, who should be responsible for the future care of those older people who will require long-term support and how (and by whom) should this be funded? |
|
Facing a grey future
We live in grey times. While the British Jewish community is experiencing major population losses (there are at least one quarter fewer Jews in the UK today than 50 years ago), the proportion of older people to those of working-age is increasing. Today, more than 4,000 older Jewish people live in sheltered housing or in institutional (residential or nursing) care homes run by Jewish voluntary sector organizations (with many others in privately run facilities). One in every nineteen Jews aged 65 or over can expect to live in a residential or nursing home at some point in their life, and currently the costs of this care can be as high as £850 per week. Nationally, the costs of long-term care are estimated to be £11 billion, which (at current prices) could rise to £45 billion by the middle of this century. Clearly this is big business and there are therefore important decisions to be made about how to finance these spiralling costs and where the burden should fall. Is it the responsibility of individuals, families, communities or the state? If we truly want high quality formal care services for ourselves and our families, how much are we willing to pay?
Confronting the taboos
As part of JPR's Leeds Jewish Community Study, people aged 75 or over were asked whether or not they would consider moving to sheltered housing or residential care in the next ten years. Twenty-three per cent replied that they would consider this option, the same percentage stated that they would not, but more than half answered
'don't know'. This worrying reluctance by many even to consider their future care is one of the big challenges facing community planners. There are still major taboos surrounding the discussion of issues relating to old age, infirmity and death. We are reluctant to think about pensions and about making wills, let alone about how we should be cared for once we can no longer take care of ourselves. Nevertheless, burying our collective heads in the sand is no answer to a problem that is only going to get worse. So, what are the possible options?
1. Maintain the status quo. This is perhaps the easiest option, at least in the short-term. Jewish voluntary sector organizations will continue to raise funds for capital projects (such as building new care homes), but will equally continue to struggle to pay core costs and to finance the services they already provide. Given the massive financial pressures facing many of these organizations, a number will go bankrupt and the community will become increasingly dependent on non-Jewish voluntary sector or private agencies. For those organizations that do survive, services may have to be cut or scaled down, which runs contrary to ever-increasing societal expectations. Alternatively, some institutions may be forced to develop a two-tier system so that those individuals who can afford to pay higher costs will do so in return for better facilities, while poorer members of the community will have to make do with 'no frills' care options.
2. Campaign for more government money. Social care services are currently chronically under-funded by the government. Reports from organizations ranging from the King's Fund to Help the Aged have consistently highlighted the shortfall in the funding care organizations receive compared to the actual costs of providing services. Moreover, the relative financial health of the Local Authority in which an older person lives determines how much funding he or she can obtain for long-term care, and indeed whether they can receive anything at all in the first place. This is 'care by postcode'. Campaigning for an increase in government support - similar to that prescribed for the NHS - would thus be another possible approach.
3. Develop alternative models of care. Another approach towards solving future demographic and financial problems is to develop alternative models of care, and, particularly, to limit the numbers entering residential and nursing homes (which account for the lion's share of government and community funding of social care services for older people). This is the preferred approach of the UK government, which is actively seeking to encourage people to stay at home for as long as possible and to avoid 'unnecessary' institutional care. Meanwhile, the bar for obtaining institutional care has been raised dramatically in recent decades so only extremely frail people can now receive a Local Authority funded place. Indeed, the average age of clients in Jewish voluntary sector care homes in London is now 90 years old. However, there are doubts as to whether a large reduction in numbers within long-term care facilities can realistically be achieved; for those who are extremely frail it is often cheaper to care for them in a residential or nursing facility rather than in their own homes. Moreover, the simplistic assumption that people are invariably happier in their own homes must be questioned. For many people, living in their own homes means that they are vulnerable, socially isolated and unable to look after themselves adequately.
Other alternative forms of care include 'assisted living' schemes. Here, older people (of all ages) are encouraged to move to schemes where they purchase or rent their own apartment, but there are care facilities on site to which they can transfer if their health deteriorates. The idea is to 'age in place'. The only such scheme in England is based near York (at Hartrigg Oaks) and has attracted very positive reviews from both residents and policy-makers. Nevertheless, the cost of constructing such schemes can be extremely high and there are concerns that they segregate the rich, who can afford the initial and weekly costs, from the poor.
A less radical alternative approach that would help people to remain in their own homes would be to divert more energy and funds into community care and day centre facilities. These centres have traditionally found it difficult to attract funding: for example, the government typically sees day centres as 'recreational' rather than as being critical to maintaining good mental and physical health. Nevertheless, developing truly world-class day centres and community services should have major benefits. Indeed, if well designed, they would have the added bonus of helping to integrate members of the community from across the age and class spectrums and would help counter the problems of isolation from which many older people suffer.
4. Greater family and community support. While the demographic picture as a whole raises serious questions for planners - although it should be noted, that while people are living longer they are also generally healthier - what is arguably more worrying is the changing nature of family support structures. Compared to older people of today, future generations are likely to have smaller families, higher rates of divorce (or not to have married at all) and to live further away from their immediate family. If family support structures are weakened in these ways, as suggested by current trends, then there will be less potential for providing informal care within people's own homes, and this will therefore put greater pressure on voluntary sector organizations. Moreover, the rise in the number of intermarried couples raises questions as to whether they will want to make use of Jewish social care services and, if they do, whether Jewish voluntary sector organizations will be willing and inclusive enough to cater for them.
For Jewish policy-planners, there is a need to think constructively about how people can become more involved in the care of their relatives and of members of the community more generally. Jewish organizations have consistently highlighted the difficulties they experience in obtaining volunteers, whose help is often crucial in providing high quality and individualized care. The Leeds Jewish Community Study revealed that over half of the population in that city did no voluntary work, and of those that did, a third said they did too little. Harnessing this potential voluntary work-force in the Jewish community is a key challenge.
5. A community tax/insurance scheme. A final possibility worth considering - although certainly not without problems - is some form of community tax or insurance scheme. If we take the analogy of the Jewish community as a club - specifically a health club - we know that we are expected to pay a membership subscription, in return for which we can use the facilities that are on offer. We also know that if we want to join a club with the very best facilities, the costs of membership are likely to be high. Many people already pay substantial amounts towards the infrastructure of the Jewish community, whether through synagogue fees, burial rights or contributions to charitable organizations. The stark reality is, however, that if we want to improve services for ourselves and for our loved ones, we will have to pay for them. Some sort of community tax, or an insurance scheme whereby those who can afford to do so pay a direct debit into a communal pot - regulated and overseen by an independent ombudsperson - might be an attractive approach. Whether the community - or the separate geographical communities across the country - is ready to unite to create such a scheme is questionable.
Opening the debate
In contrast to education (see jpr/news Autumn 2001) issues surrounding ageing and the long-term care of older people are not popular topics. It is difficult to think about and plan for the day when we, or a close relative, may be dependent on the direct assistance of others, whether in our own home or in an institution. It is uncomfortable to dwell on the thought that we may one day need help getting dressed or taking a bath, or, worse still, that we may suffer from dementia. The majority of older people fortunately do not need such assistance. Moreover, it would be totally wrong to label old people as an homogeneous mass, a
'problem' that younger people are somehow going to have to confront.
Stereotyping older people is as potentially harmful as any other form of prejudice. Nevertheless, it is also naïve to downplay the very real difficulties that a large number of older people face, and will continue to face. As the century progresses, there will be an ever greater proportion of older people with a complex set of needs and wants. The starting point for the Jewish community must be to recognise the challenges to be faced in terms of caring for those who require, or will one day require, long-term support. The next stage is to begin an honest and realistic debate about what services we want and how much we are willing to pay for them, either financially, or in terms of our time as carers or volunteers. If voluntary organizations are to meet our expectations when the need arises, each of us will have to pay one way or another.
Responding to Diversity? An initial investigation into multicultural education
in Jewish schools in the United Kingdom
Responding to diversity? was commissioned by JPR and will be published this summer. Written by Dr Geoffrey Short of the Department of Education, University of Hertfordshire, it is a groundbreaking investigation that provides, for the first time, an analysis by a particular faith or ethnic community into the teaching of multiculturalism in its day schools. Included below are extracts from the forward written by Dr Oliver Valins and Professor Barry Kosmin. |
From left: David Lerner, Director of Educational Leadership, UJIA, Dr Geoffrey Short, author of the JPR report, Dr Edie Friedman, Director of the Jewish Council for Racial Equality and Sidney Shipton, Co-ordinator of the Three Faiths Forum, at a JPR seminar to discuss the findings. |
In many ways Jewish day school education is enjoying a golden age. Since the 1950s, the number of children at Jewish day schools in the United Kingdom has increased by 500 per cent, with more than half of all Jewish children of primary age now attending such schools. In 1999, some 22,640 children went to a UK Jewish nursery, primary or secondary school. In examination results, the picture is similarly positive. Pupils in Jewish day schools tend to achieve GCSE and A-level examination results that are considerably higher than the national average. Government inspectors also consistently praise the standards of teaching and the attitudes of staff and pupils in state-sector Jewish day schools. For communal leaders and the sponsors and supporters of Jewish day schools, this is a tremendous success story.
Nevertheless, there are several challenges to be faced. While standards in secular subjects are generally very high, some independent strictly Orthodox schools have more varied results and have attracted concern on the part of government inspectors. In the rest of the Jewish day school system, it is hard to recruit and retain well-qualified Judaic subject teachers, with Jewish studies and modern and biblical Hebrew often regarded as the 'weakest links' in terms of academic performance. There are also problems in providing adequate services for children with special educational needs, particularly those with moderate learning difficulties. Finally, there are major demographic fears about the sustainability of the current network of Jewish day schools.
The role of faith-based schools
Beyond challenges that are particular to Jewish day schools, wider societal forces and government legislation also have an effect. In particular, there are ongoing political debates in the UK about the role of faith-based schools. Proponents argue that parents should be able to educate their children according to their wishes and that pupils in faith-based schools achieve examination results that are typically higher than the national average. Opponents argue that such schools are socially divisive, creating a population with little understanding of, or tolerance for, those with different beliefs or ways of life. Central to these debates are concerns about how schools deal with multiculturalism in the classroom, which in turn is linked to fundamental questions about the overall purpose of schools. Should they be concerned primarily with helping their pupils to achieve the best possible examination results? What role should they play in socializing children? Should schools be focusing more on creating citizens of their country? How much emphasis should there be on acculturating children into being members of particular religious, ethnic or cultural groups? The 2001 JPR report
The Future of Jewish Schooling in the United Kingdom suggests that many British Jewish parents want their children to grow up within the Jewish religion. However, they are also concerned that their children should not be too isolated from the wider world and should grow up to understand people with different religious views and ethnic backgrounds.
This latest report reveals great diversity. Some schools are treating multiculturalism seriously and provide models of good practice, while for others, it comes low down on their list of priorities. The report reveals the pressure that state schools are under because of the national curriculum and the unwillingness of some to undertake additional teaching requirements. This is especially relevant given the limited amount of time that many Jewish schools have for Judaic subjects (which can be as little as two hours a week). It also reveals misunderstandings about what 'multiculturalism' actually means and, therefore, how it should be taught.
Another important aspect of the debate is the introduction by the current government of a citizenship curriculum. Pupils will be expected to learn about social and moral responsibility, community involvement and political literacy, with the aim of developing informed and responsible citizens aware of their duties and rights. This aspect of the curriculum will be assessed by OFSTED in their regular school inspection reports. The citizenship curriculum will provide an extra (legal) incentive for all schools and parents to reassess how they explain the practices, beliefs and identities of 'others'.
Need for debate
Overall, this report provides an indication of some of the issues and challenges facing Jewish and non-Jewish schools in teaching about multiculturalism. It poses questions for both the Jewish community and wider society regarding effective teaching about people from different backgrounds and/or ways of life. It should be viewed as a first step in identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the current provision and encourage a wide-ranging communal debate on multiculturalism in schools.
JPR is grateful to the Stone Ashdown Trust and the Three Faiths Forum for
funding this research. The Haredi community in North London: a traditional society negotiating the modern metropolis
|
At a JPR policy seminar in June, Professor Amiram Gonen of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Floersheimer Institute for Policy Studies presented the findings of his research on
Haredi communities, summarized below, to professionals from the Board of Deputies, Norwood, the Interlink Foundation, prominent figures in the London Haredi community and JPR research staff.
Haredim and modernity: defying the linear relationship
|
From left: Professor Amiram Gonen, Councillor Aba Dunner and Winston J Held of the Conference of European rabbis at the JPR seminar |
London was a good place to explore the factors within a welfare-state metropolis that enable contemporary Haredi society to flourish and to resist the old linear view and apocalyptic prognosis. Here are some initial findings from Professor Gonen's research:
Clustering in large enough numbers
The larger the Haredi community, the more effectively it can create its own cultural territory in a threatening secular environment.
A traditional base for a civil society
Haredi society has adopted new areas of voluntary activity concerned with the daily necessities of living in a modern urban
environment. A housing association, counselling services, a first-aid voluntary organization are but some examples of new forms of civil society that they have adopted.
Relying on the rich
Haredi society continues to rely heavily on the rich amongst them to support the institutions which keep their culture going.
Relying on the welfare state
Full-time religious learning by young Haredi men after marriage is widespread and the numbers are growing, despite the fact that an overwhelming proportion of the
Haredi population is in the lower if not lowest income brackets. This development was made economically possible by the elaborate and benevolent welfare system that has evolved in many modern states. The key resources available to the
Haredim in North London are child allowance, housing benefits and income support, which are so crucial that Agudas Israel maintains a special unit solely to advise households on how to claim the social payments to which they are entitled. This is one example of the way the
Haredim help their members negotiate the welfare system and other aspects of the modern state.
A very large proportion of young Haredi households receive housing benefits, which can amount to several hundred pounds a month. It is thus possible for many low-income Haredi households to reside in a relatively expensive inner-area of the metropolis, enjoying the advantages both of living within Haredi turf and close to high concentrations of economic opportunities.
Struggling to keep an independent Haredi educational system
Haredi society has no problem adapting to the rules of the modern world when only instrumental spheres of life, such as housing or social services, are concerned. But where religious values are involved, as in education, things are different. Many of the
Haredi groups are not willing to compromise on a fully-fledged Haredi
education for boys over 12 years of age, omitting the secular studies required by the national curriculum in their
boys' schools, which are a prerequisite for granting state aid. Concessions are made only with regard to the schooling of girls. As a result, a large component of
Haredi education is cut off from state funding - a constant sore point with the
Haredim.
There are internal ramifications for Haredim over the differing attitudes to secular studies for boys and girls, with women better equipped with modern skills than men. Indeed, in many Haredi families, wives are the breadwinners and deal with the outside environment.
Taking an active part in local politics
The UK electoral system enables Haredi-populated wards to elect Haredi
councillors, who work hard to mobilize council resources for their educational system. They have read the spirit of multiculturalism that guides legislation, the judicial process and politics. Hackney is indeed multi-ethnic, and the
Haredi councillors have been able to assign an official ethnic definition for their community, which is useful in the competition for resources.
Many 'interface people' provide the culturally isolated and insulated Haredi population with a supportive link to the external world. Extremely well-versed in the intricacies of the corridors of power and of resources, they are vital to
Haredi existence in the modern metropolis. They are well equipped with the skills of modernity, ardently and professionally seek external supportive resources for their community, while at the same time generating institutional and personal development on the inside. All this is done while maintaining allegiance to
Haredi culture. The interface people symbolize the way in which a traditional society can successfully negotiate the modern world while keeping to its traditional way of life.
|
From A Community of Communities, the JPR Report of the Commission on Representation of the Interests of the British Jewish Community, 2000
Forthcoming events:
The William Frankel Lecture
Thursday 12 September, 6.00 pm
Thoughts of a Jewish Justice on Jews who paved the way
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg of the United States Supreme Court
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, one of the most eminent civil rights lawyers in the US, was born in Brooklyn, New York. She graduated from Columbia Law School in 1959, where she later returned as a member of the faculty. In 1972 she co-founded the Women's Rights Project of the American Civil Liberties Union. She directed her attack to laws which differed in their treatment of men and women. Championing the rights of women, she argued six cases before the US Supreme Court between 1973 and 1976. Winning five of the six cases, she pleaded for the application of equal protection to gender issues. Above all, Bader Ginsburg demanded the end of gender discrimination. She is considered by some 'the legal architect of the modern women's movement'.
Bader Ginsburg came to be seen as one of the pre-eminent players in legal reform and in 1993 she was nominated by President Clinton to serve on the Supreme Court. She became only the second female justice appointed to the Court.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg's philosophy can best be summed up by her belief that the law 'cannot proscribe rights to one group and not to another.'
On 12 September at 6.00 pm, Justice Ginsburg will deliver the William Frankel Lecture to an invited JPR audience in central London. The lecture will be entitled Thoughts of a Jewish Justice on Jews who paved the Way. Justice Ginsburg will speak of the Jewish US Supreme Court Justices who preceded her and Jewish women who inspired her by their example.
If you are not on the JPR mailing list for invitations and wish to receive an invitation, please call Hannah Chapman on 020 7935 8266 or e-mail
jpr@jpr.org.co.uk giving your name and address. Out and about in Berlin
In June, JPR Director Professor Barry Kosmin attended a Conference entitled The Changing Jewish Community in Europe, which was organized in Berlin by the ZWST (Central Board of Jewish Welfare in Germany), the European Council of Jewish Communities and the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee. He gave an overview of social and demographic changes in the Jewish communities throughout Europe.
He also gave a presentation on Demography, Human Resources and Social Capital in Jewish communities
at a Congress on The Role of Volunteering in Jewish Community Life, which was organized by the ZWST and the German Ministry for Families, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth.
The survival of fascism in the post-fascist era
The current issue of Patterns of Prejudice (vol. 36, no. 3, July 2002) is a special issue that explores the forms that fascism assumes in the post-fascist era. Guest editor Roger Griffin, Professor of History at Oxford Brookes University and author of
The Nature of Fascism, together with the other contributors analyse the elusive and intricate subculture of small right-wing formations.
Patterns of Prejudice is produced in association with Parkes Centre, University of Southampton, and published by Sage. For information about subscription, please contact Sage Publications on 020 7374 0645, or see the website
www.sagepub.co.uk. New Collaboration with the University of Oxford
JPR and the Oxford Institute of Ageing at the University of Oxford are to collaborate on a joint study to explore the impact of changing intergenerational relationships on the older UK Jewish population. The study will involve a comprehensive review of the future research needs and policy issues in the field of care for older Jewish people. Trends in Government policy mean that the Jewish community is at a crossroads in the delivery of services to an increasingly aged population. The report will prioritize the issues that need to be placed on the agenda of the Jewish community's human service agencies and suggest ways to access the requisite resources on offer.
Ms Sonya Levin has been appointed as a Research Officer to assist with the design and initial implementation of the study. Her post has been funded by a grant from the Safra Foundation. Ms Levin holds a Bachelor's degree in Psychology from the University of Manchester and a Master's degree in Health Psychology from the University of Sussex. Based at the Oxford Institute of Ageing, her work will be under the direct supervision of OIA's director, Dr. Sarah Harper, and she will work closely with Dr. Oliver Valins and other JPR research staff.
The academic advisory board for the study will comprise members both of the OIA and JPR, as well as external experts on gerontology.