UK Gov publishes race report

Scroll to see replies

I see no mention of the fact that black women are like 4x more likely to die during childbirth

This may say more about your reading ability than the actual contents of the report, but to make it a bit easier for you, I'll copy the relevant section below, and underline where that fact is mentioned.

Maternal mortality
In 2018, the stillbirth rate in England reached its lowest level on record, at 4.0 stillbirths per 1,000
births, a decrease from 5.1 stillbirths in 2010.663 In 2015 to 2017, 209 women died during or up
to 6 weeks after pregnancy, from causes associated with their pregnancy. This was out of the
2,280,451 women giving birth in the UK during this period. 9.2 women per 100,000 died during
pregnancy or up to 6 weeks after childbirth or the end of pregnancy.664
Maternal deaths are fortunately rare in the UK, although analysis of maternal deaths, stillbirths
and neonatal deaths undertaken by ‘Mothers and Babies: Reducing Risk through Audits and
Confidential Enquiries across the UK’ (MBRRACE-UK) shows that poor outcomes are higher
for mothers and babies from Black and Asian ethnic groups, particularly those born in Asia or
Africa, and for women living in the most deprived areas of the country.665
The emotions quite rightly attached to this topic means it is prominent in any conversation
about health disparities. It was brought up as a key example of health disparities by a number
of respondents in the Commission’s call for evidence.
It is important that all involved in these conversations understand that highlighting this disparity
without emphasising the low numbers overall, is unfair to expectant mothers everywhere. As the
MBRRACE-UK states, “many women have found these figures very worrying and it is important
always to qualify such stark statistics with absolute numbers – in 2016 to 2018 in the UK, 34
Black women died among every 100,000 giving birth, 15 Asian women died among every
100,000 giving birth, and 8 White women died among every 100,000 giving birth.”666
Although incidence of maternal mortality is rare, the increased rates seen in ethnic minority
groups need to be better understood and explained. The Commission is aware that work is
being done in this area both in government and as part of the NHS Long Term Plan.667 The
Commissioners believe that more research into causes in the disparities of maternal mortality
should be one of the highest priorities for the new Office for Health Disparities outlined in the
recommendation below.

Reply 41

TheMcSame

All I'm gonna say is this:

*Epidemiologists say X about Coronavirus based on data*
People: If you don't believe this, you're an idiot. I'm sure you armchair experts know SO MUCH more than EXPERTS

*Scientists say X about climate change based on data*
People: Only idiots don't believe this, do you really know better than the experts?

*Scientists say the Earth is not flat based on data*
People: Yep. Only an idiot would think the world is flat

*Commission of experts says X about institutional racism based on data*
People: Wow. This doesn't align with my opinion, therefore it's wrong.

I'm sorry, but if you're bashing this you're literally no different than flat earthers and anti-vaxxers... You're putting your opinion before actual data...

(edited 3 years ago)

Reply 42

rockrunride

Original post by TheMcSame

I'm afraid we've reached an era where reason doesn't matter any more.

Reply 43

Hallouminatus

Original post by DSilva

In 2010, the chair of the Panel wrote this article claiming racism doesn't exist and black boys are too feminine
https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/mar/15/black-boys-too-feminised-fathers?__twitter_impression=true

Excuse me if I don't take his report seriously.

The article you link to does not make either of the claims you say it does.

Excuse me if I don't take your opinion seriously.

Reply 44

looloo2134

Original post by -Imperator-

"Children from ethnic communities did as well or better than white pupils in compulsory education, with black Caribbean pupils the only group to perform less well".
You don't need to commission a report to find this out lol, the stats are freely available online.

I through the people who did worst at school were Travellers.

Reply 45

~Tara~

It's concerning the lack of critical thinking applied in here. The report is biased because the chair is biased. It generated its report from carefully selected sources. There is more than enough data to show the UK has serious issues with institutional racism. How can it not when the head of its government is racist? Being able to get good grades doesn't translate into getting good jobs, good pay, good healthcare, fair trials and fair experience of policing. It doesn't change the fact that the government want to protect statues more than women, off of the back of statues of slave traders being defaced/removed.

This government has no issue in lying and patting itself on the back for thigs it neither believes nor achieves. And the traditional media is the producer of their propaganda.

Reply 46

Hallouminatus

Original post by looloo2134

I through the people who did worst at school were Travellers.

This is true, both Irish travellers and Roma/Gypsies do worse in every metric of educational outcome. However, the low outcomes of black Caribbean students are more often mentioned (and the higher outcomes of black African students are often not mentioned) by those who wish to propound the view that disparities are a result of institutional racism and white privilege.
Even though this report does not uphold that view, it justifies the misleading statement that black Caribbean and mixed white and black Caribbean students have the worst outcomes by invoking the small numbers of Irish travellers and Roma/Gypsy students.

Although Gypsy and Roma and Irish Traveller groups were not included as separate ethnic
groups in this analysis due to their small sample size, we know that they are frequent outliers in
attainment. In 2018 to 2019, the average Attainment 8 score for students from the Gypsy and
Roma Traveller ethnic group was 19.1, while for the Irish Traveller group it was 26.6, compared
with 46.2 for the White British group.

(edited 3 years ago)

Reply 47

looloo2134

Original post by ~Tara~

The people who are the worst of in Britain are Irish Travellers and Roma/Gypsies they have the worst health, bullied at school, are most likely to be expelled, die younger, live in poor housing, be in prison, do worst at school. I never see anybody complaining for their rights and bigotry they face why don't look a how they are treated.

Reply 48

~Tara~

Original post by looloo2134

if the government say there is no institutional racism this would also erase the racism that travellers experience. There is nothing stopping you from raising your voice.

Also i dont need to shout about every injustice in order for a point im making to be valid. if i shouted about every injustice id never stop speaking.

Reply 49

looloo2134

Original post by ~Tara~

You have just show that you don't care about TRG communities (Gypsies Irish Traveller, Roma/Gypsies people) you are to lazy to even look up the right term. By the why British Roma/Gypsies hate being called Travellers they are different ethnic group believe to have come from India about 500 years ago.
Bye

Reply 50

Contested Claim

Original post by TheMcSame

There's respecting the expertise of others and there is blind faith in authority. You are falling for the latter.

If you take the time to read some of the opinions of others who specialise in inequality and social disparities, you'll see that this report has gone down like a flat fart. The commission's conclusions have come as no surprise. When the government appointed Tony Sewell to lead the commission, it was obvious at the time what outcome the government wanted.

To use your analogy, it is like asking an anti-vaxxer to write a report on the efficacy of covid vaccines.

Reply 51

fallen_acorns

Original post by DSilva

You're giving too much credence to the report, in my opinion.

It was commissioned by a government that doesn't think institutional racism exists, who appointed a panel who doesn't think it exists. Tony Sewel is on record for years saying it doesn't exist.

It seems to be little more than the government marking its own homework.

Your right - you certainly have to take in the political context here. I mean this isn't an unbiased peer reviewed study, its a report commissioned by a conservative government etc.

I'm still surprised though. The torries don't normally come out so blatantly against the progressive way of thinking. Sure economically they are very (or used to be) hard in their conservative convictions, but socially they have pissed off a whole lot of conservatives by not explicitly taking a conservative/right wing stance. So a report like this, if they stand by it, is quite an interesting thing.

I think that stage I will praise the report for its balance. It certainly isn't the get-out-of-jail card that those on the right want it to be.. it still acknowledges many racial problems. But its not the everything-is-awful report that the left would praise either, as it acknowledges the areas where we do well.

Balanced doesn't equal correct though, and I'm sure people will spend ages going through each point and comparing it to the actual studies/figures/evidence to see how it holds up. There are so many individual areas of something like this, that to be honest I'll wait for a nice big article or video that breaks it all down and looks at which parts are correct and which aren't.

Reply 52

fallen_acorns

Original post by N. Auditoré

I would rather he label none of them as model, relative superiority ≠ superiority. While the UK is admittedly better in a few aspects than other countries that doesn’t actually make is good as a whole, a common misconception often made. Besides, like u said i prefer Canada. This country is far from a model anything. Who is answering those racial surveys because I’m sure it’s probably white ppl (because we are in a majorly white country obviously) who are not the target demographic for racial abuse. Again, this is why trying to quantify racism is not effective often. Research methods have various drawbacks and advantages.

Also, institutional racism has many fields and colours that as i said, would probably not be covered. Trying to cover all of it is impossible hence why i said he cherry-picks. I see no mention of the fact that black women are like 4x more likely to die during childbirth, or how black people are more likely to wait longer for kidney transplants etc. Institutional racism is just that, institutional. It is interwoven under many surfaces. As Imperator pointed out, most of these stats were already available online and don’t exactly prove much.

As for those racial surveys as i said, or better yet in the words of Dave “the least racist is still racist”, no?

Also, hate crime inquiries by race increeased by 62% over lockdown so i would say we’re really not doing great at all or in a position to be celebrating being a model anything, as i said, just people trying their hardest to dismiss

https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/coronavirus-62-rise-in-hate-crime-referrals-fuelled-by-abusive-neighbours-during-lockdown-12102949

Good is only good by comparison though. Good isn't a concept that exists in isolation. The difference between the left+right when it comes to 'good' in racial debates is the left compares us to an ideal anti-racist country that has never existed, whereas the right (and this report) compares us to actual existing other countries, past and present.

Compared to things that exist, I'd accept that we are probably in the top 5 least racist countries of all time (judged by modern standards). That's out of 195 present day countries, and all past historical ones that don't exist any more. That's a pretty model country...

Compared to an ideal society that has no racists, no racial tensions, no discrimination or prejudice.. yeah we aren't very good.

Which one is more useful? Both. We need comparisons to real-world countries to avoid getting utopian delusions, and to appreciate our progress and feel thankful for how far we have come. Recognition of progress is a huge motivator to continue working hard and putting the effort in. At the same time, just being the one of the best doesn't mean we can't be better still, so looking at the areas to improve on is vital.

This report does balance that quite well. It covers areas where we excel and do well, and areas where we don't. As another poster has pointed out - it does actually mention deaths during birth, as well as other areas where we are struggling with racism.. e.g. small micro-agressions/daily events, and especially online racism. It also talks about the transition from youth to adulthood and recommends more resources to help transfer the relative success we have with young people into adulthood.

---

To the rest - the surveys that I was referring to wasn't asking if you have been a victim, but about racial attitudes. E.g. 'do you consider people who aren't white to be British' or 'would you like to live next to people from X race' etc. They are trying to find out how many people hold racist views. In that context, obviously you need to ask white people. The UK generally comes out very well compared to Europe in these types of surveys.

For the hate crimes. You need to be a little careful in using self-reported numbers as an indication of a real rise. The person quoted in your article even acknowledges "We saw that (the BLM movement) encouraged lots of people to come forward and feel empowered to report it".

That being said, I personally would fully expect to see a rise in all types of tensions due to the lockdowns. And the report seems to bare that out, if tensions generally increase nation wide, then that will manifest naturally in more racial tensions, sexist tensions, homaphobic tensions etc. That rise coupled with increased awarenses, reporting, and the media spotlight from the BLM protests, will likely explain the rise.

In the same manner, I expect to see a rise in the reporting of sexual type offenses, given the current spotlight on them right now. Not because more men are going out attacking women from january to march, but because more people will be aware and encouraged to come forward.

Reply 53

Napp

Why am i not surprised the usual suspects are on this thread saying that either its outright lying, mistaken or simply twisting the facts them whining about how in actual fact (they seem to mistake their warped opinion for facts) the UK is basically the 3rd Reich trying to wipe out those pesky coloured sorts.

Ridiculous. For a piece of news that actually points out something rather good for a change they still seem able to manufacture some faux grievance to fit their queer narrative.

Reply 54

TheMcSame

Original post by Contested Claim

Whatever makes you feel better about yourself and your conspiracies.

Reply 55

Ascend

From the report:

There is also the question of the relative success of different groups. Those groups, particularly
Indian and Chinese ethnic groups, who have the most success in British society tend to see
fewer obstacles and less prejudice. And those groups that do less well, Black people and
Pakistani and Bangladeshi Muslims, tend to see and experience more of both, though Black
African people are considerably more positive than Black Caribbean people.

This fact has been pointed out time and again for a while now and it seems to always be ignored in favour of a racialised lens to tackling socioeconomic problems. Even Marxists seem to be fed up with the racial approach.

I'd be interested to see counter-reports or at least arguments that actually engage with the contents of this report. It seems that most people who are either praising or criticising it haven't even read it, including professionals publically signalling to their respective tribes.

Reply 56

04MR17

Volunteer Section Leader

Original post by TheMcSame

Do you really believe scientific data is as objective as the findings of a panel of people investigating a metaphysical and socio-cultural phenomenon?

Reply 57

Renner

Report says what we all knew and have been saying for years. Outcomes are influenced by class and wealth, not race. Racial ‘campaigners’ who constantly paint ethnic minorities as victims do more harm than good.

(edited 3 years ago)

Reply 58

Ascend

DDU’s Response to The Committee on Racial and Ethnic Disparities’ Report

The main strength of the report is its insistence that the complexities of social life cannot be reduced to a single variable, which in this case, is race. The report does not deny that racism exists, but it does maintain that not all disparities are incontrovertible proof of racism. Even where disparities point to racism, it can be challenging to ascertain the causal weight attributable to it because racism doesn’t exist as a discrete feature; it is difficult to extricate the effects of race from other variables. A far more complex picture of the distribution of material and cultural goods in British society emerges than the dominant one in public discourse. It is well-known now that members of the Chinese ethnic minority group do well at school and in employment income measures. But they are also among the lowest in measures of household income which has a significant influence on intergenerational wealth. Similarly, in education, Bangladeshi pupils, along with Indian and Black African pupils, in 2019, achieved a higher average in Attainment 8 GCSE scores than their White British counterparts. Yet people with Bangladeshi backgrounds fared less well in measures of homeownership. Fifty per cent of women in Bangladeshi families were economically inactive, which could also have implications for potential integration. The catch-all category of BAME makes little empirical or psychological sense. Similarly, racism as a catch-all explanation of, for example, lower rates of employment among Black Caribbean or Bangladeshi young people, can obscure more than illuminate the problem.