Problematizing the context and construction of vulnerability and risk in relation to British Muslim ME groups

Authors: Ashencaen Crabtree, S.

Editors: Husain, A.

http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/27823/

Journal: Journal of Religion & Spirituality in Social Work: Challenges and opportunities for social work with Muslims

Issue: Islam in the 21st Century

Publisher: Taylor & Francis

ISSN: 1542-6432

British Muslim minority ethnic (ME) groups are perceived as holding values and beliefs distinctively different from the rest of multicultural UK. Vulnerability in these groups relates to existing material and social conditions and is contrasted to the perceived risks to British society and the State posed by religio-ethnic separatism. Such dichotomies create new textures and layers to familiar but complex concepts of vulnerability in social work. The problematization of British ME Muslims in public discourse and related social policy are critically discussed as contributing to a fluid but potentially inflammatory terrain where vulnerability and oppression are highly ambiguous and contested.

This data was imported from Scopus:

Authors: Ashencaen Crabtree, S.

http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/27823/

Journal: Journal of Religion and Spirituality in Social Work

Volume: 36

Issue: 1-2

Pages: 247-265

eISSN: 1542-6440

ISSN: 1542-6432

DOI: 10.1080/15426432.2017.1300080

© 2017 Crown copyright. British Muslim minority ethnic (ME) groups are perceived as holding values and beliefs distinctively different from the rest of multicultural UK. Vulnerability in these groups relates to existing material and social conditions and is contrasted to the perceived risks to British society and the State posed by religio-ethnic separatism. Such dichotomies create new textures and layers to familiar but complex concepts of vulnerability in social work. The problematization of British ME Muslims in public discourse and related social policy are critically discussed as contributing to a fluid but potentially inflammatory terrain where vulnerability and oppression are highly ambiguous and contested.

The data on this page was last updated at 05:12 on February 21, 2020.