A situational analysis of selected aspects of the living standards of excluded Roma households in Slovakia

8/13/2019 A situational analysis of selected aspects of the living standards of excluded Roma households in Slovakia

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/a-situational-analysis-of-selected-aspects-of-the-living-standards-of-excluded 1/222

A SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS OF SELECTED ASPECTOF THE LIVING STANDARD OF HOUSEHOLDSIN MARGINALIZED ROMA SETTLEMENTS

http://europeandcis.undp.org/ourwork/roma/



A SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS OF SELECTED ASPECTS

OF THE LIVING STANDARD OF HOUSEHOLDSIN MARGINALIZED ROMA SETTLEMENTS



A S I T U A T I O N A L A N A L Y S I S O F S E L E C T E D A S P E C T S O F T H E L I V I N G S T A N D A R D O F H O U S E H O L D S I N M A R G I N A L I Z E D R O M A S E T T L E M E N

Published byUNDP Europe and the CIS,Bratislava Regional Centre

In cooperationwith the Institutefor Public Affairs

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) expresses its gratitude to the Ministry of Labor,Social Affairs and Family of the Slovak Republic for financial support and collaboration

in implementation of this project

© UNDP 2013ISBN: 978-80-89263-17-2

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system

or transmitted, in all forms by any means, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwiseprior permission.

Technical editing, graphic arrangement and production:Valeur, s. r. o., Slovak Republic

The opinions and recommendations formulated in this publication do not always have to correspondunconditionally with the official position of the United Nations Development Program.



Author of the report is: Jarmila Filadelfiová

Field research was conducted by a team of researchers of IVO:Jarmila Filadelfiová, Oľga Gyárfášová, Miroslava Hlinčíková, Martina Sekulová

In the preparation of the methodology, field work and elaboration of the report cooperated Daniel Škobla

The following provided expert reflections and remarks on the text:Jan Grill, Sylvia Porubänová, Marek Szilvási, Richard Filčák

The broader research plan was discussed among the UNDP team, consisting of:Andrey Ivanov, Jaroslav Kling, Ben Slay, Daniel Škobla

Thank you to the following people for their help with data collection:Alena Adamková, Štefan Babindák, Adrian Berky, Magda Berkyová, Barbora Bučková, Ján Čekeľ, Ľubica Čillagová,Mária Demeová, Peter Dobrík, Eva Doktorová, Ladislav Duda, Igor Dužda, Valéria Džmurová, Slavomír Gajdoš,Peter Gonda, Peter Gomolák, Iva Grejtáková, Irma Horváthová, Monika Horváthová, Karol Horváth, Ivan Horváth,Zuzana Kollárová, Janette Knapeková, Ingrid Kosová, Erika Kušická, Tomáš Palenčár, Natália Príhodová,Dana Pustulková, Vladimír Sendrei, Monika Sendreiová, Juraj Štofej, Marián Trišč



CONTENTS

SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

1.1. The wider framework of the survey and of the submitted study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

1.2. Focus of the study and methodology used . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

1.3. Structure of the surveyed households from marginalised Roma settlements

by basic classifying attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

2. MEDICAL CARE: NEED, ACCESSIBILITY AND APPROACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

2.1. Which member of a family saw a doctor and with what kind of problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2

2.2. Spatial distance from medical services and strategies for overcoming it . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

22.3. Financial accessibility of a medical examination: total costs and the choice of medicines . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

2.4. Social accessibility of medical care: tending to other children and the approach

of healthcare personnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Appendix to chapter 2: Last time seeing a doctor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

3. HOUSING AND POSSIBILITIES OF MODIFYING A DWELLING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

3.1. Type of dwelling, its status and evaluation of living conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

3.2. Quality of dwellings by size and technical equipment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

3.3. Modifications to a dwelling: types of repairs and costs expended . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Appendix to chapter 3: Last repair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

4. MEALS: MEAL PLANS AND FOODS FROM DIFFERENT POINTS OF VIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .94.1. Eating before social benefits and af ter them . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

4.2. Disparity between favourite foods and most common foods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

Appendix 1 to chapter 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11



5. INDEBTEDNESS OF ROMA HOUSEHOLDS FROM EXCLUDED SETTLEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

6. NEEDS AND DESIRES IN THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE FAMILY AND SETTLEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

6.1. Desires for own family . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

6.2. Desires focused on local habitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17

Appendix 1 to chapter 6: Desires for the family . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

Appendix 2 to chapter 6: Requested improvements in communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18


4



7. BASIC FINDINGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .189

APPENDIX: ACCESSIBILITY OF BASIC INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES FOR RESIDENTSOF MARGINALIZED ROMA COMMUNITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .196

Structure of the sample of surveyed settlements by territory and type of spatial exclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

196Distance of surveyed settlements from the home municipalities and centres . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .197

Surveyed Roma settlements by furnishing with basic infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .199

Surveyed Roma settlements by spatial accessibility of basic services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .204

Surveyed Roma settlements by possibilities of transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .210

Community work in a settlement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .212

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .213

MRC SETTLEMENTS – LIST (name of village or town – district) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .216

LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .219



The goal of this research activity was to determinehow much effort excluded Roma households must

expend for resolving common situations and what kinds of obstacles and barriers they run up against –including financial barriers. The research was veryclosely linked to the quantitative research of the UNDPon the living conditions of Roma households whichwas the first empirical input to the surveyedenvironment of Roma communities carried out in thescope of the resolved project. In the methodological sense the goal of this research activity was to developthe findings of questionnaire survey in greater detail

and to capture more specifically the form of reality inthe life of this group of citizens of Slovakia, especiallyits excluded part. The task was to provide a morespecific image of what it means to live on social benefits and what form such a life take can in real life.At the same time the view was narrowed to the most basic needs; if measures which could help overcomeexclusion and deprivation are to be found andproperly set, it is necessary to look in more detail at how housing, nutrition and care of health appear inexcluded households.

For the recording of the selected situations from dailylife and wishes and needs a special type of researchinstrument was prepared – a logbook withthe possibility of a free and as detailed recording of selected situations as possible. The logbook wassupplemented by two short questionnaires foridentification data. The first one contained a batteryof questions which related to the different characteristics of the specific place of housing: asidefrom the type of settlement, it captured the distance

from the home community and district centres, thebarriers between the settlements and the homecommunity, the basic infrastructure in the village andin the marginalised settlements, the spatial distanceto basic facilities and services, the possibilities of transport and the presence of community centres andan assisting NGO in the settlement. The secondquestionnaire contained the characteristics of the

household segmented into five areas: it tracked thetype of household by work activities and family

structure; dwelling by type, living conditions andofficial status; the size of the dwelling and itsownership status; the furnishing of a household witbasic infrastructure; and finally the structure of thehousehold by individual statuses of each familymember. The size of the sample was set arbitrarily at 200 selected units.

MEDICAL CARE:NEED, ACCESSIBILITY AND APPROACH

In Roma communities medical care for children isgiven priority over adults. Adult members of a household see a doctor usually only with moreserious illnesses, and they do not consult a physiciawith common illnesses such as colds or stomachproblems. Aside from colds and respiratory illnessesproblems with the digestive system, such as, forexample, stomach ache, vomiting and diarrhoea, arealso among the common illnesses in Roma children.Preventive check-ups and vaccinations are almost

solely a matter for children in excluded settlements;adults predominately go for control only upon thefinding of more serious illnesses. Among the moreserious illnesses in child patients congenital diseaseand the need for controlling their progress werefound, infectious diseases such as jaundice, forexample, but also oncological diseases of children,with marked impacts on the financial situation of thefamily. A story in which the health problem of a childwas a consequence of hunger was also found.

In relation to adult members of excluded Romahouseholds, these very of ten do not seek out medicaattention with common colds or digestive problems;their reasons for seeing a doctor are longer-term andmore serious illnesses, most often, for example,cardiovascular diseases and high blood pressure,followed by motor diseases, diabetes or injuries of different types. Adult residents of excluded Roma


6

SUMMARY



communities who have common illnesses go onlyrarely to a doctor and few undergo preventiveexaminations.

Aside from the subjective reasons specified as an

“irresponsible approach to their own health”, theabnegation of health care consultations and check-ups by specialists may be a result of the inaccessibilityor worsening accessibility of such services.

Only approximately one-quarter of households hadprimary medical care, a paediatric or general physicianand dentist, located within one kilometre of theirhome; the largest portion (half) had it in a range fromone to five kilometres, and for more than one-fifth of surveyed excluded households were more than five

kilometres from a physician. Seeing a doctor, then,with a large portion of excluded households assumedthe overcoming of a certain spatial distance and did sonot only with settlements outside of village lands;sometimes medical care was distant even within atown. Households used different strategies forovercoming the distance – according to the seriousnessof the health problem, the financial situation of thehousehold and other circumstances of family life.

The provision of mandatory vaccinations or check-ups

can mean in the absence of public transport fromsettlements or with insufficient financial resources fortravelling a walk of several kilometres to the doctor andback. And in addition to overcoming the distance, it isoften necessary to ensure care of other children in thehousehold – they must make the trip together with themother or remain in the care of someone else.

The monitoring of incomes and expenditures showeda notably stressful budget in the relatively largeportion of excluded Roma households reliant on social

benefits. Low total incomes at the same time meansurviving most of the month with very small sums of available financial resources. For the givencircumstances making decisions on householdconsumption is markedly limited, and the covering of basic needs or unexpected basic expenditures,including the provision of necessary health care, canbe also be threatened.

Overall, the sum expended for the most recent trip tosee a doctor was significantly differentiated: it movedfrom zero expenditure up to 250 euro (the fee for anabortion), though sums over 30 euro occurred only inoccasional cases. Several households complained in

general that for them this was a lot, and they feel these expenditures to be a financial burden,especially if they are linked with more distant specialist examinations or with repeated health careproblems. The most common way that excluded Romahouseholds overcome the deficit in financial resources necessary for fees associated withexaminations by a physician are loans. Most oftenmembers of the broader family help – a sister,a mother-in-law, an uncle – but primarily parents.Solidarity among relatives is very intensive duringillnesses and in Roma communities the network of relatives takes a great share in ensuring health care.The lack of financial resources in the family budget of households from excluded settlements doesn’t just have as a consequence only partial, delayed or notaking of prescribed medicines. Some surveyedhouseholds from excluded Roma settlements simplygive up medical care completely due to problems withpaying for medicines.

Family roles are rather strictly divided in Romacommunities, and the predominating model of a family is based on one provider – the man; a Romawoman is confined to the domestic sphere. Sometimethe need for alternative care in the case of the maincare provider seeing a doctor means on one handinvolvement of Roma men in household care, but inthe strictly divided “family world” this can also meanfor the care-providing parent a loss of otheropportunities, for example, the loss of an opportunityto bring some work income into the family. Seeing

a doctor for a large proportion of households fromexcluded settlements also complicates or limits theneed to provide care for other children in thehousehold. The large problems found for excludedhouseholds that are predominately reliant on social benefits for financially covering transport to a doctorand health care services, including the securing of medicines, suggests the question of whether the



entire system of health care support for people inmaterial need shouldn’t be built in a completelydifferent way than it is currently, with the two-euroco-payment for health care added to the benefit inmaterial need.

HOUSING AND POSSIBILITIESOF MODIFYING A DWELLING

In households from excluded communities, living inpoor quality dwellings, which often complicates thehygienic situation of households, adds to the imageof their living conditions. According to a subjectiveevaluation walled family houses and housing units inexcluded settlements are of varying quality – from

excellent to very poor for life – and non-standarddwellings are almost always linked withdisadvantageous conditions. The monitoring of theofficial status of a dwelling also indicated that thedeeper the spatial exclusion of the place of residence,the higher the occurrence of unofficial buildings.At the same time, unofficial so-called “black”buildings significantly more often take the form of dwellings of non-standard building materials, and inthe case of walled houses they are less frequent in

excluded settlements.Unofficial buildings arise more easily in segregatedsettlements; at the same time these are not homes of the standard type and the residents of such dwellingsthemselves don’t see their living conditions ina positive light. The linking of these three aspectsindicates that the building of a non-standard dwellingin segregated environments is for its residentsa starting point for calamity. This is for many poorhouseholds from an excluded environment the only

way they are able in the given financial and social situation to ensure a “roof over their head” and tothus fulfil one of the most basic of living conditions.

The ways of acquiring a dwelling are different according to the type of settlement and the type of dwelling. This means that the processes leading toethnic segregation or separate housing are in realitydifferent. It occurs by buying a dwelling in excluded

environments, further by building a dwelling in suchsettlements or by inheriting a house, by occupying aabandoned dwelling, but also by allocation of housinfrom a village or town. Households which got theircurrent dwelling from the village or town had the

highest share in the scope of separated settlementson the edge of a community. The findings indicatethat local governments not infrequently located flatsfor the socially weak outside of a village.

The situation from the viewpoint of the type of dwelling, methods of acquiring it and the ownershiprelation regarding a dwelling seem to bevery disparate in excluded settlements. With many othe surveyed households the formal status of thelived-in flat or dwelling was not clear, which in and o

itself does not create a good starting point forhousing stability and the quality of life for householmembers. The subjective evaluation of livingconditions, which were the most unfavourable forsegregated settlements and non-standard dwellingsis also telling in this regard.

Roma households from excluded settlements ofteninhabit non-quality dwellings, and the situation getsworse for segregated settlements. Not only are non-standard dwellings – shacks concentrated in

segregated settlements, but they often remainwithout the most basic facilities. Cases were not unusual in which deficiencies were combinedtogether, for example, over crowdedness withundersized technical facilities, etc. The quality of housing of many households from excludedsettlements showed marked deficits and laggedsignificantly behind the common standards of housing in Slovakia.

The majority of EU countries have accepted some typ

of housing policy which should support thedevelopment of housing on the whole, its accessibilifor different groups of residents and ensure a certainquality of housing def ined through minimal standards. Many of the conditions of housing found iexcluded settlements decidedly do not satisfystandards. The unavailability of water in dwellingsand the absence of sewerage, problems with energy


8



and methods of heating lag far behind any standard –even minimal standards. Over-crowded housing andlimited space reduces its residents’ chances at anydevelopment. The frequent occurrence of a situationwhen each member of a household not only does not

have his or her own room, but not even his or her ownbed, is alarming.

The recorded stories of the last modification toa dwelling pointed to three basic associations:maintenance of a dwelling predominated over moreprinciple improvements in the quality of dwelling; formany households even basic maintenance of a flat orhouse is f inancially inaccessible; an absolute majority of housing modifications are done by the householdsthemselves, or with the help of relatives and friends,

while paid services are used only exceptionally. Even thelatest modifications carried out in the current dwellingdid not show a stronger trend toward improving theexisting quality of the housing in excluded settlements,although a few positive changes were recorded.

Questions relating to social housing or integrationplay a key role in the social policy of the EU. TheCharter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union inChapter IV article 34 states: “In order to combat social

exclusion and poverty, the Union recognises andrespects the right to social and housing assistance soas to ensure a decent existence for all those who lacksufficient resources, in accordance with the rules laiddown by Community law and national laws andpractices”. In association with housing the central governments of states, which develop their ownhousing policies, are primarily responsible. Slovakiafaces many challenges in this regard, for example,how to renew the housing fund, how to plan andresolve the expansion of towns and villages, but also

how to help the young and disadvantaged groups.Many households from excluded settlementsdecidedly belong to a disadvantaged group, asindicated by all of the monitored parameters of housing quality. The findings cry out for principlemeasures in the interest of correcting the existingstatus, especially taking into account thedemographic development of this part of the

population and regarding the growing need for flatsfor the growing trend in the number of newlyestablished families and their slender chances of obtaining housing themselves.

One of the most important factors influencingmethods of housing in the Roma population in generais their territorial distribution, or the measure of theirconcentration in individual regions. But aninseparable part of their housing is also the characterof the settlement – whether of the settlement orurban type. The characteristics of housing for theRoma are as follows: the concentration of Romaresidents in the objectionable, old housing fund in theownership of the state; segregation practices of villages; forced segregation, impossibility of renting

a flat in another location due to racial prejudice of theowners; the origin of ghettoes; illegal occupancy of flats, housing in flats without a rental contract.

Stories of the latest modifications to a dwelling not only brought the form, story and circumstances of thisituation closer – maintenance predominated overimproving the standard of the housing, the do-it- yourself performance of modifications, the giving upof modifications all together – they at the same timealso gave strong testimony regarding the diversity of

the quality of housing in excluded communities,especially in regard to the marked deprivation in thehousing of Roma households. The European UnionStatistics on Income and Living Conditions (EU SILC)monitors among the indicators of deprivation inhousing deficiencies of lighting and the humidity ina flat, the absence of a bath and a toilet. The findingsindicated that for dwellings in excluded environmentsthis type of deprivation has such a clear-cut form thata combination of a higher number and other variables

describing the state of housing would be required.

NUTRITION: MEAL PLANS AND MEALS

Many of the meal plans recorded showed that povertyand material deprivation in this environment isa widespread phenomenon. The daily fare of many of the surveyed households does not conform to the



nutritional value needed for healthy development.The deprivation of many of the surveyed households isconnected with their exclusion from consumption,even from the consumption of foods. This means that in regard to the social consequences of long-term

unemployment in this environment not infrequentlythere is a dramatic lowering of their level of living.Minimally in a certain period of the month beforebenefits come the characteristics of absolute povertywere indicated, when deprivation comes near to acertain “physiological threshold”, beneath which themost basic need, such as food, is not satisfied. Several of the meal plans were very poor and monotonous;sometimes very uncertain and bordering on hunger.

At the same time the research probe showed that

nutrition of Roma households from excludedsettlement is on the whole not of very good quality.Their daily menus contain a limited number of mealsper day, not many diverse foods and with less focus onfruits and vegetables or dairy products. Non-nutritious or then calorific meals predominate in meal plans, while healthy foods are more rare toexceptional.

After benefits, the variety of meals in most of thesurveyed households increased, but these are mainly

calorific and meat dishes that are added to meal plans. Although with the arrival of finances to thehousehold a great many change their daily meals,a large portion of them give priority to unhealthy andheavy foods, or social incomes are not sufficient forother types of meals. The situation before and afterbenefits is diverse in households, but a change of eating habits predominated, and a shift was recordedespecially in segregated settlements in the comparedtwo time periods of the month.

An overall view at both meal plans showed that nogreat “feast” occurred after benefits, but meal plansin essence, at least after benefits, came close tonormal eating. A missing number of meals per daywere supplemented; children received standard fooditems; some households afforded themselvesa favourite food – meat – and they ate a bellyful.Although the modes of food consumption found upon

monitoring this aspect were diverse, frompermanently deficit up through permanentlystandard, a relatively large group combine in themonth a longer period of deficit eating with “normaleating after the acquiring of incomes, particularly in

households reliant exclusively on social benefits.Even the view through the monitoring of favourite anmost common meals identified closer the orientationto cooking heavy and non-quality meals in excludedRoma settlements. The research probe thus confirmeand in sample individual meals showed the dininghabits in this environment.

A comparison of favourite and most common mealsindicated that the observing of consumption or the

relinquishing of the original range of needs in the areof nutrition is in the surveyed environment widespreaand grows along with spatial exclusion. Residents of segregated settlements are successful at preparingcommonly favourite meals only to a small measure.

The tendency predominated in the eating habits of households that the more demanding favourite mealwere – mainly if they are meat-based meals – thenhouseholds can only afford them occasionally in thecourse of the month, and commonly cannot afford

them at all. Generally, they prepare a favourite mealonly one time each month and do so after arrival of incomes into the family. The main meal on the meal plan in the period after benefits and the favouritemeal were in the majority of cases identical. Throughmost of the month they experience limitations in fooconsumption which also acquires the form of clear-cdeprivation in nutrition.

INDEBTEDNESS OF ROMA HOUSEHOLDS

Empirical data from different empirical sourcesconfirmed in terms of averages the stressed or deficifinancial budget of excluded Roma households. Thesmall incomes to these households cause a low level expenditures and do so even with expenditurescovering the most basic needs, such as food andhousing. A large portion of households have problempaying for basic needs for its members and some of


10



them are unable to do this despite frequentlyborrowing money. The worst balance was recorded inhouseholds without a working member, those with at least one young child and in multi-memberhouseholds.

From a comparison of total incomes and expendituresof excluded Roma households which managed to get recorded during one month, it followed than onaverage they are more or less equal. The remainderfrom the entire sum of incomes after subtracting total expenditures came out low (44.61 euro perhousehold), and if a sum borrowed during the courseof the month is not included in the total incomes theremainder is even much smaller (10.32 euro perhousehold and not even 2 euro per one member). But

if households were not indebted and didn’t have tomake loan repayments, the remainder of incomeswould be 60 euro higher, or excluded Roma householdscould increase their other expenditures by this sum.

The amount of income influences the principle way of managing households and the “width” of the period of the month through which they have financial resources available in a certain volume. The lowoverall incomes at the same time means survivingmost of the month with very small sums of disposable

financial resources. With households with the lowest incomes this means more than half a month witha sum lower than 10 euro per one member. With suchfinancial resources decisions on householdconsumption are markedly limited, and covering basicneeds and unexpected basic expenditures can also beendangered – households go into debt in an attempt to provide them.

The research probe into excluded settlement indicatedthat households from excluded Roma settlements are

indebted to a high degree. Their debts originatedifferently; often the way is unpaid rent for housingor for services or energy associated with housing. But they also borrow for the securing of necessary healthcare, for making modifications to a dwelling or for thepurchase of food. Typically, debts for these householdarise due to satisfying basic needs or at least minimal consumption.

At the same time, it was shown that a large portion of these households has a payment calendar worked upfor the liquidation of their debts. But as researchassistants in the field pointed out, in several respondent households having a payment calendar,

many families are unable to observe it. The researchprobe also recorded a certain group of families whichhad a special recipient for a portion of their social benefits. In some households an executoryproceeding was imposed upon their inability to paydebts; in the end this occurred in several households.The chances of some families getting out from undertheir debts in some realistic time period was inpractically negligible.

NEEDS AND DESIRES IN THE PERSPECTIVEOF THE FAMILY AND SETTLEMENTS

Work was found among the desires for the family inthe responses of Roma households not only the mostoften but was inclined from different sides. Once thecontent and character of the work was emphasised,its spatial accessibility or formal work contract;other times the result of work – a work income.A large portion of Roma households perceived a wor

income as one path to better living conditions and toa minimal life security. Many of the families alsospecified the use of potential work incomes – theywould like to invest into improving their housingconditions and strengthening their life security,families with children to their education and thefuture.

The “work” desires to a larger or smaller measureconfirmed all of the existing knowledge regarding thework activates in excluded communities. We recall the

huge unemployment, the instability of jobs which areavailable to them, the absence of job opportunities inthe nearby surroundings, the inaccessibility of permanent places for the unqualified labour force andthe like. The desire to find a job is in the surveyedenvironments strong with the parental generation,and also has an important place in the dreams of thefuture for children.



Excluded Roma households devoted a great deal of attention to different aspects of housing – theirdesires were very often linked with this particular areaof life. This means that deprivation in housing in thesurveyed environments is exceptionally strong. A

general desire for health of family members and animprovement of the financial situation and the livinglevel were also found to be frequent personal familydesires. The absolute predominance of apparent desires had the character of common, basic itemsnecessary for life; certain above-standard desireswere really only exceptional (a car, a PC for thechildren).

Desires aimed at improving life in the settlement of inhabitation were relatively varied; however, the

specific things lacking in the settlement werepredominately among them. Great emphasis wasplaced on job opportunities in the surroundings andflats for young families; they wanted a more peaceful and cleaner environment within the settlements,desired the completion of its technological infrastructure – primarily roads and sidewalks, but also sewerage, a water main and the like.A considerable group of desires associated withchildren: they felt the need for leisure-time facilities

or furnishings for children, like playgrounds and otherequipment for games; nursery schools in thesettlements were often requested. In addition,a variety of requests were recorded for services –according those missing in the settlement. Romaresidents from excluded settlements were also lackingin cultural events, and they expressed through desiresan interest in improving relations with the majority.

Many desires of Roma households implicitly gavetestimony about the poor conditions of housing and

their ties to the labour market. Exclusion from thelabour market at the same time means exclusion fromthe possibilities to improve housing. Many surveyedhouseholds live in very disadvantageous conditionsand there are too few solutions to their housingsituation. They do not have the financial resources forthe purchase of a flat or house – exclusion from thelabour market closes off such a possibility. At the

same time exclusion from the labour market for themmeans exclusion from loans and mortgages; several respondents emphasised that without work – stablework – they can’t get loans.

For many from the households the vicious circleclosed: exclusion from the labour market and theabsence of normal work opportunities; even simplephysical survival on social benefits – securing food –is problematic. Exclusion from the labour market (noinfrequently despite a skill or completed education) the same time squanders the possibilities of adult children to become independent and establish theirown household. This subsequently expands theparental family and leads to further overcrowding inalready overcrowded dwellings. The capability of adu

children to become independent is in excludedenvironments slim. What must happen in the next generation, when the housing space will still furthernarrow, is a difficult to predict.

Although families cumulate resources and make upinsufficient resources with self-help and mutual reliethese are not enough for overcoming the deficit.Despite the willingness and skilfulness regarding selhelp solutions, the deep deficit of work incomes alsocloses off this possibility. Therefore, it is not surprising that housing was found to be the secondmost common area of wishes for one’s family and thedesire for housing for children in the settlement of residence also ended up relatively strong.

Many excluded settlements lack standardtechnological infrastructure, and this begins withroads and pavements. The lack of roads and transpormake spatial exclusion still deeper. On one side therequest for improved hygienic relations in excluded

settlements is talked about, but the existingtechnological infrastructure often doesn’t create evethe basic foundations for change. When searching fosolutions it is not necessary to forget about variety –each environment is different and requires different priorities. The desire to live otherwise and the desireto work is, despite the situation of long-termunemployment, also still present.


12



1.1. The wider framework of the survey and of the submitted study

The so-called Roma question in Slovakia over the last two decades has become one of the key subjects of political discussions, a target of public policies andhas also become a subject of interest to the EuropeanUnion and foreign observers. Roma as a group arethreatened by poverty and social exclusion. Manysurveys identify Roma as the group most threatenedby poverty and social exclusion (e.g. Vašečka –Repová – Džambazovič, 2000; Poverty of the Roma..,2002; UNDP, 2006; UNDP, 2012) and many strategicgovernment documents, for example, National ActionPlan for Social Inclusion (NAPs/INCL) 2004 – 2006,National Report on Strategies for Social Protection and Social Inclusion 2006 – 2008, National Report on Strategies for Social Protection and Social Inclusion2008 – 2010. These materials point to the fact that aside from regional disparities in the measure of poverty, unemployment, average wages andindicators of education and health status in Slovakia,inequalities also appear between the standing of the

majority population and that of socially excluded andmarginalised groups of Roma population.

A prerequisite for removing poverty and social exclusionis ensuring access for all people to the resources, rightsand services necessary for participation in society,combating all forms of discrimination which lad toexclusion. A new framework and opportunity for theprevention of social exclusion and for integration of theRoma population in Europe was created by (on the basisof the Communication from the Commission to the

European Parliament, the Council, the EuropeanEconomic and Social Committee and the Committee of theRegions) the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies up to 2020 from 6 April 2011. The national strategies, worked up by governments of memberstates, created a framework which links the question of basic human rights and the question of humandevelopment. In such a framework specific

interventions should be carried out on the regional andlocal level which would help improve the situation of the

Roma. In the document the European Commission statethat “Many of the estimated 10-12 million Roma inEurope face prejudice, intolerance, discrimination andsocial exclusion in their daily lives. They aremarginalised and live in very poor socio-economicconditions.” The Communication further states that:“Determined action, in active dialogue with the Roma, isneeded both at national and EU level. While primaryresponsibility for that action rests with publicauthorities.” According to the European Commission thesocial and economic integration of the Roma is a two-way process, “which requires a change of mindsets of the majority of the people as well as of members of theRoma communities. First of all, Member States need toensure that Roma are not discriminated against but treated like any other EU citizens with equal access to alfundamental rights as enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.” (EU, 2011). On the basis of thementioned communication, Slovakia developed its Strategy of the Slovak Republic for Integration of theRoma up to 2020 (ratified by the Slovak government on

11 January 2012), in which a large role is included for“monitoring and evaluation on the level of programmespolicies and projects” with the goal to “utilise synergythrough partnership with other state administrationbodies, international organizations, scientificinstitutions and the Roma civil society”. ( Strategy of the SR..., 2012: 63)

The UNDP project Statistical Monitoring of LivingConditions of Selected Target Groups of the SlovakRepublic, carried out with the support of the Slovak

Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Family in the years 2010 – 2015, which maps the living conditionsof socially excluded groups of Roma population inSlovakia, stems from an understanding of social exclusion as a complex, multi-dimensional, multi-layers and dynamic phenomenon. It comprises severaresearch components, in the scope of which attentionis given to all key areas of inclusion of the Roma, such

1. INTRODUCTION



as housing, health, education, the labour market, thehousehold income situation and material deprivation.

1.2. Focus of the study

and the methodology usedThe contents of this report are the result of a qualitative examination with the working name“situational accounts”, whose aim was to find out howmuch effort excluded Roma households must expendfor resolving common living situations and what kindsof obstacles and barriers they run into – includingfinancial barriers. The research is very closely tied tothe quantitative UNDP survey on the living conditionsof Roma households (UNDP, 2012), which was the first

empirical entry into the surveyed environments of Roma communities carried out in the scope of thisproject. In the methodological sense the goal of thepresented research was to develop the findings of aquestionnaire survey into greater detail and tocapture a more specific form of the reality of the lifeof this group of citizens in Slovakia, especially itsexcluded portion. The task was to provide a morespecific image about what it means to live off of social benefits and in reality what form such a life can take.At the same time the view was narrowed down to the

most basic needs; if measures are to be found andproperly set which could help overcome exclusion anddeprivation, it is necessary to look over in more detail how housing, nutrition and care for health appears inexcluded households.

The research focused primarily on monitoring thecourse and resolution of selected situations fromeveryday life. During preparation of the research,everyday situations, such as seeing a doctor, housingand modifications to a dwelling, the range and depth

of household indebtedness and its resolution, weregradually singled out on the basis of interviews withexperts. But the greatest emphasis was placedprimarily on the area of nutrition, for which thedifferences in eating between the periods beforebenefits and after benefits arrive, the differencesbetween favourite meals and the most commonlyprepared meals, the methods of providing sustenance

under the situation of insufficient f inancial resourcefor securing food for the household, were followed; aaccompanying aim was the effort to record recipes fofrequent and favourite meals in marginalised Romacommunities. The monitoring of selected situations

from everyday life was supplemented by the needs andesires of residents of marginalised Romasettlements, who were affected on two levels. On onhand, the wishes and desires in relation to their ownfamily or household were surveyed; on the otherhand, proposals and needs for changes in the place oinhabitation – in specific settlements.

For the recording of selected situations from everydaylife and the wishes and needs a special type of researcinstrument was prepared – a logbook with the

possibility of free and as detailed as possible recordinof the selected situations. The logbook wassupplemented by two short questionnaires foridentification data. The first one contained a battery oquestions related to different characteristics of thespecific settlement of the domicile: in addition to thetype of settlement, it captured the distance from thehome community and district centres, barriers betweethe settlement and the home community, the basicinfrastructure in the village and in the marginalised

settlements, the spatial distance from basic facilitiesand services, the possibilities of transport and thepresence of community centres and NGOs assisting inthe settlement. The second questionnaire containedthe characteristics of the household divided into fiveareas: the type of household was monitored by workactivity and family structure; the dwelling by type,living conditions and official status; the size of thedwelling and its ownership status; furnishing of thehousehold with basic infrastructure; and lastly thestructure of the household by individual status of eachhousehold member.

With the combination of these three researchinstruments the possibility was created to monitor at least the framework differences between the individuagroups of Roma households from excluded settlementThe research thus took the form of a combined surveyqualitative survey linked with a certain possibility of


14



quantifications – of a mutual comparison of individual groups of Roma households defined by attributescharacterising the settlement or household.

Also in this research, the research sample was madeup of Roma households living in excluded settlementsof different types: in segregated settlements, insettlements separated on the edge of a communityand in concentrated settlements within a community.Only one type of household was selected from oneexcluded settlement and only in exceptional caseswere two households chosen (if the settlements werenon-homogeneous in terms of living conditions).

The size of the sample was set arbitrarily at 200selected units, from this one group was made up of

households assigned to monitoring incomes,expenditures and consumption of selected types of foods (the logbook of the situational accounts andidentification questionnaires were added to a logbookfor monitoring the movement of finances and theconsumption of foods); the same number of households from other marginalised Romasettlements were meant to make up the othersample.1. The reason for such a solution was partiallyan attempt at creating the possibility of linking dataand information from the monitoring of incomes,

expenditures and consumption of food withinformation from the situational accounts (thefinancial possibilities of the project enabled the verycostly f inancial and consumer monitoring in the given100 households); the second reason was an attempt to capture the daily life situations and methods of consuming meals in the widest circle possible withinexcluded Roma settlements (therefore, expansion byan equal number of selected units were involved).

The majority of the data collection for this research

ran in the year 2011 in the months of August (44.3%)

and September (46.9%), as determined by the projectplan for f ield work. During October, thesupplementing of missing households was carried out (8.8%), during which the regions of Slovakia wereconsidered: geographic regions which remained

uncovered by the survey were given preference; at thesame time, emphasis was placed on the regions of eastern Slovakia.

In the end result, a total of 192 logbooks werecollected from Roma households living in excludedsettlements. From this, 100 represented householdsmonitoring incomes, expenditures and selectedconsumption, and 92 were from households fromother marginalised Roma settlements.2 All of thecollected logbooks representing the three types of

excluded settlements were included in the analysisof selected daily situations, because duringthe check no serious doubts were found regardingtheir being filled out. The one deficiency was that not every household gave an answer to all of themonitored situations; the number of analysed casesfor individual situations therefore differed innumbers – the analysis was thus conducted only onthose households that responded.

The submitted report is divided by the individuallymonitored types. After a basic description of thesample, the use and accessibility of health care andexperiences with the approach of healthcarepersonnel begins; this is followed by a description of housing and the possibilities and types of modifications to dwellings and an overview of theindebtedness of Roma households. A chapter devotedto eating habits then follows – it offers an overview ofmeal plans from different angles of view and differentaspects, and a special output is a collection of recipes

of favourite or the most commonly cooked dishes. The

1 The selection of 100 households which were a part of the monitoring of incomes, expenditures and consumption took place on the basis of quotas (for more details,see Chapter 2) determined on the basis of results of a quantitative surveying of the living conditions or Roma households from 2010 (UNDP, 2012), which was a part of this project. The selection of an expanded sample of 100 additional households was a random af fair (not in the sense of a random selection). Research assistantswere to search for in the surroundings of their own income-monitored household additional excluded Roma communities which were not yet covered by the surveyand to find t ypical households within them. The territorial distribution was also observed: the goal was to e xpand the research to additional uncovered regions in thinterest of obtaining the f inal sample of Roma households from the widest possible circle of spatially excluded communities.

2 Thus, to the overall planned number of 200; eight logbooks were missing, as their collection was not possible due to time reasons (the data collection had to finish bthe end of October, in order to gather information from the relatively same period, in relation to society-wide conditions and legislative definitions).



chapter ends with a presentation of the needs anddesires from the family perspective and from theperspective of the lived-in settlement.

1.3. Structure of the surveyedhouseholds from marginalisedRoma settlements by basicclassifying attributes3

According to the distribution in geographic space of the final 192 households which were analysed in thescope of this research, eastern Slovakia had thehighest representation in comparison with thewestern parts of the country.4 The total sample forthe survey of situational accounts of Roma

households from excluded settlements consisted of 69.3% units representing the eastern region(Graph 1), with the Košice Region making up 40.1%and the Prešov Region 29.2%. Central Slovakia wasrepresented in the sample by 26.6% (BanskáBystrica Region) and western Slovakia by 4.1%(Trnava and Nitra Regions).

The research sample of Roma householdsrepresenting excluded settlements covered a total of 25 districts of Slovakia. From them, 3 districts fell

administratively in the territory of western Slovakia,9 districts represented the central Slovakia regionand 13 were in eastern Slovakia. In relation tospecific settlements, the final sample includedhouseholds from 132 excluded Roma settlements (inthe case of settlements with a large differences inthe living conditions between groups of householdsliving in the given settlement, two typical households could be selected). From this, WesternSlovakia was represented by 6 settlements, central

Slovakia by 38 settlements and the east by 88settlements (a list of settlements is given inAppendix 1).

According to the type of spatial segregation of

settlements the sample of 192 analysed households ithe scope of the survey of situational accounts wasalso distributed relatively equally, similarly as withthe previous two research activities. On the basis of classification of researchers5 30.2% of the surveyedhouseholds were located in segregated settlements,another 39.6% were from separated settlements onthe edge of a community and the remaining 30.2% osurveyed Roma households belonged to concentratesettlements within a community (Graph 2).


16

3 The description of the sample in this case does not have the character of a check of its representativeness; it serves exclusively for the presentation of therepresentation of the individual groups of households in the created sample. Analysis during the description of the f inal sample of Roma households from excludedsettlements shows, despite its small sample size, percentage values in the tenths of numbers; with meritorious subjects it is rounded to a whole number. We note ththe goal of the research was to record in as much detail as possible the course of and solutions to individual situations, not quantitatively measure them. Thepresented numerical values serve exclusively for comparative purposes (a comparison of the differences between differently def ined groups of Roma households);they decidedly to not correspond to the quantitative range of the give value indicator in excluded Roma communities.

4 This is a result primarily of the real distribution of marginalised Roma settlements in Slovakia as well as the research preference to primarily cover during selectionsettlements from missing areas in the eastern Slovakia regions.

5 As is presented in part 1 of this report, researchers classified visited settlements into individual types of housing according to subjective consideration; they did nhave available exactly determined and specific criteria for classification.

Graph 1:Structure of the sample of 192 Roma householdsby region (in %)

Note Overall for the selection of households for this survey no quotas were set according to these indicators.

WesternSlovakia

Central Slovakia

EasternSlovakia

69,3

26,6

4,1



Distance from the home community for segregatedand separated settlements ranged from 200 metresto 5 kilometres. The most commonly found distancewas 1 kilometre (more than 18% of all the surveyedhouseholds), then 0.5 km (nearly 15%) and after

this a distance of 2 km (approximately one-tenth of the research sample). The average distance from thehome community with settlements labelled assegregated settlements was 1.65 km, and forsettlements separated on the edge of a community 1.09 km.

In the structure of the surveyed Roma householdsfrom excluded settlements by the presence of a working member of members households without work activity greatly predominated. As can be seen in

Graph 3.3, the share of households without a workingmember was 79.2% and the share of households withat least one working member was 20.8%. From themthe most households were those where only onemember worked – nearly 16% – while less than 5% of households had two working members; householdswith three working members made up just 0.5% of thetotal sample.

And in the case of this sample, with spatial segregationthe share of households without a working memberdecreased: among segregated they made up nearly90%, for concentrated households less than 70%. Withexpression through the average number of working

members per household, the differences came out asfollows: 0.12 working for households livingsegregated; 0.25 for separated on the edge of acommunity; and 0.43 for households living insettlements concentrated within a community.

In relation to recording situations of common life, thesize and structure of a household can contribute todifferences. In the research this was monitoredthrough the total number of members as well as thenumber of children in different definitions. The real

number of persons making up a household came out tobe very diverse – from 1 member to 19 members livingin one dwelling. The most abundant category was inthe end households with five members (25.5%),followed by households with four members (19.8%)and then seven members (14.1%). About one-tenth of the sample was made up of households with six andwith three members, and other sizes were less

Graph 2:Structure of the sample of 192 Roma householdsby type of housing (in %)

Note Overall for the selection of households for this survey noquotas were set according to these indicators.

segregated set-tlements

separated

on the edge of a community

concentratedwithina community

30,230,2

39,6

Graph 3:Structure of the sample of 192 Roma householdsby number of working members (in %)


0 members

1 member

2 members

3 members

79,2

15,6

4,7 0,5



represented (Graph 5). Together households with 1-2members made up not quite 8%; on the other hand,households with eight or more members achievednearly 12%. The average number of members for onesurveyed household came out to be 5.4 persons, andamong households on the basis of type of housing thedifferences were not larger; only in separated on the

edge of a community was a moderately higher averagrecorded (5.7 members versus 5.2 members forsegregated and concentrated households).

As is presented in part 2 of this final report, thenumber of children living in a household in theresearch conducted was specified in different way. Noonly was the total number of children monitored but also the number of young children (children too younto attend school), the number of school-attending

children and the total number of dependent children(young and school-attending children together).

In the final sample the total number of children inhouseholds (i.e., the number of children without regato status in relation to preparation for a profession –not only young and school-attending children but alsochildren with completed school attendance who wereup to 25 years old, if they had yet to start their ownfamily) was very diverse: it moved from no children upto 11 children (Graph 3.6). The most common categor

was three children in one household (more than 27% the surveyed sample of households); the second mostnumerous group was households with two children(nearly 23%) and the third one was households withfive children (more than 14%). Households without children obtained a share of 7.3% and on the otherhand, those with more than five children 8.3%. Onaverage 3.1 children were present per one household,


18

Graph 4:Number of working household members by type of housing (in %)

0 members

1 member

2 members

3 members

Note Households with 2+ working members made up only 5.2% of the total sample.

89,7

80,367,2

0 20 40 60 80 100

8,614,5

24,1

1,75,3

6,9

00

1,7

segregated settlements separated on the edge concentrated within a communit y

Graph 5:Structure of the sample of 192 Roma householdsby number of members (in %)


1 member

2 members

3 members

4 members

5 members

6 members

7 members

8 members

9+ members25,5

19,8

14,1

3,6

8,2

0,5

7,3

9,4

11,5



the most for separated on the edge of a community(3.2 children) and the least for households livingwithin a community (2.9 children).

According to the number of young children 45.8% of

households assigned to the analysis of situational accounts did not have even one such child, 26.6% of surveyed households had one young child, 14.6% two young children and in 13% of households there werethree and more young children (Table 1). On averagealmost exactly one young child was present per

household, the most in segregated settlements andseparated settlements (1.2 and 1.1 young children), andfor households living concentrated within a community,the average was lower (0.7 young children).

The presence of school-attending children among thehousehold members divided the surveyed sample intonot quite a third without a school-attending child andmore than two-thirds with at least one such child. In thestructure of the sample of households, on the basis of the number of school-attending children who attendedelementary school or a higher level of education, thegroup with two school-attending children predominatedwith 26%, and behind them were households with threeschool-attending children with a share of 17.7% whilehouseholds with one such child achieved not quite 15%.

Nearly 10% of the research sample of households hadmore than three school-attending children. The averagenumber of school-attending children per one householdwas for the entire sample 1.7 children; with the smallestappearing for segregated settlements (1.6 children) andthe highest for separated on the edge of a community(1.8 children).

The majority of the surveyed households combined young children and school-attending children; thetotal number of dependent children in household

came out to be from 1 to 11 children, while thosewithout a dependent child at all made up 15.1% of thesample. Households with 3 dependent children hadthe highest representation within the research sample(nearly 28%), followed by those with two dependent children (approx. 23%); 12% of households had

Graph 6:Structure of the sample of 192 Roma householdsby total number of children (in %)


0 children

1 child

2 children

3 children

4 children

5 children

6+ children

7,3

10,9

22,99,4

14,1

8,3

27,1

Young children School-attending children Dependent children total 0 children 45.8 31.8 15.1

1 child 26.6 14.6 8.3

2 children 14.6 26.0 22.9

3 children 8.9 17.7 27.6

4 children 3.1 6.3 12.0

5 or more children 1.0 3.6 14.1

Total 100.0 100.0 100.0

Note Overall for the selection of households for this survey no quotas were set according to these indicators.

Table 1Structure of the sample of 192 Roma households by number of children of different definitions (in %)



4 dependent children and just over 14% had 5 or moredependent children. The average for dependent children per household for the entire research samplewas 2.7 children; households separated on the edge of a community had the most on average (2.9 children)

and those living concentrated within a community hadthe least (2.3 children). For households fromsegregated settlements the average number of dependent children was 2.7 per one household.

When searching for differences between householdsthe analysis also uses classifying attributes accordinto the context of the individually monitoredsituations, such as, for example, spatial membershipto a town or village, distance from a paediatrician or

general practitioner, the type of dwelling and its sizeand others. The structure of the sample on the basis these characteristics is presented in the text concurrently upon their being used.


20



The Report on the Living Conditions of Roma Householdsin Slovakia 2010 (UNDP, 2012), which is the first output

of this project, observed a higher occurrence of chronic illnesses in the Roma population in comparisonwith the general population geographically close toRoma communities with increasing age: although the youngest generation recorded approximately the samelevel, in the middle and older generations chronicillnesses were more common in the Roma population.At the same time, the report, based on a quantitativeresearch questionnaire, recorded approximately thesame occurrence of common illnesses in the Roma andgeneral population, but seeking out a doctor with suchhealth problems was significantly less frequent for theRoma sub-sample – especially among householdsliving in segregated and separated environments. Andamong the reasons found for not seeing a doctor inboth compared groups was the subjective convictionthat it was not necessary, and in the Roma populationwaiting for a spontaneous improvement in the healthproblem but also the fact that they could not afford tosee a doctor for financial or still other reasons. Whileavoiding trips to see a doctor with common illnesses

was in the Roma and general population causedpredominately by a “natural” attempt at managing theproblem with one’s own power, in the Roma populationfinancial and other limitations entered into thisdecision a great deal more often. At the same time it was shown that in the Roma population not picking upprescribed medicines was also more frequent, and that this deepened in the direction toward segregation;with this the reason was again very often a lack of money (UNDP, 2012, pgs. 77-87).

The higher occurrence of chronic illnessesascertained, the lower measure of seeing a doctor andthe stronger barriers in access to medical care in theRoma population, especially its spatially excluded

segments, were sufficient reasons for the aspirationfor deeper knowledge of this particular side of life in

excluded communities. The use of and access tomedical care is therefore classified among thesituations monitored in the framework of theexpanded research activities of a qualitativecharacter. Specifically, the situational analysis singledout the last time seeing a doctor, and for this thespecific forms this situation can take in excludedRoma communities were surveyed. Assistantsproviding contact with respondent householdsentered into the logbook in as much detail as possiblethe story of the last time seeing of a doctor. In thestory they were to write which member of the familylast saw a doctor and with what kind of healthproblem, the method of transport to see the doctor,the picking up of possible prescribed medicines at apharmacy, the total resources expended in associationwith seeing a doctor, the approach of the healthcarepersonnel and the securing of care for other childrenwhen going to see a doctor.

2.1. Which member of a family sawa doctor and with what kind of problem6

Together a total of 184 descriptions of last seeinga doctor managed to get recorded; 8 respondent households did not list any such story. According tothe cases found, members of surveyed Romahouseholds from marginalised settlements most oftensaw a doctor when they accompanied a child to anexamination. Of all the presented situations for last seeing a doctor the illness of a child was the reason in

57% of cases; another 3% of the collected stories weredevoted to a situation when a child of higher age sawa doctor himself or herself; an identical 3% of storiesdescribed a common visit of the entire family seeing

2. MEDICAL CARE: NEED ACCESSIBILITY AND APPROACH

6 We recall a note from the introductory section: from the character of the research it follows that the presented numerical values serve exclusively for comparativepurposes – for comparing differences between differently defined groups of excluded Roma households; they decidedly do not correspond to the quantitative rangeof the given value attribute in excluded Roma communities.



a doctor or offered a general expression of theexperience with medical care for the entire family.Thus, overall more than three-fif ths of the determinedsituations with seeking out healthcare services fully orpartially related to child patients. The share of suchvisits when the head of the household or a partnerwent to see the doctor with a healthcare problemachieved only one-third (34%) of all recorded

situations, and in the remaining 3% of the storiesgrandparents or some other member of the householdwent to see a doctor.

As the comparison of the group of households withchildren and without children indicated, forhouseholds with children the share of seeing a doctorwith a child patient was even higher; adult membersof such excluded Roma households (those with achild) went to see a doctor with their own healthproblem still more rarely than was the result for the

entire sample of recorded cases. Alongside the higherprobability (with a higher number of children thanadult members in a household a higher probabilityexists that the last recorded time seeing a doctor will be with a child) the preference for seeking out medical care in the case of the health problem of a child alsoplayed a part in the result found. Several recordedstories mentioned such a preference explicitly:

Anyway, we adults don’t go to the doctor, I can’t remember when we last went. Oh, when I gave birth tGabika, but we don’t go for examinations. During thewinter I go several times with the children to see thedoctor, in the summer less. We go by bus, round-tripit‘s 1.70 euro. I can’t say anything bad about thedoctor or even the nurse.

Well, thank God, we haven’t had to go see the doctor

for a long time now. My husband doesn‘t go at all:even when he is ill, he says that it will pass. We gomore often with the children, but mostly in the spring I go often by car with my brother-in-law – it’s cheapethan by bus. The nurse is very nice; I’ve known her foa long time now.

According to the reason for seeing a doctor, overall a relatively broad scale of common and seriousillnesses was found. Most often in the answers werecommon illnesses such as colds or a temperature, or

problems with the digestive tract (stomach ache,diarrhoea, vomiting), which obtained 45% of the totsituations found. The remaining 55% was dividedamong more serious illnesses and specialist or contrexaminations, or were trips to the emergency room oa dentist; further found were injuries, preventivecheck-ups, visits to the baby clinic or vaccination, orgynaecological problems or examinations.


22

Graph 7:Last time seeing a doctor by household member needing this service and the type of household (in %)

Head of household

or partner

Child accompaniedor alone

Entire family

Grandparentsor other relatives

Note In the scope of recorded stories on the most recent trip to see a doctor (n = 184) households with children made up 93% and households without children 7%.

34

30 84

0 20 40 60 80 100

6064

0

33

8

33

8

Total Households with children Households without children



A comparison between individual groups of households showed that common illnesses were amuch more frequent reason for last seeing a doctor forhouseholds with children, and excluded Romahouseholds without children do not see a doctor at all

with such common illnesses or only in exceptional cases. On the other hand, a more serious illness anddifferent specialist examinations connected with thecontrol of development of health status were againa great deal more frequent in households without children: while they obtained a share of 16% (seriousillness) and 12% (specialist or control examinations)overall, for households without children their sharenearly doubled (together over 46%). A similar trendwas manifested with seeing a dentist – the last timeseeing a doctor occurred a lot more often in the formof a dental check-up in the case of households without children than for households with children (14% to4%). Injuries and going to emergency rooms were alsomore frequent on the side of households without

children; the difference, however, with these tworeasons for seeking medical help was not verystriking. Preventive check-ups, as with going to babyclinics and vaccinations, again related exclusivelyonly to households with children.

The giving of preference to children in the case of common illnesses and preventive check-ups orvaccinations is also indicated in a comparison of thereasons for seeing a doctor by the person involved –that is, the patient. From all of the stories of the last seeing of a doctor with a common illness, only in not quite one-fifth of the cases was an adult member of a household involved; in more than four-fifths thepatients were children. Similar proportions were

found with going to baby clinics or vaccinations (75%with children) or with preventive check-ups (63% withchildren); the surveyed households also went toemergency rooms most often with ill children (82%).On the other hand, specialist and control

Total

Householdswith childre

Householdswithoutchildren

Graph 8:Last time seeing a doctor by reason and the type of household (in %)

common illness

serious illness

injury

professional examination, control

preventive check-up

emergency room

dentist

consultation and vaccination

gynaecological and pregnancy

Note In the scope of recorded stories on the most recent visit to a doctor (n = 184) households with children made up 93% and households without children 7%.

4547

8

1614

23

0 10 20 30 40 50

44

8

1211

23

45

0

66

8

5414

45

0

44

8



examinations, as well as serious illnesses and dental check-ups related more often to adult members thanto children (from 50% to 75%).

According to the type of illness with which excludedRoma households last sought out medical help, in thecase of children colds or flu or a sore throat – that is,illnesses of the respiratory passages – were very oftenlisted.7 However, digestive problems occur relativelyoften in excluded Roma households: stomach ache,diarrhoea or vomiting in the case of child patients are

widespread in the environment, or are the reason fordeciding to see a doctor. From more serious illnessesin child patients, congenital diseases and the need tocontrol their development, infectious diseases, suchas, for example, jaundice, as well as oncological

disease, were found in children with a significant impact on the financial situation of the family. Onestory was found in which the health problem of thechild was a consequence of hunger:

The daughter (nine years old) was hospitalised,because she fainted. An ambulance came for her and she was in hospital for three days. It was found that she fainted because she had not eaten anything inthe morning; but she had a weak concussion from th fall. After being released she supposedly didn’t get any medicine; they paid 10 euro at the hospital. Shewent home with her mother by bus, and the grandmother watched the other children in themeantime (four other children from 5 to 16 years).The behaviour of the nurses and doctors was said tobe normal.


24

Graph 9:Last time seeing a doctor by reason and the person who went as the patient (in %)

common illness

serious illness

injury

specialist examination, control

preventivecheck-up

emergency room

dentist

baby clinic andvaccination

gynaecological andpregnancy

Note For the composition of recorded cases of last seeing a doctor by the person who went on the visit, see Graph 7.

82 0

029

075

0

0

0

18

45 33 11 11

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

25 50 12 13

70 21 0 9

25 63

18

25

71

78

82

11 11

Head of the household or partner Child (accompanied or alone) Entire family Grandparents or other relativ

7 For more details regarding the reasons for seeing a doctor, see Appendix 3.2.



In relation to adult members of excluded Romahouseholds, those with common colds or digestiveproblems very often do not seek out medical help;their reasons for seeing a doctor are longer-term andmore serious diseases, most often, for example,

cardiovascular diseases and high blood pressure,8

then diseases of the locomotive organs, diabetes or aninjuries of different types.

Comparisons between groups of excluded Romahouseholds in the framework of this research probeconfirm the finding known from other research andmonitoring activities carried out in marginalised Romacommunities. Adult residents of excluded Romacommunities go only rarely with common illnesses tosee a doctor and few also go in for preventive check-

ups.9 If they see a doctor with their own problem, it islikely for a more serious illnesses or when they havea long-term condition which requires regular specialist examination and repeated controls of health status.More often the reason for seeking out a doctor by adult patients was also a toothache and obviouslygynaecological examinations. With common illnesses,adult members of excluded Roma households onlyrarely seek medical care, but they do see a doctor if children have common childhood illnesses.10

Ignoring common health problems and preventivecheck-ups in general can from the viewpoint of

consequences be manifested in worsened healthstatus and can lead to the origin of chronic or long-term illnesses. Monitoring their occurrence inindividual groups of residents indicates such a link –in excluded Roma communities for the older age

group the spreading of chronic diseases was found ina significantly larger range (UNDP, 2012, pg. 78).From another point of view, according the causes of such an approach to one’s own health, the question ofaccessibility of medical care for some groups of citizens shifts to the centre of attention. In additionto the subjective causes specified as an “irresponsibleapproach to one’s own health”11 the resignation of consultations and control of health status byprofessionals may also be the result of inaccessibilityor worsening access to such services.

Reports and analysis dedicated to surveying thehealth status and accessibility of healthcare pointedpartially to hindered spatial accessibility of healthcare facilities for residents of some excludedsettlements but also to the problem of f inancial accessibility of healthcare – picking up medicines andfees for treatments and travel, as well as to limitationfollowing from the need to ensure the care of otherchildren during trips to see a doctor. The recorded

empirical cases describing the last time seeinga doctor indicated that for each of the mentioned

8 Several other sources have pointed out the high occurrence of cardiovascular diseases in the Roma population: aside from the cited medical reports, for example,doctors working directly in the field. As is presented in the article „Zdravie Rómov – katastrofa“ [“The Health of the Roma – catastrophe”] which was published by thnewspaper SME on 12 Decembre 2008, a general practitioner from Kežmarok gathers statistics on illnesses and causes of death among his patients, according towhich: “Up to 43 percent are consist of problems of the circulatory system. The reason is the consumption of foods with a high content of animal fats, the increasedoccurrence of overweight and obesity, smoking and the giving up of seeing a doctor.” (for more, see: http://primar.sme.sk/c/4220164/zdravie-romov-katastrofa.html#ixzz2DzGYoQGG).

9 See, for example, the Evaluation Report on the Results of the 1st Stage of the Programme for the Support of Health of Disadvantaged Roma Communities for the Years2007 – 2008 (Bratislava, Public Health Authority of the Slovak Republic 2008, pg. 11); Programme of Health Support of Disadvantaged Communities in Slovakia for the

years 2009 – 2015 (Bratislava, Public Health Authority of the Slovak Republic 2009, pg. 9); UNDP, 2012; ETP Slovakia, 2009; and many others. Also pointing out thisproblem are the in-depth interviews with representatives of different aid professions carried out in the framework of this project (Part II. of this final report).

10 The preference for healthcare examination in the case of children was also confirmed in the research of the non-profit organisation Quo Vadis from a Central Slovakiamapping the situation of Roma women ( Image..., 2012). According to the empirical findings of this sur vey the bad economic situation in many cases leads tothe resignation of Roma women of medical examinations. When due to a lack of money in the household they cannot pick up prescribed medicines, they considerseeing a doctor as pointless; but at the same time several of the Roma women emphasised, they always try to see a doctor with children, when this is necessary. At least two statements will speak for all: “It happens, yes. Sometimes not even for medicine, that’s how it is. In relation to us (adults – author’s note), so why should I gowhen I don’t have the money. But when it is a child, and you go to the doctor, then you get the medicines! But only for ourselves later... (unemployed Roma women withSOU and four children, place – separated environment).” “... and often enough (there are no finances for a doctor – author’s note). Or I don‘t go a doctor, because wh

should I, when I don’t pick up the medicine?! And again this is an obligation, a woman actually to put up with a terrible lot of feelings and would rather let herself be sickrather than a child or husband.” (Roma woman of middle age with a university degree working in an NGO, separated town environment).

11 But such behaviour through the media or through healthcare reports presented as “an irresponsible approach to one’s own health” is in its essence likewise theconsequence of objective, external factors. Let us mention at least some: relinquishing responsibility for one’s own health from the side of societ y to an individual ohis/her family without regard to individual prerequisites for fulfilling such a competence; a lack of awareness of some groups of citizens regarding care of their ownhealth; a lack of information about healthcare ser vices; the small space for informed choice; def iciencies in prevention and health education and the like.



barriers a portion of residents of excluded Romacommunities was found for which the given aspect of accessibility of medical care represented a larger orsmaller problem.

2.2. Spatial distance from healthcareservices and strategies for overcoming it

The surveyed Roma households from excludedcommunities of different types were differentiated bydistance to basic medical care, while an emergencyroom and hospital were for many of them more distant still. Only approximately one-quarter of householdshad basic medical care, a paediatrician or a local doctor and dentist within a distance of less than one

kilometre; the largest portion (45 to 50%) had it fromone to five kilometres distant, and for more than one-fifth of the surveyed households the distance wasmore than five kilometres. Seeing a doctor, then,presupposed in a large portion of households theovercoming of a certain spatial distance and did sonot only with settlements outside of municipal lands;sometimes medical care was distant even within atown (households from communities lying in theterritory of a village or town made up 39% of all recorded cases of seeing a doctor).

In relation to the method of transport to a medical examination, from the total sample of recordedstories of last seeing a doctor 43% used publictransport when seeking medical treatment and nearlythree-fifths (57%) went to see a doctor in some otherway. Exactly one-third of them went to see a doctor onfoot, another 19% travelled by car, and most oftenthis was not their own car. From the other methods in

the stories about calling for emergency medical services (EMS) or travel to see a doctor by bicycle wementioned. The method of transport used, however,primarily depended on the spatial distance of thehealthcare facilities from the place of habitation –

from an excluded settlement. As Graph 3.9 shows, fomarginalised settlements lying at a certain distancefrom the home municipality the share of those goingto see a doctor on foot came out higher and publictransport was used less; they listed the calling of emergency medical services for the most recent medical problem in the household more often.

A more detailed look at the stories found of seeinga doctor indicated even larger differences in themethods of transport used to travel to see a doctor by

distance from the doctor. If the person who neededhealthcare was a child, the method of transport differed significantly by the distance from apaediatrician. With distances of a paediatrician fromthe place of habitation smaller than one kilometre 59%of recorded cases went on foot to see the doctor, 36%used public transport and 5% went by a car other thantheir own. With a distance of a paediatrician from theresidence in the range from 1 to 5 km the situation wittransport changed markedly. On one hand going to se

a doctor on foot was reduced, although 44% of caseseven with this higher distance went to seea paediatrician in this way; on the other hand,passenger cars were used more often for transportingchildren to the doctor, and the share of public transporemained approximately the same (and this probablydepended on the availability of public transport to theplace of residence). If the paediatrician was more than5 km distant from the excluded settlement, cases of no


26

Up to 1 km 1 – 5 km More than 5 km

Paediatrician 26 45 29

Local doctor 28 50 22

Dentist 26 45 29

Note In the scope of the recorded stories of the last time seeing a doctor (n = 184) households from communities which were a part of the home municipality made up 39% and households living in settlement at a certain distance from the home municipality was 61%.

Table 2Structure of the sample of Roma households by distance from basic medical services (in %)



using some form of transport and seeing a doctor onfoot no longer occurred: for the given conditions publictransport dominated, and the share of transportinga child to see a doctor by a car other than one’s owngrew notably, as did calling on emergency medical

services for a child patient.

Similarly, with adult household members seeinga doctor, the method of transport changed accordingto distance from a general practitioner. In the groupless than one kilometre distant from a local doctor,going on foot to see the doctor predominated, or

travel by public transport; the other methods of

Graph 9:Last time seeing a doctor by method of transport and distance from the village (in %)

on foot

public transport

own car

other car

EMT – ambulance

bicycle

other

Note In the scope of the recorded stories of the last time seeing a doctor (n = 184) households from communities which were a part of the home municipality made up 39% and households living in settlement at a certain distance from the home community was 61%.

33

27 37

4351

38

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

79

6

121212

11

111

30

0

5

Total

Settlement part of thehomemunicipality

Settlement distant fromthe homemunicipality

Graph 10:Last time seeing a doctor by method of transport and distance from a paediatrician (in %)

on foot

public transport

own car

other car

EMT – ambulance

Note In the scope of recorded stories of the last time a child patient saw a doctor, 26% of households were less than one kilometredistant from paediatrician; 45% were from one to 5 km away, and 29% were more than 5 km distant.

5944

0

3635

57

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

0 67

515

29

00

7

to 1 km

1-5 km

6-19 km



transport to an examination did not occur at all. Withmore distant basic medical care the use of passengercars and calling EMT services were added, in additionto an increase in the use of public transport.

Even a simple comparison on the basis of the spatial distance of medical care (of basic – with more seriousprofessional interventions requiring specialised

medical help or hospital facilities medical care waseven further) from the place of residence points toproblems in the accessibility of healthcare forresidents of spatially distant settlements. Distant healthcare is a problem primarily for thosesettlements which do not have public transport intheir vicinity. Households use different strategies forovercoming distance – based on the seriousness of the health problem, the financial situation of thehousehold and other circumstances of family life.

The recorded stories of seeing a paediatrician from asettlement more than one kilometre distant tookmany different forms. The securing of a compulsoryvaccination or check-up can mean in the absence of public transport from a settlement or with a lack of financial resources for travelling, a walk of a fewkilometres and back to see a doctor. And aside fromovercoming distance, the need to arrange for the care

of other children in the household is common – theyhave to make the trip together with the mother orremain in the care of some alternate person:

They last went to see the doctor for the vaccination ofa child. The mother went on foot (4 km) to theneighbouring village to see the doctor. Since the chilwas not ill, the vaccination ran just fine and was freeof charge. She also took older child with her to the

doctor; she had no one to leave him/her with.The twelve-year-old daughter appeared in the compaof the mother for a summons to a local doctor for anexamination. They went on foot (1.5 km), and didn’thave to pay the doctor anything. The visit went without problems; the other children (three children ages 5, 9 and 11 years) remained at home with anolder sibling (a 16-year-old daughter).

However, even ill children from excluded settlementsnot infrequently had to go on foot to see a doctor

some kilometres distant, not only those fulfillingcompulsory check-ups or mandatory vaccinations.And mothers living on the margins of large towns arealso familiar with going a long way on foot for medictreatment. Although in such a case medical care islocated within the home municipality, a large towncan mean a walk of several kilometres for medical cafrom the marginal parts of Roma communities to


28

Graph 11:Last time an adult household member went to see a doctor by method of transport and distancefrom the local doctor (in %)

on foot

public transport

own car

other car

EMT – ambulance

Note In the scope of recorded stories of the last time an adult member saw a doctor 28% of households were less than one kilometredistant from paediatrician; 50% were from one to 5 km away and 22% were more than 5 km distant.

7136

0

2936

59

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

08

10

012

21

08

10

to 1 km

1-5 km

6-19 km



a healthcare facility. Such was the story of a mother of a three-month old baby with bronchitis or a twelve- year-old child with a fever and cough:

The sister was with a small three-month old baby at the emergency room – the baby had bronchitis. The

sister came on foot to the hospital emergency room(more than 3 km within the town) and paid 2 euro for the examination. On that day she picked up the prescription at the pharmacy for 7 euro; this was two syrups. The nurse asked after the baby, how chubby she is, what does she like to eat, how many months old he was – she was nice. The doctor was not mentioned;the mother of the child was accompanied to the doctor by her sister.

A mother went with her twelve-year-old daughter on foot to see a doctor; the bus is too expensive (from the

edge of the regional capital to the centre). The girlhad a fever and cough. They paid only for the medicine– approximately 7 euro. Sometimes the father also goes with the daughter to see the doctor. Thebehaviour of the personnel was agreeable.

Several stories described a several-kilometre walk tothe doctor from a segregated settlement to the homeor a neighbouring municipality. For example, with anill son who had a temperature and vomited they had towalk four kilometres there and back; or to go from

a separated settlement on the edge of a village withthree children with a temperature, vomiting anda stomach ache, to see a paediatrician; in yet anothersituation a mother with a small child in fever walkedfrom a segregated settlement to a doctor in thevillage, when other children in the household waitedfor them at home. The f ield collection of empirical material ran during the summer (August andSeptember 2011), thus the question here arises howill children from an excluded settlement get toa doctor during the winter months or during

unfavourable weather:They went on foot to see a doctor; this is perhaps3-4 km. The son was ill with a temperature and vomiting. They paid 2 euro for medicine. The nursewas edgy because one lady quarrelled with her; thedoctor was normal.

Three sons had a temperature, vomiting and a stomach ache. They saw a doctor accompanied by

the mother and father – they went there on foot (within the village). The behaviour of the doctor and nurse was appropriate.

The youngest daughter (two years old) had a fever;the mother went with her to see a doctor (this is

4 kilometres; three minor children remained at home). She didn’t pay for the doctor, but she paid 6 euro for medicine.

The youngest daughter (two years old) had a sorethroat; I went with her on foot (approx. 3 km) with themother (two other minor children at home). They paidonly for medicine, 5 euro, she was happy with theexamination.

Sometimes the trip to a medical examination took theform of the lone pilgrimage of a child with a painful

injury or with medical problems. Obligations to carefor other children in the household didn’t allow thechild to be accompanied to the doctor:

The daughter (twelve years old) broke her arm and went on foot to the doctor (1.5 km from a settlement on the edge of a village). This was perhaps threemonths ago. She doesn’t remember how much she paid for the examination. She was in a cast for about two and a half months; seeing the doctor was without problems.

The last time seeing a doctor was due to a skin rash,

which the oldest daughter had (sixteen years old). Shewent on foot alone to the doctor (3 km) because themother had nowhere to leave the other children (six children from age 2 months to 14 years). A tincture was prescribed that cost 2.50 euro, and she picked it up.The behaviour of the doctor and the nurse was normal.

Problems with the trip to a distant doctor, obviously,did not only relate to child patients; adult membersof households also went to see a doctor on foot without accompaniment for their own illnesses or

a health problem:Mama: a month ago I needed to go see a doctor withinflammation of the back, pain up to my eyes. I went to see the doctor alone, on foot to the opposite side oftown (an estimated 3 km). She wrote mea prescription for 5 euro (Veral, Dorsiflex). I didn’t payanything at the doctor – when they examine, you don’ pay, thank God; only when you go to the emergency room you pay 2 euro. The children were home with my



oldest son (twenty-year-old son, the other fivechildren aged 5 to 16 years). The doctors were good; I waited about an hour for the examination. I can’t push to the front like an Ólah´. When a person is ill,it has to happen that the Olahs jump the queue ahead of us, they also scolded the doctor.

The standard method of overcoming distance toa medical examination is the use of public transport.In the case of excluded settlements a total of 43% of the surveyed cases travelled this way; with a distancecovered greater than five kilometres, this was up to57%. The assumption is that public transport actuallyruns between the place of residence and thehealthcare facility, which was not a general phenomenon (transport doesn’t go through some

communities and some do not lie in the vicinity of transport corridors). But even with the existence of transport from the side of many surveyed householdsnoted the problem of paying for travel, and due tostress in household’s financial budget even a fewcents or euro was a big burden, especially withrepeated trips to see a doctor or when the illnessoccurs in the period shortly before benefits come.Households often had to borrow money to go seea doctor, and travelling “black”, that is, without a travel ticket, was also found:

Jóžika (two-year-old son) has a respiratory illness;we’ve already been to town to see a doctor two timesthis month (5 km). Through the autumn and winter wewent to see a doctor every month. When we don’t havemoney to travel, we borrow 4.20 euro from aneighbour (a white woman, but we like her a lot, shealways helps us) for the round trip. I always take my son to see the doctor; the nurse and the doctor have praised us many times (medicines were about 11.30 euro).

The youngest son (five years old) was the last to see

a doctor; he is often ill. He went to see the doctor intown 8 km distant by bus with his mother. They had toborrow for the bus tickets because this was beforebenefits. The doctor was said to be nice. They didn’t pay for the medical service; the medicines would havecost a lot, but they didn’t pick them up. The trip cost them 1.20 euro, and they got home by bus, too. Theother children were in the care of grandparents and older siblings.

We last went to see a doctor with our thirteen-year-oldaughter, who complained of a stomach ache. Shewent to see the doctor with mother; they went by mass-transit bus without a ticket, because they didn’have money for a ticket. An auntie stayed with theother children, because the father had to go to anactivation activity. The medical examination was problem-free. They gave the daughter an injection an prescribed some medicines. We didn’t pick these up from the pharmacy, because it was necessary to pay perhaps 5 euro and we didn’t have the money. The pain eventually went away.

A bicycle is sometimes used to deal with the lack of financial resources for public transport in the case of a great distance of the place of habitation fromhealthcare services. One ill six-year-old child went several kilometres by bicycle for a medical examinationfrom a segregated settlement to a neighbouring villagewithout her mother, who stayed home to care for fiveother siblings. This story, like several others (seeAppendix 2), pointed at the same time to the problem repeated seeing of a doctor. An ill child must survive noonly the journey to see a doctor and then back but alsothe repeated overcoming of distance for care during thprocess of treating an illness and regular controls of itsdevelopment:

My husband went with the little girl (6 years) on abicycle, because we didn’t have money for the traveltickets (5 km). She is well now. The doctor didn’t give the tablets immediately and after we had to go back.

Approximately one-fif th of recorded cases of seeing doctor took place via a passenger car. One’s own car excluded settlements is only used rarely (7% of casessee Appendix 3.2); usually a car owned by anotherhousehold in the community is used. Two basic waysare used in relation to a car. The first is mutual

neighbourhood help with transport by car to see adoctor, which in the surveyed environment occurredrelatively often. Seeing a doctor with one’s ownhealth problem was connected with a journey by thecar of another household to a determined place; bothouseholds went to see a doctor together or they toothem along the way on journey of the car owners to gshopping:


30



I last saw a doctor perhaps a half-year ago when my son had a fever. I waited in line at the doctor’s off ice; she examined him, where she explained the process of treatment and wrote a prescription. I didn’t pay anything there, or for the journey, becausea neighbour with a motor vehicle, who was also seeinga doctor, took me there and back. The doctor and themedical personnel behaved well toward me; I had my daughter with her granddad at the time.

The daughter (two years old) had a cold – a runny and stuffed up nose. She went to see a doctor with her mother by the car of another family, who went food shopping. She didn’t pay for the journey, but she paid at first 2 euro for the medicine and a week later approximately 3 euro. She chose the medicine herself – recommended by the family. The trip back was againby car with a family from the settlement. The other

children were home alone (four children between 2and 17 years old). Seeing the doctor was without any problematic behaviour.

The youngest son (one year old) had a high fever. Wewent to the doctor by bus (6 km). The trip cost us 3euro, and we paid 6 euro at the pharmacy. The doctor and the nurse are very nice; we don’t have any problems with them. We got home by car, our friend took us but we still had to go 2 km on foot.

The second method of using another’s car fortransport to see a doctor was by a paid services –a family paid the owner of the car for transport tothe examination. The surveyed households fromexcluded Roma communities used the renting of another’s car in the absence of other possibilities of transport and in acute cases, when rapid medical care was sought after:

Our eleven-year-old son was last ill. He had atemperature, and we had to go with him to theemergency room one afternoon. We paid 2 euro for the

emergency room visit, and more than 8 euro for themedicines for the temperature and antibiotics. Wewent to the emergency room by car with a neighbour;we gave him 8 euro. The doctor and the nurse behaved politely; the doctor explained to me how I was to givehim the medicine, and if the temperature didn’t drop,how to give him a wrap. The nurse measured the boy’stemperature and asked whether he was happy at school, if he has good friends.

The five-year-old son swelled up after being stung by an insect. The mother went with her son to theemergency room in town (5 km); their neighbour tookthem for 10 euro because it was the weekend and thebus stops near the settlement only if someone is getting of f. The fee for the emergency room was 2euro. After the examination on Sunday, they picked upthe medicine on Monday: they paid 3.40 euro for anointment. They went to the paediatrician on Monday and also to the pharmacy, again by car for 15 euro – tothe district town (25 km). There was a problem withthe connection, and therefore, she had to make it home on time, because she was nursing (she had fivechildren at home from 9 months to 6 years old).Because she stated that the sting occurred on Friday,the paediatrician shouted at the mother for not bringing the child to her sooner to the hospital.

In such cases of “hiring a car” costs for travel areoften relatively high; the respondents, however,evaluate this solution as cheaper than transport byambulance or taxi. Due to a lack of financial resourcesthis method of transport to see a doctor hasconsequences in the form of another familyindebtedness family or disruption of the budget needed for buying food. One case was also found whencosts for transport by car from the neighbourhoodhad, for example, to be worked off:

Control examination with a neurologist – a mother with a one-year-old son who was born prematurely with a weight of 1.5 kg by Caesarean section. The tripto a more distant town by car for the examination cost30 euro, the fee for the neurological examination was4 euro (for the ultrasound). The father was at homewith the children (the other four children from 4 to 12 years), and couldn’t go on a work brigade, and so lostearnings of 10 euro for the whole day (plus food and cigarettes).

Perhaps three months ago their ten-year-old son

(they also have a thirteen-year-old son) fell in the yard and cut his forehead. He bled a lot, and therefore it was necessary to take him to theemergency room in the district town (17 km). They didn’t have money for the journey and the 2 euro fee for the doctor, therefore, my husband went to thelocal usurer. The usurer offered that he will take us tothe doctor; the husband went with him and the wife stayed at home. The boy was examined at the



emergency room without problems, and going to seethe doctor cost 30 euro, which is how much the usurer collected on the day of benefits.

A seriously disabled two-year-old son had to seea neurologist (for child’s cerebral palsy) for a control

examination at the polyclinic in a distant town. The family, without a car, has a problem travelling (they live in a settlement 2.5 km from a village, 6 km fromthe district town); an ambulance is more expensivethan a taxi (approx. 50 euro, taxi 30 euro, without a receipt it may be 20 euro). A private car costs 10-15 euro. The examination was scheduled, but right before the deadline of a loan from a private personthe agreement was rejected. The family without financial resources asked neighbours with a car – the father worked it off at home (digging the foundations for a new fence). For the digging he had 50 euro, for

the car they gave 10 euro; the family situationimproved. They kept to the schedule, no criticismof the personnel at the polyclinic – super professional approach.

Sometimes the story regarding the provision of care isa long one, when seeing a local doctor is not sufficient and it is necessary to take a trip fora specialist examination in a distant town. Theproblem can be the lack of preparedness for sucha situation – financial or for care of other children in

the household:The fourth child (daughter, f ive years old) had a splay-mouth. I got to town from the settlement on foot (thisis 2.5 km). Our doctor was just then on holiday and another doctor treated us. She said that I must takemy daughter to the hospital in Košice. I requested anambulance because I didn’t have any money, so sheanswered that this is not how it works, that it’s not a case that requires an ambulance; she said I have to get there by bus. I argued with the doctor and I went to scrape the money together. A neighbour loaned me10 euro, and so I took my daughter to the hospital.My mother looked after the other children (she has six children in all from 1 to 10 years old).

Although a large portion of the surveyed householdsfrom excluded settlements did not declare anyproblems with the distance when going to see adoctor or with overcoming it, that they have medical care relatively close by or were able to pay travel costs

without stating larger problems (for more, seeAppendix 3.2), for many of them distant medical caris a reality which brings difficulties of different typesWith marked stress in f inancial budgets, householdsalso decide, even with larger distances, to go to see

a doctor on foot and do so even in the case of an acuillness of a child or adult household member. The useof public transport for some excluded settlements isnot accessible at all (no connection operatesregularly) or they make seeing a doctor moreexpensive. In acute cases households try to secure aalternative method of transport, such as, for examplrequesting a ride using in a personal car of someonefrom the neighbourhood. This takes the form of neighbourly help, but also of a purchases service,which is such a case is relatively expensive. Contractwith owners of cars in a situation under pressure andin stress due to the need for medical treatment areoften disadvantageous. They lead to indebtedness othe household, when they have to borrow for travel,subtracting from financial resources originally meanfor food, or they mean a “material liability” in theform of working off costs associated with travelling tsee a doctor.

2.3. Financial accessibilityof a medical examination:total costs and the choice of medicines

The linking of medical care with the financial situationof households has already been indicated by theprevious section devoted to spatial accessibility of thespublic services, when because of the distance of a doctor from the place of habitation many excludedRoma households must give up transport to see a doctcompletely and instead go there on foot, or

expenditures for travel become a burden on householdbudgets in other ways. The monitoring of incomes andexpenditures showed significant budget stress fora relatively large portion of excluded Roma householdsin the situation of reliance on social benefits. Thedifference in total monthly sums of incomes andexpenditures was found to be only minimal,12 andhouseholds without a working member, where there wa


32



at least one young child and also multi-member

households, recorded the worst balance. Furthermore,it was found that stress in the household budget is alsoincreased by the possibilities of handling financial resources during the month when the predominant part of the month a household has only a small portion of itstotal monthly incomes available. The low total incomesat the same time mean surviving most of the month withvery small sums of disposable financial resources. Forthe given conditions, decisions on householdconsumption are markedly limited and even coveringbasic needs or unexpected expenditures, including the

provision of essential healthcare, is threatened. Many of the situations capturing the last time seeing a doctorfound confirm problems with the financial accessibilityof healthcare.

The average expended total sum for the last time

seeing a doctor, which included fees for theexamination and medicines and expenditures fortravel, represented a sum on the level of 10 euro. Thesum differed moderately according to the person ill and the type of medical problem. For treatment of child patients the sum was moderately lower than foradult patients (by approx. 2.50 euro), and costs forcommon illnesses came out less expensive thantreatment at the dentist or seeing a doctor due toa serious disease and specialist examinations. Withthe common illnesses for which children go to see a

doctor, basic medical care, which is closer and is lessdemanding in terms of fees for medicines, issuff icient; in the case of specialist examinationsmedical care in part becomes more distant, which

Graph 12:Average sum expended for the last time seeing a doctor by selected characteristics (in %)

Total

Medical examination of a child

Medical examination of an adult

Common illness

Serious disease

Specialist examination

Dentist

On foot

Public transport

Own car

Another’s car

Emergency medical service

Note In the scope of the recorded stories of the last time seeing a doctor child patients made up 63% and adults 27% The share of common illnesses represented 45% of all cases, seeing a doctor for a serious disease16%, specialist and control examinations 12% and dental examinations 5%.

10,01

9,11

11,49

8,15

11,29

14,90

9,10

6,96

10,89

9,64

14,76

23,50

0 5 10 15 20 25

12 The average sum of monthly incomes per one household achieved 597.60 euro and the sum of expenditures 552.99 euro; per one household member this was onaverage a sum of 112.75 euro of incomes to 104.34 euro of expenditures.



increases the financial demands for transport,but the demands for co-payments for medicine arealso higher with such medical problems. Theexpended sum differed significantly uponcomparisons of the method of transport to see a

doctor: the lowest was going to see a doctor on foot;on the other hand, the sum increased two- or three-fold with the hiring of another’s car for the trip tothe doctor or upon calling for emergency medical service, after which a stay in a hospital facilityusually followed, thus increasing the expendituresfor healthcare services.

Overall, the sum expended for the last time seeinga doctor differed significantly: it ranged from zeroexpenditures to 250 euro (the fee for an abortion);

sums over 30 euro, however, occurred only insporadic cases. Most often the financial amountscame out to be 10 euro, followed by 12 euro, 20 euroand 6 euro.13 Although overall financial expenditures for treatment are especially high, fora significant portion of excluded households theystill mean difficulties with paying them. Several households complained in general that this is forthem a lot, and they feel these expenditures asa financial burden, especially if they are connected

with a more distant specialist examination or withrepeated health problems:

I last saw a doctor with my youngest son in June. Thedoctor isn’t very nice. When we have to go to thedistrict town for a specialist examination at the polyclinic, the travel costs for the month is around 12euro, medicines 20 euro, which is a lot for us.

The last time seeing a doctor was in mid-September –at a paediatrician. It involved repeated inflammationof the air passages and an increased allergy to pollen.The examination went communicatively and without

problems; the mother goes to the controls and examinations with the children. Travel costs were 3euro there and back, expenditures for medicines were20 euro – and they are ill two times a month! The younger child remained at home with the father.

The stressed financial budget of some households alcomes from a situation when paying for necessarymedicines means the limiting of other basic needs;financial resources intended for providing food arereduced – they subsequently don’t have the money

needed for food:The last time seeing a doctor was for cardiovascular disease, diabetes and hypertension. They travell 4 kmby bus to see the doctor. The examination in the cliniis calm; they are satisfied. They pick up the medicinebecause they cannot function without them;afterward, they don’t have money for food. They donhave any young children; only adults.

The last time my son (sixteen years old) was beaten ithe settlement and needed medical help. He’d takena hard hit to his head and nose. The local surgery

clinic sent him to the regional capital. I had just comback from a work brigade where I’d received 10 euro. I gave the 10 euro to a neighbour to gas up his car sothat he could take us to town. I wanted to use that money for food.

The probe into the last time seeing a doctor in theenvironments of excluded settlements recorded severstrategies for securing missing financial resources formedical treatments. Among the more rare strategieswas “saving for a doctor”. Even from small incomes

some mothers are able to stash money away foranticipated expenditures for healthcare treatment, onso that they don’t always have to borrow:

When I go to see a doctor, I go on foot or by bus, and my husband watches the children... The children havcommon illnesses – sore throat, cough, bronchialtrouble (in the household are eleven children of age to 15 years). When we don’t have money, my family loans it to me. I was last at the doctor with my youngest daughter; she had a temperature and inflammation of the air passages. I paid 5.80 euro fo

medicines; I had 10 euro put away, so I didn’t have toborrow. We have a paediatrician in our village who isvery good. The children like him and he always givesthem a sweet or a colouring book during theexaminations.


3413 Average monthly expenditures for healthcare for all members of a household (defined through medicines and examinations, not transport) came out according to

the monitoring of incomes and expenditures on a level of 16 euro.



I was with my son – he had throat inflammation. Wewere in our village – on foot. The nurse called us intothe outpatient clinic for a consultation, but white people knocked on the door and were taken ahead of us for the examination – it seemed unfair to me. They prescribed him medicines for 12 euro; I had themoney, because I put a little on the side for medicines.

But most common method excluded Roma householdsused to overcome the deficit of f inancial resourcesnecessary for fees associated with medical treatment are loans. Borrowing for seeing a doctor was relativelywidespread; parents – usually the mother – havealready shown with standard illnesses in their childrenthat they are able to estimate the sum they will need

for medical treatment: It was necessary to go see doctor with a girl because she had a temperature. The parents went with the girl1.5 km on foot. The doctor, after the examination,assured the parents that it isn’t serious. It wasnecessary to pay 5.78 euro for the medicines; the parents had to borrow the money. A neighbour womanwatched the children at home.

I last went to see a doctor with my younger daughter (ten years old), she had a temperature; she drank a cold soda and got a sore throat. I didn’t have the

money so I had to borrow from the family. I borrowed 10 euro, and the medicines cost 6 euro. I didn’t haveto pay anything for the journey, because the doctor ishere in the village (1 km). She is very good, nice tochildren, even to our Roma kids.

It was necessary to go see a doctor with the youngest member of the family (five-year-old daughter),because her stomach ache would not go away. Themother went to see the doctor with the little girl. Theexamination went normally. They made the journey tothe doctor on foot, because the medical centre is not

far away. The father in the family watched the children(they are 10, 11 and 17 years old). The parents had toborrow 10 euro for medicine. The behaviour of thenurse was normal.

I go to see the doctor most often with the smallest boy (eighteen months old) – he’s used to coughing; he gets a temperature and we have to go. It oftenhappens that I don’t have the money and then I borrow approximately 10 euro from the family. When

the older boy (four years old) is ill and I need medicines for both, I borrow 15 euro. The last time I was at the doctor was today, with the smallest, and I took the four-year-old one with me. The doctor ishere in the village, so I went on foot (the settlement is1 km away). The older children (three age 8 to 15 years) were in school. I borrowed 10 euro from my sister, and I gave 5 euro for medicine, and I bought some tea and sugar to have for him. We have a good doctor; she always knows our children by name.

Households borrow money for covering essential costsfor treatment or a cure from different sources. Most often, however, members of their wider family help –a sister, a mother-in-law, an uncle – but especiallyparents. Solidarity among relatives is with illnesses

very intensive, and networks of relatives play a largepart in ensuring healthcare in Roma communities. Theabove-listed stories have already presented, inaddition to other family members, borrowing within aneighbourhood, and a story even occurred with a loanfrom a field social worker:

We went to see the doctor this month with our youngest son, who had a temperature. We both went,my husband and I, and the children stayed at homewith our oldest daughter, thirteen years old (four children age 5 to 13 years). We went on foot; we didn‘

have money for the bus (2 km). We picked up themedicines thanks to my mother-in-law, who loaned usthe money. We paid more than 4 euro for themedicine. The doctor and nurse behaved well; they only commented that we never have money for medicines.

I was at the doctor with my son, who is two and a half years old; he had a temperature and cried in the nightMy husband and older daughter were with the smaller children (three others of age 5 to 15 years). The doctowas normal. I went to see the doctor in town by bus

(one way 0.50 cents). I didn’t have money for medicine, so I borrowed from my sister (10 euro).

My daughter was the last one in the family to take ill – she had the flu. We went to see the doctor on foot (2km), because we didn’t have the money for travel right then. I went with my daughter; I’m her mother. Themedicines cost 10 euro and we had to borrow from the field social worker. In the meantime, the children werewith my husband (two children age 12 and 4 years old).



The last of the presented ways that a family got themoney needed for covering expenditures for a trip tosee a doctor and for buying medicines was the use of a pawn-shop. Purchases in this case also expanded toother necessary commodities when treating a cold:

A two-year-old child had bronchitis. The travel cost was3 euro and the medicines 4 euro. They pawned someearrings and bought tea and sugar.

The paths to f inancially covering medical treatment inthe surveyed excluded households, which have a lowincome or an income unevenly distributed in time (inthe course of a month they do not have disposablefinancial resources in the amount covering thefinancial demands of treatment and cures), aretherefore varied. The described stories indicated that

they are predominately based on the activation of broader networks of relatives or on loans from another– from other sources. Among the stories, however,were those in which a household was unable to securethe resources for medicines in the current state of need for a medical examination and treatment. It thenoccurred that they picked up in a pharmacy only someof the prescribed medicines, they picked them up late(which meant some time between treatment at all orgiving up any supporting treatment) or they gave up

prescribed and necessary medicines completely due toa lack of financial resources.

In the total sample of recorded stories of the last timeseeing a doctor 59% were health problems for whichmedicines were prescribed to the patient. As Graph 13shows, among them 85% picked up all of the prescribemedicines, whether without problems or with the help

of a loan from another source. The remaining 15% of households signalled in their story some problem withthe picking up of medicines. A portion of householdspicked up medicines or only some of them later thanthey needed them, while 4% of the cases recorded inthe research probe completely gave up prescribedmedicines. As was also shown within the framework ofcomparison of groups, residents of segregatedsettlements – where double the number of cases of households (nearly one-third) was involved – indicatethe most problems with picking up medicines on timeand in a comprehensive way.

Despite the overall declared preference for seeinga doctor with a child patient, some excludedhouseholds were unable to pick up all the medicineseven with the illness of a child, or they picked them uwith a certain time delay, when they were able tosecure the financial resources needed:

I was with my small son (four years) at the doctor; hecoughed and had a fever in the night. I went to the

waiting room; I was the first one there, so I waited.The nurse called in a few people before me. Inside th


36

Graph 13:Last time seeing a doctor with prescription medicines by their being picked-up (in %)

Total

Segregatedettlement

Separated settlementon the edge

Concentrated settlement in a municipality

Note The number of cases with prescribed medicine represented n = 113 units (59%).

85 5 6 4

69 8 17 6

93 2 0 5

88 6 3 3

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Picked up all Picked up some Picked up later Did not pick up



clinic the nurse laughed, saying that I come often withthe children and that I don’t care for them (together she has three children ages 4, 9 and 11 years). Thedoctor gave him an antibiotic for 5 euro. He alsoneeded a syrup, but I didn’t have the money. I travelled by bus (approx. 1 euro).

The youngest son (five years old) was the last to seea doctor; he is often ill. He went to see the doctor intown 8 km distant by bus with his mother. They had toborrow for the bus tickets because this was beforebenefits. The doctor was said to be nice. They didn’t pay for the medical service; the medicines would have cost a lot, but they didn’t pick them up. The trip cost them1.20 euro, they got home by bus, too. The other childrenwere in the care of grandparents and older siblings.

We last went to see a doctor with our thirteen-year-old daughter, who complained of a stomach ache. Shewent to see the doctor with mother; they went by mass-transit bus without a ticket, because they didn’t have money for a ticket. An auntie stayed with theother children, because the father had to go to anactivation activity. The medical examination was problem-free. They gave the daughter an injection and prescribed some medicine. We didn’t pick these up from the pharmacy, because it was necessary to pay perhaps 5 euro and we didn’t have the money. The pain eventually went away.

The nine-year-old son often catches cold and has a high

fever. The family often doesn’t have the financialresources for a trip to town to the emergency room. By car to town costs 10 euro, the emergency room 2 euro, plus medicines. If they go to see a paediatrician, they don’t always have money for medicines.

Much more often, however, were situations whenadult members of a household were unable to secureall of the necessary medicines. Primarily regularexpenditures for medicines with long-term illnesses,which presuppose the permanent use of medicines in

the interest of stabilising the health condition, led tothe occurrence of periods when such patients did not have the necessary medicines available. They couldonly acquire life-essential medicines later when someadditional incomes came into the household:

Mama goes regularly to see the doctor, she is beingtreated by an eye doctor – she has high pressure in her eyes. She always goes to see the doctor on the eighth of

every month. It goes well, because the doctor has knownmama for years now. The problem is financial: whenmama gets a prescription, she doesn’t always pick it up.

I have mental health problems; travel costs and medicines cost 20 euro for the whole month. I don’t

always have my medicines – the financial situationdoesn’t allow for it; another member of the family ison a disability pension. We are happy with the doctor.

I was last at the doctor with my own problem: I havean untreatable vein; it has broken twice now. I was at a check-up in Košice. When I had some inflammationin my body, the doctor gave me antibiotics and recommended that I take probiotics, but I didn’t havethe money for these. I bought the antibiotics for 10euro. They helped me a lot.

The last time seeing a doctor was a neurologist in

Košice; my wife suffers from insomnia. She travelled 28 km; she paid 5 euro for the bus. Since I work, weleft our son with the neighbours, because the other children were in school. She was there until nearly evening. We had to pay more than 12 euro for themedicines, which we picked up after just a few days,because we didn’t have so much money just then. Themedical service was average.

Unacquired prescription medicines and their lack of use in the necessary regularity or in an acute state of illness may manifest itself in the worsening healthstatus of the patient. Such consequences weredescribed in the recorded empirical stories. Non-treatment of a disease ended, for example, withhospitalisation in great pain or it was necessary to calfor emergency medical help with a worsening diseasewithout the use of medicines:

The last time the wife was at the gynaecologist. Shewent on foot to the surgery, but she wasn’t able to pick up the medicines, because they cost 16 euro. Shedidn’t know anyone she could borrow from, so in the

end she wound up in the hospital with strong cramps. She was treated for f ive days in the hospital, where themedical personnel treated her like a Gypsy.

The mother (grandmother) went to see the doctor; shewas dizzy. She didn’t have the money to buy the blood pressure tablets, because she didn’t want to borrow. She didn’t take her medicines for a week; she had a tingling in her face and the rescuer injected her withmagnesium. She picked up her medicines the next day



The lack of financial resources in the family budget of households from excluded settlements not only has asa consequence the partial, delayed or not picking upof prescription medicines. The last time seeinga doctor also captured the problem of financial

inaccessibility of services for reproductive health. Thedecision of a household for ending the fifthpregnancy in a row could not being realised, becausethe family was unable to borrow the sum of 250 eurowhich is needed to pay for an abortion. Despite thepoor economic situation and raising four children inpoverty and want, the parents had to involuntarilykeep the fif th child, although they could not handlesecuring the needs of the children, which caused themgreat problems14:

I was the last one who was ill; this isn’t an illness but I was pregnant and they wanted me to have anabortion (they have four children ages 8 to 13 years). I was in the second month. I needed to 250 euro but we didn’t have the money. Since I was unable to get the money together I had to keep the child. Now I amin the fifth month and after eight years I will again give bir th, although I no longer want to have another child in such poverty.

The financial situation also enters into the process of treatment of members of households from excluded

settlements in other ways. Among the stories of last time seeing a doctor was found a case of refusal of hospitalisation due to financial problems. This was thestory, for example of a woman whose stay in thehospital was covered with the deadline for paying of benefits. Since she was indebted, she was refuseda longer stay in the hospital and left to be treated at home (in substandard hygienic and spatial conditions):

Last month a relative of the head of the household (two older people live together in one household)

broke her leg. She was taken to the hospital by theemergency medical service (EMS), where she stayed for two days. The next day he went by rented car af ter her to take some necessary items and personal items.He had to borrow 30 euro for providing this, plus 10

euro for being taken to the hospital (4 km). She didnwant to stay in the hospital because she had borrowemoney and in three days was to get her benefit. Shewas admitted on Friday and on Monday money came, so that on Sunday, during visiting time, she wasreleased for home treatment. She had been on work leave since June, so until she had control, she’ll haveto extend it. In total she became indebted – for both by a sum 80 euro.

Problems with financial accessibility of a publicservice of this type did not end with merely thereduction or partial giving up of necessary medical care. Some surveyed households from excluded Romsettlements give up medical care completely due tothe problems with paying for medicines. Theexplanation that it is pointless to go to see a doctor the household doesn’t have money for buyingmedicines was repeated several times in the scope ofthe recorded situations:

We don’t go to see a doctor very much; not that weweren’t ill but we were unable to pick up medicines,then for what?! When one of us goes to see a doctor,it’s me; I’m always coughing. My father had something with his lungs... But so what, such is life.

According to the qualitative research carried out in

the surveyed excluded environments, problems withfinancial securing of medical care are relativelywidespread. Without a claim on any quantification thbudgets of many of the surveyed households wereinsufficient for paying for necessary medicines,although the overall sum of necessary costs for thelast times seeing a doctor was not on averageparticularly high (about 10 euro). For a signif icant portion of households from the surveyed environmegiving such expenditure from a limited householdbudget was a problem. As was emphasised at the sam

time, their expenditure means limitations in otherareas of consumption – predominately fromenvironments for meals. This testifies to the extremebudget stress of these families.


3814 A six-member family lives in a shack with one room without a kitchen and bath, where they don’t have any furnishings – they are without water and sewerage; they

don’t have their own beds; both partners are unemployed.



Families which went to see a doctor used several strategies for securing and carrying out the necessarytreatment. The most widespread was the “current solution”, i. e. immediate loans of the necessaryfinancial amounts – predominately from familymembers. Medical care for household members(particularly for children) in excluded communitiesbecomes to a large measure a common experience of the wider family networks.

Upon the failure of all alternative solutions forfinancing necessary medicines, treatment sometimes gets to patients in a limited range orlater than is necessary. Cases were also recorded inthe research when an unresolved illness led toa deepening or worsening of the medical problemand to necessarily broader medical interventions –in the form of hospitalisation with progressivediseases or an emergency medical serviceintervention. It was also a not unusual phenomenonthat adult patients gave up on common medical examinations completely; if they were unable tosecure medicines, they considered seeing a doctorto be pointless.

2.4. Social accessibility of medical care:tending to other children andthe approach of healthcare personnel

Aside from spatial and financial accessibility, storiesof seeing a doctor with some family member alsolimits the possibility of ensuring care for otherchildren in the household. In view of the fact that 85% of the recorded cases of households had at least one dependent child, and of this 54% had three ormore dependent children, the question of thepossibility of seeing a doctor with some of thechildren or with the health problem of one of theparents, while at the same time ensuring care for theother children in the household, becomes more thancurrent.15 The obligations of parental care in thesurveyed environments are exceedingly broad, whichwhen seeing a doctor means not only handling the tripto the doctor with an ill family member itself, but alsosolving the problem of caring for the remaining

children in the household.How families resolve care for other children whengoing to a medical facility with an ill child or one of

Graph 14:Last time seeing a doctor for excluded households with the obligation of care for other childrenby provision of care (in %)

1 = partner2 = grandparent

3 = other relative

4 = older child

5 = they were at school

6 = brought them with me

7 = neighbour

Note The share of cases with the obligation regarding other children was 54% (n=104 units).

46

11

5

7

20

8

3

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 5

15 From the final sample 54% of households had at least one young child, and from this 30% had two or more young children; 68% of the sample had at least oneschool-attending child, and from this 28% of the sur veyed households had three or more school-attending children. The average number of dependent children perone household came out to be nearly three (2.7 dependent children, in segregated settlements 2.9 dependent children).



the parental pair was indicated in several of the citedstories. Graph 14 indicates16 that there are essentiallytwo possible strategies – aside from cases whenchildren were in school at the time of the trip to thedoctor (20% of the relevant stories). The first strategy

is that they take the child to the doctor along with thepatient – they accompany their sibling or a parent intothe examination. Such solutions were not veryfrequent, but they did occur among the stories (theyformed 8% of cases with the obligation of caring forother children). Sometimes this meant for a parent overcoming a relatively large distance to the doctoron foot not only with an ill child, but also with otherchildren; another time the accompanying of a child tosee a doctor had the form of a visit in the eveninghours when the parent was, aside from beingburdened by his or her own health problem, troubledwith the care and fears for a young child:

They were last at the doctor for the vaccination of achild. The mother went on foot to the neighbouringvillage to see the doctor (4 km). Since the child wasnot ill, the vaccination ran just fine and was free of charge. She also took older children with her to thedoctor; she had no one to leave them with.

The last time I was at the doctor was today, with the smallest (eighteen months), and I took the four-year-

old child with me. The doctor is here in the village, so I went on foot (the settlement is 1 km away). Theolder children (three age 8 to 15 years) were in school. I borrowed 10 euro from my sister, and I gave 5 euro for medicine, and I bought some tea and sugar to have for him. We have a good doctor; she always knows our children by name.

Both parents after a physical attack needed a CT examination; the mother with the head af ter a concussion felt nauseated, she had to go with theneighbour in the car and with the family go to theemergency room to the nearest hospital (20 km). They

paid 2 euro at the emergency room, 15 euro for thetrip by car there and back. Because it was eight o’clock

in the evening, she had a problem with waiting,because her five-year-old son wanted to go to sleepand didn’t want to stay home with the father (they had three older children).

The second strategy for resolving care while going to sa doctor consisted in leaving another child or children some form of supervisory care. Among them casespredominated when the children remained in the care the other partner – the father or mother (a total of 46%of relevant cases); according to which of them took carof the necessary medical examination:

The daughter coughed a lot; they went by bus for 1.10euro. She went with her mom; they didn’t pay anything for the doctor and in the pharmacy 2.80euro. The husband guarded the children (they have

a total of four children age 3 to 6 years).They were at a control and vaccination for the one- year-old son. The examination went without problemthe mother went with the child by bus (10 km). The family father stayed with the other children (four children age 3 to 8 years).

The youngest son (one year old) had an ear infection. I went to see the doctor with him alone (a half km tothe village); my husband watched the children (theother four children age 3 to 15 years). We went on foot so we didn’t pay anything, but at the pharmacy I paid

more than 6 euro. Illnesses always make life difficult,on the wallet, too. Both the doctor and the nurse werenice, but it bothered me that I had to wait a lot.

The mother was with the son for an examination for bronchitis (he is four years old). Transport was witha neighbour for 5 euro (7 km); they paid 2 euro for theexamination and 7 euro for the medicines. The other children (age 7 and 5 years old) were with the husband.

Family roles are rather strictly divided in Romacommunities, and the predominating model of a

family is based on one provider – the man; a Romawoman is confined to the domestic sphere.17


40

16 In the total sample of stories of the last visit to see a doctor 46% did not have to resolve the problem of care for children (the household did not have childreor other children) or they were of an age when they were able to care for themselves); the remaining 54% had to consider care for children upon their departfor the medical facility.

17 More about the spreading of traditional family contract in Roma communities based on elements of classical patriarchal, see the publication of the Cultural Association of Roma in Slovakia from 2009 Data on Human Rights of Roma Women (Data.., 2009) or a newer publication from the non-profit organisation Quo Vadiscalled A Picture of Roma Women (Picture..., 2012).



Sometimes the need for alternative care in the case of the main care provider seeing a doctor means on onehand involvement of Roma men in household care, but in the strictly divided “family world” this can alsomean for the care-providing parent a loss of other

opportunities, for example, the loss of an opportunityto bring some work income into the family:

... The father was at home with the children (the other four children from 4 to 12 years), and couldn’t go ona work brigade, and so lost earnings of 10 euro for thewhole day (plus food and cigarettes)...

In the position of other alternative care-providerson the basis of empirical facts were grandparents(11% of relevant cases of seeing a doctor). If themother or father departs to see a doctor, thegrandmother, more rarely the grandfather, take onthe obligations for care:

The mother was last to see a doctor with the daughter because of a regular check-up. No illness was found.They travelled by bus and paid 1.10 euro. The grandmother cared for the other children (six other children from 2 months to 20 years).

I was last to see a doctor by myself, because I am pregnant. My father took me to the doctor, and thedoctor examined me and wrote the results into the

pregnancy book. She behaved politely to me and gaveme other advice, particularly about nutrition. I didn’t pay for the medical examination, and likewise for thetravel, because my father didn’t want me to. Duringthe trip to see the doctor my mother took care of thechildren (three children age from 2 to 7 years).

I last saw a doctor perhaps a half-year ago when my son had a fever. I waited in line at the doctor’s off ice, she examined him, where she explained the process of treatment and wrote a prescription. I didn’t pay anything there, or for the journey, becausea neighbour with a motor vehicle, who was also seeinga doctor, took me there and back. The doctor and themedical personnel behaved well toward me; I had my daughter with her granddad at the time.

Sometimes parents are forced when going to seea doctor themselves or with some of the children toleave other children in the care of their older siblings.Such a situation can bring a certain danger, primarily

in those cases if the older child is of relatively youngage to have care over several younger siblings:

The twelve-year-old daughter appeared in the companyof the mother for a summons to a local doctor for anexamination. They went on foot (1.5 km), and didn’t

have to pay the doctor anything. The visit went without problems; the other children (three children inthe age of 11, 9 and 5 years) remained at home withan older sibling (sixteen-year-old daughter).

We went to see the doctor this month with our youngest son, who had a temperature. We both went,my husband and I, and the children stayed at homewith our oldest daughter, thirteen years old (four children age 5 to 13 years). We went on foot; we didn‘have money for the bus (2 km). We picked up themedicines thanks to my mother-in-law, who loaned us

the money. We paid more than 4 euro for themedicine. The doctor and nurse behaved well; they only commented that we never have money for medicines.

A visit to the gynaecologist – a consultation (pregnantin the seventh month). I went by bus to see the doctorthe nurses helpfully accommodatingly and nicely, and I was satisf ied. The children were with their older siblings (four children age 2 to 15 years).

From among other relatives an aunt or sister-in-law

occurred in the role of alternative care provider forchildren in the recorded cases of the last time to see adoctor, but in reality the diversity of wider familynetworks can be even more significantly varied. Thesolution of involving the broader range of relatives inthe care of children occurred, when one of the parentscould not take care of the children, for example, whenboth parents had to see a doctor together or thepartner could not take on this role of alternative careprovider because of a work commitment. In such caseswomen from the neighbourhood became thealternative care providers:

The woman was at the gynaecological examination(abortion); and her partner and a neighbour went with her to see the doctor. They travelled by passengercar; petrol cost 10 euro. Payment for the abortion was250 euro. The sister-in-law took care of the children(two children ages 8 and 10 years). The medical carewas excellent.



It was necessary to go see doctor with a girl because she had a temperature. The parents went with the girl1.5 km on foot. The doctor, after the examination,assured the parents that it isn’t serious. It wasnecessary to pay 5.78 euro for the medicines; the parents had to borrow the money. A neighbour womanwatched the children at home.

The last time seeing a doctor was a neurologist inKošice; my wife suffers from insomnia. She travelled 28 km; she paid 5 euro for the bus. Since I work, weleft our son with the neighbours, because the other children were in school...

Among the empirical stories a case was recorded inwhich due to the obligation to care for children,combined with fear of the children from the medical examination, a family with children didn’t goregularly for check-ups and could be found at thepaediatrician only when the children had more seriousmedical problems. Such was the case of a woman andher partner with an unfinished primary education andwho have eight children and live in a segregatedsettlement approximately one kilometre distant fromthe home village in very poor housing conditions:18

They don’t go to see a doctor often; the children areafraid of injections (eight children age 5 to 12 years). She only communicates with the doctor because of the

children; she doesn’t go for consultations, only at thetime of birth. So it’s hard to communicate with thedoctor. Despite this, they examine them and offer medical care (from the settlement to the village ismore than 1 km).

On the basis of the empirical material, it was shownthat obligations of care for a larger number of childrenin the scope of the household also contributed to thelimitation from the viewpoint of accessibility of medical care. Going to see a doctor in the case of

a large portion of households from excludedsettlements is complicates or limited by the need tosecure care for other children in the household. At thesame time the primary role of partners in caring forother children was confirmed. If both parents go to

see the doctor or the second of the partners hasanother obligation, other children also go to theexamination or the broader family or neighbourhoodnetworks get involved in their care. And cases are norare when the oldest of the siblings takes on the

obligation of care, sometimes even when they havenot achieved an appropriate age.

The last characteristic which respondent householdwere to describe in relation to their last time seeinga doctor were their experiences with the approach of healthcare personnel. As is shown in Graph 15, themajority of stories evaluated the behaviour of doctorsand nurses as normal, common or problem-free, equalas to other patients. Such statements about healthcareworkers were made in 57% of cases, while another 12%

stated in the end an incomparable or excellent approach. On the other hand a critical voice sounded ofrom not quite one-fifth of the surveyed households(19%), and the remaining 12% did not make mention othe behaviour of doctors. Evaluations were moderately


42 18 A family with ten members lives in an illegally built shack with one room, without a kitchen and bath, in which they don’t have running water and no sewerage system.

Graph 15:Evaluation of approach of healthcarepersonnel (in %)

Note From all stories of the last time seeing a doctor (n = 184 un

Excellent

Normal

Poor

Not givennot applicable

1212

19

57



differentiated according to whether the given caseinvolved children or adults going to a healthcarefacility. With children patients excellent evaluations of the behaviour of healthcare personnel occurred moreoften, but at the same time critical comments also

occurred more often in such cases (by approximately 5%more positive and negative evaluations); in the case of adult patients the represented average evaluationsacknowledging professionalism and problem-freebehaviour were stronger.

Roma parents linked positive evaluations of paediatricians with a humane approach to their child,and the appreciated communicativeness of the doctoror nurse, as in when they praised the child or gavethem sweets or a colouring book, which creates goodrelations between the child and the doctor:

I went last to see a doctor with my older son (nine years), who had bronchitis. I had the money, so I didn’t have to borrow it. I gave 3 euro for medicines.The younger son was home with my husband, who ison disability leave, the older kids were in school (fivechildren in total). The doctor and the nurse are very good to us; they praised my son for being so polite and he got a sweet.

... We have a paediatrician in our village who is very good. The children like him and he always gives thema sweet or a colouring book during the examinations...

Very often they emphasised the length of therelationship with a good evaluation the approach of healthcare workers, when they know doctors or nursesfor years, and often they treated them when they werethemselves children. They appreciated if they knowthe children by name:

The last time seeing a doctor took place on 21 August 2011 with the youngest daughter – she had a stomach

ache. The mother went on foot to see the doctor withthe child, because the healthcare centre was located not far from them. The doctor has known this family for years, so the visit occurred in a pleasant atmosphere. They paid 4.15 euro for the medicines.They went home on foot and the father watched theother children (older children, 14 and 17 years old).

I went to see a doctor this month with both children,because they had a fever and diarrhoea. We have

a doctor here in town, so I went on foot. I paid 12.50euro for the medicines, which I picked up so they’d gewell. The doctor and nurse have known us for a longtime and they are always good.

The daughter took ill (ten years old), the father went

with her and the mother watched the children. Thedaughter had the flu; they went to see the doctor by bus.The roundtrip fare cost 10 euro, and they paid 5 euro for medicines. The nurse has known them for a long timeand is a very nice lady. So no problems occurred.

...We have a good doctor; she always knows our children by name...

They didn’t just have positive experiences withpaediatricians; such cases also occurred when seeinga gynaecological clinic or a general practitioner.

Again, open communication from the side of thepersonnel was the reason for the good feeling withgoing to the medical facility: help with overcomingfear of the examination and expressions of interest intheir life situation:

Our fif teen-year-old daughter was the last to have a problem. She was found to have a disease of theovaries and a gynaecological examination wasnecessary. This was her first examination of this type; she was afraid, even though her mother was there withher. The doctor and the nurse both behaved very nicely

to her; they told her that there was nothing to fear,that everything will be f ine. The travel cost was 2.20euro times two, and we paid 10 euro for medicines.

I have high blood pressure; I take medicines regularly so I go to see the doctor regularly. Her surgery is in thevillage, so I go on foot. I’m able to estimateapproximately how much money I’m going to need each month for medicines, so that I always put money away for this. The doctor has known me for years and she always asks what’s new and how work is going andhow the family is doing.

Several of the respondents in their evaluations of theapproach of healthcare personnel emphasised the factthat they always go to see the doctor cleaned up andwell-dressed. They see in the first condition of favourable behaviour from the side of healthcarepersonnel, but also other institutions or the public.Hidden, but also explicitly in their own statementsthey distanced themselves from some groups of their



own ethnicity, in which they saw the reason for thenegative approach from the side of the majority:

... The nurse behaved well to them, because they go to see the doctor cleaned up and well-dressed.

... I always take my son clean to see the doctor, and the

nurse but also the doctor has praised us many times...The mother went with her daughter to see the doctor on 21 August 2011 with a headache. Their paediatrician was at one time the mother’s paediatrician so the visit went normally, friendly. They paid 2.87 euro for the medicines and 1.50 euro for thetickets. The father watched the other children (twochildren). Everywhere the difference in the approachof other people can be see among clean Roma and dirty, whether at an off ice, at the doctor or in school. At least here in town people prefer the cleaner ones.

The doctor of these girls sees them as peers because she has known the family for several years.

My younger daughter was last ill (15 years old); she had a sore throat. The doctor works in the village, we paid 10euro for medicines. The doctor and nurse are nice, but in the waiting room its always stuffy and a smell.

... The doctors were good; I waited about an hour for the examination. I can’t push to the front like anÓlah´. When a person is ill, it has to happen that theOlahs jump the queue ahead of us, they also scolded the doctor.

So long as critical voices are concerned regarding themedical examination and behaviour of personnel,these are related to several aspects of the medical care provided. Most often criticism is connected witha long wait for treatment, or even with a patient scheduled for a set time. Not infrequently, althoughnot in all cases, respondents linked their long wait fortreatment with being passed by and with preferential treatment of non-Roma over Roma. They expresseda strong feeling that Roma patients are left to wait

and others are called into the surgery preferentially,or they point to the different behaviour of nurses tothe patients from these two groups of residents. Romahouseholds also have experience with distance fromthe side of other patients in healthcare facilities:

We last went to the emergency room, when our youngest son (eight years old) broke his arm. Aneighbour took us to the district town (19 km);

the trip cost 10 euro. We had to wait a long time,because just then a lot of ambulances delivered ill andrunk people. We were very angry.

The partner went to see the doctor – he had anappointment at an exact time and they didn’t take

him at all; he waited a long time. I only had one problem at the doctor: that preferencewas given to whites before Roma in the waiting roomThe Roma in waited in the waiting room and they called in the white people.

A week ago my daughter had a fever. We came to thewaiting room, people always look when a ‘Gyspyćomes. We went there on foot, as it is not far away. Thnurse is always irritable when I come with the childrenbut when the non-Roma cut in front of me, she smilesThe doctor is very good. He prescribed a syrup for my

daughter to treat the fever (4 euro) and control in aweek. My partner stayed home with the children.

Several empirical stories differentiated between thebehaviour and approach of the nurse and the doctor.They repeatedly commented on the unpleasant andshouting behaviour of a nurse, which differed fromthe doctor, but a direct association of such behaviouwith their ethnic membership was not mentioned intheir answer:

The trip to see the doctor didn’t cost anything,because the settlement is near the hospital. The nursalways barks at people, but the doctor is good. They were there with the youngest child, who had a temperature and a cough (five years old). They pai4 euro for medicines.

The daughter is pregnant, so she went to the pregnancy clinic. The nurse there is ver y unpleasant; she is thinking of changing gynaecologist as a result She went by bus and the trip cost 2 euro.

A simple rebuke from the side of healthcare personne

that they do not go to see the doctor for preventiveexaminations regularly and on time contributed to tnegative feeling that Roma mothers had from visitina medical facility:

Preventive check-up for a child; the mother went withthe child – this costs 3 euro. The nurse was a bit irritated, since the mother should have been at thecheck-up sooner.


44



A control examination of a child (three years, they have two other children age 1 year old), the mother went with him. It cost 4 euro; they didn’t pay anythingat the surgery. The nurse and doctor remarked to themthat it’s necessary to go regularly.

Feelings of injustice from insufficient care are alsofound alongside the overall appreciation of the workof doctors. Such were found in the story of a seriouslyill child, when the father very positively evaluated thebehaviour of the doctors in the given situation, whoare willing to explain the procedure treatment and togive hope to the patient and his parents. Despite theconviction of good care, the parents came away withfeelings of injustice and unfairness, if the personnel were unable to devote themselves to all the patients.

The linking with ethnic membership of the family,however, was not indicated in the story:

We have a twenty-five-year-old son ill with leukaemia.He is often hospitalised in Košice – he is undergoingchemotherapy; and this month he is in the hospital.His health status is worsening. The doctors are helpinghim; they believe that after the chemotherapy he isundergoing now his status will improve. We arewaiting for a bone-marrow donor. The doctors arewilling to explain everything to him and to me that wedon’t know, that we don’t understand. Unfortunately,it sometimes happens that the nurses are unable tohelp all of the patients who need help. It’s then I feelthis injustice that my son is there along and I cannot help him. His illness is costing us a lot of money; weare already in debt. The family is helping us; they arealways willing to loan us money.

However, a different approach from the side of medical personnel on the basis of ethnicity was found amongthe stories collected regarding the last time seeinga doctor – and several times. Some of the respondentsmet with unequal treatment, for example, when going

to the emergency room. According their ownconvictions, doctors behaved badly and unpleasantlydue their being members of the Roma ethnicity. Andthey felt such behaviour instantly upon first contact, if membership to the Roma nationality was visible, orthey registered a change in behaviour from the side of the doctor, when membership was identified on thebasis of the surname:

My man had an asthma attack; we went to theemergency room; we paid 2.50 euro. He had to remainin the hospital, and for the trip home I didn’t havemoney. So I stayed in town with my sister. The doctorsbehaved badly, as soon as they noticed that we areGypsies.

On 14 September 2011 my boy (son – three years old) got a high fever, so in the night at 8:30 p.m. I went on foot with my son in the pram. I waited for nearly anhour for the doctor, because he was seeing a patient at home. The first contact with the doctor was pleasant,until I told him our name. After this information he saidthat he is not a paediatrician so I’d have to go to theemergency room in a larger town, which is 24 km away.

Roma women were also judged by their ethnicmembership in cases of refusing them a stay in thehospital together with an ill hospitalised child.Despite all attempts and pleadings to stay togetherwith the child, the medical facilities would not allowthem to stay. The off icial reason was the lack of spacebut as the women noted, other mothers werepermitted to stay. They evaluated the situation asdiscrimination and during discussions on a hospital stay; they met with expletives and racism:

Our youngest son (four years old) had strongdiarrhoea and needed hospitalisation. We were very

angry at the doctor and the nurse, because I couldn’t remain with him in the hospital, although our soncried a lot. I offered them money, but in vain. They supposedly didn’t have room, and then we found out that a non-Roma was admitted with a small girl to the same department. This was discrimination.

Last time my second child was ill (eight-year-old son, she also has a twelve-year-old son and two-year-old daughter). He had jaundice and it was necessary tohospitalise him in the regional capital. We didn’t havemoney, so I asked my uncle for 20 euro for travel by

car. I wanted to stay with him to take care of him, but they didn’t let me. I argued with the nurse who wasvery contrary and racist; she told me I was like thedirty slobs. In the meantime, I left the other childrenwith the neighbours.

The amount of humiliating and unjust feelings wasbased on stigmatisation, with which many of therespondent households met even on the premises of



medical facilities. They experienced cases of social prejudice against their own person, when they haddifferent negative characteristics from thestereotypes of the Roma minority ascribed to themfrom. This involved being “labelled” with negative

characteristics „which are connected with the Roma inthe society. According to the experiences of several households from excluded settlements these tookdifferent forms.

One of the Roma mothers was accused by hospital personnel of turning the facility into a “depository”for children; at the same time she had a daughter withan infectious disease which requires hospitalisation.Her paediatrician had to stand up for her. Anotherexperience told of seeing a local doctor with high

blood pressure during which the doctor first asked if she used alcohol. Another Roma mother experiencedfeelings of shame and humiliation when she brought her son to see the paediatrician with a rash and thedoctor first asked whether they had fleas at home. Apair of Roma parents felt very uncomfortable whenthey went to the emergency room with their child,who had a fever, and the nurse asked them, in front of the other patients, whether they have the fee for thetreatment, though such a question was not asked of

the other patients.My youngest daughter was often ill. In the hospital at the overnight department I several times experienced that the personnel has raised their voice at me, tellingme that I’m using the department as a depository. Our local paediatrician, however, stood up for me, becausehe knows that I don’t neglect to care for my children.Certainly it’s a lot better now, when a social worker accompanies us. Then they don’t allow so muchagainst us Roma.

The wife had high blood pressure; her daughter was

with her. The doctor first asked how much she had had to drink, measured her blood pressure and gave her aninjection. This was all; we were in our own village(more than half a km to the doctor).

Here in the village I went to see the doctor with my son, because he had a rash on his legs and belly. Thedoctor gave me a liquid ointment that cost about 1.50euro. She asked whether we have fleas at home and I was offended.

We last saw a doctor at the end of June with our ten- year-old daughter (they have one younger child, five years old and 3 older age 15 to 22 years), who had atemperature. I and my wife and daughter went in ourown car to the emergency room at the regional capitabecause it was a Saturday. The older siblings were witthe children. Petrol cost 4 euro (15 km to town), andwe paid 2 euro at the doctor and perhaps 4 euro for the medicine, which the doctor prescribed for my daughter. The examination went normally, but weweren’t happy that the nurse asked us in front of theother patients whether we have the two euro fee for the doctor, because he will not examine us, and at th same time she didn’t ask the other patients. Weborrowed 20 euro for this treatment.

And the fear of Roma residents with calling for

emergency medical help can be considered to bea certain consequence of negative stigmatization.They fear accusations of abusing the rescuers, whichhas as a consequence the expanded myth of unjustified calling on medical services of this typeinto Roma communities. The diff icult access to distamedical care from excluded settlements and worsehealth status is forgotten with this, however. It wasshown that in some residents of Roma communitiesinhibitions are created regarding free decisions aboucalling on emergency help, because they fear thefinancial recourse of an unauthorised call:

The grandmother (sixty-four years old) fainted threetimes in a four-hour period. Emergency medical help wcalled and no change in her health status was found.During the writing of the medical report, she fainted again, and they determined unsteady blood pressureand suspicions of diabetes. She was then hospitalised ithe district town 15 km distant as reliant on insulin. If the EMS had not found any health problem, the daughtwould have borne the consequence of abusing the EMS with a financial penalty.

Evaluation of the approach of healthcare personnel ended up on the basis of the research probe into thelast time seeing a doctor relatively favourable forhealthcare workers. The majority of Roma patientsmet during this public service with a standardapproach, a portion in the end with a very goodapproach, but the research at the same time pointed


46



out the existence of unfavourable experiences andfeelings from this field of the public sphere. Romahousehold predominately have good feelings andexperiences with doctors with whom they have long-term contact and have created a relationship of

mutual trust and respect, but they meet withdifferent treatment or racism in foreign, more distant environments, when they have to go to the hospital oremergency room in a larger town. Not infrequentlywith the provision of medical services they meet withstigmatising labelling connected with theirmembership in the Roma minority, which is associatedwith negative stereotypical images regardingneglectful care of children, alcoholism, lack of cleanliness and poor hygienic relations, or with non-payment of obligatory fees for treatment or forabusing the emergency medical services. Members of Roma households from excluded settlements, whengoing to see a doctor, met with a refusal or distancefrom the side of personnel and other patients, withprejudice and discrimination, as well as with verbal attacks. To a certain measure, such negativeexperiences with the approach of healthcarepersonnel works as a barrier of accessibility tohealthcare services.

Summary of the findings:The situational analysis indicated that in Romacommunities preference for medical care is given tochildren before adults. Adult members of householdsgo to see a doctor with more serious diseases(cardiovascular diseases, motor diseases), and theydo not see a doctor with common illnesses. Among thecommon illnesses Roma children experience, asidefrom colds and respiratory illnesses, are also digestiveproblems, such as a stomach ache and diarrhoea.

Preventive check-ups and vaccinations are nearlyexclusively an experience of children.

The compiled cases of the last time seeing a doctoralso indicated several barriers in access to medical care in a significant portion of marginalised Romacommunities. Spatial exclusion itself immediatelyestablishes problems with access to medical care. Themajority of recorded cases had standard medical

services relatively distant, whether this isa paediatrician or a local doctor, in the case of accessibility of an emergency room or a hospital andspecialist treatment or examination the distance tomedical care deepened further.

For overcoming this distance families from excludedsettlements must expend special efforts. In theconditions of poor financial situation of manyexcluded Roma households going to see a doctor onfoot is not uncommon – they overcome the trip of some kilometres even with an ill child or with theirown illness. Only a few from excluded householdshave their own vehicle available, and a relativelyfrequent strategy is using a passenger car of someonefrom the neighbourhood. Such a journey to see

a doctor is either an accompanying activity of thevehicle owner to a distant location, or the householdrenting a care for the purpose of an urgent journey tosee the doctor. Then to pay the costs they borrow, andeven cases of usury or working off of debts accrued fotransport were found. Public transport is alsoa problem for households from excluded settlementswhen going to see a doctor: for some settlements,namely it is not accessible or permanent or thehouseholds cannot afford it for financial reasons.

But problems of marginalised communities do not endwith spatial limitations in the accessibility of medical care. The poor economic situation complicates theaccessibility and quality of care for many of thesehouseholds. Not only for transport to see a doctor arefinancial resources not available, but also for fees andprescribed medicines, which forces families to borrowor leads to giving up and a limitation of neededtreatment, or the inaccessibility of other services, forexample, for reproductive health.

The great broadening of loans in the surveyedenvironments for covering basic needs for medical care point out the connection of broader family andneighbour networks for solving specific healthcareproblems, primarily in children. Networks are involvedwith transport and financial coverage of transport,and also wit securing necessary medicines andtreatments. And broader family networks in the



surveyed environments function also with securingcare of other children in households when seeing adoctor. The lack of financial resources and theabsence of many public services support cooperationof family and community networks for overcoming

existing barriers and limitations in access to medical services. The potential of one household for this typeof social integration in many cases is not sufficient;they must activate relational and communitynetworks. In a certain group of excluded households,however, deficiencies lead to giving up on thestandard form of medical care.

Aside from spatial distant and financial difficultiesthe situational analysis also pointed to the limitationof social accessibility of medical services. Access to

medical services for members of households fromexcluded communities is complicated by theobligation to care for other children in the household.The discriminatory experiences with which a certain

portion of the surveyed households met with whenseeing a doctor also have a negative impact here.

The large problems found for excluded householdspredominately reliant on social benefits for f inanciacoverage of transport to see a doctor and medical services, including the securing of medicines,indicates a question of whether the entire system of support for healthcare of people in material needshould not be built in a different way than the currentwo-euro allowance for medical care to the benefit inmaterial need.19 If society has a genuine interest inimproving the health status of all of its citizens and iensuring the right to medical care, which belongsamong fundamental human rights and which isstipulated by the Constitution of the Slovak Republic

the situation found with problems in spatial, financiand social accessibility of medical services forsubstantial groups of citizens urges public policiesregarding responsible intervention.


48 19 For more, see: http://www.employment.gov.sk/prispevok-na-zdravotnu-starostlivost.html.



Problem-free visit with a doctor:

My daughter had the flu; I’m her mother and I went with her; we went on foot (the paediatrician in the village). I have a pleasant doctor so we don’t have problems. I picked up her medicines.

Our ten-month old son had trouble breathing; the doctor gave him a prescription for a syrup for 15 euro, which I picked up that day. The doctor was nice.

They went by car to see the doctor with a child, who had a cold. They have their own car, and they gave about 3 euro for petrol. The doctor prescribedmedicine, for which they paid 2 euro. The behaviour of the medical personnel was normal.

We went to see the doctor because my daughter had inflamed tonsils and a high fever. The other children (four children age 18 to 8 years) stayed home with their father. The doctors are always charitable to us, and the nurses, too. Medicines cost me 12 euro, because I bought more to put away for the other children (four others). We went by bus (7 km for about 2 euro).

The last time my daughter was ill. I’m her mother so I went with her and everything went okay. We didn’t have to travel, because we have a doctor close by.

We went to see a doctor a month ago with our eleven-year-old son. Mama went with him to see the doctor in the village (1.2 km). Our son had in the

night a temperature and cough. The visit with the doctor went without larger problems; the behaviour of the doctor was normal. He looked over the boy and prescribed him medicine. We paid 4.20 euro for medicines.

The daughter, who had a cough, needed a medical examination. The mother went with her by bus to the local doctor in the neighbouring village (7 km). They determined that the daughter had bronchitis, and medicines were prescribed costing 7 euro, which they picked up. The visit went normally; the behaviour was normal.

The daughter coughed a lot; they went by bus for 1.10 euro. She went with her mom; they didn’t pay anything for the doctor and in the pharmacy 2.80 euro. The partner guarded the children (they have a total of four children age 3 to 6 years).

With a child (sixteen years old), he coughed – had a cold. The visit went normally. They had no costs at the doctor or the pharmacy; they went there and back by car, petrol cost 5 euro.

Flu, the mother went with the daughter (ten years old; they have three other children age 3 to 9 years old). They have a doctor in the village; the nurse was very nice.

They went to see the doctor in their own car; the youngest son was ill (ten years), he had a fever and coughed. They paid 5 euro for medicines.

The behaviour of the nurse was normal, as they have been going there for years.

I went last to see a doctor with my older son (nine years), who had bronchitis. I had the money, so I didn’t have to borrow it. I gave 3 euro for medicines. The younger son was home with my husband, who is on disability leave, the older kids were in school (five children in total). The doctor and the nurse are very good to us; they praised my son for being so polite and he got a sweet.

The daughter took ill (ten years old), the father went with her and the mother watched the children. The daughter had the flu; they went to see the doctor by bus. The roundtrip f are cost 10 euro, and they paid 5 euro for medicines. The nurse has known them for a long time and according to their words she is a very nice lady. So no problems occurred.

In February went to see the doctor with the mother – the daughter had the flu. They travelled to the district town by car (20 km), the trip cost 10 euro. They didn’t pay anything at the doctor and the visit went fine; the behaviour of the doctor and nurses was normal.

Yes, a week ago I was at the doctor with the children (two children, 6 and 8 years old), they had the flu. I gave around 30 euro for medicines, and I don’t have any problems with the behaviour of the doctor or nurses.

Our young son (six years old) had a throat infection. We travelled to see the doctor in town (13 km); the trip cost 5 euro. We picked up the medicines and we paid 4.80 euro. The doctor and the nurse were nice and in my opinion we received good medicines, because by evening his fever was already normal.

The mother was with the son for an examination for bronchitis (he is four years old). Transport was with a neighbour for 5 euro (7 km); they paid 2 euro for the examination and 7 euro for the medicines. The other children (age 7 and 5 years old) were with the husband.

The mother went with her daughter to see the doctor on 21 August 2011 with a headache. Their paediatrician was at one time the mother’s paediatrician so the visit went normally, friendly. They paid 2.87 euro for the medicines and 1.50 euro for the tickets. The father watched the other children (two children). Everywhere the difference in the approach of other people can be see among clean Roma and dirty, whether at an of fice, at the doctor or in school. At least here in town people prefer the cleaner ones. The doctor of these girls sees them as peers because she has known the family for several years.

Appendix to Chapter 2:Last time seeing a doctor

SEEING A PAEDIATRICIAN



The last time seeing a doctor was the mother with two daughters due to a cough and a preventive check-up. They travelled by bus to see the doctor (nearly 11 km), for which a one-way journey cost 1.40 euro (1 whole and 2 half-price tickets). The behaviour of the doctor and the nurses was normThey didn’t pay any fee, but they paid 7 euro for medicines. The husband stayed home to watch the third daughter.

The mother was last to see a doctor with the two- year-old daughter because of a regular check-up. No illness was found. They travelled by bus and paid 1.10 euro. The grandmother cared for the other children (six other children from 2 months to 20 years).

Regular check-up with the children (three children ages 1, 2 and 3 years). The children are not ill; the visit went without problems. The mother travelled with the children by car with her brother. The father of the children stayed home with the three-year-old son. So far they have not run across any unpleasantness.

We last went to see the doctor with our youngest daughter (f ive years old) to the emergency room in our town. The f irst day I went alone with the galone and on foot. The doctor examined her and his behaviour was good. It was visible that he was doing his duty, and the nurse was nice.He diagnosed my daughter – a cold. Only on the second day her condition worsened, so I went with my sister-in-law and her husband by car again tthe emergency room; this was six in the evening. The costs for the doctor and everything associated with this came out to be 10 euro.

The mother went to see the doctor with the youngest daughter (four years old); she had a high temperature and a cough. They went to the doctor (approx. 6 km) by car with a neighbour, who has a car and who drove; she gave 5 euro for the journey. She paid a total of 6 euro for medicines.The husband stayed home with the children (four children 5 to 12 years).The nurse behaved well to them, because they go to see the doctor cleaneup and well-dressed.

The daughter (two years old) had a cold, a runny and stuffed up nose. She went to see a doctor with her mother by car of another family, who went go food shopping. She didn’t pay for the journey, but she paid at first 2 euro for the medicine and a week later approximately 3 euro. She chose the

medicine herself – recommended by the family. The trip back was again by car with a family from the settlement. The other children were home alon(four children between 2 and 17 years old). Seeing the doctor was without any problematic behaviour.

They went down to the village by bus (the trip cost 0.70 euro/child 0.35 euro). The mother went with a child – a common children’s illness. They pa6 euro for medicines. The people at the surgery behaved politely, since they already know them. They also returned home by bus; the husband was in the household at the time.

I (the father) and mother went to see the doctor with our daughters; we travelled there by car in the afternoon hours. The daughters had symptomof a sore throat. We paid 7 euro for the treatment and 12 euro for the medicines. The doctor was pleasant with us; he has known our family for a lontime. We don’t have any problems going to see the doctor; we have our own car.

I last saw a doctor perhaps a half-year ago when my son had a fever. I waited in line at the doctor’s off ice, she examined him, where she explained the process of treatment and wrote a prescription. I didn’t pay anything there, or for the journey, because a neighbour with a motor vehicle, who walso seeing a doctor, took me there and back. The doctor and the medical personnel behaved well toward me; I had my daughter with her granddadat the time.

Our young son was ill – a cough and temperature. My wife went with him to see the doctor; they went by bus (1.60 euro), and the cost for medicineswas 5.90 euro. The behaviour was optimal; the doctor knows us well, because I was also her patient.

Our son had a sore throat, so we went, both parent, by car (they have one child). The journey cost 2 euro, and at the pharmacy we paid 3 euro for thprescription. We were happy with the visit.

Three sons had a temperature, vomiting and a stomach ache. They saw a doctor accompanied by the mother and father – they went there on foot (within the village). The behaviour of the doctor and nurse was appropriate.

Perhaps a week ago the mother went to see the paediatrician with her son (twelve years old; they also have an eleven-year-old daughter). He had stomach problems. They paid 2 euro for the journey for the two of them (4 km), for confirmation in the pupil’s school book they paid 1 euro and forthe prescription medicines 13 euro. The behaviour of the doctor and nurses was good.

I went to see a doctor this month with both children, because they had a fever and diarrhoea. We have a doctor here in town, so I went on foot. I paid12.euro for the medicines, which I picked up so they’d get well. The doctor and nurse have known us for a long time and they are always good.

They don’t have any serious care with their son that causes them to see a doctor often. The paediatrician has known this family for years. The doctobehaviour is very good. The last visit to see her was perhaps sometime in June; the son had a stomach ache. They bought medicines for 3.70 euro.

The last time seeing a doctor took place on 21 August 2011 with the youngest daughter – she had a stomach ache. The mother went on foot to see tdoctor with the child, because the healthcare centre was located not far from them. The doctor has known this family for years, so the visit occurredin a pleasant atmosphere. They paid 4.15 euro for the medicines. They went home on foot and the father watched the other children (older children14 and 17 years old).

The last time seeing a doctor was because the son had stomach problems (eleven years old); therefore they went to the district town for a specialisexamination (21 km). They went there and back in a private car (the trip cost about 10 euro). The father went with his brother-in-law. The behaviouof the doctor and nurses was normal; they paid 2 euro for the examination, and they didn’t get a prescription. The wife watched the other, youngerchildren.


50



The last time my youngest son was ill (he is three years old), he had diarrhoea. The doctor prescribed tablets that cost 12 euro. It was good that we then had the support and we could pick up the tablets without problems. Our doctor and nurse are very pleasant; I’ve never yet had any misunderstandings with them.

My son was the last one ill, his stomach hurt. They said that he perhaps has appendicitis, so I had to go with him for an examination to Košice. Since we have a car, it wasn’t a problem to get there. I bought petrol for 6 euro. Thank God, it wasn’t appendicitis; he was only swollen. They prescribed himsome tablets, which I picked up. I paid 8 euro for them.

My son was vaccinated against jaundice. We have good experiences with healthcare workers. I went on foot – the doctor is here in town.

I was last to see a doctor with my youngest daughter (ten years old), who suffers from chronic kidney disease. We were at a check-up with our paediatrician. They took blood and urine samples; it was cost-free. The journey by bus cost 1.60 euro. Our doctor knows her really well; he has treatedher for years already – since she was small.

The mother and father were last to see the doctor with the young son for an examination with a hernia. The trip cost 2 euro, without the medicines,and they didn’t pay anything for the doctor. They were happy with the examination.

Our youngest, ten-month old son was the last who needed treatment. He was hospitalised for ten days because he repeatedly had an inner ear infection. The mother was together with him. First, however, they were at the emergency room, where they paid 2 euro. The trip there and back cost 1.50 euro. They didn’t receive any prescription medicine. The behaviour of the nurses and doctors was normal.

Our fif teen-year-old daughter was the last to have a problem. She was found to have a disease of the ovaries and a gynaecological examination was necessary. This was her f irst examination of this type; she was afraid, even though her mother was there with her. The doctor and the nurse both behaved very nicely to her; they told her that there was nothing to fear, that everything will be fine. The travel cost was 2.20 euro times two, and we

paid 10 euro for medicines.

The oldest son (twenty years old) went to see a dentist; he went alone and paid a total of 7 euro for the journey and 10 euro at the dentist.

Well, thank God, we haven’t had to go to the doctor for a long time now. My husband doesn‘t go at all: even when he is ill, he says that it will pass.We go more often with the children, but mostly in the spring. I go of ten by car with my brother-in-law – it’s cheaper than by bus. The nurse is very nice; I’ve known her for a long time now.

Anyway, we adults don’t go to the doctor, I can’t remember when we last went. Oh, when I gave birth to Gabika, but we don’t go for examinations.During the winter I go several times with the children to see the doctor, in the summer less. We go by bus, round-trip it‘s 1.70 euro. I can’t say anything bad about the doctor or even the nurse.

A daughter (nine years old) was hospitalised, because she fainted. An ambulance came for her and she was in hospital for three days. It was found that she fainted because she had not eaten anything in the morning; but she had a weak concussion from the fall. Af ter being released she supposedly didn’t get any medicine; we paid 10 euro at the hospital. She went home with her mother by bus, and the grandmother watched the othechildren (four other children from 5 to 16 years). The behaviour of the nurses and doctors was normal.

Problematic visits with a doctor – hindered spatial accessibility:

We haven’t been to see a doctor for two months now. The children have been healthy. We go by bus or on foot (8 km), when we don’t have money.My husband stays at home with the children. The doctors behave well to us, but sometimes they shout they I don’t come with the children for vaccinations on time.

They were last at the doctor for the vaccination of a child. The mother went on foot (4 km) to the neighbouring village to see the doctor. Since the child wanot ill, the vaccination ran just f ine and was free of charge. She also took older children with her to the doctor; she had no one to leave them with.

The youngest daughter had a fever; the mother went with her to see a doctor (this is 4 kilometres). She didn’t pay for the doctor, but she paid 6 euro for medicine.

They went on foot to see a doctor; this is perhaps 3-4 km. The son was ill with a temperature and vomiting. They paid 2 euro for medicine. The nurse was edgy because one lady quarrelled with her; the doctor was normal.

The youngest daughter (two years old) had a sore throat; I (the mother) went with her on foot (approximately 3 km). They paid only for medicine,

5 euro, she was happy with the examination.A daughter (twenty years old) broke her arm and went on foot to the doctor. This was perhaps three months ago. She doesn’t remember how much she paid for the examination. She was in a cast for about two and a half months; seeing the doctor was without problems.

The last time seeing a doctor was due to a skin rash, which the oldest daughter had (sixteen years old). She went on foot alone to the doctor (3 km) because the mother had nowhere to leave the other children (six children from age 2 months to 14 years). A tincture was prescribed that cost2.50 euro, and she picked it up. The behaviour of the doctor and the nurse was normal.

A mother went with her twelve-year-old daughter on foot to see a doctor; the bus is too expensive (from the edge of the regional capital to the centre). The girl had a fever and cough. They paid only for the medicine – approximately 7 euro. Sometimes the father also goes with the daughter to see the doctor. The behaviour of the personnel was agreeable.



The youngest son (one year old) had a high fever. We went to the doctor by bus (6 km). The trip cost us 3 euro, and we paid 6 euro at the pharmacy. The doctor and the nurse are very nice; we don’t have any problems with them. We got home by car, our friend took us but we still hto go 2 km on foot.

The twelve-year-old daughter appeared in the company of the mother for a summons to a local doctor for an examination. They went on foot(1.5 km), and didn’t have to pay the doctor anything. The visit went without problems; the other children (three children in the age of 11,9 and 5 years) remained at home with an older sibling (sixteen-year-old daughter).

The daughter coughed (six years old), and the mother went with her on foot (it’s about 1.5 km from the settlement to the village); they paid3.50 euro for medicines. The other daughter (1 year old) was home with the father. The behaviour of the nurse was normal, with no problems.

A preventive check-up with a paediatrician. The mother went with the child. The nurse and the doctor are nice; they didn’t pay for the journey (it’s 1.2 km from the settlement on foot).

A sister was with a small three-month-old baby at the emergency room – the baby had bronchitis. The sister went on foot to the hospital emergencyroom (more than 3 km within the town) and paid 2 euro for the examination. On that day she picked up the prescription at the pharmacy for 7 eurothis was two syrups. The nurse asked after the baby, how chubby she is, what does she like to eat, how many months old he was – she was nice.The doctor was not mentioned; the sister accompanied the mother of the child to the doctor.

The five-year-old son swelled up after being stung by an insect. The mother went with her son to the emergency room in town (5 km); their neighbour took them for 10 euro because it was the weekend and the bus stops near the settlement, only if someone is getting off. The fee forthe emergency room was 2 euro. After the examination on Sunday, they picked up the medicine on Monday: they paid 3.40 euro for an ointment. They went to the paediatrician on Monday and also to the pharmacy, again by car for 15 euro – to the district town (25 km). There w

a problem with the connection. She had to make it home on time, because she was nursing (she has five children at home from 9 months to 6 years old). Because she stated that the sting occurred on Friday, the paediatrician shouted at the mother for not bringing the child to her sooner to the hospital.

The thirteen-year-old daughter had a high temperature, and a stomach and headache. No one knew what was wrong with her, so they called a neighbour with a car to take them to the emergency room in town (5 km). The daughter was hospitalised, in the end it turned out that she has problems with menstruation.

Our eleven-year-old son was last ill. He had a temperature, and we had to go with him to the emergency one afternoon. We paid 2 euro for the emergency room visit, and more than 8 euro for the medicines for the temperature and antibiotics. We went to the emergency room by car with a neighbour; We gave him 8 euro. The doctor and the nurse behaved politely; the doctor explained to me how I was to give him the medicine and if the temperature didn’t drop how to give him a wrap. The nurse married the boy’s temperature and asked whether he was happy at school, if he has good friends.

A seriously disabled two-year-old son had to see a neurologist for a control examination at the polyclinic in a distant town (child’s cerebral palsy).The family, without a car, has a problem travelling (they live in a settlement 2.5 km from a village, 6 km from the district town); an ambulance is moexpensive than a taxi (approx. 50 euro, taxi 30 euro, without a receipt it may be 20 euro). A private car costs 10-15 euro. The examination was scheduled but right before the deadline of a loan from a private person the agreement was rejected. The family without financial resources asked neighbours with a car – the f ather worked it off at home (digging the foundations for a new fence). For the digging he had 50 euro, for the car theygave 10 euro; the family situation improved. They kept to the schedule, no criticism of the personnel at the polyclinic – super professional approach

A member of the family, the youngest son (twelve years old), went to a control examination with the father. He has a clef t-palate after plastic surgery and deformed ears. They set the alarm for 5:00 a.m.., at 6:00 a.m. the bus went and at 6:40 the train to Košice. Total costs for travelling wa30 euro there and back. He was supposed to receive and ear prosthetic, but he was not scheduled for the pre-operation examination.

They were at a control and vaccination for the one-year-old son. The examination went without problems; the mother went with the child by bus (10 km). The family father stayed with the other children (four children age 3 to 8 years).

Going to see the doctor is very weak; they only go there with the children – bronchitis, infectious disease, diarrhoea. The visit went normally; for medicines and travel costs they paid 20 euro (the doctor is in town 15 km away). The behaviour of the doctor is normal, likewise the nurses.

My partner went with the little girl (6 years) on a bicycle, because we didn’t have money for the travel tickets (5 km). She is well now. The doctor don’t give us the tablets immediately and after we have to go back.

They don’t go to see a doctor often; the children are afraid of injections (eight children age 5 to 12 years). She only communicates with the doctor because of the children; she doesn’t go for consultations, only at the time of birth. So it’s hard to communicate with the doctor. Despite this, they examine them and offer medical care (from the settlement to the village is more than 1 km).

Problematic trip to see a doctor – behaviour toward the patient:

My youngest daughter was often ill. In the hospital at the overnight department I several times experienced that the personnel has raised their voat me, telling me that I’m using the department as a depository. Our local paediatrician, however, stood up for me, because he knows that I don’t neglect to care for my children. Certainly it’s a lot better now, when a social worker accompanies us. Then they don’t allow so much against us Rom


52



Our youngest son (four years old) had strong diarrhoea and needed hospitalisation. We were very angry at the doctor and the nurse, because I couldn’t remain with him in the hospital, although our son cried a lot. We of fered them money, but in vain. They supposedly didn’t have room, and then we found out that a non-Roma was admitted with a small girl to the same department. This was discrimination.

Last time my second child was ill (eight-year-old son, she also has a twelve-year-old son and two-year-old daughter). He had jaundice and it was necessary to hospitalise him in the regional capital. We didn’t have money, so I asked my uncle for 20 euro for travel by car. I wanted to stay with himto take care of him, but they didn’t let me. I argued with the nurse who was very contrary and racist; she told me I was like the dirty slobs. In the

meantime, I left the other children with the neighbours.

A month ago I went to see the doctor with my son – he had a temperature and refused to eat. I have good relations with the doctor and we always chat about everything. We go there on foot, as it’s only about 600 metres from the housing block. He gave me a stomach powder and a syrup for the fever. My partner stayed at home with our daughter. Experiences: One time it’s okay, another time they ignore us; it depends which doctor has service that day.

A week ago my daughter had a fever. We came to the waiting room, people always look when a ‘Gyspy´ comes. We went there on foot, as it is not far away. The nurse is always irritable when I come with the children, but when the non-Roma cut in front of me, she smiles. The doctor is very good. He prescribed a syrup for my daughter to treat the fever (4 euro) and control in a week. My partner stayed home with the children.

On 14 September 2011 my boy (son – three years old) got a high fever, so in the night at 8:30 p.m. I went on foot with my son in the pram. I waited for nearly an hour for the doctor, because he was seeing a patient at home. The first contact with the doctor was pleasant, until I told him our name.After this information he said that he is not a paediatrician so I’d have to go to the emergency room in a larger town, which is 24 km away.

We last went to the emergency room, when our youngest son (eight years old) broke his arm. A neighbour took us to the district town (19 km); the trip cost 10 euro. We had to wait a long time, because just then a lot of ambulances delivered ill and drunk people. We were very angry.

The youngest son (one year old) had an ear infection. I went to see the doctor with him alone (a half km to the village); my husband watched the children (the other four children age 3 to 15 years). We went on foot, so we didn’t pay anything, but at the pharmacy I paid more than 6 euro.Illnesses always make life difficult, on the wallet, too. And the doctor and the nurse were both nice, but it bothered me that I had to wait a lot.

I was with my son – he had throat inflammation. We were in our village – on foot. The nurse called us into the outpatient clinic for a consultation; well white people knocked on the door and were taken ahead of us for the examination – it seemed unfair to me. They prescribed him medicines for 12 euro; I had the money, because I put a little on the side for medicines.

They were last with their son at the baby clinic, and the visit went normally. Later they were also with their youngest son, who had a high temperatur– perhaps from the vaccination. Another paediatrician was filling in, and her nurse was pretty unpleasant because she had a lot of patients.

The trip to see the doctor didn’t cost anything, because the settlement is near the hospital. The nurse always barks at people, but the doctor is good.They were there with the youngest child, who had a temperature and a cough (f ive years old). They paid 4 euro for medicines.

Preventive check-up for a child; the mother went with the child – this costs 3 euro. The nurse was a bit irritated, since the mother should have been athe check-up sooner.

A control examination of a child (three years, they have two other children age 1 year old), the mother went with him. It cost 4 euro; they didn’t pay anything at the surgery. The nurse and doctor remarked to them that it’s necessary to go regularly.

They went by bus to see the doctor (2 euro). A granddaughter was ill – she had a boil (she is a one year old). She also had a high temperature.The nurse shouted that the child had only been bitten by a mosquito. They paid 5 euro for medicines.

The daughter is pregnant, so she went to the pregnancy clinic. The nurse there is very unpleasant; she is thinking of changing gynaecologist as a result. She went by bus and the trip cost 2 euro.

My son was treated at a surgical clinic, because he’d fallen and had broken his little toe. In my opinion the doctor didn’t treat my son properly,because he didn’t bandage up his foot. The trip to see the doctor together with transport (journey, ointment and wrap) cost me about 10 euro.

A trip to the dentist with the son. It went calmly until the dentist began to drill a cavity. It hurt the son a lot and the mother had to hold him.She paid about 10 euro for the filling; the husband stayed with the other children.

Here in the village I went to see the doctor with my son, because he had a rash on his legs and belly. The doctor gave me a liquid ointment that cost about 1.50 euro. She asked whether we have fleas at home and I was offended.

We last saw a doctor at the end of June with our ten-year-old daughter (they have one younger child, five years old and 3 older age 15 to 22 years),who had a temperature. My wife and I and our daughter went in our own car to the emergency room at the regional capital, because it was a SaturdayThe older siblings were with the children. Petrol cost 4 euro (15 km to town), and we paid 2 euro at the doctor and perhaps 4 euro for the medicine,which the doctor prescribed for my daughter. The examination went normally, but we weren’t happy that the nurse asked us in front of the other patients whether we have the two euro fee for the doctor, because he will not examine us, and at the same time she didn’t ask the other patients.We borrowed 20 euro for this treatment.

My younger daughter was last ill (15 years old); she had a sore throat. The doctor works in the village, we paid 10 euro for medicines. The doctor and nurse are nice, but in the waiting room its always stuffy and a smell.



Problematic trip to see a doctor – lack of money:

We went to see the doctor this month with our youngest son, who had a temperature. We both went, my husband and I, and the children stayed at home with our oldest daughter, thirteen years old (four children age 5 to 13 years). We went on foot; we didn‘t have money for the bus (2 km).We picked up the medicines thanks to my mother-in-law, who loaned us the money. We paid more than 4 euro for the medicine. The doctor and nurbehaved well; they only commented that we never have money for medicines.

Perhaps three months ago our ten-year-old son (they also have a thirteen-year-old son) fell in the yard and cut his forehead. He bled a lot, and therefore it was necessary to take him to the emergency room in the district town (17 km). We didn’t have money for the journey and the 2 euro feefor the doctor, therefore, the husband went to the local usurer. The usurer offered that he will take us to the doctor; the husband went with him anthe wife stayed at home. The boy was examined at the emergency room without problems, and going to see the doctor cost 30 euro, which is how much the usurer collected on the day of benefits.

My daughter was the last one in the family to take ill – she had the flu. We went to see the doctor on foot (2 km), Because we didn’t have the moneyfor travel right then. I went with my daughter; I’m her mother. The medicines cost 10 euro and we had to borrow from the f ield social worker. In themeantime, the children were with my husband (two children age 12 and 4 years old).

The fourth child (daughter, five years old) had a splay-mouth. I got to town from the settlement on foot (this is 2.5 km). Our doctor was just then oholiday and another doctor treated us. She said that I must take my daughter to the hospital in Košice. I requested an ambulance because I didn’t have any money, so she answered that this is not how it works, that it’s not a case that requires an ambulance; she said I have to get there by bus.I argued with the doctor and I went to scrape the money together. A neighbour loaned me 10 euro, and so I took my daughter to the hospital.My mother looked after the other children (she has six children in all from 1 to 10 years old).

Jóžika (two-year-old son) has a respiratory illness; we’ve already been to town to see a doctor two times this month (5 km). Through the autumn anwinter we went to see a doctor every month. When we don’t have money to travel, we borrow 4.20 euro from a neighbour (a white woman, but we liher a lot, she always helps us) for the round trip. I always take my son to see the doctor; the nurse and the doctor have praised us many times (medicines were about 11.30 euro).

The nine-year-old son often catches cold and has a high fever. The family often doesn’t have the financial resources for a trip to town to the emergency room. By car to town costs 10 euro, the emergency room 2 euro, plus medicines. If they go to see a paediatrician, they don’t always havmoney for medicines.

I had to borrow money to pay for the trip and medicines; I went to town (19 km). Our little girl had a throat infection. I picked up the medicine and went home.

The last trip to see a doctor was back in July. The mother with the boy went 20 min by bus to see the doctor within the town. The mother had to borrow money for the bus and for medicines. The boy had a sore throat. The doctor has known the family for years now and the visit went in a friendatmosphere. The other children were at home with the oldest sibling (together 5 children from 8 to 21 years). The trip cost 1.40 euro and medicines4.70 euro.

It was necessary to go see doctor with a girl because she had a temperature. The parents went with the girl 1.5 km on foot. The doctor, after the detailed examination, assured the parents that it isn’t serious. It was necessary to pay 5.78 euro for the medicines; the parents had to borrow the money. A neighbour woman watched the children at home.

When I go to see a doctor, I go on foot or by bus, and my husband watches the children. The last time seeing a doctor was my seriously ill husband,who had an operation on his knee. The children have common illnesses – sore throat, cough, bronchial trouble (in the household there are eleven children age 2 to 15 years). When we don’t have money, my family loans it to me. I was last at the doctor with my youngest daughter; she had a temperature and inflammation of the air passages. I paid 5.80 euro for medicines; I had 10 euro put away, so I didn’t have to borrow. We have a paediatrician in our village who is very good. The children like him and he always gives them a sweet or a colouring book during the examinations

I last saw a doctor with my youngest son in June. The doctor isn’t very nice. When we have to go to the district town for a specialist examination at the polyclinic, the travel costs for the month is around 12 euro, medicines 20 euro, which is a lot for us.

The last time seeing a doctor was in mid-September – at a paediatrician. It involved repeated inflammation of the air passages and an increased allergy to pollen. The examination went communicatively and without problems; the mother goes to the controls and examinations with the childre

Travel costs were 3 euro there and back, expenditures for medicines were 20 euro – and they are ill two times a month! The younger child remained home with the father.

The last time my son (16 years old) was beaten in the settlement and needed medical help. He’d taken a hard hit to his head and nose. The local clisent him to the regional capital. I had just come back from a work brigade where I’d received 10 euro. I gave the 10 euro to a neighbour to gas up hcar so that he could take us to town. I wanted to use that money for food.

Control examination with a neurologist – a mother with a one-year-old son who was born prematurely with a weight of 1.5 kg by Caesarean sectionThe trip to a more distant town by car for the examination cost 30 euro, the fee for the neurological examination was 4 euro (for the ultrasound).The father was at home with the children (the other four children from 4 to 12 years), and couldn’t go on a work brigade, and so lost earnings of 10 euro for the whole day (plus food and cigarettes).


54





The last time she went to see the doctor was for a regular check-up, which my mother-in-law living with the family needed; she has problems with hheart and blood pressure. She went to the doctor and back by bus and the ticket cost 4 euro. She was prescribed medicines costing 15 euro, which spicked up. The visit went normally; the behaviour of the nurse and doctor was normal.

In September I went to see the doctor, I have stomach and psychological problems. I went there on foot; I paid 14 euro for medicines. The children were in school; we have a very good nurse.

The wife last went to see a doctor perhaps a month ago. She has been treated for health problems for a long time – elevated salt in her blood. The visit with the doctor went without major problems. A neighbour went to the neighbouring village in his car (3 km) with the wife, fuel costs – 3 euroWe paid 5.60 euro for the medicine. The husband also went to see the doctor (they have only one twenty-four-year-old child). The behaviour of the nurse and doctor was good, because they know us.

The last time seeing a doctor was in early September, because my wife had a fever. We travelled perhaps to the local doctor for an x-ray about 1 km from where we live. Nothing bad was found in the x-ray, so the local doctor prescribed medicine for treating a sore throat. We didn’t register any unwillingness on the part of the doctor. We paid 8 euro for medicines.

The wife had bronchitis, and went to see the doctor in the neighbouring village by bus (1.10 euro). She didn’t pay anything at the doctor, but she p15 euro in the pharmacy.

The husband has diabetes, and went for a check-up. He went by train and by mass transit, a total of 2 euro. The behaviour of the nurse and doctor was fin

The mother of the head of the family was ill; she didn’t pay for the journey, because the doctor is in the village. She had intestinal problems;she didn’t get any medicines, and was ordered on a strict diet. The doctor and nurse were f ine.

The husband went to the local doctor in the neighbouring village three months ago; he was at a post-operative control of the back. Behaviour was normal; the bus cost him 3.40 euro.

The mother was the last to be ill; she had great pain of the neck vertebrae. The local doctor is in the village, so there were no travel costs. She was prescribed medicines, for which she paid 4.50 euro. If the medicine didn’t help, she was told to come for a control and would be sent to a specialistexamination in the district town. The medicines helped her, so she didn’t go to the control. The behaviour of the doctor and nurse was normal.

Perhaps two weeks ago the father – the head of the family – went to see the doctor. He has long-term health problems with his lower back, on that day he had a strong pain, and so he went to see the doctor with a neighbour by car and with his wife. The children remained home alone (15 and 13 years old). The medical examination was without problems; the behaviour of the doctor and nurse was standard. He paid 12.50 euro for medicines.

The husband had pain in his legs, and went to town by bus for 5 euro. He didn’t pay anything to see the doctor and an ointment for his legs cost2.50 euro.

In January the father of the family had a painful lower back; he travelled by bus to see a doctor in town; one way cost 2.50 euro (14 km). He paid10 euro for medicines and everything was all right. The children were at home with their mother (they now big: 13, 15 and 18 years old).

The head of the family (a widow age 52 years) needed a medical examination, she had back pain. She went by bus, and the ticket cost 0.55 euro.The visit with the doctor went normally; the behaviour of the nurses and doctor was normal. Medicines were prescribed to her costing 6 euro, whichshe picked up.

On 29 July 2011 I had inflammation of the legs. I went by bus, and I paid 0.40 euro. I didn’t pay for any medicines because I didn’t have to pick any– I went to see the doctor every other day and she treated me. I got home by city mass transit and I paid 0.40 euro.

At the end of September mother had pain in her legs and joints; I (the daughter) went with my mother. We went on foot (half a km), and I picked upthe medicines. She paid 15 euro for them. The children were in school; the behaviour of the nurses is reasonable.

A month ago I was at a surgery; I had a problem with a pulled muscle in my arm. I paid 2 euro for the examination and 3.85 euro for a prescription and an ointment.

The wife went to see the doctor for a gall-bladder examination. She went by ambulance and the price for transport was 2 euro, and for the examination also 2 euro. She picked up medicines from the pharmacy for 4 euro. She was happy with the behaviour of the doctor and the nurses.

I last needed treatment. I went to see the doctor by bus. I went with my husband, since we no longer have young children and they have their own families; this wasn’t a problem. The doctor and nurses were both nice. The journey cost us 3 euro, and I paid 10 euro for medicine. I took the bus home.

The local doctor – a cold, a throat infection. The visit went well as did communication with the other medical personnel.

The last time seeing a doctor was 15 August 2011; I was ill – a throat infection. I went by bus (15 km) and the children meanwhile were home alonethree children ages 12 to 16 years). I have older kids so they don’t need to be looked after. They can take care of themselves. I paid more than 10 euand 2 euro for the bus. The doctor and the nurse both behaved well to me, no problems.

The last trip to see a doctor was in July, when the father had a problem – difficulty breathing and a cough. He travelled to see the doctor by himself(2 euro), and medicines and a cough syrup were prescribed (5 euro). The mother stayed at home with the children, and the visit to the doctor went fine.


56



The wife went to see the local doctor. She went by bus at 7:30 in the morning; the ticket cost 1.45 euro to Poltár. The doctor found symptoms of flu,and wrote her a prescription for medicines that cost 3.50 euro. The children were at home and a daughter cooked lunch.

The woman was at the gynaecological examination (abortion); and her partner and a neighbour went with her to see the doctor. They travelled by passenger car; petrol cost 10 euro. Payment for the abortion was 250 euro. The sister-in-law took care of the children (two children ages 8 and 10 years). The medical care was excellent.

The wife was at a gynaecological examination in the district town (25 km). She went alone by bus. She had pain in her stomach; she paid 5 euro for medicines. The behaviour of the medical personnel was normal.

A visit to the gynaecologist – a consultation (pregnant in the seventh month). I went by bus to see the doctor; the nurses helpfully accommodatinglyand nicely, and I was satisfied. The children were with their older siblings (four children age 2 to 15 years).

I went to see the gynaecologist, because I had a test, which was positive. I had problems with bleeding so it was recommended I go to the hospital.There I found out that I’d miscarried. Nothing happened to me; the nurses were nice to me.

I was last to see a doctor by myself, because I am pregnant. My father took me to the doctor, and the doctor examined me and wrote the results into the pregnancy book. She behaved politely to me and gave me other advice, particularly about nutrition. I didn’t pay for the medical examination, anlikewise for the travel, because my father didn’t want me to. During the trip to see the doctor my mother took care of the children (three children agefrom 2 to 7 years).

I last went to a doctor to give birth to a daughter (they have their first child; the mother is 16 years old and the father 19). This cost 6 euro,the behaviour of the nurses was very good.

On 5 August the husband went for a rehabilitation stay (14 days). Before that he had an operation on his back. He stayed in Bardejov, where he got by bus, one way cost 0.85 euro. During his stay, the wife came several times to visit. You can’t say that the personnel there behaved unfriendly towarhim; the opposite, they behaved nicely to him and accommodating. He didn’t pay for medicines.

The grandmother (sixty-four years old) fainted three times in a four-hour period. Emergency medical help was called and no change in her health status was found. During the writing of the medical report, she fainted again, and they determined unsteady blood pressure and suspicions of diabetes. She was then hospitalised in the district town 15 km distant as reliant on insulin. If the EMS had not found any health problem,the daughter would have borne the consequence of abusing the EMS with a financial penalty.

A preventive check-up, I didn’t pay anything. They measured my blood pressure, took a blood sample, and sent me to the lung doctor. The behaviour of the doctor and nurse was excellent; I’ve never had any problem with them.

A preventive check-up free of charge; the father stayed home with the children. The visit with the doctor went without any problems.

A preventive check-up at the dentist, behaviour was the same as with any person. He got there in his own car.

A visit to the dentist – repair of a dental prosthesis. He went on foot to the dentist in the village, he paid 20 euro for the repair. The nurse was nice.

I went to see the dentist – he pulled out a tooth, because I was in pain. The anaesthetic and the extraction cost me 7 euro, plus I had to buy some tablets for the pain. I’m happy with the dentist, except that it’s expensive. We travelled by car; petrol cost perhaps 3 euro.

He had a toothache, so he went to the emergency room, because he didn´t want to go before, he was afraid. When he couldn’t withstand anymore,he was forced to go to the dentist. He paid a fee (2 euro), the behaviour of the nurses was normal.

Problematic visit to a doctor – made difficult by spatial inaccessibility:

About two weeks ago, a trip to see the doctor in the neighbouring village (approx. 1.5 km). He prescribed medicine for the mother; they didn’t pay fothe journey, because they went on foot. They paid 1.60 euro for the verification for school. The prescribed medicines cost 10 euro. The behaviour of the nurses and doctor was satisfactory.

Mama: a month ago I needed to go see a doctor with inflammation of the back, pain up to my eyes. I went to see the doctor alone, on foot to the opposite side of town (an estimated 3 km). She wrote me a prescription for 5 euro (Veral, Dorsiflex). I didn’t pay anything at the doctor – when they examine, you don’t pay, thank God; only when you go to the emergency room you pay 2 euro. The children were home with my oldest son. The doctorwere good; I waited about an hour for the examination. I can’t push to the front like an ́ Olah´. When a person is ill, it has to happen that the Olahs

jump the queue ahead of us, they also scolded the doctor.

We walk 7 km to see the doctor in the neighbouring village. We give the medicines prescribed to mama, who must go regularly for cardiological medicines. I don’t go for the controls, when they don’t call me; so far the medicines are helping me. For the control it would be necessary to go 39 km.

Problematic visit – behaviour toward the patient:

My husband had an asthma attack; we went to the emergency room; we paid 2.50 euro. The partner had to remain in the hospital, and for the trip home I didn’t have money. So I stayed in town with my sister. The doctors behaved badly, as soon as they noticed that we are Gypsies.

The wife had high blood pressure; the daughter was with her. The doctor f irst asked how much she had had to drink, measured her blood pressure andgave her an injection. This was all; we were in our own village (more than half a km to the doctor).



The partner went to see the doctor – he had an appointment at an exact time and they didn’t take him at all; he waited a long time. The trip cost 3 euro and medicines 9 euro.

I only had one problem at the doctor: that preference was given to whites before Roma in the waiting room. The Roma in waited in the waiting roomand they called in the white people.

We were at the emergency room in Trebišov (20 km), the wife dislocated a leg. The nurse was unpleasant, didn’t take people in order but in the orde

she wanted. We waited more than three hours. The doctor was good. The wife had haemorrhage; she received a splint (2 euro).A check-up at the eye doctor; the price for the bus was 2 euro. The nurse was pretty unpleasant, but she is unpleasant to everyone.

While picking cherries I fell from high in the tree and broke my arm. A good friend took me to the emergency room for surgery to the district town (31 km). For the ride I paid only 10 euro but only after social benefits came. The nurse wasn´t insolent, but the general practitioner was unpleasanMy mother-in-law watched the children (f ive children from 1 year to 18 years).

The wife was for a regular control at the endocrinologist in the district town (15 km). She went in her own car, drove it herself (perhaps 10 euro).The doctor was good; the nurse was unpleasant. She didn’t pay for medicines, in fact she paid 0.17 euro for the prescription.

The last time seeing a doctor was at the dentist. I had to borrow 5 euro for the dental exam and 1.50 euro for travel by bus (5 km distant to town).Because of the long lasting toothache I decided to have it f ixed. I was really afraid of the dentist; he didn’t know how to prepare a patient psychologically, as if he just wanted to get it done as soon as possible.

Problematic visit – lack of finances:

The last time the wife was at the gynaecologist. She went on foot to the surgery, but she wasn’t able to pick up the medicines, because they cost

16 euro. She didn’t know anyone she could borrow from, so in the end she wound up in the hospital with strong cramps. She was treated for five dain the hospital, where the medical personnel treated her like a Gypsy.

The mother (grandmother) went to see the doctor; she was dizzy. She didn’t have the money to buy the blood pressure tablets, because she didn’t want to borrow. She didn’t take her medicines for a week; she had a tingling in her face and the rescuer injected her with magnesium. She picked uher medicines the next day.

Mama goes regularly to see the doctor, she is being treated by an eye doctor – she has high pressure in her eyes. She always goes to see the doctor the eighth of every month. It goes well, because the doctor has known mama for years now. The problem is f inancial: when mama gets a prescriptioshe doesn’t always pick it up.

I have mental health problems; travel costs and medicines cost 20 euro for the whole month. I don’t always have my medicines – the f inancial situation doesn’t allow for it; another member of the family is on a disability pension. We are happy with the doctor.

Last time seeing the doctor: an internist, orthopaedic, neurology. Communication with the doctor and other personnel was good. Paid 30 euro for medicines, travelled by bus. He borrowed from relatives for the trip.

The head of the family had pain in his teeth, he paid 10 euro for the examination – he had to borrow from relatives. They behaved humanely towardhim, but he had to wait a lot (the bus cost two-times 1.20 euro).

The last time seeing a doctor was a neurologist in Košice; my wife suffers from insomnia. She travelled 28 km; she paid 5 euro for the bus. Since I wowe left our son with the neighbour, because the other children were in school. She was there until nearly evening. We had to pay more than 12 euro fthe medicines, which we picked up after just a few days, because we didn’t have so much money just then. The medical service was average.

The father of the f amily dislocated his shoulder, and he had to go to the doctor alone due to f inancial problems. He travelled from the examining doctor to the surgery, then to the regional capital to be hospitalised, which lasted 10 days, in order to avoid being operated on. The total costs wer70 euro; they didn’t complain about the doctors.

Visit to a diabetes doctor and internist; the visit went fine, though the fees for medicines are high – 20 euro. I go on foot to see the doctor(more than 1 km). It takes half an hour, and I don’t use mass transit.

The husband is a diabetic, but in a small way; but it is a problem, which the family fears due to increasing financial costs, because they anticipate the will have to use injection treatments, and this will cost even more. The diabetes is increasing. The behaviour of the doctors toward us is friendly

and professional. The husband travels 17 km by bus to see the doctor, and this costs 2.20 euro for a ticket.

I was last at the doctor with my own problem: I have an untreatable vein; it has broken twice now. I was at a check-up in Košice. When I had some inflammation in my body, the doctor gave me antibiotics and recommended that I take probiotics, but I didn’t have the money for these. I bought tantibiotics for 10 euro. They helped me a lot.

I don’t have health problems, but I haven’t had bad experiences with doctors. Not even when the children were little I didn’t have problems; I alwaytried to listen to the doctor’s advice. I was used to buying medicine for pain directly in the pharmacy, but this is still a larger item from my income.

The last time seeing a doctor was for cardiovascular disease, diabetes and hypertension. They travelled 4 km by bus to see the doctor. The examination in the clinic was calm; they are satisfied. They pick up the medicines, because they cannot function without them; afterward, they donhave money for food. They don’t have any young children; only adults.


58



Last month a relative of the head of the household (two older people live together in one household) broke her leg. She was taken to the hospital by the emergency medical service (EMS), where she stayed for two days. The next day he went by rented car after her to take some necessary items and personal items. He had to borrow 30 euro for providing this, plus 10 euro for being taken to the hospital (4 km). She didn’t want to stay in the hospital because she had borrowed money and in three days was to get her benefit. She was admitted on Friday and on Monday money came, so thaton Sunday, during visiting time, she was released for home treatment. She had been on work leave since June, so until she had control, she’ll have toextend it. In total she became indebted – for both – by a sum 80 euro.

I was the last one who was ill; this isn’t an illness but I was pregnant and they wanted me to have an abortion (they have four children ages 8 to 13 years).I was in the second month. I needed to 250 euro but we didn’t have the money. Since I was unable to get the money together I had to keep the childNow I am in the f ifth month and after eight years I will again give birth, although I no longer want to have another child in such poverty.

Problem-free visit to see a doctor:

The last time seeing a doctor was at the local general practitioner – repeated visits of the husband and wife regarding cardiovascular diseases.Communication with the doctor is direct, open, without problems. The trip and expenditures for medicines were around 50 euro.

Two weeks ago we took the children to see the dentist. All four had a preventive check-up. We learned that the children, with regular cleaning, have good teeth; in us cavities were found and so our dentist scheduled treatment. We didn’t have any problems with the doctor; he was pleasant.

The mother and her daughter needed treatment. The mother suffered with a cough and the daughter with a toothache. They went by bus and the tripcost 4 euro. The mother didn’t pay anything at the doctor; they found that she had bronchitis and prescribed medicine that cost 3.50 euro, which she

picked up and used. The daughter paid 3 euro for the examination at the dentist, and they went home by bus. The visit went normally; the grandmother, who is retired, watched the children.

No problems.

We have so far not run across in problems in going to see the doctor in our family.

Problematic visit to see a doctor:

Both parents after a physical attack needed a CT examination; the mother with the head after a concussion felt nauseated, she had to go with the neighbour in the car and with the family go to the emergency room to the nearest hospital (20 km). They paid 2 euro at the emergency room, 15 eurofor the trip by car there and back. Because it was eight o’clock in the evening, she had a problem with waiting, because her f ive-year-old son wanted to go to sleep and didn’t want to stay home with the father (they had three older children).

We have invalids in the family and for this reason we go to see a doctor a lot. The travel costs vary, because we go to the nearest town or the district town and even to Bratislava. We older ones don‘t know the Slovak language so well, but we don’t speak much with the doctor, mainly in Bratislava.The travel costs per month are about 40 euro.

The family does not go to see a doctor

No visits.

We don’t recall it’s been so long since we went to see a doctor (they have two adult sons in the household – 29 and 26 years).

We don’t go to see a doctor very much; not that we weren’t ill but we were unable to pick up medicines, then for what?! When one of us goes to see a doctor, it’s me; I’m always coughing. My father had something with his lungs... But so what, such is life.

None of us has been to see a doctor during the past year; I don’t remember when we last saw a doctor (they have three children from 7 to 11 years old). The doctor is polite to use; we don’t pay for the journey, because we go there on foot (it is in the village).

COMMON TRIPS TO SEE A DOCTOR AND UNDIFFERENTIATED GENERAL RESPONSES



Motto:

“I saw in the Roma settlements in the Spiš region for

the first time people who live in conditions worse thanagricultural animals.” (Milan Daniel, reporting froma Roma settlement in Slovakia, 2011).

Housing belongs among the most basic needs andconditions for life; housing conditions are generallyconsidered to be a key indicator of the level of livingof the residents of a country. A lack of housing or aproblem in its quality fully has the most principleimpacts on the life of individuals and families. Thelocation of a habitation and the quality of the

dwellings determine in a major way the possibilities of development of the individual and his or her broaderintegration into different areas of the public sphere.Two fundamental positions or dimensions are ingeneral monitored with the question of housing. Thisis partly the spatial placement of the site of habitation– marginalisation and segregation of the place of habitation; on the other hand there are thecharacteristics of the dwelling itself – the type andtechnical furnishings of a house or flat, its size and

inhabitation and the like. Since this research probe isdevoted especially to excluded settlements, theresearch focus was therefore concentrated on thedwellings themselves and their quality. Its goal was tocapture and zoom in on the housing conditions inexcluded settlements as they are captured in standardsurveys (e.g. EU SILC or other surveys of the livingcondition of households) and to broaden this view bythe different sides of the last modification to adwelling, which may in more detail correspond to thequality of housing and to a certain development

trend.

Despite the preferential focusing on the status andquality of a dwelling, we mention briefly in the

introductory section on housing the basicassociations and knowledge which are in this contexunspoken assumptions – which means spatial segregation or separation of the place of habitationfor the life of its residents. The spatial exclusion of ainhabited settlement itself already represents a hugeproblem and has principle impacts on the quality of life and success in connecting to society. A segregatplace of habitation brings its residents manylimitations and barriers in the securing of the basicrunning of life, not to speak about the form of standard activities of provision and of self-development. The results of surveys speak about the“stickiness” of such a housing environment; they ranit among the conditions of life which are very diff icuto overcome with one’s own forces; from theindividual viewpoint they state that for a largeportion of households even the strength of several generations is not enough to overcome these barrier(The Image..., 2012).

The main problems of spatial segregation orseparation on the basis of ethnicity according toresearch can be included into several points. Primarisegregation of the place of habitation itself bringsa huge problem, and that is distance. The residents osuch settlements are distanced from schools andeducation,20 jobs, possibilities of participating inother areas of public life and public services,including healthcare services, as described in thepreceding chapter. With ethnic segregation of theplace of habitation it is also emphasised that such

segregation represents a risk for the favourable


60

3. HOUSING AND POSSIBILITIES OF MODIFYING A DWELLING

20 For example, the qualitative research of the non-profit organisation Quo vadis The Image of Roma Women recorded several responses of Roma women fromsegregated environments in central Slovakia, for whom the distance from the place of habitation to a secondary school is a barrier to further studying, or is a barrito their children studying (The Image..., 2012, Chapter 3.1.1): “...I was at school with school-leaving examination perhaps a year... Then they cancelled the entire

school, so we had to go to XY (a more distant town from the place of habitation); financially I didn’t have money for the travel costs, because at that time my mother diand I drew only the orphan benefit, so I couldn‘t commute... I left it...” ; “...pretty often it was decided how far away it is, parents were afraid when it was so far... So,

something near home was looked for, which is the closest... now it’s really bad, these school are becoming extinct here, and therefore a lot of (Roma) children remain ahome... a lot of children don’t go to any school...” .



development of children and other residents that positive models in the surroundings are lost withsegregation, and at the same time that segregationcontributes to the spreading of negative ones. Froma time point of view segregation recently has had

a tendency to advance very quickly – changes inregions are visible even in the course of a single life;many different strategies and processes contribute tosegregation.21 The consequences of segregation orseparation of the place of habitation on the basis of ethnicity are very diverse and represent a widespectrum of problem situations, to get out of such anenvironment remains only on the level of desires.22

The mentioned (and other) “general” problems andimpacts of excluded sites of habitation are for the

object of the research of this research probe acommon context, since it attempts to find deeperknowledge of the living situation for those citizens of different types of excluded settlements in Slovakia. Asis stated above, aside from the fact of exclusion of theplace of habitation itself, the conditions of housingassociated with the house or flat can also represent a serious barrier to the quality of integration intosociety. Many empirical surveys have attested that with spatial exclusion the quality of a dwelling also

worsens – segregated settlements have significantlymore poor quality dwellings with worse or notechnical infrastructure and household furnishings at all (UNDP, 2006, 2012; Mušinka ed., 2012; Scheffel,2009). The poor conditions in dwellings causedemotivation and deactivation in relation to broadersocial integration: they are more demanding for workand time when securing the basic running of

a household and one of the consequences is a loss of motivation for self-development, education and thelike. Also, over-crowding reduces the quality of livingof its residents, leading not only to a loss of privacy,but also negatively limiting the conditions for the

performing activities that strengthen the foundationsof successful economic and social connection tosociety (for example, for education, working, using ofservices and the like).

Housing conditions connected with specific dwellingscan be assessed from very dif ferent angles of view,from surveying the financial accessibility of a flat,through the quality of a dwelling in terms of external and internal characteristics, or the over-crowding of aflat up through unpaid arrears for housing or energy

and the like. On the basis of analysis of existingknowledge those indicators were selected to enterinto a logbook which are crucial with excludedcommunities. In the scope of the research probe thetype of house or flat and its official status wassurveyed along with a subjective evaluation of housing, the size of the dwelling and number of persons living in it, also the technical infrastructureof dwellings, such as, for example, access to waterand energy of different types, connection to

sewerage, methods of heating and cooking,accessibility of a functional bath and toilet, as well asthe availability of an independent bed for eachhousehold member. What image emerged by types of indicators of quality of housing in excluded Romasettlements on the basis of analysis of 192 typical households representing 131 excluded settlements ispresented in the following chapter.

21 In recent years in relation to the segregated or separated Roma population stated in particular are: the desire of members of multi-member Roma households fortheir own living and f inancial accessibility of housing right in the segregated parts of the towns and villages; housing policies on the local level which build social flats focus on land outside of a village’s residential area; the purchasing of f lats from indebted Roma families and their subsequent moving to the edges of towns; thecancelling of housing estates or residential blocks and the moving of non-payers “to the edge”, the absolute absence of possibilities of independent living inexcluded settlements after starting a f amily, which forces families of generations of children to build abodes illegally in order to obtain a certain amount of privacyfor their family and to get away from over-crowded parental dwellings ( Image..., 2012; Mušinka, 2012; Mušinka ed., 2012; Mušinka – Benč (eds.), 2011; UNDP, 2012;Scheffel, 2009).

22 Again, the responses of Roma women from Banská Bystrica Region from the cited research can serve as an example, when among general ideas about the future of their own children the wish was often repeated from the side of women living in segregated settlements, that they ge t “away from the present environment”: “...to

get to a better environment than I was in...” ; “And what I would dream about for both (children)... I would wish...until they are adults that they’ll find themselves in some other environment... My biggest dream would be the two of them get out of here...” ; “...I have a little boy and what I would like is that he has things a bit better than I do, where I live... that he not be there, that I go with him somewhere else to live...” (The Image..., 2012, Chapter 3.5.2).



3.1. Type of dwelling, its statusand evaluation of living conditions23

Empirical data from excluded Roma communities

points repeatedly to the low quality of housing of households living in such environments. For examplethe Report on the Living Conditions of RomaHouseholds states an increased occurrence of non-quality types of dwellings without the most basicfurnishings which lags far behind common standardsof housing, especially in segregated settlements. TheReport for 2010 speaks of overall 16% of non-standarddwellings24 for all Roma households, and insegregated environment this share increased to over

30% (UNDP, 2012). As Table 3.3 shows, this researchprobe copies the results quantitatively to a significant measure. But what’s more, the research methods used(the layering of data about the home municipality andselected households) and expansion by stories of thelast modification to a dwelling at the same time givein comparisons with classic survey questionnaires thepossibility of looking over the individual aspects of housing in more detail and in connection to the local infrastructure.

The final sample of 192 Roma households from 131excluded settlements had according to type of dwelling a diverse composition. The most numerous

were brick houses (a total of 56%), households livinin a flat in a housing block (block of flats) with 28%,and for non-standard dwellings together totalled16%: wooden house 3%, shack 10%, portable hut,

dwelling not intended for housing and other types ofdwellings just 1% each). But the dif ferences in the“housing fund” were significant for the individual types of housing, from segregated settlementsthrough those concentrated within a village or townNon-standard dwellings had for the group of households living in segregated settlements up to35%; on the other hand, for Roma concentratedwithin a town or village only 2%. Thus, the muchhigher concentration of non-standards dwellings in

segregated environments was confirmed.The type of dwelling according to external attributei.e. discerning a brick house, a flat in a block of flatsand non-standard dwellings, however, does not inand of itself correspond to the overall quality of theflat or lived in house. As subjective evaluation of the“conditions for life” in one’s own dwelling showed,also in the case of brick houses and housingblocks, the living conditions not infrequently werestated as “poor” or “very poor”. One-fifth of the

group of households living in a brick house receivednegative evaluations and for the group of householdin a housing block, this was in the end more than


62

23 We recall a note from the introductory part: from the character of the survey it follows that the presented numerical values serve exclusively for comparative purpo– for comparing differences between differently defined groups of Roma excluded households; they decidedly do not correspond to the quantitative range of thegiven value attribute in excluded Roma communities.

24 The following are considered to be non-standard dwellings: a wooden house, a shack, a portable hut, a container, or some other dwelling not intended for housing(old manor house, garden shack, etc.).

Type of dwelling Segregated settlementsSeparated on the edgeof a municipality

Concentrated withina municipality

Total

Brick house (total) 48 49 72 56

Housing block (total) 17 38 26 28Non-standard types of dwellings* 35 13 2 16

Total 100 100 100 100

Note *The following belong to the category “non-standard dwellings”: a wooden house, a shack, a portable hut, or another dwellingnot intended for housing.

Table 3Roma households from excluded settlements by type of housing and type of dwelling (in %)



one-quarter. But obviously, it applied that with non-standard dwellings the living conditions wereclassified as “poor” or “very poor” disproportionallymore – as much as 97%; positive evaluations with

non-standard dwellings did not occur at all, while forbrick houses (family houses and housing blocks) thisachieved one-third (Table 4). While brick familyhouses and housing blocks are of differing quality inexcluded settlements, from excellent up through verypoor conditions for life, non-standard dwellings arenearly exclusively connected with disadvantageousconditions.

In relation to the off icial status of a dwelling, three-quarters (76%) of the final sample of surveyed

households had a dwelling officially registered andthe remaining quarter stated that it was an illegal building or some other possibility (24%). Illegal buildings were again more often linked withsegregated settlements (40%); for settlementsseparated on the edge of a municipality this wasapproximately half as much and for settlementsconcentrated within a municipality up to four-fold less(Table 5). According to the type of dwelling, non-standard dwellings in particular were labelled as

illegal: more than 70% of them were illegal buildings,while approximately 18% of brick houses were illegal and obviously no housing blocks. It was also shownthat these illegal buildings were labelled as housingwith poor or very poor conditions for life significantlymore often. Illegal buildings made up nearly half of the buildings given a negative evaluation of livingconditions, and not quite one-fifth of those evaluated

as average; on the other hand, no illegal buildings at all were found among those evaluated as positively foliving conditions.

The official status of a dwelling, therefore, isassociated with the type of excluded settlement, aswell as with the type of the dwelling itself and theoverall evaluation of housing differs significantly.The deeper the spatial exclusion of the place of habitation, the larger the occurrence of unofficial buildings; illegal buildings are built significantlymore frequently from non-standard materials – withbrick houses they occur less frequently in excludedsettlements; critical evaluations of living conditionsare linked with black buildings from the residents of

the dwellings themselves. Unofficial buildingsoriginate more easily in segregated settlements; theyare not houses of a standard type and the residentsthemselves don’t see the living conditions in suchdwellings in a positive light. The linking of theseaspects indicates that the building of a non-standarddwelling in segregated environments is for itsresidents a starting point for poverty; this is the onlyway they are able in the given economic and social situation to provide for their own family a “roof over

the head”, or to fulfil one of the most basicconditions for life.25

Different proportions were expressed among thecompared groups of surveyed households uponmonitoring the ownership relations regarding thelived-in house or flat. A dwelling in the ownership of some member of the household was rarer in spatiallyexcluded settlements: for the group of households

Evaluation of dwelling Brick houses total Housing blocks total Non-standard dwellings* Total

Positive evaluation (excellent and good) 32 31 0 26

Average 48 43 3 40

Negative evaluation (poor and very poor) 20 26 97 34 Total 100 100 100 100

Note: *The following belonged to the category “non-standard dwellings”: a wooden house, a shack, a portable hut, or another dwellingnot intended for housing. In the logbook brick family houses were differentiated with one flat and two and more flats, and housingblocks were recorded with the number of flats up to and over 10 separately; the table presents the data for them in summary.

Table 4Roma households from excluded settlements by type of dwelling and evaluation of conditions for life (in %)



from segregated and separated settlementsa household member or other relative declaredownership of a dwelling in more than half, while theshare of family owners of a dwelling in concentrated

settlements within a community exceeded 70%. Onthe other hand, in segregated settlements theresponses “no one owns the dwelling” or “I don’t know the ownership situation” were more frequent (14% versus 2% for households concentrated within amunicipality). The owners of flats in housing blockswere municipalities, and other private subjects werefound in the position of dwelling owner only less –together 5%. According to the type of dwelling, withbrick houses ownership of the household and family

predominated, and with non-standard dwellings the

responses “no one” owned the dwelling and “I don’t know” were more frequent. Ownership relationsregarding a dwelling was thus the least clear in thecase of non-standard dwellings, which are more ofte

in segregated settlements.

Among the methods of obtaining the current dwellinin excluded settlements the so-called self-helpsolution was most often given – an entire one-third the final sample of households built the dwellingitself. The second method of acquiring the current dwelling became obtaining a flat from themunicipality with 23%, and an additional 21%purchased their dwelling in an excluded settlement.

Other possibilities of acquiring the current dwelling


64

25 As, for example, Z. Kusá points out, the availability of flats overall in Slovakia has a below-average level (Kusá, 2007). While in Slovakia there are 350 flats per 1,00residents, the Maastricht criteria speaks of a standard of 450 flats and in several EU countries the number exceeds 500 flats; the def icit of Slovakia towards the topthe EU is thus 25% to 30%. The availability of housing is also limited on the f inancial side. Since flats in Slovakia in the second quarter of 2012 sold on average for1,256 euro per square metre, for a broad group of residents owning one’s own housing remains an unfulfilled dream. For a flat with 60 square metres about 75thousand euro is necessary at the mentioned price, while the majority of people in the country earn less than the average pay of 750 euro gross (which is about 50euro net). If an individual did not eat, did not dress and was able to put away 500 euro each month for housing, he would have to save for more than 12 years. And the case of groups of residents in poverty who are reliant exclusively on support from the system of social benef its, such a horizon is inaccessible. For more, see:http://m.tvnoviny.sk/bin/mobile/index.php?article_id=616777; or the site of the Slovak Statistical Off ice: http://portal.statistics.sk/showdoc.do?docid=26531.

Note *The possibility “other” includes: inherited it, moved in illegally, came after a family moved out and others (bought from the Slovak Railways). The structure of the final sample of 192 households was according to the type of housing in the ratio: 30% segregate settlements (n = 58); 40% separated on the edge (n = 76); and 30% concentrated within a municipality (n = 58).

Table 5Roma households from excluded settlements by type of housing and status of dwelling (in %)

Segregatedsettlements

Separated on the edgeof a municipality

Concentratedwithin a municipality

Total

Official status of dwelling

Official building 60 76 91 76Illegal building and others 40 24 9 24

Method of acquiring a dwelling

Built it 47 34 19 33

Bought it 14 13 40 21

Got it from the village/town 17 30 19 23

Renting it 12 12 12 12

Other* 10 11 10 11

Type of ownership

Owned by a household member or relative 55 51 72 59

Owned by another private subject 2 4 5 4

Owned by the municipality 26 38 21 29

Other 3 0 0 1No one knows 14 7 2 7



had a total of 23%: from this 12% of the surveyedhouseholds lived in a rented dwelling, 7% of dwellingswere inherited from parents and 4% listed illegal moving in or occupying after a family moved out orpurchasing the dwelling from the Slovak Railways.

For the individual types of housing and types of dwellings the methods of acquiring a home or flat were differentiated rather significantly. In segregatedsettlements households most often “built” their owndwelling (47%), and the other half was more or lessequally divided among the other possibilities. Withthe group of households living separated on the edgeof a municipality two methods of acquisition occurredmost often – they built the dwelling themselves with34%, and they received it from the municipality with

30%; purchase, rental and another method of obtaining a flat here was related to approximatelyevery tenth/one tenth of the surveyed households.For the group of households representingconcentrated settlements within a municipality, thepurchase of a dwelling achieved the highest share(40%), and building a house and having a flat assigned from the municipality followed at a great distance with not quite one-fifth, while the last twomethods related to approximately 10% of these

households.Differences between the types of settlements are alsoobviously given by the type of dwelling, and themethod of acquiring it is to a significant measurepredetermined. Among households living in non-standard dwellings over 71% built the dwellingthemselves, and another 10% utilised other non-standard methods such as illegal moving in and thelike; however, housing assigned by a municipality wasalso found among non-standard dwellings (making up

16% of them), and 3% living in such dwellings werepaying rent for them. Residents of housing blockspredominately listed, logically, the assigning of a flat from the municipality (63%) or renting (32%), andfrom the other methods of acquiring only purchasing

of a flat occurred (however, only 6%). Brick houseswere predominately built or bought by their current residents (each of the possibilities had over 40%),while 13% were inherited and the other methods of obtaining this type of housing occurred only rarely.

The methods of acquiring a dwelling in excludedsettlements ascertained on the basis of the researchprobe were relatively diverse and differed by type of settlement and by type of dwelling. This couldindicate that the processes leading to segregation orseparation of housing, as was mentioned above, are inreality also varied. Getting into segregation orseparation occurred by the purchase of a dwelling inthe excluded environments, further by building thedwelling in this settlement or by inheriting it from

parents, by occupying a free dwelling, but also byassignment of housing from the municipality.

Households which got their current housing from themunicipality occurred in all three types of excludedsettlements. They had the highest share in the scopeof separated settlements on the edge of amunicipality, where this method of acquiringa dwelling obtained 30%; for concentratedsettlements within a municipality this was 19% and insegregated settlements 17%. The representation of

flats assigned by the municipality in all three types ofexcluded settlements was also confirmed by theopposite perspective: from all of the excludedhouseholds which declared that they received theircurrent housing from the municipality more than half were in settlements separated on the edge, a quarterin concentrated settlements within a municipality andnot quite a quarter in segregated settlements. At thesame time, this involved almost exclusively housingblocks; other types of dwelling assigned from the

municipality were more sporadic.26

Although specificpercentage shares are not with this type of surveyrelevant in any way, the data indicate that municipal flats for the socially weak are not infrequently locatedoutside its own residential areas – predominately on

26 Aside from housing blocks among them was found, for example, a brick house, a wooden house, a portable hut, a small garden cabin and an old manor house.



the edge of municipalities, and they build housingblocks predominately outside the internal territory of the municipality.

The situation from the viewpoint of type of dwelling,the methods of its acquisition and the ownershiprelations regarding the dwelling appear in excludedsettlements to be very diverse. The formal status of a lived in flat or dwelling was not with many surveyedhouseholds clear, which itself does not create a goodstarting point for the stability of housing and thequality of life of households in these conditions. Thiswas ultimately confirmed also in the subjectiveevaluation of housing conditions, which came out most unfavourable for segregated settlements andnot-standard dwellings.

3.2. The quality of dwellings by sizecharacteristics and technical furnishings

The current situation from the viewpoint of quality of dwelling in excluded settlements can be brought closerthrough the monitoring of quantitative parameters of

a dwelling and its technical infrastructure. Several indicators pointing to the quality of housing areknown from surveys, the most basic being its size, asdefined by the number of rooms. From this dimensionthe total number of rooms, as well as the furnishing o

a dwelling with a kitchen and bathroom, was thusassigned to this survey.

As Table 6 shows, among the surveyed households froexcluded settlements were those which did not have aindependent kitchen in their dwelling. Overall this wa12%, while for the group from segregated settlementsit was 17%, but in the case of concentrated withina municipality only 3%. Kitchens were missingparticularly in non-standard dwellings: while inhousing blocks or brick houses only 6% didn’t have an

independent kitchen, for non-standard dwellings thiswas 42%. The increased occurrence of dwellingswithout a kitchen at the same time was linked witha poor evaluation of the living conditions – a third of households with a negative evaluation of their ownhousing did not have an independent kitchen. Anabsolute majority of the surveyed households had onl


66Note The structure of the f inal sample of 192 households was according to the type of housing in the ratio: 30% segregated settlemen(n = 58); 40% separated on the edge (n = 76); and 30% concentrated within a community (n = 58).

Table 6Roma households from excluded settlements by type of housing and signs of quality of the dwelling (in %

Segregated settlementSeparated on the edgeof a municipality


Total

Kitchen in the dwelling

Kitchen 0 17 13 3 12

Kitchen 1+ 83 87 97 88

Kitchen – average per dwelling 0.84 0.89 1.03 0.92

Rooms in the dwelling

Room 0 5 3 0 3

Room 1 49 32 26 35

Room 2 31 42 43 39

Room 3 12 13 14 13

Room 4+ 3 10 17 10Rooms – average per dwelling 1.59 2.04 2.31 1.99

Average number of persons per 1 room 3.80 3.37 2.76 3.31

Bathrooms in the dwelling

Bathrooms 0 47 28 22 32

Bathrooms 1+ 53 72 78 68

Bathrooms – average per dwelling 0.53 0.73 0.81 0.69



one kitchen, while only 3% of those surveyed had twoand more kitchens. On average, then, the figure perone dwelling came out to be not quite one kitchen: fora dwelling in segregated settlements only 0.84 kitchensper dwelling and for concentrated within a municipality

1.03 kitchens per dwelling.The housing situation of Roma households fromexcluded settlements came out even worse with themonitoring of the presence and number of bathrooms.Nearly one-third of the surveyed households did not have an independent bathroom in their dwelling. Themost “bathroom-less” dwellings were in segregatedsettlements, where their share was nearly one-half; inthe case of separated and concentrated settlementsthis was 1.5- to 2-times less. Again, it was non-

standard dwellings or shacks that were primarilywithout a bathroom: 97% of them did not have oneand only 3% did. With flats in blocks of flats the ratiowas the opposite: 96% had a bathroom and 4% didnot. Brick buildings were from this point of view morevaried: 27% of them were without a bathroom and73% had at least one. On average, the figure fromsegregated settlements was 0.53 bathrooms perdwelling, 0.73 per dwelling for separated on the edgeof a municipality and 0.81 per dwelling for those

concentrated within a municipality.According to international comparisons, the availabilityof sufficient space in a dwelling is also considered to beone of the key characteristics for assessing the qualityand conditions of housing. Several simple and complexindicators are use to monitor this, one of which is themeasure of over-crowding of a household.27 It expressesthe percentage share of people living in over-crowdeddwellings, which is defined by the number of availablerooms in the household and the size of the household,

or still other characteristics of a family or its members.As the research probe indicated, the housing situationof households from excluded settlements did not come out very favourably even by the number of

rooms per dwelling, again especially with segregatedsettlements. All together, as much as 54% of thegroup representing segregated settlements in thesurvey did not have any or only one room, for thegroup of separated households this was 35% and for

those concentrated within a municipality 26%. In all three excluded environments the share of one-roomdwellings versus the common standard in the countrywas high; for segregated settlements, however, it came out exceptionally unfavourable. The averagesshowed this clearly: the average number of rooms perone dwelling represented 1.59 rooms for the groupsegregated; 2.04 in the case of separated and 2.31 forconcentrated within a municipality. On the otherhand, the number of persons per one room came out for the group of households living in segregatedsettlements to be 3.80; in separated settlements thiswas 3.37, and for concentrated within a municipality2.76 persons per one room. All mentioned indicators,therefore, suggest a high over-crowdedness of dwellings in excluded settlements.

Still another view at over-crowdedness is offered bythe total number of rooms in a dwelling and thenumber of persons in the household. Together 11% of the surveyed households lived in only one room (a

kitchen or a room); another 30% lived in dwellingswith two rooms and 35% in dwellings with threerooms. A total of 76% of the total surveyedhouseholds had a dwelling with three rooms or fewer.At the same time the number of persons in dwellingswith such a small number of rooms was very diverse –it ranged from 2 to 19 persons. Over-crowdednessthen also acquired in the reality of excludedhouseholds the following forms:

A four-generation family (two parents and their

children with partners and without partners and grandchildren) with 19 people in a dwelling with tworooms without an independent kitchen and bathroom, from this 14 adults and 5 independent children(1 school-attending child and 4 young children).

27 The measure of over-crowdedness of dwellings in Slovakia was according EU SILC data from 2010 one of the highest in the EU (more than 40%; the average for the EU27 was 17.7%; the lowest was the Netherlands with 2.2% and the highest Latvia with 57.1%). For the population at risk of povert y the measure of over-crowding waseven significantly higher – namely by nearly 20% (web SO SR).



A four-generation family (two parents and their children with partners and grandchildren) with10 people in a two-room flat in a block of flats, fromthis 6 children (3 school-attending and 3 youngchildren).

A single-parent family (mother with children) with9 people living in a shack with one room without a kitchen and bathroom, from this 8 children(6 school-attending and 2 young children).

A two-parent family (two parents and children) with8 people in a one-room flat with a kitchen and bathroom, from this 6 children (3 school-attendingand 3 young children). A four-generation family (two parents and their children with partners and grandchildren) with11 people in a two-room flat in a housing block, fromthis 6 children (4 with a completed educationand 2 young children).

A three-generation family (parents, grandparents and children) with 12 people in a shack with two rooms

and a kitchen, but without a bathroom, from this7 children (3 of them with a completed education,1 school-attending and 3 young children).

A two-parent family (two parents and children) with10 people in a shack with one room without a kitchenand bathroom, from this 8 children(7 school-attending and 1 young child).

A four-generation family (two parents and their children with partners and grandchildren) with17 people in a three-room flat in a block of flats, from this 11 children (7 school-attending and 4 young children).

A four-generation family (two parents and their childrenwith partners and grandchildren) with 15 people in a twroom flat in a housing block, from this 9 children(3 school-attending and 6 young children).

Excluded environments recorded significantly moresimilar stories of extreme over-crowding. This spatiaaspect already tells of the extreme lack of quality


68

Note *The category “Heat standard” includes central heating, radiators on a boiler and Gamat heater, i.e. all methods of heatingwithout heating using solid fuel; a similar division is used in the table with the method of cooking (standard methods and cooking ove

solid fuel).

Table 7Roma households from excluded settlements by type of housing and signs of quality of the dwelling (in %

Segregated settlementsSeparated on the edgeof a municipality


Total

Household farming

Grow vegetables 5 11 24 13Raise domestic animals 5 8 14 9

Technical furnishings of a flat

Drinking water from the main 45 60 67 58

Connected sewerage 29 49 36 39

Sewerage – sump 16 13 35 20

Electricity – official and functions 66 86 93 82

Electricity – connected illegally 12 7 0 6

Gas connection – functions 9 20 36 21

Heat standard* 9 32 41 28

Heat from a solid fuel stove 83 61 48 64

Cooking standard* 10 33 53 32

Cooking on solid fuel 90 67 47 68Liquidation of waste – hauled 71 83 86 80

Liquidation of waste – other 29 17 14 20

Bed for each 45 61 69 58

Toilet standard 36 54 57 50

Bathing standard 45 55 72 57



housing of many households from excludedsettlements. And additional characteristics of housingquality markedly lower it even further. This has beenshown in numerous surveys and reports from excludedRoma settlements, which recorded especially huge

deficiencies in technical infrastructure of dwellings(UNDP, 2006, 2012; Mušinka, 2012; Scheffel, 2009;several numbers of the magazine Plus 7 dní and manyother sources). And in the scope of this research thiswas no different. Here, too, a large portion of thesurveyed households was recorded which did not havedrinking water from a functioning water mainavailable in its dwelling, was not connected tosewerage and didn’t have their own sump; a group of households was found without electricity at all orwhich was connected illegally, while only a negligiblegroup had a gas connection in their dwelling; themajority heated and cooked with solid fuels, ofteneven within housing blocks, and they had problemswith the functioning of a toilet and bathroom. Onlyone-tenth of the surveyed households devoted itself to cultivating vegetables and raising domesticanimals, and in segregated settlements the numberswas only half as many (Table 7).

A comparison between individual groups of Roma

households defined on the basis of type of housingconfirmed that with the deepening of spatial exclusion the situation worsened – for individual types of standard housing infrastructure segregatedsettlements had the worse situation. More than half of

them did not have drinking water available througha water main, were not connected to sewerage or evena sump,28 did not have any form of standard bathing(with a standard toilet the deficit was higher still),29

and the same share of households in the end did not

even have an independent bed for each householdmember.30 Only a real minimum of these householdswere linked to a gas connection (not even 10%),similarly as a minimum of them used standard sourcesof heat and cooking. More than one-fifth of thesurveyed households here did not have electricity andnearly a third were lacking wasted liquidated bycollection and hauling through containers.

Roma households from excluded settlements remainwithout basic technical furnishings oftentimes even

when the given infrastructure is introduced in thesettlement or home municipality. From comparisonsof infrastructure at the site of the habitation and thefurnishings of specific households a relatively largelagging was shown in the individual items. Thus, forexample, 76% of the surveyed households listed awater main in a housing settlement, but only 58% hadwater in their own (from this 55% were connected tothe public water main and 3% had running water froma garden or their own well). A lagging of 20% thus

appears in excluded households in terms of connection to a water main for possibilities of a specific settlement. With sewerage the differencewas on the level of about 10%, when 50% of surveyedhouseholds had sewerage at the site of habitation,

28 For a more Ŗexible image regarding the life and hygienic relations in segregated settlements we present the frequency of occurrence of non-standard possibilities.But the percentage shares decidedly do not correspond to the situation for residents of Roma settlements in Slovakia – such data can only be provided by themapping of such settlements, which after nearly ten years is repeated by the end of 2012 ( Atlas of the Roma community in Slovakia). Among households representing58 segregated settlements, 55% had a source of drinking water other than a water main: 19 % used a public well or water main tap or hydrant in the settlement, 12%a well in the yard, 9% took drinking water from the dwelling of relatives, 7% bought bottled water for drinking, 5% used a spring and 3% a stream or river (the last

two possibilities did not occur for separated or concentrated settlements at all, and with other non-standard sources of drinking water a smaller occurrence wasrecorded in comparison with segregated settlements). With the absence of a connection to sewerage and a private sump (a total of 55% of households fromsegregated settlements) the majority stated that they pour wastewater out into the surroundings (29%), or into latrines (2%) or runoff into a stream (2%), while thremaining 22% only stated the absences of sewerage without explaining their handling of wastewater.

29 Again we present more detailed parameters for non-standard household furnishings from segregated settlements. For bathing households which were lackinga connection to running water most often used a wash-basin or a bucket (40%; in the other two excluded environments such a method of “bathing” was half to one-their less frequently); this was followed by a tub or vat without a connection to running water (14%), and then a stream or river (2%). As much as 64% of this groupof households declared a non-standard toilet; most often this was a latrine in the yard (36%), “in the surroundings” was given by 14%, 9% used a public latrine inthe settlement, and a Ŗushing toilet without running water and a bowl or bucket was also found (2% and 3%); for concentrated settlements within a municipality thelast four possibilities did not occur, in place of this the dwelling of relatives or neighbours increased.

30 A total of 55% of the surveyed segregated households did not have an independent bed for each member; most often the number of persons per one bed was twopeople (29%) and then three people (17%), but the number of persons – mainly children – represented an even higher number (a total of 9% of the surveyedhouseholds from segregated settlements had four to six children for one bed).



but only 39% of them had sewerage connected in theirdwelling. Similarly, an electricity main belonged tothe infrastructure of the habitation site of 96% of thefinal sample households, and 82% had a functioningconnection in their own dwelling (4% had an official

connection but not functioning and on the other hand6% of households said they had an illegal connection). The furnishing of electricity in excludedhouseholds lagged behind the possibilities of thespecific settlement by more than 10%.

The lagging behind of households from segregatedsettlements was significantly higher still and was soin the possibilities of the specific settlement as well as in the furnishing of households behind thestandard of a housing settlement. While 76% of all

surveyed households had a water main in thesettlement and 55% were connected to a publicwater main, for segregated settlements this was60% with a water main in the settlement and 45% inthe household. Less than 40% of segregatedsettlements had sewerage in the place of habitation(the average for the entire surveyed excludedhouseholds was 50%), but only 29% had theirdwelling connected to sewerage (while overall thiswas 39%). In segregated settlements 93% had

electricity in the place of habitation (for all excluded settlements this was 96%); 66% of thesurveyed households from segregated settlementshad an official and functioning connection in theirdwelling (on average for the whole of the surveyedhouseholds this was 82 %). Although specificallygiven percentages decidedly do not correspond tothe real situation with furnishings in excludedsettlements, the captured differences between thegroups of households indicate a differentiatedsituation within them. The research probe

repeatedly and in detail showed that Romahouseholds from excluded settlements live often in

poor quality dwellings, and the situation comes ouworse for segregated settlements. Not only are nonstandard dwellings – shacks – concentrated insegregated settlements, they are often laggingbehind without the most basic furnishings.

But problems with dwelling are found in all threeexcluded environments; in each are found householdliving in dwelling not satisfying the criteria of qualitywhether the size of the house or f lat is involved, itsover-crowdedness or its lack of basic technical furnishings. The case was not infrequent when theindividual deficiencies were combined with oneanother – over-crowdedness with sub-standardtechnical furnishings and the like. The quality of housing of many households from excluded

settlements showed significant deficiencies andmarked lagging behind the common standards of housing in Slovakia.31

3.3. Modification of a dwelling:types of repairs and expended costs

Every dwelling requires regular maintenance ormodifications or repairs – in the interest of maintaining its existing state or in the interest of

improving the quality of living. As is presented in thepreceding section, many dwellings from excludedsettlements show several signs of poor quality – up tan extreme – which increases the need formaintenance and modifications even further.Therefore, among the situations which were recordedin the scope of the research probe into excludedsettlements was a voluntary description of the last modification made to a dwelling. The situationscaptures were alongside the type of modification of a dwelling made to also introduce the period when

such change was made, who made it and what sum omoney was expended to do it.


70

31 According to data from the 2001 census 92.9% of permanently lived in houses were connected to a water main (68.5% to a public network), 86% had some kind ofsewerage (28.7% a public network and 57.3% a septic tank). The number of habitable rooms per one resident represented 1 room, for one permanently lived in Ŗatthere were 3.18 persons; the share of permanently lived in Ŗats with one room represented for all of Slovakia 7.4% and with two rooms 19.7%; the number of roomsper one Ŗat came out to be 3.21 rooms (a room with a sur face larger than 8 square metres was counted as a room). The values of individual indicators for the surveyexcluded settlements lagged far behind the averages from a decade ago, it can be assumed that the lagging in several aspects up to the year 2011 deepened evenfurther (data from the 2011 was not yet available for the housing module).



According to the collected data 21% of the final surveyed households did not make any modificationto their own dwelling in recent times, while the

remaining four-fifths did perform some form of renovation in their household. In terms of time,modifications made during the past half-yearpredominated among such households (nearly 40%),while another 20% made the modification during thelast three years and for not quite 10% themodification was made more than three years ago. Inmore than one-tenth of the situations the time of therepair of a dwelling was not specified. Householdswithout a modification performed on a house or flat were represented by one-third more in the group

living in settlements concentrated within amunicipality, where they represented 27%; in contrast to this in segregated and separated settlement thiswas 19%. In comparisons with the two more excludedgroups, “older” modifications to a dwelling were morecommon in settlements concentrated withina municipality: the last modification of a dwellingrelated to the period two to three years ago nearly

two-times more, while in segregated and separatedhouseholds they again gave modifications not olderthan half a year more often (a difference of approximately 15%). This may mean that less qualityhabitations with a high share of non-standard

dwellings in spatially segregated and separatedsettlements require more interventions into the stateof the dwelling and do so more often.

The relatively high share of households which did not make any modifications to their dwelling during thepast years raises a question about the reasons. On thebasis of a loose description four basic areas of reasonsfor giving up on maintenance or improvement of a dwelling can be identified. The first of them was therelatively good state of the home or flat which did not

require any interventions:This is mainly a newer dwelling; it wasn’t necessary inrecent times to make any modifications. The last timeit rained, to prevent the carrying of mud into thedwelling, they poured stones in front of the entrance,which they swept up from around the main road. /brick house, separated settlement 1km distant fromthe home municipality

We haven’t made any modifications recently; we live ina new building. /flat in a smaller housing block, segregated settlement 3 km distant from the homemunicipality

We didn’t make any modifications this year; we haveour house in order. /brick duplex, settlement concentrated within the municipality

We haven’t had any problems with the dwellingrecently. /shack, segregated settlement 1 km distant from the home municipality

The second reason why a household from an excludedsettlement did not carry out any modifications is their

dwelling recently was the ownership relation in regardto the lived in dwelling. Although the dwelling wouldneed a modification, since they live in a rented flat orsublet, they are not authorised to make repairs ormodifications. Such argumentation was connectedwith flats in housing blocks, but also with brick familyhouses; from the viewpoint of type of settlement it was found in dif ferent excluded environments:

Graph 16When households made the last modificationto a dwelling (in %)

Note The graph presents the percentage shares of the total final sample of 192 households representing131 excluded settlements.

no modification

in the last half-year

more thanhalf a yearup to 3 years

longer than3 years

we do it always,when needed

no response

21

38

20

1 12

8



We live in a rental flat – we don’t paint because the roof leaks and there are streaks. /flat in a smaller housingblock, separated settlement 3 km from the homemunicipality 3 km

We live in a housing block and we aren’t allowed to do

anything; we’re in debt, so we’re glad that we someplace to live. /flat in a larger housing block,separated settlement 0.5 km distant from the homemunicipality

The house isn’t ours (it belongs to the municipality),accordingly we aren’t really able to make modifications,although we would need them. We don’t even have themoney for this. /brick house, settlement concentratedwithin a municipality

I live with my parents and I don’t decide when and what gets done, even if I wanted. /brick house, separated

settlement 0.5 km distant from the home municipality

Another reason which was repeatedly found in thereplies of respondent households was the very poorcondition of the dwelling which thwarted everyattempt at improving the living conditions. Similararguments were made exclusively by resident living inshacks, e. g. dwelling of various materials. Accordingto the type of settlement this was related to thosefrom segregated settlements and separatedsettlements on the edge of a municipality:

We don’t do anything at home, because this isn’t a home (a shack with no infrastructure), only when something is really urgent. /shack, separatedsettlement 1 km distant from the home municipality

Our dwelling is in a very bad state (a shack with no furnishings and electricity); we don’t have money for a repair. But we have a promise from the mayor that if he has a free flat or house, we will get it. /shack,segregated settlement 0.5 km distant from the homemunicipality

We don’t make any modifications to the home, becauseour shack is hardly standing. We would need completely new housing, at least a portable hut . /shack,segregated settlement 1 km distant fromthe home municipality

But most often financial barriers was given among thereasons for not making any modifications or repairs toa dwelling in the recent period. Many of the surveyed

households had such a stressed family budget that nfinancial resources remain for improving andmaintaining a dwelling. Financial inaccessibility of maintenance of a dwelling was general – householdsliving in flats in housing blocks, as well as residents

brick houses or non-standard dwellings mentioned itAnd it was also general on the basis of type of settlement: households from segregated andseparated excluded environments knew financial inaccessibility, but also those living concentratedwithin a municipality. Some respondents only statedthe lack of f inancial resources for dwellingmodifications, while other chose a broaderexplanation. They spoke of their owl plans ornecessary reconstructions, which did not get done, oof the desolate state of the dwelling, whose solutionhowever is not within their financial possibilities.With these opportunities some of the householdsemphasised that the economic situation only allowedthem bare survival; they only have money for food anmedicines and covering modifications to a home orflat is not within their possibilities:

They haven’t done anything at home for a long timebecause they don’t have the money . /brick house,concentrated within a municipality

They don’t made modifications at home due to a lack

finances. /brick house, concentrated within amunicipality

We haven’t done anything around the house for a longtime now; we live only from social benefits and it’s notenough for anything else. /brick house, separatedsettlement 1 km distant from the home municipality

Our home would need a lot of repair work (one roomwithout a bathroom, weakly furnished); unfortunatelywe don’t have the finances. We plan to install water from the neighbour, at least to the kitchen. And then wwould make a bathroom. /brick house, concentratedwithin a municipalityWe would have to rebuild the whole house (bad conditions, they don’t have electricity or water, withoua bathroom and just one room and a kitchen), but wedon’t have the finances for it. /brick house,concentrated within a municipality

Due to existential problems they can‘t even afford tobuy a lock on the door to the flat; or paint or put glass


72



in the windows. /flat in a larger housing block,segregated settlement 2.5 km distant from the homemunicipality

From the viewpoint of the weak economic situation wehaven’t repaired the house for at least 20 years. It is in

a desolate state; the roof is falling in. /brick house,concentrated within a municipality

The roof is falling in on us, but we don’t have money for anything; we can hardly live. At least we don’t havechildren! /brick house, concentrated withina municipality

They don’t make modifications to the home, they can’t;they are glad that they have money for medicines and food. /brick house, concentrated withina municipality

The lack of finances doesn’t allow me any modifications

and renovations to my dwelling. I live under my ownconditions, as I can (they live in a shack with tworooms, a total of 12 people). For a modification or repair they scrounge from those better off. /shack,settlement concentrated within a municipality

The bad financial situation, mentally disabled, bad care for the dwelling (shack), they try to survive by day today. /shack, segregated settlement 1 km distant fromthe home municipality

Reasons for giving up on maintenance and repair of a

dwelling are in excluded environments relativelydiverse:32 from the reason consisting of a dwelling ingood condition which didn’t require any repairs;through ownership relations of the household to theflat or house – as renters cannot make repairs;further the desolate state of the dwelling, uponwhich the household simply gave up anymodifications; up through the limited financial possibilities of households which practically negateany modifications to a dwelling. But despite thisvariation the strongest reason was financial

inaccessibility of improving housing. Explaining thereasons for not realising maintenance of a dwellingcan be seen closer through several stories from thereal state of some dwellings in excluded settlements.

Specifically they took the form of a collapsing roof,broken windows, non-functioning locks in a dwelling,the unavailability of water in households and manyother aspects of deprivation.

The majority of the surveyed households (nearly four-fif ths) did make some intervention into the current dwelling for the closer undetermined “recent period”.As Graph 3.16 shows in more detail, the only onefrequent activity related to modification of a dwellingwas painting – it was the content of 40% of theinterventions carried out on a dwelling. Roof repairs(with 12%) followed at a large distance, and then thereworking of a bathroom or toilet and repair or layingof a floor. Reconstruction of plaster and modificationor repair of window occurred on a large-scale, while

other types of interventions in a dwelling, such asbuilding an extension or expansion, tiling, repair of facilities in a f lat, repair of a chimney, the reworkingof waste or water, repair of the foundations or plasterof a house and the like, could be classified more asrarer modifications.

From the graph it is at the same time obvious that modifications of a maintenance characterpredominated; a glance along the line of maintaininga dwelling versus improving the quality of housing

showed the domination of maintenance overimprovement of the standard of living. Overall morethan 70% of the described situations of modificationto a dwelling had the character of maintenance of theexisting state of housing and less than a third wouldbe evaluated as a more principle or longer-lastingimprovement in the quality of the housing. Thusmaintenance as well as improvement modifications todwellings in reality had a relatively varied form.

Among the modifications significantly improving themethod of overall quality of housing is, for example,more principle reconstruction or redevelopment of a house or dwelling. The research probe in sucha position captured positive examples of broader

32 A portion of the households, however, only stated that they had not made any repairs or modiřcations without giving more detailed reasons (see the Appendix tochapter 3).



reconstruction of a dwelling with the effect of significantly improving living conditions with the helpof the ETP Slovensko loan programme, but also thestory of self-help construction of a non-standarddwelling – a shack:

I built my house myself from money saved, froma private savings scheme (so-called ´Včielka´ or ‘Bee )

and the building saving account. After using it up I wasconnected to the IDIA savings program, which was provided by ETP Slovensko. Then I continued ina microloan programme where I took out an interest- free loan which I am now paying back. I’m glad that I have a place to live, because a house is covered and I have it furnished for housing. /brick house, separatedsettlement without giving the distance from the homemunicipality

The roof leaked and it was necessary to modify thebathroom and the toilet. I took out a microloan througETP Slovensko in the amount of 1,160 euro. For thementioned money I bought material, where I modifiedthe floor and reconstructed the bathroom and the toileand I want to change the roof covering. We did all thementioned work ourselves. /brick house, separatedsettlement 0.4 km from the home municipality

We did a reconstruction of rooms from microloans whicwere offered by ETP Slovensko. We managed to improveour housing: we changed the floor, painted the roomsand rebuilt the bathroom. /brick house, settlement concentrated within a municipality

Three years ago we built a small house; duringconstruction of the shack the entire family helped us,but I don’t remember the sum that was spent on the


74

Graph 17Last modification to a dwelling in excluded households by type of modification (in %)

1 = repairs of facilities in a flat

2 = painting, spackling, walls

3 = repair of a roof, a leak

4 = made, remade a bathroom or toilet

5 = installed tiles, covered a floor

6 = tiled the kitchen

7 = added on to the home, extension to a dwelling

8 = insulation of doors

9 = repair of a chimney

10 = repair, reworking of waste or water

11 = modification to garden, yard, fence

12 = reworking of the infrastructure core13 = repair of foundations of a shack,

load-bearing walls14 = connection to a water main

15 = built a fireplace

16 = repair plaster, new plaster, facade

17 = change windows, alter windows

18 = remodel a house

99 = other problem with housing

Note The graph presents the percentage shares of total given situations of the last modification to a dwelling (n = 151).

40

3

3

3

3

5

12

7

6

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

4

2

6

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 4



building. /shack, separated settlement wit without giving the distance from the home municipality

An extension or the adding of a storey, which likewisetake a variety of forms, can be included among the

larger modifications improving the quality of house ordwelling. On one hand this was, for example, a moreradical increasing of living space in a family house byadding an additional storey; on the other hand, thiswas the adding of a vestibule to a portable hut, toprevent the leaking of heat from the portable hut:

We added on a storey, so far it has cost 1,500 euro, but we still haven’t finished it. My husband is building it with his brother and my father. They’re working on it for the second month now. /brick house, segregatedsettlement 1 km from the home municipality

They live in a portable hut, so this is very complicated,they are crammed in (two parents, four children age13 to 22 years, plus a grandson from the oldest daughter). They last build on a vestibule to prevent losing heat in winter. They paid 50 euro for the cinder blocks used, bought the cement, sand and lime they got for free (for work – the husband worked in the villageand in place of money they gave him materials). They built it themselves. /portable hut, separatedsettlement 0.2 km from the home municipality

Among the larger quality changes of a current dwellingwhich brought more principle improvement of the livingconditions for its residents the reworking of a bathroomor toilet in the house, the connecting of the householdto the public water main, the laying of tiles in the houseor an extension of the internal space of a flat, insulationof a house of changing of windows can be included:

They built a bathroom themselves during three months,they paid about 1,200 euro for materials. /brick house,separated settlement on the edge without giving thedistance from the home municipality

We last reconstructed the bathroom. We borrowed 1,000 euro, which I’m repaying at 42 euro a month. Webought a bathtub, a toilet, tiling, wall tiles and anautomatic washer. My father and brother-in-law helped with the work; it’s finished now. /larger family house,concentrated settlement within a municipality

We had a problem with water: there wasn’t enough inthe well. Not long ago the village had a connection put

in which they linked to their home. They did it themselves and the family helped. /brick house,separated settlement 0.5 km from the homemunicipality

They put in tiles and insulation with fibreglass. They did

it ourselves; they gave 800 euro for materials. /brickhouse, separated settlement on the edge without giving the distance from the home municipality

Two months ago we reworked the core of the flat toincrease space in the living room. I did the modificationmyself; I cut out the wall and pulled down the edge and painted. Costs for reconstruction were 180 euro. Theliving room is larger and the space is open from thekitchen. /smaller housing block, concentratedsettlement within a municipality

They insulated the entire house; they borrowed

5,000 euro (a retired grandmother). They had a masterbuilder from the village, it’s not finished yet. They wantto put on a new facade – they don’t know if they willmanage it, it depends on the weather. /brick house,separated settlement 2 km distant from the homemunicipality

Three years ago we did a reconstruction on the house;we repaired the plaster on the outside. We didn’t know how to do it ourselves; some professionals did it. Thework with the materials I don’t much remember, about around 700 euro. /brick house, concentratedsettlement within a municipality

Replaced three wooden windows with plastic onesbecause they were not insulated and the wood wasdamaged for years; it couldn’t be renovated. Threewindows with a complete offer cost 890 euro (the priceincludes disassembly, installation, alteration of the plaster and blinds). Because we didn’t have successwith the bank, a non-banking company provided a 1,000 euro loan. And in the instalment for 36 monthsat 40 euro a month it comes out to 1,450 euro. Thebank didn’t provide the financing because our incomedoes not achieve the life minimum for a family. The

leftover money was invested into clothing for thechildren, paint and painting – roughly for three rooms40 euro. /brick house, concentrated withina municipality given as 1 km distant

We changed the windows three years ago; we both stillworked then. We borrowed 2,000 euro, since then wehaven’t made any modifications. We also painted allthe rooms then. /brick house, concentrated withina municipality



In the end in the monitored excluded environmentsmodifications made in dwellings which could becharacterised as above-standard or aesthetic werealso found. These were, for example, the building of a grassy lawn and a summer house in the garden,

aesthetic modifications of a ceiling, the building of a f ireplace in a house or insulating an entire home.But these were only occasional activities in the scopeof the overall sample of recorded cases:

In July we put the grassy surface in the yard in order; we planted new grass and rolled it. We build a new wooden summer house and a wooden fence. The material and the work cost 2,500 euro. My cousin – a carpenter – and the wife helped me during the weekends. /brick house,concentrated within a municipality with a distancegiven of 1 km

The last modification was an aesthetic change to theceiling. They bought a polystyrene gazette, paint and glue, which cost perhaps 150 euro. The husband together with relatives did the work themselves; it lasted two days. /larger housing block, segregatedsettlement 1.4 km distant from home municipality

Two years ago they put a fireplace into the house; thehusband did almost all of it himself; his brother helped him. They took out a loan for 2,000 euro. /larger familyhouse, segregated settlement 2 km distant from homemunicipality

They insulated the entire house; they borrowed 5,000 euro (a retired grandmother). They had a master builder from the village; it’s not finished yet. They want to put on a new facade – they don’t know if they willmanage it; it depends on the weather. /brick house,separated settlement 2 km distant from the homemunicipality

Larger modifications of a higher standard were at thesame time financially the most demanding, and oftenthe indebtedness of the household was recordedbecause of them – without loans they would not havebeen able to carry them out. And this is so despite thefact that members of households did the workthemselves, or with the help of family members. Somehousehold during their realisation went significantlyinto debt and are now paying the debt back, which at

the same time means that this related more to thestronger households in terms of income, since theywere able to get loans of larger sums. Fewer solvent Roma families managed only with the help of the microloan fund of ETP Slovensko, otherwise the

path to larger modifications meaning a change in thquality of the housing is for them practicallyinaccessible, or possibly it leads to overly expensiveloans from non-banking subjects.33

But we repeatedly emphasise that more demandingmodifications of the type of principle qualitative oraesthetic changes to a dwelling make up only a smalpart of the entire sample of stories found;maintenance work around a dwelling (or the abovementioned any absence of intervention into housing

predominated greatly. Some stories expressedexplicitly the conflict between the need for principlerepairs of a dwelling which is in an unfavourable toemergency state and the persistence in maintenancerepairs, especially in the form of painting. As a reasothey clearly noted the absolute lack of finances; forsome households even the cost for painting in theamount of 20 euro was high. Although they havea dwelling in a bad to very bad state, they are onlyable to regularly paint it, so that they maintained at

least basic hygienic conditions and cleanliness.Despite the bad housing conditions strong emphasison painting or “representation” in certain regularintervals was repeated in individual stories relativelyoften:

Modifications could be made to the house, but we donhave the money. At least I paint each year, at least these basic things, so that we don’t live in filth(40 euro). /brick house, concentrated settlement within a municipality

Nothing remains for house repairs; we are glad that we

have electricity. If the partnet gets activation work inthe village, we would have more; they promised her th for the spring. During the summer we bought Primalexand painted. /brick house, separated settlement onthe on the edge, 2 km distant from the homemunicipality


76 33 Regarding the practice of non-banking subjects in Roma communities, as described by řeld social workers or community workers.



We should have long ago repaired the roof; we already have the roofing tiles, but not the other things. Theinterior, as you see, we always keep clean; once a year we paint; in fact my wife does this. She always says that I don’t know how to work. The painting costs about40-45 euro. What we should urgently do needs around 800-900 euro. /brick house, segregated settlement 2 km distant from the home municipality

We can only make essential repairs from benefits. Last year we painted and this is expensive (paint costs 20euro). I would like to repair the dwelling, it is cold there, there is a draft through the windows and door but unfortunately, we can’t afford it, so this only f ix, as weare able. /shack, separated settlement on the edge1 km from the home municipality

We haven’t had any modifications, although we would

need them very much, but building materials are very expensive for us. Through the summer we got rid of thetrash dump which we had right behind the house – wedug out a large hole. /brick house, concentratedsettlement within a municipality

Another interesting aspect when monitoringmodifications performed in a dwelling is theirprovision – whether the work was done by theresidents themselves or by a public or purchasedservice. Who made the modification in the dwelling

was moderately differentiated according to the typeof house or flat, but on the whole do-it-yourself work absolutely dominated. As can be seen in Graph18, the described modifications were made by thehouseholds themselves – one or more of itsmembers (65%), or together with a neighbour 26%.The situation in which some known person – friends,neighbours or relatives – made the modificationshad a small share of the situations (a total of 3%).Purchased service in the surveyed set was very rare,relating to only 3% of the recorded dwelling

modifications; the administrator of a flat had thesame share in repairs (3%). Purchased service orrepair performed by the administrator of a flat (when living in housing blocks) occurred only insettlements concentrated within a municipality(12%) and separated on the edge of a municipality(7%); segregated settlements did not know thisservice at all.

According to the research probe Roma householdsfrom excluded settlements either do not makemodifications to their dwellings at all, most often forfinancial but also other reasons associated with the

state or ownership status of the dwelling(approximately one-fifth of the final sample), or theymake them by themselves. Only in a small group of recorded cases was this in cooperation with membersof the wider family or other known persons. Thisapplies in an increased measure for segregatedsettlements, where a purchased service is almost completely unknown.

The do-it-yourself solution was therefore verywidespread and related to painting as well as other

dwelling modifications. Specifically, painting wasaccording to the stories exclusively do-it-yourself;members of households typically did it themselves.An interesting finding was that relatively often womenmade this modification to the dwelling and not only inhouseholds which had a woman as the sole provider. Awas demonstrated from the interviews, relatively oftenpainting in the surveyed households is necessitated by

Graph 18Who made the modification in the dwelling (in %)

Note The graph shows the percentage share from all of the given situations of the last modification to a dwelling (n = 151).

1 = alone

2 = relatives3 = neighbours

4 = purchasedservice

5 = administratoof the flat

6 = alone withrelatives

7 = friends formaterialgoods

8 = alone withneighbours

65

24

2

3

3

1

11



the poor housing conditions or over-crowdedness,cooking on a stove with solid fuel, leaking, dampnessand the creation of mould and the like:34

We last painted. I painted it myself (a woman), thehusband helped me in the household a little; he has

health problems. I go to work – for 4 hours in themorning. Now through the school holidays I tidy up at the kindergarten, so when I come home, I need to rest a little and then I can do something at home. That’swhy the painting took me two days and tidying up alsotwo days. It cost me 25 euro: Primalex 12 euro, paint for the baseboards 10 euro and cleaning needs 3 euro. /larger housing block, separated settlement 2 kmdistant from the home municipality

Painting of the flat – two buckets for 6 euro. I did the painting myself and the children helped me with the

tidying up. We paint often, because our adult daughter with her family and our son with his partner live with usin our flat; together we are 15 people (a two-room flat in a housing block). /larger housing block, separatedsettlement 2 km distant from the home municipality

I last painted the kitchen. It was necessary to paint thewhole house, but I don’t have the money. Since my husband died I live with difficulty; a man’s help is missingin the house. Painting cost me approximately 8 euro for paint, I painted it alone, but the girls helped me (twodaughters age 10 and 15 years). /brick house, separated

settlement 1 km distant from the home municipalityTwo months ago they whitewashed the room that servesas a living room and bedroom. It was necessary to buy Primalex for approximately 30 euro; they borrowed thetools from relatives. They painted themselves and thework went without problems, but the walls are at present again dirty (there are nine people living ina house with three rooms without a bathroom and water, five of them are children under the age of 10). /brick house, separated settlement 1 km distant fromthe home municipality

We had mould behind the couch so we had to spray thewall against mould and paint it again. This cost a totalof about 7 euro, and my husband did the work. /brickhouse, separated settlement 0.5 km distant from thehome municipality

The collected modifications to a dwelling, however,showed that members of the surveyed Romahouseholds from excluded environments were able,aside from painting, to perform a great many otherdo-it-yourself modifications to a dwelling. The

stories, for example, described how they made a dooto a shack or built a woodshed or fixed a fence, howthey resolved a collapsing floor in a dwelling. Veryoften the do-it-yourself modifications to a dwellingrelated to the consequences of rainy weather – theyrepaired the roof for different types of dwellings,fixed leaks or insulated windows in the dwelling,resolved undermined foundations to a shack and thelike. In some of the stories they resolved leaking orundermining repeatedly – after each big rainfall:

The head of the family put a door on the shack by himself: he bought the hinges for 8 euro, brought thewood from the forest, trimmed off the small stumps anhammered it all together. /shack, segregatedsettlement 4 km distant from the home municipality

Woodshed – huts from wood for storing fuel and wood for putting in the stove in winter. Costs 60 euro(material – boards, strips of wood, plastic sheets,nails). /larger family house, segregated settlement 2 km distant from the home municipality

We repaired the trellis fence around the house, it was

torn and dogs would come to the door. It cost about 35 euro, my husband and father-in-law did it; in oneday the work was done. /brick house, segregatedsettlement 1.2 km distant from the home municipalit

They repaired a hole in the floor – an old chimney sprinkled with sand and gravel (they live in an old manor house in one room without a kitchen and a bathroom and any furnishings, not even electricity;together with children they are six persons). They madthe modification themselves without investing any money. /old manor house, segregated settlement

3.5 km distant from the home municipality In July 2011 they whitewashed a room (they live ina house with one room and a kitchen, without a bathroom). And they also repaired a part of the roofthey put on boards from the side. They bought wood


78 34 For more described examples of do-it-yourself painting of a Ŗat, see Appendix 1 to Chapter 3.



strips from the sawmill; they chose the best boards and used them in the repair. /brick house, segregatedsettlement 1.5 km distant from the home municipality

They last repaired the roof: they bought sheet metalworth perhaps 100 euro, and they removed the old

sheeting and put on the new. They did the repair themselves; the roof, however, still leaks. /shack,segregated settlement 1 km distant from the homemunicipality

We don’t repair anything because we don’t have themoney for it. When the shack begins to lead, then my husband has to insulate something (they live with fivechildren in a shack without any infrastructure). /shack,segregated settlement 0.5 km distant from the homemunicipality

Insulation of the windows: during the last rain shower water leaked into the dwelling through a crack abovethe window frame (they live in a container – a gardencottage in one room without a bathroom, electricity or water). The repair went with glazier’s putty and a new coat of paint: 6 euro. /container, segregatedsettlement 0.5 km distant from the home municipality

As we live in a settlement and we have a wooden shack,repairs to the place are always occurring regularly,mainly after rainy weather. Water leaks under the foundations of the house, and so I always repair it. I build a supporting foundation from rocks and cement,but this costs me as much as 50 euro a month, so I only repair it after rain. /wooden house, segregatedsettlement 1 km distant from the home municipality

Excavation around the circumference of the dwelling(they live in a dwelling not intended for housing,without a bathroom and water, with the electricity switched off), so that during rainstorms water doesn’t lead through the dwelling, but instead collects into thedrainage excavation. Excavation of a canal 20 x 20 cmaround the entire circumference, plus a side channel toa hill so that it runs off . /dwelling not intended forhousing, separated settlement 0.5 km distant fromthe home municipality

Some of the modifications performed by members of households had the character of more expert buildingwork. They were able themselves to concrete a floorand to lay a floating floor, to concrete steps, to repairthe house after flooding, to reconstruct the external

walls of a house, but, for example, also to applyplaster on a house. It is possible from this to deducethat in the surveyed environments this type of skill isrelatively widespread:

They changed the floor in the living room; they had anold floor in there (wooden slats), with ants coming out of it. They had to put concrete down which they madethemselves; they gave about 100 euro for the materials. Afterward they put down a floating floor which cost 150 euro. /brick house, concentrated settlement within a municipality

We modified the stairs – the entrance into the house,which got broken. My husband made the stairs out of concrete and our oldest sons helped him (22 and 19 years). We bought the cement, which cost us perhaps 20 euro; the work went without problems and the stairs are all right . /brick house, separatedsettlement 0.2 km distant from the home municipality

Last year floods – the roof leaked; the ceiling got wet –they had to paint it, change the damaged roofing tileson the roof, and change the floating floor. They did it all themselves; they got 300 euro (a grant from the state). /brick house, concentrated settlement withina municipality

The last was repair of the external walls of the house, to prevent the dampening of the wall. It was necessary to

purchase plastic sheeting and stone drainage for approximately 400 euro. The family did the repair themselves, and they borrowed the tools from thevillage. The repair lasted one day but the wall kept getting damp. /brick house, separated settlement onthe edge, distant from home municipality not given

Falling plaster on the house: they bought cement, lime,they had sand at home. The owner of the house did it himself. /brick house, concentrated settlement withina municipality

Not all of the surveyed households were able tohandle a modification to a dwelling with their ownpowers and needed either smaller or larger assistanceThis took a great variety of forms. According to thespecific person, members of the wider family inparticular helped, as well as acquaintances, friends orneighbours. In regard to the forms of help, perhapsthe most common was work help, i.e. a member of the





it was dirty here; the air here wasn’t good when I got up. When it’s a mess, you feel ashamed. I painted alone, and my oldest son (20 years old), who is at home, hung around the stove, he would have painted until the evening; for me it took two hours. I got the paint from Dáša, who also painted. I don’t have any money; so why go crazy? It was already half spent and I asked her when she had some left over to leave it for me. It was necessary to shift the cabinets, my sonhelped. The neighbours didn´t help. I had the roller; I didn’t have to borrow one. /portable hut, separatedsettlement on the edge distance from the homemunicipality not given

After a big windstorm the wind took off half of the roof.They didn’t have the material or the money, so they helped with what they were able. They got the sheet metal and boards from relatives, a neighbour gave them

old linoleum, and so they were able to repair the roof sothat rain didn’t leak into the room. (They live in poor conditions with three children in a house without a bathroom and with one room, without furnishingsand electricity.) /brick house, segregated settlement 0.5 km distant from the home municipality

Leaking roof: the original sheet metal was rusted, and so it was like a sieve. They got the sheet metal from the scrap metal yard for 10 euro, where it was sold to them for 0.60 per kilo. The father had to transport it fromtown (about 5 km) on a wagon borrowed from

a neighbour; for loaning it he drank two bottles of a favourite wine (Milenka) with the neighbour. A nephew helped with changing the sheet metal for food. The other necessary materials like nails and wood,they got from a non-Roma, where the partner goes ona work brigade – he helps in a garden and around thehouse (spade work, manual digging, concreting). /shack, segregated settlement 2 km distant from thehome municipality

In the spring they painted their own flat; people for whom the father works digging the garden gave themlime

. /larger housing block, separated settlement onthe edge 0.5 km distant from the home municipality

In the spring before Easter they painted the rooms and did all the work themselves. They didn’t have to pay anything for the material, because one woman whomthe father of the family had helped with digging and spading the garden gave them whitewash for painting. /brick house, separated settlement on the edge0.2 km distant from the home municipality

As Graph 18 shows, with those living in housing blocksmodifications or repairs done by the flat administrator occurred, although in a small measure.Also in such a case modifications of a different typewere involved – improving the quality and

maintaining the flat. From the first group this wasinsulation of the housing block or changing of thewindows, and from the other group the removal of faults in the electrics, changing of the flat doors,a malfunctioning boiler, problems with windows orflooding in the basement occurred in the responses.The stories at the same time indicated that theapproach of the administrator of flats is not alwaysaccommodating – households also meet with refusal when declaring a problem or requesting a repair:

They changed the windows in the entire housing block. It costs us more for paying the monthly rent: they raisedit by 50 euro a month. Aside from this, we would really like them to change the entrance door, because it doesn’t close very well. /smaller housing block,concentrated settlement within a municipality

They insulated our block of flats, and they put in plasticwindows. The town made the repair. We have it really nice now; I’m not complaining. /larger housing block,concentrated settlement within a municipality

We had our housing block insulated, but the light still

didn’t work in the hallway. The town financed themodification to the block; that is the administrator of the housing blocks. /larger housing block,concentrated settlement within a municipality

Modifications in the dwelling: The toilet didn’t flush, theelectric switches didn’t work, and the kitchen faucet wasbroken... We turned with the problems the administrator of the flat, with whom we agreed on the removal of defects in the flat. /larger housing block, separatedsettlement 1 km distant from the home municipality

Someone banged on the door of the flat and they had to

give us a new one. The lock was damaged and it couldn’t be locked; the whole door was devastated. Theculprit was never discovered. It was necessary to replacethe door – we notified the care-taker and after threedays they brought us a new door. We had to pay for it –30 euro; the administrator added it onto our rent. The police were not notified. It took three hours to changeit; the care-taker came with two workers and they replaced the door themselves. The door was a little long



so we had to saw the bottom. They plugged into our electricity. Now the door functions well, but sometimesit closes with difficulty. This happens to our neighboursregularly, but the culprit hasn’t been found. / smallerhousing block, separated settlement without givingthe distance from the home municipality

The boiler broke down and water from it flooded the flat and caused the last modification in the household. Thehusband stopped the water, all the furnishings in the flat had to be taken outside to dry. A professional cameto repair the boiler and the municipality paid for it fromthe repair fund that we contribute to each month. /smaller housing block, separated settlement 0.5 kmdistant from the home municipality

I have a problem with plastic windows (they live ina housing block): they can’t be opened. I called thetown but they just laughed at me. /larger housingblock, separated settlement 0.5 km distant from thehome municipality

Water leaks into the housing block basement; I notified the employees of XY [the name of the companyadministering to the flats – note from author] , who put if off. After a number of visits, I managed to urgethem along, and so they are working on it . /largerhousing block, separated settlement without givingthe distance from the home municipality

In the environment of excluded Roma communities,

with housing and its modifications a relatively widemeasure of solidarity and help from family or thebroader community was shown.35 A positive example of neighbourly help was also found with living in housingblocks, when neighbours together, at their ownexpense, painted the exterior walls. The research probe,however, recorded one such positive example, while onthe other hand, critical voices regarding co-inhabitantswere recorded: they don’t want to tidy up entryvestibules, they need to be scolded, they make a mess

around the housing blocks and avoid work brigades:

Perhaps a month ago we together with the other neighbours painted the exterior walls of our housingblock; we did it ourselves and it cost around 20 euroeach. /smaller housing block, segregated settlement3 km distant from the home municipality

The problem is with cleaning the entrance (housingblock), people need to be scolded. When I begin, they add on. /larger housing block, separated settlement0.5 km distant from the home municipality

It’s totally bad here; there is trash in front of the blockof flats and we don’t have a repaired housing block.When it rains, it leaks, and we have to wipe the floors.When there is supposed to be a work brigade, no onewants to do anything and one person doesn´t doanything. To get out of here, but we don’t haveanywhere to go. /larger housing block, separatedsettlement 2 km distant from the home municipality

The stories told about the last modification toa dwelling in excluded Roma settlements showed thamaintenance of the dwelling, such as painting andrepair of a roof or furnishings, predominates overmodifications which in a more principle way improvethe quality and standard of the dwelling. In excludedsettlements basic maintenance of a f lat or house is fomany households financially inaccessible. Thesurveyed households did an absolute majority of themodifications to a dwelling themselves (they are ablto do many of these activities), or with the help of relatives and acquaintances or with the help of giftsand the exchange of work (working off materials);they use paid services only occasionally.36

The situations found also indicated that housing wasimportant for a significant portion of thesehouseholds; with a lack of finances for largermodifications they at least try to maintain regularpainting; a portion of the households, however, due

to a lack f inances, have given up on this activity. Eve


82

35 Let us recall that similarly as with resolving the spatial and řnancial difřculties of accessibility of healthcare.36 As these were very diverse modiřcations to a dwelling of a more principle and maintenance character, which required different materials, although households

predominately did them themselves, the expended sums covered a relatively wide scale. They ranged from 0 to 5 thousand euro, and 16% of the sample did not givthe řnancial cost for the repair. The most frequently given sum was 20 euro, and then 40 euro and 60 euro. The average sum expended for modiřcation of a dwellingachieved for all types of repairs 214.67 euro, and the least řnancial resources were spent by households from settlement separated on the edge of a municipality(126.28 euro). A very similar sum came out for segregated settlements (136.75 euro), and the highest outlay for a modiřcation represented those for householdsconcentrated within a municipality, where this was three-times more (444.65 euro). Obviously, the type of repair intervened into the řnal sum in a principle way: thighest sum came out with a house reconstruction (1,160 euro) and the building of a řreplace (2,000 euro), the lowest with repair of the foundation of a shack (27euro). The average sum for painting was 31.11 euro.



modifications done in the present dwelling do not signal for the most recent period any stronger trendtoward improving the existing state of housing inexcluded settlements. More these better dwellings areimproved, shifts from bad conditions to standard ones

was rather infrequent.

Summary:

As was shown, with households from excludedcommunities – aside from the consequences of spatial segregation of the place of habitation itself, which arein many in many case fatal, there are many others andthey have a negative impact on the possibilities of integration into the individual area of the publicsphere – housing in poor quality dwellings is added to

the image of their living conditions, which oftencomplicates the hygienic situation of households.

This research probe also confirmed the findings fromquantitative surveys: a much higher concentration of non-standard dwelling in segregated environments.According to a subjective evaluation brick familyhouses and housing blocks in excluded settlementsare of varying quality – from excellent to very poor forlife, and non-standard dwellings are almost exclusively connected with disadvantageous

conditions. The monitoring of the official status of a dwelling also indicated that the deeper the spatial exclusion of the place of residence, the higher theoccurrence of unofficial buildings. At the same time,unofficial so-called “black” buildings significantlymore often take the form of dwellings of non-standard building materials, and in the case of brickhouses they are less frequent in excluded settlements.Critical opinions evaluating the living conditions fromthe side of residents of such dwellings themselves is

strongly linked with illegal buildings, which take theform most often of non-standard dwellings insegregated or separated settlements.

Unofficial buildings arise more easily in segregatedsettlements; at the same time these are not homes of the standard type and the residents of such dwellingsthemselves don’t see their living conditions in apositive light. The linking of these three aspects

indicates that the building of a non-standard dwellingin segregated environments is for its residentsa starting point for calamity. This is for many poorhouseholds from an excluded environment the onlyway they are able in the given financial and social

situation to ensure a “roof over their head” and tothus fulfil one of the most basic of living conditions.

The methods of acquiring a dwelling determined onthe basis of the research are relatively different according to the type of settlement and the type of dwelling. This means that the processes leading toethnic segregation or separation of housing are inreality varied. It occurs by buying a dwelling inexcluded environments, further by building a dwellingin such settlements or by inheriting a house, by

occupying an abandoned dwelling, but also byallocation of housing from a municipality. Householdswhich got their current dwelling from the municipalityoccurred in all three types of excluded settlements,with the highest share in the scope of separatedsettlements on the edge of a municipality. Thefindings indicate that local governments not infrequently located flats for the socially weak outsideof a municipality.

The situation from the viewpoint of the type of

dwelling, methods of acquiring it and the ownershiprelation regarding a dwelling seem to be verydisparate in excluded settlements. With many of thesurveyed households the formal status of the lived-inflat or dwelling was not clear, which in and of itself does not create a good starting point for housingstability and the quality of life for householdmembers. The subjective evaluation of livingconditions, which were the most unfavourable forsegregated settlements and non-standard dwellings,

is also telling in this regard.The research probe repeatedly and in detail showedthat Roma households from excluded settlementsoften inhabit non-quality dwellings, and the situationgets worse for segregated settlements. In segregatedsettlements not only are non-standard dwellings orshacks concentrated, but they often are and remainwithout the most basic facilities. But problems with



dwellings were found in all three types of excludedenvironments; in each households were found livingin dwelling not corresponding with the criteria of quality, whether the size of the dwelling was involvedor its over-crowdedness or deficiencies in basic

technical furnishings. Cases were not unusual in whichdeficiencies were combined together, for example,over-crowdedness with undersized technical furnishings, etc. The quality of housing of manyhouseholds from excluded settlements showedmarked deficits and lagged significantly behind thecommon standards of housing in Slovakia.

The majority of EU countries have accepted some typeof housing policy which should support thedevelopment of housing on the whole, its accessibility

for different groups of residents and ensure a certainquality of housing defined through minimal standards. Many of the conditions of housing found inexcluded settlements decidedly do not satisfystandards. The unavailability of water in dwellingsand the absence of sewerage, problems with energyand methods of heating lag far behind any standard –even minimal standards. Over-crowded housing andlimited space reduces its residents’ chances at anydevelopment. The frequent occurrence of a situation

when each member of a household not only does not have his or her own room but not even his or her ownbed is alarming.37

The recorded stories of the last modification to adwelling pointed to three basic associations:maintenance of a dwelling predominated over moreprinciple improvements in the quality of dwelling; formany households even basic maintenance of a flat orhouse is financially inaccessible; an absolute majorityof housing modifications are done by the households

themselves, or with the help of relatives and friends,while paid services are used only exceptionally. Eventhe latest modifications carried out in the current dwelling did not show a stronger trend towardimproving the existing quality of the housing in

excluded settlements, although a few positivechanges were recorded.

Questions relating to social housing or integrationplay a key role in the social policy of the EU. The Chartof Fundamental Rights of the European Union inChapter IV article 34 states: “In order to combat sociaexclusion and poverty, the Union recognises andrespects the right to social and housing assistance soas to ensure a decent existence for all those who lacksufficient resources, in accordance with the rules laiddown by Community law and national laws andpractices” (Charter..., 2007). In association withhousing the central governments of states, whichdevelop their own housing policies, are primarilyresponsible. Slovakia faces many challenges in this

regard, for example, how to renew the housing fund,how to plan and resolve the expansion of towns andvillages, how to support sustainable development, bualso how to help the young and disadvantaged groupMany households from excluded settlements decidedbelong to a disadvantaged group, as indicated by all the monitored parameters of housing quality. Thefindings cry out for principle measures in the interestof correcting the existing status, especially taking intaccount the demographic development of this part of

the population and regarding the growing need forflats for the growing trend in the number of newlyestablished families and their slender chances of obtaining housing themselves. The right to a decent existence defined in the Charter is minimally “laggingbehind” in this group.

One of the most important factors influencingmethods of housing in the Roma population in generis their territorial distribution, or the measure of theconcentration in individual regions. But an

inseparable part of their housing is also the characteof the settlement – whether of the settlement orurban type. The characteristics of housing for theRoma, according to P. Navrátil on the basis of ananalysis of the situation in Czech Republic, are as


8437 Still more alarming is the fact that this situation was stated back in 2002 in the report Poverty of the Roma and Social Care for them in the Slovak Republic (Poverty...

2002), and to 2012 nothing had changed.



follows: the concentration of Roma residents in theobjectionable, old housing fund in the ownership of the state; segregation practices of municipalitiesforced segregation, impossibility of renting a flat inanother location due to racial prejudice of the owners;

the origin of ghettoes; illegal occupancy of f lats,housing in flats without a rental contract (Navrátil,2003, pg. 124). According to the findings, it can bestated that in Slovakia these not only apply in full measure, but ultimately there are a great many moresegregation practices.

Stories of the latest modifications to a dwellingbrought not only the form, course and circumstancesof this situation closer: maintenance predominated

over improving the standard of the dwelling, the do-it-yourself performance of modifications, the givingup of modifications. At the same time they also gavestrong testimony regarding the diversity of thequality of housing in excluded communities,

especially in regard to the marked deprivation in thehousing of Roma households. The European UnionStatistics on Income and Living Conditions (EU SILC)monitors among the indicators of deprivation inhousing deficiencies of lighting and the humidity in aflat, the absence of a bath and a toilet. The findingsindicated that for dwellings in excluded environmentsthis type of deprivation has such a clear-cut form thata combination of a higher number and other variablesdescribing the state of housing would be required.



Nothing, don’t know

They don’t repair the dwelling – low income.We live in a housing block and we aren’t allowed to do anything; we’re in debt, so we’re glad that we someplace to live.

Due to existential problems they can‘t even afford to buy a lock on the door to the f lat; or paint or put glass in the windows.

The father in the family makes modifications to the dwelling (they live in a two-room flat with a bathroom which they got from the municipality).And likewise he takes care that the flat is maintained and is in order.

They haven’t done anything in the flat for a long time.

None.

We haven’t made any modifications recently; we live in a new building.

We live in a rental flat – we don’t paint because the roof leaks and there are maps.

They don’t made modifications at home due to a lack of finances.

The roof is falling in on us, but we don’t have money for anything; we can hardly live. At least we don’t have children.

They don’t make modifications to the home, they can’t; they are glad that they have money for medicines and food.

We haven’t made any modifications in the house for a long time now.

We haven’t repaired anything at home for a long time now.

So far none (house with one room and a bathroom and with basic furnishings).

None.

No modifications in recent times.

So far they’ve not done anything (brick house with 1 room and basic furnishings).

No modifications were done in the dwelling in recent times.

They haven’t done anything at home for a long time because they don’t have the money.

The house isn’t ours (it belongs to the municipality), so we aren’t really able to make modifications, although we would need them. We don’t even have the money for this.

We haven’t done anything around the house for a long time now; we live only from social benefits and it’s not enough for anything else.

Our home would need some repair work urgently (one room without a bathroom, weakly furnished); unfortunately we don’t have the finances for that. We plan to install water from the neighbour, at least to the kitchen. And then we would make a bathroom.

We would need to rebuild the whole house (bad conditions, they don’t have electricity or water, without a bathroom and just one room and a kitchen), but we don’t have the finances for it.

From the viewpoint of the weak economic situation we haven’t repaired the house for at least 20 years. It is in a desolate state; the roof is falling in

We haven’t repaired anything; we don’t have the money. But it would be necessary to change the doors and paint (illegal building, brick house withtwo rooms).

We haven’t repaired anything in the last two years, even though we need to. Financially it’s not possible; we pay a lot for electricity and at the moment we are living in the parents’ house.

I live with my parents and I don’t decide when and what gets done, even if I wanted.

This is mainly a newer dwelling; it wasn’t necessary in recent times to make any modifications. The last time it rained, to prevent the carrying of muinto the dwelling, they poured stones in front of the entrance, which they swept up from around the main road.

We didn’t make any modifications this year; we have our house in order.

Our dwelling is in a very bad state (a shack with no furnishings and electricity); we don’t have money for a repair. But we have a promise from the mayor that if he has a free f lat or house, we will get it.


86

Appendix to Chapter 3:Last modification to a dwelling

TYPE OF MODIFICATION



We don’t do anything at home, because this isn’t a home (a shack with no infrastructure), only when something is really urgent.

We don’t make any modifications to the home, because our shack is hardly standing. We would need completely new housing, at least a portable hut

The lack of f inances doesn’t allow me any repairs and renovations to my dwelling. I live under my own conditions, as I can (they live in a shack with two rooms, a total of 12 people). For a modification or repair they scrounge from those better off.

The bad financial situation, mentally disabled, bad care for the dwelling (shack), they try to survive from day to day.

We haven’t had any problems with the dwelling recently.

1 Repairs of facilities in a flat:

A change of the front doors in June of this year. They did the work themselves, and everyone who lives in the household had a share in it. Nearly everyone contributed to it: the total cost was approximately 270 euro.

Modifications in the dwelling: The toilet didn’t flush, the electric switches didn’t work, and the kitchen faucet was broken... We turned with the problems the administrator of the flat, with whom we agreed on the removal of defects in the f lat.

Someone banged on the door of the flat and they had to give us a new one. The lock was damaged and it couldn’t be locked; the whole door was devastated. The culprit was never discovered. It was necessary to replace the door – we notified the care-taker and after three days they brought us a new door. We had to pay for it – 30 euro; the administrator added it onto our rent. The police were not notified. It took three hours to change it; the care-taker came with two workers and they replaced the door themselves. The door was a little long, so we had to saw the bottom. They plugged into our electricity.Now the door functions well, but sometimes it closes with diff iculty. This happens to our neighbours regularly, but the culprit hasn’t been found.

My husband and I (currently a widow with two adult children ages 22 and 25) last modified our roof half a year ago; we put in new furniture.

The head of the family put a door on the shack by himself: he bought the hinges for 8 euro, brought the wood from the forest, trimmed off the small stumps and hammered it all together.

2 Painting, spackling, walls

We recently painted – only white; colours are more expensive. We haven’t made any other modifications. This cost 5 euro; we did it ourselves.

We last painted. I painted it myself (a woman), the husband helped me in the household a little; he has health problems. I go to work – for 4 hours inthe morning. Now through the school holidays I tidy up at the kindergarten, so when I come home, I need to rest a little and then I can do somethingat home. That’s why the painting took me two days and tidying up also two days. It cost me 25 euro: Primalex 12 euro, paint for the baseboards 10 euro and cleaning needs 3 euro.

Not long ago we painted the entire flat. It cost me around 50 euro, which I gave for paint. Since my husband is handy, he painted the entire flat himself with my help.

It was necessary to paint, because on the walls, even after painting, there were cracks (housing block). The father in the family painted it himself.They bought paint and spackle; he covered the cracks and this is less expensive. The material was purchased in the amount of 17.90 euro and now it’sall right.

They don’t make any modifications, only when they paint the flat.

Painting of the flat – two buckets for 6 euro. I did the painting myself and the children helped me with the tidying up. We paint often, because our adult daughter with her family and our son with his partner live with us in our f lat; together we are 15 people (a two-room flat in a housing block).

In the spring they painted their own flat; people for whom the father works digging the garden gave them lime.

The last modification was an aesthetic change to the ceiling. They bought a polystyrene gazette, paint and glue, which cost perhaps 150 euro. The husband together with relatives did the work themselves; it lasted two days.

The last modification was perhaps two years ago; there was mould in the kitchen and bathroom and the walls were dirt y. The oldest son did the work (21 years old), as he has been trained in such a f ield. They bought paint, plaster, a roller for painting – for perhaps 27 euro. The work proceeded quickly, but today it is still necessary to paint, because mould is still made.

The neighbour flooded them out perhaps a year ago, it was necessary to paint the kitchen and the corridor. The neighbours contributed 10 euro to them. They bought paint, a paint roller; brushes and other stuf f they got from the f amily. The material they bought cost 38 euro. They made the modification themselves and help also came from the family. The work went really well, so now this is okay.

We have facilities in the flat; I painted myself a half-year ago. I bought the material for 10 euro.

They painted the rooms: they bought the material (40 euro) themselves and the man and woman did the work together. It’s okay now; they painted because smoke had dirtied the walls.

The last modification was painting the rooms. It was necessary to buy paint and a brush, together for 15 euro. This went well and members of the family worked on it; it lasted one day. The wall is still clean.



Since we have lived in a municipal rental flat for only three years, no modifications are necessary, only painting. We painted in August; we bought paint already mixed and we paid perhaps 20 euro for it.

We’ve only lived in the flat for two and a half years, so no repairs are necessary. Only we now painted in the summer; my son painted and the oldestdaughter helped him. It didn’t cost too much, paint perhaps 20 euro.

So, we last painted both rooms (housing block), we don’t have money for the f loor. My husband painted and this cost us 25 euro.

We painted the whole flat this year and did it ourselves; we paid about 40 euro for paint.

The dwelling, the flat, we didn’t rebuild; we don’t have the money for this; in the summer we only painted the rooms.

Painting of rooms ourselves, with our own money.

We pay rent, so we don’t make big repairs. We paint every year in the spring. It would be nice to have our own home.

Modifications could be made to the house, but we don’t have the money. At least I paint each year, at least these basic things, so that we don’t live filth (40 euro).

They painted the kitchen and bedroom.

They painted the rooms; they did it themselves. They bought Primalex and tools for painting, together they paid perhaps 15 euro. They don’t remember exactly, because this was last year in summer.

In April they painted themselves – wife. Together it cost 18 euro: Primalex 15 euro and paintbrush 3 euro.

Every two years they paint in August. They do it themselves; the material costs perhaps 17 euro.

The last modification was three years ago, when they painted. My husband painted himself, but now we need to repair the roof, but we don’t have tfinancial resources.

Painting the room themselves; the family helped. They gave 13 euro for Primalex and 3 euro for colour.

Two months ago they whitewashed the room that serves as a living room and bedroom. It was necessary to buy Primalex for approximately 30 euro;they borrowed the tools from relatives. They painted themselves and the work went without problems, but the walls are at present again dirty (therare nine people living in a house with three rooms, without a bathroom and water, five of them are children under the age of 10).

We haven’t done any large modifications for 3-4 years. Oh, we painted two years ago; it wasn’t expensive. We did everything in white and it cost around 23 euro.

A year ago they painted all the rooms; they did it themselves. They paid 5 euro for the whitewash.

I last painted the kitchen. It was necessary to paint the whole house, but I don’t have the money. Since my partner died I live with diff iculty;

a man’s help is missing in the house. Painting cost me approximately 8 euro for paint, I painted it alone, but the girls helped me (two daughters age 10 and 15 years).

We painted in the summer; I bought the paint and brushes and my husband painted. It cost us perhaps 20 euro.

They painted the interior last month. They put the furniture in front of the house, swept out the room and plastered the cracks. They paid approximately 20 euro for paint. The family helped move the furniture out and then back in, but they did the painting themselves.

In August they painted the kitchen and rooms themselves (they live in a house with two rooms and a bathroom). They bought Primalex for 15 euro.

We last painted the living room; it cost about 100 euro.

They had problems with the wall, so they need to paint. They painted themselves; together they gave around 50 euro for paint.

We had mould behind the couch so we had to spray the wall against mould and paint it again. This cost a total of about 7 euro, and my husband did the work.

On 20 August 2011 we painted all three rooms; a member of the family helped us. It cost us 40 euro, but we have a clean and tidy house now.In August we painted the walls in the rooms. I bought paint for two rooms for 30 euro and also 7 euro for paint brushes. I began to paint a second time; before that we paid a painter.

This summer we painted and my son and his wife helped us. We paid approximately 18 euro for paint. We painted all three rooms and the hallway.

We painted in the summer; our nephews came to help We paid 30 euro to paint three rooms and the hallway. It took about three days.

Nothing remains for house repairs; we are glad that we have electricity. If the partner gets activation work in the village, we would have more; theypromised her this for the spring. During the summer we bought Primalex and painted.

Painting the kitchen; purchase of Primalex for around 10 euro. They did it themselves – the father in the family painted.


88



The last thing we did was paint the rooms in the house around a year ago. My husband – the head of the family – did the work. Costs were for buying paint, plaster, a roller and brushes for around 60 euro.

Perhaps before Easter we painted the living room. My husband painted with our sons (18 and 15 years old); it cost perhaps 20 euro.

We should have long ago repaired the roof; we already have the roofing tiles, but not the other things. The interior, as you see, we always keep clean;once a year we paint; in fact my wife does this. She always says that I don’t know how to work. The painting costs about 40-45 euro. What we should

urgently do needs around 800-900 euro.

He doesn’t have time to repair his own home, because he must earn his living (he lives alone). There is always something to do on the house. Perhapsthree years ago he pained all of the rooms white. When something gets dirt y, he just paints that place.

Modification of the kitchen and painting; we did it ourselves and it cost us 100 euro for materials.

The last thing was my husband repaired one wall in the bedroom: the mesh, glue and spackle costs perhaps 40 euro.

Spackle on the walls – this was our last modification in our house. We did it ourselves, my husband and sons. The sons also helped us financially,although they don’t live with us anymore and have their own families. They gave us 100 euro, so that we could afford to do it. The material with transport cost us around 60 euro, to this something to eat, so from this 100 euro nothing was left. Everything was done in three days and it was okay

They painted the kitchen and room themselves; paint cost 15 euro.

They reworked the kitchen and had to paint it. I did the modification myself; I had to buy the paint and brushes. I’m happy with the result.

They did a house repair three years ago when they bought it. It was painting; they don’t recall the exact expenses for paints and the necessary tools.

We last had to paint the f lat; it cost us around 70 euro. I got the money together like this: each month I put away 20 euro. My brothers helped me with the work and didn’t ask for any money for the work.

In the spring before Easter they painted the rooms and did all the work themselves. They didn’t have to pay anything for the material, because one woman whom the father of the family had helped with digging and spading the garden gave them whitewash for painting.

This was painting the rooms before Easter. We painted the kitchen and living room; my husband painted and our son helped him. We bought paint,a paint roller and a brush: it all cost about 30 euro. The work went without any problems.

The last modification was on 20 June; it was necessary to paint and plaster places on some parts of the walls. The paint was bought white because it’s cheaper and the plaster: about 10 euro. The father of the family did the work. We varnished the frames of the windows and doors: the lacquer cost 8.70 euro.

I last painted a room. I needed 30 euro for paint and my brother-in-law helped for free.

We can only make essential repairs from benefits. Last year we painted and this is expensive (paint costs 20 euro). I would like to repair the dwellingit is cold there, there is a draft through the windows and door but unfortunately, we can’t afford it, so this only fix, as we are able.

Last week on Saturday we painted; I can’t on Sunday when I have to bathe the children. I painted, because it was dirty here; the air here wasn’t goodwhen I got up. When it’s a mess, you feel ashamed. I painted alone, and my oldest son (20 years old), who is at home, hung around the stove, he would have painted until the evening; for me it took two hours. I got the paint from Dáša, who also painted. I don’t have any money; so why go crazyIt was already half spent and I asked her when she had some left over to leave it for me. It was necessary to shift the cabinets, my son helped. The neighbours didn´t help. I had the roller; I didn’t have to borrow one

Painting rooms four months ago, repair of the facade – painting. They did it themselves with the family. Paint costs around 15 euro.

3 Repair of a roof, a leak:

After a lot of rain we found that we have to repair the roofing, to buy more and to repair the roofing. So far the neighbours helped us with old roofing, which is in good condition. My brother helped me with changing the roofing tiles; we changed perhaps 100 of them and now it no longer leaks. A non-Roma neighbour promised us that he’d get hold of the roofing for free.

Repair of the roof by themselves, just a few roof ing tiles.

The roof leaked so we repaired it ourselves. We didn’t buy anything, because we had the material at home.

Leaking roof – waterproofing the roof. I did it myself; the materials cost me 190 euro. I do such things myself; otherwise I wouldn’t havethe finances for it.

In July 2011 they whitewashed a room (they live in a house with one room and a kitchen, without a bathroom). And they also repaired a part of the roof; they put on boards from the side. They bought wood strips from the sawmill, they chose the best boards and used them in the repair.

They don’t do modifications around the house due to lack of f inances, but in fact they repaired a leaking roof. They paint once a year and only one room where it leaks.



Last was repair of the roof. The family helped. They bought wood for the roof and sheet metal (an independent brick house with a bathroom and furnishings).

After a big windstorm the wind took of f half of the roof. They didn’t have the money or the money, so they helped with what they were able. They gothe sheet metal and boards from relatives, a neighbour gave them old linoleum, and so they were able to repair the roof so that rain didn’t leak intothe room. (They live in poor conditions with three children in a brick house without a bathroom and with one room, without furnishings and electricity.)

Modification of the roof – leaking, cement roofing tiles damaged after winter. The problem originated still in winter, when they had to buy a plasticsheeting to cover the interior on the side where 8 roof ing tiles had cracked. They hammered the plastic sheets to beams, which then sluiced the waaway to a part away from the walling. This costs 15 euro. To that was renewal of the leaking roof and walls: plaster (plaster and sand) for 10 euro,painting for 15 euro, purchase of 8 roof ing tiles from a neighbour for 10 euro, 5 euro to the other neighbour for changing the tiles. Total costs achieved 60 euro.

Repair due to leaking: the flat enterprise repaired this from the repair fund (two-room flat with a bathroom in a housing block in ownership of the municipality).

They bought new sheeting (rubber) for the roof a month ago; this cost them 48 euro. They pulled and secured the sheeting themselves; the partnerworked on this himself and his father-in-law helped.

They last repaired the roof: they bought sheet metal worth perhaps 100 euro, and they removed the old sheeting and put on the new. They did the repair themselves; the roof, however, still leaks.

The roof leaked, the last modification to the dwelling was repairing it. They did it themselves with relatives. The sheet metal cost perhaps 280 euro

The problem of leaking is resolved but the roof is still not fully completed. The repair lasted three days.

The last modification to the dwelling was repair of a leaking roof. They did the repair themselves, putting a piece of sheet metal and unused PVC flooring over the holes. No costs for the repair.

Repair of the roof – it leaked. The husband worked off the material at a white man’s place; he did the repair work himself and family members helpehim. Painting by themselves – 15 euro for paint. Ceiling repair: mesh, glue, polystyrene, plaster (25-30 euro); December 2010.

We had to repair the roof (they live in a shack), because water was leaking in. We bought sheet metal in the bazaar, a large rubber sheet and my husband repaired the roof with his brothers. It didn’t cost us much, perhaps 15-20 euro.

Leaking roof: the original sheet metal was rusted, and so it was like a sieve. They got the sheet metal from the scrap metal yard for 10 euro, where was sold to them for 0.60 per kilo. The father had to transport it from town (about 5 km) on a wagon borrowed from a neighbour; for loaning it he drank two bottles of a favourite wine (Milenka) with the neighbour. A nephew helped with changing the sheet metal for food. The other necessary materials, such as nails and wood, they got from a non-Roma, where the man goes on a work brigade – he helps in a garden and around the house (spade work, manual digging, concreting).

We don’t repair anything because we don’t have the money for it. When the shack begins to lead, then my husband has to insulate something (theylive with five children in a shack without any infrastructure).

4 Bathroom or toilet:

They built a bathroom themselves over three months, they paid about 1,200 euro for materials.

We modified the bathroom and family and friends helped. We saved up for the work.

The last was reworking the bathroom; the mother of the head of the family is bed-bound (unable to walk); they got a grant from the Slovak Off ice oWork, Social Affairs and Family for repair of the bathroom or for its reconstruction, so that there would be a shower for the ill mother.

In 2011 they reconstructed the bathroom and toilet. The man and the close family did it themselves. They bought building materials for about 200 euro. They haven’t managed to quite f inish it yet – because of the lack of financial resources.

We last reconstructed the bathroom. We borrowed 1,000 euro, which I’m repaying at 42 euro a month. We bought a bathtub, a toilet, tiling, wall tiland an automatic washer. My father and brother-in-law helped with the work; it’s f inished now.

The last was changing the bathroom pipes for new ones. They did the modif ication themselves – the husband with relatives. They didn’t buy the material, together with cement they got as a gif t from the mayor. The work took one day.

We last reworked the bathroom and put a f loating floor in the living room. All of the changed we made ourselves.

We last reworked the bathroom in our flat; our family and friends did the work for us.

Two years ago we put heating in the bathroom; lately we haven’t modified anything in the flat.

5 Tiles, floor:

They put in tiles and insulation with fibreglass. They did it ourselves; they gave 800 euro for materials.


90



They changed the floor in the living room; they had an old f loor in there (wooden slats), with ants coming out of it. They hadto put concrete down which they made themselves; they gave about 100 euro for the materials. Afterward they put down a floating floorwhich cost 150 euro.

We painted and we changed the floating floor, because it was old. These repairs cost us 250 euro.

We changed the floor; my brothers helped. They worked gradually on it slowly. Now it is in the state it should be in.

Four months ago we changed the floor, replacing the old linoleum with new one. My husband did the work. We bought the new linoleum for 80 euro.

We modified the stairs – the entrance into the house, which got broken. My husband made the stairs out of concrete and our oldest sons helped him (22 and 19 years). We bought the cement, which cost us perhaps 20 euro; the work went without problems and the stairs are all right.

Purchase and laying of a f loating floor. They did the work themselves.

In the kitchen there was rubber f looring (a housing block), which after a certain number of years became cracked and destroyed. It was necessary toreplace it. The material was bought for 29.45 euro, and the family did the work itself and f inished in May of this year.

6 Tiled the kitchen, etc.:

We last put tiles on the wall in the kitchen around the stove and kitchen cabinet. I bought the tiles on sale, so they were not expensive (4.50 euro pesquare metre). I bought 5 m 2 , glue, grouting – all came out to approximately 40 euro. A friend did it for me and didn’t want anything for the work, soI evened things out with material goods – I bought him a sack of potatoes.

7 Added a storey, an extension:

We added on a storey, so far it has cost 1,500 euro, but we still haven’t finished it. My husband is building it with his brother and my father. They’re working on it for the second month now.

They live in a portable hut, so this is very complicated, they are crammed in (two parents, four children age 13 to 22 years, plus a grandson from the oldest daughter). They last build on a vestibule to prevent losing heat in winter. They paid 50 euro for the cinder blocks used, bought the cement,sand and lime they got for free (for work – the husband worked in the village and in place of money they gave him materials). They built it themselves.

8 Insulation, doors:

My husband insulated holes in the extension – in the hallway. It wasn’t expensive; we gave around 20 euro for it. We bought a little f ibreglass.

9 Repair of a chimney, heating:

I last had problems with the chimney perhaps a week ago; it was smoking a lot. When my husband got his pay, I had it repaired. My husband did the repair with my brother-in-law, but bricks and other things relating to the chimney cost 100 euro.

The family lives in a housing block (two-room flat, three people living in it, parents and their daughter); they last changed the pipe in the chimney and did the work themselves.

They plan to modify the dwelling in September – change the flue from the stove and repair of the chamotte in the stove. The anticipated costs are 50 euro: for material, costs for delivery. The cost for mounting it perhaps 30 euro, so 80 euro in all.

They repaired a hole in the floor – an old chimney sprinkled with sand and gravel (they live in an old manor house in one room without a kitchen and a bathroom and any furnishings, not even electricity; (together with children they are six persons). They made the modification themselves without investing any money.

10 Repair or reworking of waste, water:

Before the start of the year we had a problem with waste, so we had to order a company to clear the waste pipe of waste, because the pipe was blocked. They cleaned out all of the waste pipes with a snake and we paid 60 euro for the work and 50 euro for transport for the company.

We fixed a leak – a repair in the bathroom, a damp wall.

11 Modifications to a garden, yard, fence:

In July we put the grassy surface in the yard in order; we planted new grass and rolled it. We build a new wooden summer house and a wooden fence.The material and the work cost 2,500 euro. My cousin – a carpenter – and the wife helped me during the weekends.

Modification of the yard – we did it ourselves.

We repaired the trellis fence around the house, it was torn and dogs would come to the door. It cost about 35 euro, my husband and father-in-law didit; in one day the work was done.

Woodshed – huts from wood for storing fuel and wood for putting in the stove in winter. Costs 60 euro (material – boards, strips of wood, plastic sheets, nails).



12 Reworking of the core:

Two months ago we reworked the core of the f lat to increase space in the living room. I did the modif ication myself; I cut out the wall and pulled dothe edge and painted. Costs for reconstruction were 180 euro. The living room is larger and the space is open from the kitchen.

13 Repair of foundations, new walls:

We finished building a fallen wall.

Because we live in a settlement and we have a wooden shack, repairs to the place are always occurring regularly, mainly after rainy weather. Water leaks under the foundations of the house, and so I always repair it. I build a supporting foundation from rocks and cement, but this costs me 50 eura month, so I only repair it after rain.

We last repaired the shack. Winter is coming and we have to put the shack in order so we don’t freeze. From benefits we bought wood and we put it order. It cost us 60 euro. My brother and brother-in-law helped us and now it is done.

Excavation around the circumference of the dwelling (they live in a dwelling not intended for housing, without a bathroom and water, with the electricity switched off), so that during rainstorms water doesn’t lead through the dwelling, but instead collects into the drainage excavation.Excavation of a canal 20 x 20 cm around the entire circumference, plus a side channel to a hill so that it runs of f.

14 Connection to a water main, water:

We had a problem with water: there wasn’t enough in the well. Not long ago the village had a connection put in which they linked to their home. Thdid it themselves and the f amily helped.

Replacing a faucet and an inlet hose, which flooded from their ground f loor flat the 24 m 2 ceiling of the basement flat below. The faucet and hose cost 40 euro, and the material for repair: plaster 4 euro and Primalex 15 euro; the inlet hose cost approximately 60 euro.

15 They put in a fireplace:

Two years ago they put a f ireplace into the house; the husband did almost all of it himself; his brother helped him. They took out a loan for 2,000 euro.

16 Repair of plaster, new plaster, facade:

Falling plaster on the house: they bought cement, lime, they had sand at home. The owner of the house did it himself.

The last modification related to the entry hall, where the plaster was falling. The brother-in-law helped them, and the husband assisted. It was necessary to purchase cement, lime, gravel and Primalex for the repair: it cost about 60 euro in all. It was necessary to clear the wall of the originaplaster, to smooth out the wall with mortar, add the stucco and then rub it smooth. They left it to dry and then painted it. The hallway is repaired ain a good state even at present.

They insulated the entire house; they borrowed 5,000 euro (a retired grandmother). They had a master builder from the village, it’s not f inished yeThey want to put on a new facade – they don’t know if they will manage it, it depends on the weather.

Three years ago we did a reconstruction on the house; we repaired the plaster on the outside. We didn’t know how to do it ourselves; some professionals did it. The work with the materials I don’t much remember, about around 700 euro.

The last was repair of the external walls of the house, to prevent the dampening of the wall. It was necessary to purchase plastic sheeting and stondrainage for approximately 400 euro. The family did the repair themselves, and they borrowed the tools from the village. The repair lasted one day but the wall kept getting damp.

Five years ago they insulated the family house. They did it themselves with the family. Now they are preparing to change the windows themselves.

Perhaps a month ago we together with the other neighbours painted the exterior walls of our housing block; we did it ourselves and it cost around 20 euro each.

Repair of fallen plaster and damaged plaster in part of the front door frame. Rough plaster for 10 euro without the f inishing plaster, plus painting o

the exterior with the rest of the whitewash from the plaster.

17 Change, modify windows:

Replaced three wooden windows with plastic ones because they were not insulated and the wood was damaged for years; it couldn’t be renovated.Three windows with a complete offer cost 890 euro (the price includes disassembly, installation, alteration of the plaster and blinds). Because we didn’t have success with the bank, a non-banking company provided a 1,000 euro loan. And in the instalment for 36 months at 40 euro a month it comes out to 1,450 euro. The bank didn’t provide the f inances because our income does not achieve the life minimum for a family. The leftover monwas invested into clothing for the children, paint and painting –roughly for three rooms 40 euro.

We changed the windows three years ago; we both still worked then. We borrowed 2,000 euro, since then we haven’t made any modifications. We apainted all the rooms then.


92



In summer they replaced the windows and painted the rooms – together about 150 euro. They did the work themselves.

Replaced windows with help from the f amily (brick house with two rooms, bathroom and basic furnishings). Financed from savings (older couple – both on a pension).

They changed the windows in the entire housing block. It costs us more for paying the monthly rent: they raised it by 50 euro a month. Aside from this, we would really like them to change the entrance door, because it doesn’t close very well.

Insulation of the windows: during the last rain shower water leaked into the dwelling through a crack above the window frame (they live in a container– a garden cottage in one room without a bathroom, electricity or water). The repair went with glazier’s putty and a new coat of paint: 6 euro.

18 Building, remodel of a house, dwelling:

I built my house myself from money saved, from a private savings scheme (so-called ´Včielka´ or ‘Bee ) and the building saving account. After using it up I was connected to the IDIA savings program, which was provided by ETP Slovensko. Then I continued in a microloan programme where I took out aninterest-free loan which I am now paying back. I’m glad that I have a place to live, because a house is covered and I have it furnished for housing.

We did a reconstruction of rooms from microloans which were offered by ETP Slovensko. We managed to improve our housing: we changed the floor,painted the rooms and rebuilt the bathroom.

The roof leaked and it was necessary to modify the bathroom and the toilet. I took out a microloan through ETP Slovensko in the amount of 1,160 euro. For the mentioned money I bought material, where I modified the f loor and reconstructed the bathroom and the toilet and I want to change the roof covering. We did all the mentioned work ourselves.

Three years ago we built a small house; during construction of the shack the entire family helped us, but I don’t remember the sum that was spent onthe building.

99 Other problem:

Last year floods – the roof leaked; the ceiling got wet – they had to paint it, change the damaged roofing tiles on the roof, and change the floating floor. They did it all themselves; they got 300 euro (a grant from the state).

A woodshed in the yard from wood shaf ts and boards; we had the wood from the sawmill.

The boiler broke down and water from it f looded the flat and caused the last modification in the household. The husband stopped the water, all the furnishings in the flat had to be taken outside to dry. A professional came to repair the boiler and the municipality paid for it from the repair fund that we contribute to each month.

The problem is with cleaning the entrance (housing block), people need to be scolded. When I begin, they add on.

I have a problem with plastic windows (they live in a housing block): they can’t be opened. I called the town but they just laughed at me.

It’s totally bad here; there is trash in front of the block of flats and we don’t have a repaired housing block. When it rains, it leaks, and we have to wipe the floors. When there is supposed to be a work brigade, no one wants to do anything and one person doesn´t do anything. To get out of here,but we don’t have anywhere to go.

Water leaks into the housing block basement; I notified the employees of XY [the name of the company administering to the flats – note from author], who put if of f. After a number of visits, I managed to urge them along, and so they are working on it.

Building of a fence – they bought material and built it themselves from the foundations. Basically the entire settlement helped, some were helpful,others not.

We last had a problem with the electricity. The annual statement came and we had a large undercharge. So I had to take out a small loan of 500 euro and pay for the electricity so that the kids were not in the dark. (I gave the money to a neighbour from who I get electricity.)

We haven’t had any modifications, although we would need them very much, but building materials are very expensive for us. Through the summer we got rid of the trash dump which we had right behind the house – we dug out a large hole.

Insulating of a housing block:

They insulated our block of flats, and they put in plastic windows. The town made the repair. We have it really nice now; I’m not complaining.

We had our block of f lats insulated, but the light still didn’t work in the hallway. The town f inanced the modification to the block; that is the

administrator of the housing blocks.



Empirical surveys of a quantitative and a qualitativecharacter (UNDP, 2005, 2011, 2012...) are testimony

regarding the poverty of Roma households. Most generally it is defined as “a state characterised bya lack of basic life resources and access to services.An individual, a family or a social group cannot fromtheir own resources satisfy the most necessary lifeneeds. Therefore, help is needed from other social units (the state, municipality, third sector, charity,etc.). Poverty is a situation when incomes are not sufficient to cover the subsistence minimum”(Strieženec, 1996, pg. 75). According to theory anda legislative definition, in addition to housing andclothing, eating – the securing of food – also belongsamong the “most essential needs of life”.

Which is why the situational analysis devotedrelatively great attention to the method of consumingfood in excluded settlements. The reasons were not only economic but also empirical: according to theresults of quantitative research from 2010, 55% of Roma households with children experiencedthe situation that they really did not have anything to

feed their children, while approximately 46% had thisexperience repeatedly. At the same time, extremedeprivation still increased in segregatedenvironments, when overall 61% of householdsexperienced an overall absence of food for childrenand approximately half of the households from thisenvironment did so repeatedly (UNDP, 2012, pg. 191).

Sociological findings have demonstrated that forexcluded communities are often characteristicindicators of absolute poverty. That is, aside from the

relative poverty in comparison with the “livingstandard common in the given society”38 deprivation

acquires the traits of absolute poverty connected wita certain “physiological threshold, under which the

basic needs essential for sustaining existence itself are not fulfilled”, including food (Filipová – Valná,1995 pg.119).

Poverty and long-term unemployment go hand-in-hand: according to the literature, impoverishedgroups of residents display the highest risk of long-term unemployment, and unemployment in returnstrengthens poverty.39 Several quantitative surveys(UNDP, 2006, 2012; World Bank, 2011),40 havelikewise confirmed the huge measure of

unemployment and the large share of long-termto very long-term unemployment in the Romapopulation, especially those living in spatiallyexcluded settlements, and this research probereached a similar result. Among all of the 192surveyed households from 131 excluded settlementsthe person designated as the head of the householdwas unemployed in 73% of them (employed heads ofthe household reached 13%, and 14% had some othestatus). The period of unemployment among them

ranged from 3 to 348 months, and the average lengtof unemployment for the current unemployed heads households achieved 117.51 months, with the most occurring in those separated on the edge of amunicipality (125.92 months) and segregatedsettlements (119.45 months), while for concentratedwithin a municipality this was 101.62 months.Together 79% of surveyed households did not haveeven one working member (16% had one workingmember and only 5% two or more, but usually this wnon-standard employment not on the basis of

a contract for an indefinite period, but more as workbrigades and occasional work).


94

4. MEALS: MEAL PLANS AND FOODS FROM DIFFERENT POINTS OF VIEW

38 Which depends on the excessive division of resources and is usually associated with education and qualiřcation, healthy customs, family background, nutrition andhousing, spending leisure time and social standing.

39 See, for example, Mareš, 2002, pg. 97.40 According to UNDP research from 2010 the measure of employment of the Roma population 15-64 years counted using the VZPS methodology represented 15.5%

and unemployment 84.4%; for segregated settlements only 13.5% and 88.9%; in the case of Roma women only 11% and 75.1%; from all unemployed Roma residenolder than 15 years, 63.6% had been unemployed for longer than one year and 46.9% longer than two years (UNDP, 2012, pg. 140-152).



In the surveyed settlements we thus come across veryconcentrated and very long-term unemployment,which on average lasts for nearly 10 years. In respect to the situation of the long-term unemployed, wespeak about the anomic situation and about deprivation a lot sooner, after shorter period of unemployment. The deprivation of the unemployed islinked with their exclusion from social relations andwith exclusion from consumption as a central activityof modern society (Mareš, 2002, pg.76). According tothe author, the social impact of long termunemployment for individuals is primarily thelowering of the level of living, but also other impacts,such as the growth of stress in the family and in other

interpersonal relationships, depression, loss of motivation and a feeling of helplessness; and societyfeels the increased consequences41 as well.

In the surveyed environments a high measure of dependence on social benefits was also found; inconsequence of the high rate of unemployment inthese environments social benefits represent animportant and frequently the only source of incomefor many Roma households (for more, see Chapter 2).Many long-term unemployed respondents from

excluded settlements are dependent on benefits andallowances in material need and other social benefits.Therefore, meal consumption in the course of a month

in many households from excluded settlements isoften based on the flow of social incomes into thehouseholds – it is different before the arrival of benefits and after their receipt. What specific form it takes before benefits arrival was one of the maingoals of including meal plans into the research.Another question was in what direction did the meal consumption change after the receipt of social benefits (or other incomes).

4.1. Meals before social benefitsand after them42

The task of the research assistants was to write into

a logbook, in as much detail as possible, what theadult members and children ate from breakfast through dinner and after, on two days during themonth: one falling into the period before benefits andthe other after benefits. During processing thenumber of meals per day was monitored, as well asmeat, dairy products and fruit on the menu; furtherthe variety of the meal plan was tracked, as well as thecaloric quality and healthiness of the food.

As was shown, in the period before benefits three

meals per day predominated on the menu of households from excluded settlements. A total of 47%of the meal plans had this number of daily meals

41 We shall mention the increased demands on the state budget (unemployment beneřts and other support and social services, losses for uncollected taxes and taxrelief), the growth of social-pathological phenomena, the instability of society. (Mareš, 2002, pg. 47).

42 We recall a note from the introductory section: from the character of the research it follows that the presented numerical values serve exclusively for comparativepurposes – for comparing differences between differently deřned groups of excluded Roma households; they decidedly do not correspond to the quantitative range othe given value attribute in excluded Roma communities.

Note A total number of 191 surveyed households provided their meal plans before and after receiving benefits.

Table 8Meal plans of Roma households from excluded settlements by number of meals per day (in %)

Period before benefits Period after benefits

1 meal 3 -

2 meals 9 1

3 meals 47 364 meals 28 31

5 meals 13 32

Total 100 100



before benefits, and usually the mid-morning andafternoon snacks were left out. All together 12% of thedaily menus consisted of only two or one meal per day.More than three meals before benefits were stated by41% of households, and from this, only 13% had

a complete meal plan. With a shift towards spatiallyexcluded settlements, the number of meals decreased:from the group of households from segregatedsettlements only 31% had more than three meals perday (without regard to their quality of healthynutrition) before benefits; in the group of separatedsettlements on the edge of municipalities it was 46%and in concentrated within a municipality 59%.

In comparison with the period before benefits, a shift toward several meals per day occurred in this direction

after receipt of benef its (Table 8). Fewer than threemeals almost did not occur on the meal plans at all:more than one-third consisted of three meals per day;on the other hand, the number of meal plans withfour, but especially with five meals increased (from13% to 32%). While before benefits 41% of therecorded menus in excluded settlements had morethan three meals per day, after benef its this was 63%.Upon comparisons of the two menus for specifichouseholds it was shown that 56% of the meal plans

remained in the same regimen in terms of the numberof meals per day and the remaining 44% increased inthe number of meals. The multiple-meal menustypically remained in the same regimen: 28% hadthree meals before benefits and after them, 16% hadfour meals before benefits and after them and 12%had five meals before and after.

How, for example, meal plans of households lookedbefore social benefits and how the number of mealschanged after benefits is shown in more detail by the

following examples (for more, see Appendix 1 toChapter 3.4). As they indicate, among the householdswith a limited number of meals per day were solitarycouples without children as well as households withdependent children. The meal plan of a family withchildren before benefits consists, for example, of what the head of the family was able to exchange forwork and from the consummation of the existing

stores of foodstuffs, or from one meal which possiblyremains also for dinner:

Before benefits: Breakfast: -; Mid-morning snack: -;Lunch: Food from potatoes and flour: the family doesnhave a large difference before benefits and after

benefits, because they are so heavily in debt that theylive more from what others offer them. In the period before benefits they eat from supplies of potatoes and flour.; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: -;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Bread, butter, salami, tea,coffee; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Potatoes indifferent ways – with cabbage, milk, pastas; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: -. (solitary couple age 40 and 41 yearsboth unemployed, separated settlement on the edge)

Before benefits: Breakfast: -; Mid-morning snack: -;Lunch: My partner goes around the village to help for

food, and we eat what he brings, but he always brings something; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: -;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Bread, salami, bread cookein egg; Mid-morning snack: Yoghurt, banana; Lunch: - Afternoon snack: Bacon, onion, mustard; Dinner:Chicken in its juices, rice, cucumber. (three-generatiofamily – two parents with children and their familiestogether 7 people, 2 of whom are young children, noone works, concentrated settlement withina municipality)

Before benefits: Breakfast: Nothing; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Bean soup, potatoes; Afternoon snack-; Dinner: Leftovers from lunch;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Yoghurt, bread, butter, salami; Mid-morning snack: Leftovers from breakfast;Lunch: Chicken, potatoes; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Sausages, bread. (two-generation family – twoparents with children, together 8 people, 3 of whomare school-attending and 3 young children, no oneworks, segregated settlement 2.5 km from themunicipality)

Another aspect controlled during the comparisons ofmeal plans of households from excluded settlementswas the scale of occurrence of individual food items.Especially meat and meat products were recorded onthe meal menus, then dairy products and fruits. In athree commodities the same four-level scale was use1 = not at all; 2 = minimally; 3 = at least once a day; 4= several times a day.


96



As Table 9 presents, more than 60% of the captured“pre-benefits” meal plans did not have meat and meat products at all, and another 11% of the surveyedhouseholds had meat only minimally before benefits,

for example, in the form of salami or similar smokedproducts once per day. A total of 24% of the surveyedhouseholds had meat in their meal plan at least onceper day and only 3% had it more than once per day. Sothat in the periods before benefits the meal plan of excluded Roma households contained meat at least one time per day in 27% of the recorded cases, whilefor the group of segregated households this was evenless – only 22%; in the group of separated thisincreased to 26% and in settlements concentratedwithin a municipality to 33%.

A significant difference in regard to meat consumption was also recorded on the menus uponcomparison of the two periods in the month. In theperiods after benefits 63% of the surveyedhouseholds had meat at least one time per day andmore than 22% had meat several times per day afterbenefits. Together 85% of the meal plans listed meat and meat products once or more times per day (beforebenefits this was 27%), and after benefits only 5% did

not have any meat and 10% in only a minimal range.A meatless menu after benefits looked, for example,like this:

Before benefits: Breakfast: Rolls, frankfurters; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Drop dumplings; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Bread cooked in eggs, tea;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Bread with butter and jam,tea; Mid-morning snack: Fruit; Lunch: Soup, Gója –

potatoes with onions; Afternoon snack: Yoghurt,biscuit; Dinner: Gója from lunch. (two-generationfamily – two parents with 1 child age 21 years,together 3 people, the father of the family works,separated on the edge 1 km distant from the homemunicipality)

Before benefits: Breakfast: Rolls, frankfurters; Mid-morning snack: Pork scratching with bread; Lunch:Children have lunch in the school canteen; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Fried potatoes, tea;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Bread with butter, salami,tea; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Children – schoolcanteen; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Fries, tea, bread.(two-generation family – two parents with 3 children,together 5 people, from this 3 children – 2 school-

attending, no one works, concentrated settlement within a municipality)

Before benefits: Breakfast: Milk, tea, bread with meat spread; Mid-morning snack: Child at school; nothing at home; Lunch: Vegetable soup, vegetable risotto, tea; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Potato mash, milk;

/After benefits: No difference. (two-generation family– two parents with children, together 4 people, fromthis 2 young children, no one works, segregatedsettlement 1.5 km from the home municipality)

From the viewpoint of the absence of dairy productsthe situation on the meal plans before benefits wasapproximately the same (Table 10). A total of 61% of recorded meal plans for households from excludedsettlements listed hardly any milk and dairy productsbefore benefits and 30% only minimally. Togethermore than 90% of households did not have milk anddairy products on their menus before benefits at all or


Table 9Meal plans of Roma households from excluded settlements by consumption of meat (in %)


1 = not at all 61 5

2 = minimally (salami and the like) 12 10

3 = at least once a day 24 634 = several times a day 3 22

Total 100 100



had them only minimally, while 8% listed them at least once per day (the repeated occurrence with different foods in the course of the day was not recorded at all).

In contrast to this, in the meal plans after benefits

the consumption of milk and dairy products grewmoderately: nearly one-quarter of the recorded caseslisted them in the “post-benefits” meal plan at least once a day and another 28% consumed milk at least toa minimal extent. Yoghurt, milk, cheese, or curdcheese or bryndza (type of sheep cheese) were foundon their table:

Before benefits: Breakfast: Bread with lard; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Bean soup with bread; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Bean soup with bread –leftovers from lunch;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Bread, plums, syrup; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Tomato soup, fried meat with potatoes; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Leftovers fromlunch, children also a small yoghurt. (two-generationfamily – two parents with 2 young children, together4 people, no one works, separated on the edge 2 kmdistant from the home municipality)

Before benefits: Breakfast: Challah bread with coffee,baby – had milk; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Chicken soup and lemonade; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Bread

cooked in egg, baby – had milk; /After benefits: Breakfast: Bread with meat spread and salami, coffee; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Chicken inits juices with pasta; Afternoon snack: Frankfurters withbread and ketchup; Dinner: Cake with curd and milk .

(three-generation family – two parents with childrenand grandchild, together 5 people, 1 of whom is young child, no one works, separated on the edge ofa municipality, no distance given)

Before benefits: Breakfast: Bread with lard; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Tomato soup, potatoes with peppers; Afternoon snack: Leftovers from lunch; DinneBread cooked in egg, tea;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Rolls with ham, coffee; for the children cocoa; Mid-morning snack: Yoghurt,biscuits; Lunch: Stuffed pepper, sweet steamed buns; Afternoon snack: Fruit, biscuits; Dinner: Baked sausag(two-generation family – two parents with 3 children2 of whom are school-attending and 1 young child,together 5 people, no one works, segregatedsettlement 0.5 km distant from the home municipalit

However, nearly half of the surveyed households fromexcluded settlement even after benefits did not put dairy products on their food list.43 As the followingexamples present, among them were not infrequentlhouseholds which had among their members childreand young children:

Before benefits: Breakfast: Bread cooked in egg; Mid-morning snack: Bread, meat spread, apple; Lunch:Meatless goulash; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Wrapped

salami, potato; /After benefits: Breakfast: Bread, butter, meat spreadMid-morning snack: Bread, butter, ham; Lunch: Chicke soup, baked chicken, potato mash; Afternoon snack: -Dinner: Bread, frankfurters. (three-generation family


98


Table 10Meal plans of Roma households from excluded settlements by consumption of dairy products (in %)


1 = not at all 61 48

2 = minimally 31 28

3 = at least once a day 8 234 = several times a day - 1

Total 100 100

43 Although the meal plans listed butter, it usually was a margarine spread; real butter was only rarely purchased in the surveyed environment (see Chapter 2 on theconsumption of foods).



two parents with children and a grandparent, together7 people, from this 3 children – 1 school-attendingand 2 young children, 1 working household member,concentrated settlement within a municipality)

Before benefits: Breakfast: Roll with butter; Mid-morning snack: Rolls and biscuits – only school-attending children, others nothing; Lunch: Dropdumplings; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: -;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Roll with salami; Mid-morning snack: Only school-attending children havethis – roll and biscuits; Lunch: Salad and cutlet; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Salami, sausage, bread.(two-generation family – two parents with children,together 8 people, from this 4 school-attendingand 2 young, no one works, segregated settlement 1.5 km distant from the home municipality)

Before benefits: Breakfast: Bread with meat spread;Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Vegetable soup; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Bread with salami and tea;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Bread with a margarine spread; Mid-morning snack: Meat spread on bread;Lunch: Fried cutlets with potato mash, lemonade; Afternoon snack: Young children wafer and lollipops,older children with mama potato crisps; Dinner: Again fried cutlets with potato mash – as for lunch. (single-parent family – mother with children, together7 people, from this 3 school-attending and 1 youngchild, no one works, separated on the edge distancefrom home municipality not given)

The situation with consumption of fruits andvegetables came out even less favourable than withmeat and dairy products. Before benefits 79% did not list fruits or vegetables in their meal plans at all and 12% had them in a minimal range. At least once

a day and more often was found in only in one-tenthof the surveyed households (Table 11).

After benef its, 25% of recorded meal plans had fruitsand vegetables on the menu at least one time per day

and an additional 22% listed them at least ina minimal range. But at the same time this means thatthe remaining 53% of households did not consumefruit even after benef its. The consumption of fruitsand vegetables was least frequent in segregated Romaenvironments, where 60% did not consume it at all even after benefits:

Before benefits: Breakfast: Bread with ham; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Meat soup, potatoes; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: -;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Yoghurt or pudding, bread rolls; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Cutlets and potatoes; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Bread, butter, salami . (two-generation family – parents withchildren, together 9 people, from this 7 children,6 school-attending and 1 young child, no one works,segregated settlement 1 km distant from homemunicipality)

Before benefits: Breakfast: Bread with butter; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Drop dumplings with cabbage; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Drop dumplings leftover

from lunch; /After benefits: Breakfast: Bread with salami; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Fried meat with potatoes; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Leftovers from lunch.(three-generation family – single parent and childrenwith their families, together 9 people, 5 of whom arechildren, 1 school-attending and 4 young children,noone works, separated on the edge 1 km distant fromthe home municipality)

Note A total of 191 of the surveyed households provided their meal plans before and after receiving benefits.

Table 11Meal plans of Roma households from excluded settlements by consumption of fruits and vegetables (in %)


1 = not at all 79 53

2 = minimally 11 22

3 = at least once a day 9 244 = several times a day 1 1

Total 100 100



Before benefits: Breakfast: Bread with lard; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Potatoes with white sauce,

potato pancakes; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: The sameas for lunch;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Frankfurters, bread, tea;Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Goulash, bread; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: The same as for lunch.(married couple, together 2 people, no one works,concentrated settlement within a municipality)

Aside from the occurrence of individual types of foodswith the processed meal menus other characteristicsimportant for assessing the quality of eating habits

were monitored. This was the variety of foods, thecalorific quality of the main meals listed and healthyeating, which was assessed ex post by researchers ona scale from 1 to 7 points. In the case of the variety of meals, degree 1 recorded a very monotonous meal anddegree 7 a very diverse meal plan composition anddegree 4 expressed the average.

In an evaluation of the diversity of meals beforebenefits 13% of the recorded meal plans were rankedin the average degrees, while variegated meals

(degrees 5-7) was obtained in only 6%.The remaining80% were ranked as below average in terms of varietyof foods, with 22% of the menus consisting of verymonotonous meals (Table 12). After benefits, therepresentation of menus of average variety in

particular increased: namely from 13% to 37%. Afterbenefits the very monotonous meals dropped

significantly (from 49% to 7%), while the number ofvery diverse menus also grew, though not greatly(from 3% to 10%).

Based on the type of excluded settlement segregatedRoma settlements had the “lead” in terms of thevariety in their meal plan – that is, they recorded theleast varied meals. After benefits, 12% of meal plansfrom households from segregated settlements wereassigned the first two degrees of monotony of meals(degrees 1 + 2) and on the opposite pole (degrees

7 + 6) only 5%; in the group concentrated withina municipality the mutual ratio was the opposite:3% monotonous and 12% variegated daily menus.44

Poorly variegated daily meals with weak nutritional value occurred in the time before benefits in all threexcluded environments, as the following examplesindicate:

Before benefits: Breakfast: Soup and fried dough – thiis for the whole day;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Rolls, cheese, salami,

butter, tomato; Mid-morning snack: Yoghurt; Lunch:Baked chicken legs, potato mash, pickled vegetables; Afternoon snack: Fruit; Dinner: Pasta with cheese and potatoes, with ketchup. (three-generation family –two parents with children and their families,


100

Note A total amount of 191 surveyed households provided their meal plans before and after receiving benefits.

Table 12Meal plans of Roma households from excluded settlements by variety of composition (in %)


1 = very monotonous meals 22 1

2 27 6

3 32 334 = average 13 37

5 3 13

6 2 8

7 = very diverse meals 1 2

Total 100 100

44 In the period before beneřts, the “variety” of menus was in segregated settlements disproportionally worse – 53% exceptionally monotonous menus and inconcentrated settlement this was 37%.



together 15 people, from this 3 school-attendingand 6 young children, no one works, separated on

the edge 2 km distant)Before benefits: Breakfast: -; Mid-morning snack: -;Lunch: Dry bľread, goulash soup with two potatoes and drop dumplings; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Same as for lunch – dry bread and goulash soup;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Bread, salami, butter; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Boiled potatoes, baked cucumber, salad cucumber; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner:Leftovers from lunch. (three-generation family – twoparents, their children and a grandparent, together6 people, from this 3 young children, no one works,

segregated settlement 2 km distant)Before benefits: Breakfast: Coffee and cigarettes; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Bread with lard; Afternoon snack: Coffee; Dinner: Jacket potatoes;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Ham and rolls; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Chicken in its juices plus dropdumplings; Afternoon snack: Lemonade, buns; Dinner:Baked blood sausage with bread. (solitary couple over50 years old, both unemployed, concentratedsettlement within a municipality)

Commentary devoted to the nutrition of Romaresidents in excluded communities often relate tooverly calorific meals on one hand and the unhealthydining habits on the other.45 The calorific quality of the presented daily meals was evaluated likewise on

a seven-degree scale, where 1 meant very littlecalories (light meals) and 7 the opposite –very

calorific (heavy meals). These had the form of friedfoods, salads heavy with mayonnaise and the like(Table 13).

Before benefits nearly 40% of meal plans could beassigned, in terms of calorific demand, to theaverage degree of 4, and only 16% of the menus wereabove average and a total of 45% were belowaverage (13% had very low calorie meals). Afterbenefits the share of meal plans evaluated asaverage remained nearly the same – on the level of

two-fif ths; where a change occurred was in the dropin light meals and the growth in heavy meals. Nearlyhalf of the meal plans were evaluated in the timeafter benefits as calorific to very calorific.46 Again,households from segregated settlements had anabove-average share had calorific meals on the dailymeal plan (before benefits up to 17% versus 9% inthe other two environments), and after benefits hereagain very calorif ic meals came out above-average(23% versus 15% for separated and concentrated

households). Examples of calorific meal plans:Before benefits: Breakfast: -; Mid-morning snack:Bread with butter; Lunch: Lentil soup, drop dumplingswith potatoes; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: The same as for lunch;


Table 13Meal plans of Roma households from excluded settlements by caloricity of foods (in %)


1 = low calorific meals 1 -

2 12 1

3 32 114 = average 39 41

5 13 29

6 3 15

7 = very calorific meals - 3

Total 100 100

45 See, for example, the cited report of the Office of Public Health on the hygienic and health situation in MRC.46 Also see examples in Appendix 1 to Chapter 4.





/After benefits: Breakfast: Frankfurters with ketchup,bread; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Roasted brisket, sauerkraut, steamed bread; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner:Leftovers from lunch – brisket and cabbage with steamed bread. (two-generation family – two parentsand their children, together 9 people, from this7 children – 3 still school-attending and 3 youngchildren, no one works, separated on the edgeof a municipality with no distance given)

Before benefits: Breakfast: Dry bread – and they eat thisall day;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Sweets, sausages, rolls; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Barley soup, smoked ribs, potatoes; Afternoon snack: Soup from lunch with bread;Dinner: Soup from lunch with bread. (four-generationfamily – two parents and their children with families

and a grandparent, together 10 people, from this5 children – 2 still school-attending and 3 youngchildren, no one works, segregated settlement 2.5 kmdistant from home municipality)

As Graph 19 shows, from a comparison of meal plans of households before and after benefits it may beconcluded that nearly three-quarters of them had adifferent menu, and from this 46% even very different.On the other hand, in approximately one-fourth a moreor less identical menu was recorded and from this one-

tenth of households had a completely identical menu.

The households which had identical menus werepredominately those not reliant on social benefits andthose to which other incomes also arrived; as well asvery poor households for which the shift of social incomes was not suff icient for a more radical changein their daily food consumption. In relation to thefirst group, it can be said that the meal plans beforebenefits and after them were above-standard, andsome of the respondents explicitly stated that their

eating habits didn’t change after benefits – they cookapproximately the same or they do not draw benef itsand the situation thus cannot be differentiated:

Before benefits: Breakfast: Bread and butter; Mid-morning snack: Fruit; Lunch: Goulash; Afternoon snack:-; Dinner: Bread, meat spread;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Bread, frankfurters; Mid-morning snack: Fruit; Lunch: Bean soup, drop

dumplings with sauerkraut; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner:Boiled smoked ribs, bread. (two-generation family –two parents and 1 school-attending child, together3 people, no one works, concentrated settlement within a municipality)

Before benefits: Breakfast: Cheese, eggs, butter, tea,cocoa, bread; Mid-morning snack: Open sandwich withham and salami; Lunch: Lentil soup, steamed bread and sirloin sauce; Afternoon snack: Fruit; Dinner: Lentil soup from lunch;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Roasted knackwurst, boiled frankfurters, bread, vegetables; Mid-morning snack:Hot-dog or open baguette sandwich; Lunch: Soup and baked chicken with potato mash and compote; Afternoon snack: Fruit; Dinner: Toast with spreads.(two-generation family – two parents and 2 school-attending children, together 4 people, both parentswork, separated settlement 2 km distant from thehome municipality)

Before benefits: Breakfast: Bread, ham, cheese,vegetables, tea, yoghurt; Mid-morning snack: Juice;Lunch: Chicken soup, rice, baked chicken, vegetable salad, kofola drink; Afternoon snack: Poppy-seed cake;Dinner: Potato hash;

Graph 19Comparison of meal plans of Roma householdsfrom excluded settlements before benefits andafter them (in %)


1 = completeldifferent

2 = ratherdifferent

3 = ratheridentical

4 = completelidentical

46

28

16

10



/After benefits: Breakfast: Bread rolls (rolls, Kaiser roll), frankfurters, vegetables, milk, cheese; Mid-morning snack: Baguette; Lunch: Goulash, bread,lemonade, pudding; Afternoon snack: Yoghurt and roll;Dinner: French potatoes. (two-generation family – twoparents and 2 children, from this 1 school-attendingand 1 young child, together 4 people, no one works,concentrated settlement within a municipality)

Before benefits: Breakfast: Bread, meat spread, butter;Mid-morning snack: Roll; Lunch: Bean soup, tea, bread; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Fries with ketchup, tea, bread;

/After benefits: Their meal plan doesn’t change after benefits. (two-generation family – two parents and 8children, from this 7 still school-attending, together10 people, no one works, separated on the edge of themunicipality, no distance given)

Before benefits: Breakfast: Bread with salami (withbutter, egg, meat spread), tea and honey; Mid-morning snack: Bread with ham and vegetables; Lunch:Vegetable soup, drop dumplings with meat; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Potatoes with sour milk, bread;

/After benefits: They don’t receive benefits – the same.(two-generation family – two parents and 1 school-attending child, together 3 people, 1 member works,separated on the edge of the municipality, nodistance given)

Identical meal plans before and after benefits werealso recorded with very poor families. Then it had theform of a deficit meal plan in both compared periods,and as can be seen, not infrequently it actuallyconsisted of one warm meal – soups – daily:

Before benefits: Breakfast: We don’t eat breakfast –only bread by itself; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Pastaor potatoes; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Bread or bokeľa(Roma bread);

/After benefits: Breakfast: Bread; Mid-morning snack: - ; Lunch: Pasta with meat or chicken with potatoes; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Bread or no dinner. (two-generation family – two parents and 3 children, fromthis 1 school-attending and 2 young, together 5people, no one works, segregated settlement 0.5 kmdistant from home municipality)

Before benefits: Breakfast: Bread, lard, water; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Lentil soup, bread; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Lentil soup from lunch;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Meat spread, bread; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Macaroni with perkelt (creammeat sauce); Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Coffee, frankfurters and bread. (two-generation family – twoparents and 1 adult child age 19 years, together3 people, no one works, segregated settlement 2 kmdistant from the home municipality)

Before benefits: Breakfast: Bread and jam or butter;Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Potatoes; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Bread and butter;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Bread and cheap salami;Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Potatoes, smoked pork knees; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Bread and common frankfurters. (two-generation family – two parentsand 1 adult child age 19 years, together 3 people, noone works, segregated settlement 2 km distant from

the home municipality)Before benefits: Breakfast: Bread rolls, butter, jam;Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Potato mash with meat; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Same as for lunch – potatomash with meat;

/After benefits: The same. (two-generation family –two parents and children with families andgrandchildren, together 12 people, from this 8children – 4 young children, no one works,concentrated within a municipality)

Also in the framework of different menus in themonitored two periods of the month, the researchprobe captured a relatively large amount of variety.Specifically, they had the form of large changes in thmeal plan, such as, for example, the changeover fromconsumption of Roma bread and pasta throughout thentire day, without a morning or afternoon snack anpractically without dinner, to fried cutlets and saladand four to f ive meals per day. Or a change from breaand buttered drop dumplings to Hungarian goulashwith steamed bread and four meals per day. Possibly

also the turnaround from eating bread cooked in eggall day to four meals and baked chicken (see alsoseveral examples above):

Before benefits: Breakfast: Tea, fried dough; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Pasta with tomato paste; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Leftovers;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Bread, rolls, strudel, butter salami, tomato, peppers; Mid-morning snack: Biscuits


104





Biscuits, apple, roll with meat spread (children);Lunch: Salad, cutlet, cake (children in school); Afternoon snack: Fruit (children); Dinner: Potatoes,meat. (two-generation family – two parents andchildren, together 4 people, from this 2 school-attending children, no one works, concentratedsettlement within a municipality)

Before benefits: Breakfast: -; Mid-morning snack: -;Lunch: Son in school tomato soup and drop dumplingswith cabbage; others – bread cooked in egg; Afternoon snack: Bread with salami and with butter (children);Dinner: Bread cooked in egg;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Salami, vegetables, rolls,tea; Mid-morning snack: Only children – bread, butter, salami, vegetables; Lunch: Son at school (sour soupand steamed buns); at home – chicken broth, baked

chicken with potatoes; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner:Roasted sausage, bread, mustard. (two-generationfamily – two parents and children, together 4 people,from this 1 school-attending and 1 young child, onemember works, concentrated settlement within amunicipality)

Before benefits: Breakfast: Children – tea with butter; parents – black coffee; Mid-morning snack: Children in school; at home – bread with butter; Lunch: Children in school; at home – vegetable soup, potato hash; Afternoon snack: potato hash; Dinner: Soup from lunch,butter and bread, tea;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Children – cocoa, roll withcheese; adults – coffee; Mid-morning snack: Children – sweet cocoa roll sprinkled, juice; at home – omelette;Lunch: Children in school; potato salad, fried cutlets; Afternoon snack: Cutlets with bread or with salad fromlunch; Dinner: Cooked bacon; children sweets. (two-generation family – two parents and children,together 7 people, from this 3 school-attending and1 small child, no one works, concentrated settlement within a municipality)

The last circumstance which we managed to recordwas a certain seasonality of eating habits. Becausethe research probe was conducted mainly in themonths of August and September, dining dependent on the collection of wild mushrooms was alsorecorded, either their direct consumption orstrengthening of the meal plan before benefits withmoney obtained by selling them:

Before benefits: Breakfast: Scrambled eggs with freshl picked wild mushrooms, fried dough (dry); Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Mushroom soup with dropdumplings, boiled potatoes, fried parasol mushrooms an egg/flour/breadcrumb batter; Afternoon snack: -;Dinner: Roasted sausages, sweets for children, and father red wine (Milenka) and cigar tobacco – for wild mushrooms sold (8 euro);

/After benefits: Breakfast: Rolls, butter, salami; Mid-morning snack: Biscuits, rolls, lemonade; Lunch: Grillechicken thighs, boiled potatoes, cucumber salad; Afternoon snack: Same as for lunch; Dinner: Same as for lunch. (two-generation family – two parents and5 young children, together 7 people ( the grandfathdoes not live in the household), no one works,segregated settlement 2 km distant from the homemunicipality)

Before benefits: Breakfast: Scrambled eggs from fresh picked wild mushrooms, bread and tea; Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Mushroom sauce and pasta; Afternoo snack: Same as for lunch; Dinner: Same as for lunch;

/After benefits: Breakfast: Bread, butter, sausages;Mid-morning snack: -; Lunch: Roasted sausages, boile potatoes; Afternoon snack: -; Dinner: Frozen steamed buns, tea. (two-generation family – two parents and3 young children, together 5 people, no one works,segregated settlement 2.5 km distant from the homemunicipality)

On the basis of the examples of menus obtained it ispossible to summarise that food consumption of Romhouseholds from excluded settlements does not overall appear to be of particularly high quality.A relatively large proportion of the meal plans beforbenefits contained a small number of meals per day,little variety, monotonous meals more focused onflour-based and potatoes-based foods than on fruitsand vegetables or dairy products. Households were

also found which minimally in the period beforebenefits suffer a lack of food. Sometimes the meal plan took the real form of one hot meal per day.Before benefits, a certain portion of excludedhouseholds had an exceptionally monotonous diet.

After benefits the variety of meals in the majority of the surveyed households grew, but these are to a largextent calorific and meat dishes which are added to


106



the meal plan; healthy foods were rarer. Beforebenefits poor quality, monotonous meals without nutritional value and after benefits heavy andcalorific meals – such could be evaluated the eatinghabits of a large portion of Roma households from

excluded communities.

According to the doctors´ warning, the consumptionof foods with a high content of animal fats leads toincreased occurrence of overweight and obesity,which have as a consequence health problems,primarily of the circulatory system.47 If smoking andresigning to visit a doctor, which were not at all unusual (primarily for adults) among residents of excluded Roma settlements, are then factored in,48

this can have an effect in earlier and higher mortality.

According to some meal plans differences in eatinghabits were expressed between children and adults, aswell as school-attending children and those remainingat home. In adults a tendency was expressed towardgiving preference to children, to whom they give foodmore often and of a different type. As was shown, forexample, dairy products and fruits were not addedeven after benefits in all excluded households withchildren. The second dimension represents therecorded difference in the diets of children attending

school and other household members. In somehouseholds the difference recorded in the eating of school-attending children in comparison with what those at home received (especially before benefits –they lacked a mid-morning snack, the meals were lesshealthy), the programme of school dining appears asa step in a good direction.

An overall view on both menus at the same time showsthat after benefits no great “feasting” took place. Forthe most part, at least after benefits the meal plan of many households became only standard: a mid-morning or afternoon snack was added, they allow

children to have biscuits, yoghurt or fruit; somehouseholds permitted a favourite meal, they indulgedin a favourite meat – in short they eat a bellyful. Theprobe did not capture which of the two meal planspredominated in the course of the month. But as is

shown further, households permit a favourite dishonce, maximally two times per month, and somehouseholds in the end only on holiday occasions. Withgreat probability it can be assumed that it is the moredeficit “pre-benefits” meal plans that are appliedlonger during the month in these households.Although modes of eating discovered during themonitoring of this aspect were varied, frompermanently deficit to permanently standard,a relatively large group combine in the month a longeperiod of deficit eating with “normal” eating evenafter receipt of incomes – especially with householdsreliant exclusively on social benefits. A comparison offavourite meals with most commonly prepared mealsreveals more in this regard.

4.2. Disparity between favourite mealsand most common meals

As the professional literature states, unemployment impacts in a principle way not only social institutions

and processes the position of unemployed individuals,it also manifests itself inevitably on their social behaviour. So, if the loss of employment changes thestatus of a person and his roles and creates for him ananomic situation, it must also invoke his reaction tosuch a situation in the form of wilful or intuitive lifestrategies; their content is influenced in part culturally, but also by the period of duration of unemployment (Mareš, 2002, pg. 103). During long-term unemployment, “restraint in consumption” or“relinquishing of the original range of needs” can bealso identified as life strategies:,49 in extremesituations also in the area of food consumption. This

47 As Chapter 2 describes, this very type of illness is among the most widespread among adults in the surveyed environments.48 Also see more in Chapter 2 of this report.49 Aside from these two strategies, for example, adaption without abandonment is mentioned (alternative methods of satisfying the same range of needs) in attempts

to become established on the labour market and in society (seeking work or preser ving rituals associated with the status of the unemployed), resignation (fallinginto social isolation and apathy). For more, see Mareš, 2002, pg. 104-105.



was already indicated in the previous section, whichdocumented the restraining in consumption of foodsin the course of the month according to the level of available financial resources in excluded households.50

Another method able to indicate a reduction in foodconsumption is a comparison of favourite meals withthe most commonly prepared meals. It can beassumed that with ideal economic conditions which donot compel them toward a limitation in foods,a household will prepare favourite meals morefrequently, or with a longer-term deficit it will at least prepare a favourite meal after receiving a certain sumof money. At the same time it gives further testimonyregarding the quality of food consumption in thesurveyed excluded environments. Therefore, withboth meals – the favourite and the most commonlyprepared — the type of food was recorded, its caloric

content and healthiness.Also from this comparison meat-based meals came out to be a great favourite from the monitored meals.Together 57% of the surveyed households put a meat

dish among their favourite meals, and from this 37%of cases were a heavy dish, from non-quality meat,such as fried meat, fatty meat, smoked brisket and thlike. Quality meats, such as sautéed beef, dif ferent types of chicken meat or very rarely fish, were givenamong the favourite meals approximately half asoften. Next in line among favourite meals of Roma

households in excluded settlements with 16% weredifferent kinds of potato dishes, be it potatoes indifferent ways, “halušky” (drop dumplings) or“placky” (potato pancakes), potato “gója” (atraditional Roma potato-filled sausage), etc. Well behind with 8% were flour-based dishes (buns,different types of pancakes, so-called “gypsy” bread(known by different names), jam-filled donuts andthe like; and then rice dishes such as risotto or stuffecabbage leaves (7%). Other types of dishes, such asthick soups, light soups or broths, sauces withsteamed bread, pasta, fried cheese and mayonnaise-based salads, found only a small preference amongthe favourites. Vegetable dishes did not occur amongthe favourite meals at all (Table 15).


10850 Chapter 2 provides more detail regarding the Ŗow of incomes into excluded Roma households and their availability in the course of the month. It showed that

through a large part of the month households have only a small portion of their total monthly incomes available; we recall that on average these were not very hig

Note A total amount of 190 surveyed household provided their favourite and most common meal.

Table 15Favourite and most common prepared meals in Roma households from excluded settlementsby type (in %)

Favourite food Most common food

1 = non-quality meat (fried, fatty, etc.) 37 15

2 = quality meat (sautéed beef, chicken, fish) 20 133 = pasta 1 15

4 = vegetable - 2

5 = unhealthy (thick, roux-based) 3 9

6 = healthy soup (vegetable, light) 2 4

7 = rice (risotto, stuffed cabbage) 7 3

8 = roux-based sauces (with steamed bread...) 2 1

9 = flour-based foods – buns, pancakes, etc. 8 16

10 = potato-based – potatoes, drop dumplings, pancakes, etc. 16 22

11 = fried cheese 3 -

12 = salad with mayonnaise 1 -

Total 100 100



And what do Roma households from excludedsettlements cook most often? Here a different structure of dishes compared with favourites wasshown. Again meat dishes were put in first place, but with a significantly lower frequency than with

favourite dishes. Together they obtained 28%: non-quality meats 15% and more quality 13%. The secondmost frequently made dishes were again different types of potato dishes, but with a higherrepresentation than in the favourite dishes (22%).Further, not only the frequency but the sequence of dishes differed as well: flour-based dishes were inthird place with 16% behind them were pastas indifferent ways with 15%. Relatively often householdsprepared as the most frequently cooked dish different thick roux-based soups; other types were again givenin a smaller range.

Upon comparing these two dishes with one another bytype, it resulted that in 13% of cases they wereapproximately identical and in 87% the favourite andmost frequently prepared dishes were different. Thefollowing examples will show the differences morespecifically. As the table itself indicates, consideringfavourite meals, there was predominately a shift frompotatoes and flour-based meals or from thick soups,

which are cooked more frequently toward meat-based,mainly calorific (but not only) meat dishes. Among thefavourite meat dishes, fried cutlets and mayonnaise-based salad dominated in the surveyed environments,and roasted brisket, baked chicken, Hungarian orSegedinsky goulash with steamed bread, pašvare(smoked ribs), baked thighs or sirloin sauce withsteamed bread and meat and the like were repeatedrelatively often. In comparison with them the most frequent dishes were rather different: lentil or beansoup, drop dumplings, risotto, meatless goulash, potato

hash, dry bread or pancakes, boiled dumplings or Romadishes like gója (potato-filled sausage) (for more, seeAppendix 2 to section 3.4) were more frequent. Themost frequently prepared dishes are financially muchless demanding and require a larger input of women’swork. Such a type of differences between the favouriteand the most frequent dishes was inherent in Romahouseholds across the regions of Slovakia:

Favourite meal: Potato salad with fried meat – childrenwould eat this every day (4 and 2 years). Pancakes –mainly with jam; Most common meal: We can rarely afford main meals; most often I cook bean soup with pancakes or bread . /Nové Zámky district

Favourite meal: Baked chicken with rice, French potatoes; Most common meal: Thick soup (bean,lentil). /Zvolen district

Favourite meal: Roasted brisket, potatoes. Pašvare – smoked ribs; Most common meal: Drop dumplings with sauerkraut, Drop dumplings with curd cheese. /Michalovce district

Favourite meal: The husband likes meat – mainly pork cutlets; the wife likes boiled dumplings filled with potatoes or jam; Most common meal: They most oftencook (mainly if there is no money) browned pancakes.

/Gelnica district Favourite meal: Cutlets, salad. Drop dumplings withbryndza (type of sheep cheese); Most common meal:Chicken perkelt (creamy sauce). Pasta with sauce and meat. /Košice – environs district

Favourite meal: Stuffed baked brisket; Most commonmeal: Homemade bean soup. Cabbage soup. /Trebišovdistrict

Favourite meal: Stuffed cabbage; Most common meal:They most commonly make potato pancakes in place of bread, sometimes they make them sweet. /Trebišov

district Favourite meal: Pork ribs, sauerkraut and leavened steamed bread; Most common meal: Potato pancakes;they most prefer them with lard, with tea. /Trebišovdistrict

Favourite meal: Fried meat or cheese, fries, tartar sauce; Most common meal: Artificial fish with fries. /Veľký Krtíš district

Favourite meal: Segedínsky goulash with steamed bread(last time before 1 August); Most common meal:Potatoes with sour milk. /Bardejov district

Favourite meal: Potatoes and roasted meat (they had itlast week); Most common meal: Baked pasta. /StaráĽubovňa district

Favourite meal: We don’t have any special favourite,but the children like baked chicken the most.Meat and bokeľa; Most common meal: Bokeľa –we makethis most often in place of bread. /Rimavská Sobotadistrict



Favourite meal: Sirloin and sauce with steamed bread. Steamed buns or pancakes – children love this; Most common meal: Sour soups. /Detva district

Favourite meal: Roasted brisket and potatoes ; Most common meal: Pasta. Bean or potato soup.

/Michalovce district Favourite meal: Fried meat with potato salad: wemake fried meat approximately every Sunday, but the salad only for some kind of celebration. We can list steamed buns as our second-favourite dish; Most common meal: We don’t make anything in particular,most frequently bean soup with meat and fried bread. /Levice district

Favourite meal: Drop dumplings with cheese. Chickencutlets most often from thighs) and potato salad; Most common meal: Pasta “dry” (with oil and done, also

with tomato paste or with potatoes, instant soup, sauce for pasta – according to the possibilities). Fried dough –dry with oil and sugar, tea with this; often this is an all-day food . /Gelnica district

Favourite meal: Roma meatballs with sauerkraut; Most common meal: Bodák – Gypsy bread. /Rimavská Sobotadistrict

Favourite meal: Potatoes and cutlet, cucumbers; Most common meal: Boiled dumplings with cheese. /Rožňavadistrict

The difference between the favourite dish and themost commonly prepared dish did not always take theform of meat versus flour-based or potato dish ora thick soup. In many poor households or householdswith children both of the mentioned dishes weresometimes meatless dishes, and in the bettersituation the opposite – both meat-based dishes. Dryflour-based cakes or potato pancakes, which havedifferent names in different regions, often occurredamong the most common dishes in place of bread. Oneof the households stated an attempt at modulating

the menu, but the lack of finances leads to commonlyprepared potato dishes. After receipt of food aid51 theconsumption of pasta strengthened still further in themeal plans of some households:

Favourite meal: Creamed lentils; Most common meal:Potato pancakes. /Prešov district

Favourite meal: Buttered drop dumplings – we cook th2-3-times a month. The children love rice and potato gruel; Most common meal: Soda cake – we make this in

place of bread. /Veľký Krtíš district Favourite meal: The husband loves only drop dumpling– I prepare it with tomatoes/peppers, when I have themoney also with meat; Most common meal: Gója(potato-filled sausage) – and my children like this verymuch. /Veľký Krtíš district

Favourite meal: The favourite dish in our family is perkelt (creamy meat sauce) drop dumplings and bodá(Gypsy bread); Most common meal: If I had the possibility, I would cook perkelt (creamy meat sauce)with drop dumplings for the whole family several times

but money doesn’t allow for this; so most commonly wmake „bodák“. /Levice district

Favourite meal: Kyšky – potato-filled sausage, I last made it a month ago; Most common meal: Dropdumplings with cheese. /Bardejov district

Favourite meal: Potato pancakes cooked on a skillet,buttered or stuffed ground meat; Most common meal: Spaghetti is cooked most often, because the childrenlike it best with ketchup and sprinkled with grated cheese. /Prešov district

Favourite meal: Gója – the majority of Roma use this

name, nowadays Roma cuisine is also beingmodernised, so the most specifically these are stuffed intestines (we last made it two months ago); Most common meal: Potato pancakes. /Prešov district

Favourite meal: Fried dough with mushrooms; Most common meal: Drop dumplings with cabbage or withcurd cheese. /Košice – environs district

Favourite meal: Drop dumplings with tomatoes/peppeand sausage (we last cooked it last week);Most common meal: Bodák – Gypsy bread (we bake thioften when there is no money ). /Rimavská Sobota

district Favourite meal: Gója (potato-filled sausage); Most common meal: We try to change this, but we often coo potatoes. /Revúca district


110 51 This was an activity of the government of Iveta Radičová in 2011; during the summer Ŗour and pasta were distributed to families in material need. Some of thesurveyed households from excluded environments received food aid (26%), while others awaited it at the time of the survey.



Favourite meal: Bean soup (a week ago). Drop dumplingswith cabbage and bacon; Most common meal: After delivery of food aid they cooked mainly pasta (macaroni, fusilli) with pieces of meat . /Rožňava district

The replies of respondent households at the same timeconfirmed that favourite meals are not madefrequently at all during the month. They usuallyoccurred on the meal plans only once per month, morerarely twice, and usually after the arrival of somelarger sum of incomes into the family budget. In theend, some households can only afford a favourite dishon holiday occasions. The high frequency of preparation of the most commonly made dish followsby definition. These were recorded repeatedly duringthe month, and sometimes they even were in the

position of being for nearly all-day consumption. Veryoften these are dry bread or potato pancakes cookedon a skillet, and many households consume them inplace of bread, which for multiple-memberhouseholds is a too-expensive food item. The messagewas also found among the replies that a family knowshow tasty dishes are, but without money they simplycannot afford it:

Favourite meal: Fried cutlet, salad or potato mash – wealways cook this after support comes; Most commonmeal: Hungarian goulash with steamed bread. /SpišskáNová Ves district

Favourite meal: Fried pork cutlet and potato salad withmayonnaise – we always cook this after payments (theeighth of the month); Most common meal: „Fried dough“ with cocoa and sugar; or only greased in placeof bread with bacon, sausages, meat. Chicken legs with pasta. /Spišská Nová Ves district

Favourite meal: Baked chicken and salad (we alwayscook this after support comes); Most common meal:Meatballs with sauerkraut. Gója (potato-filled sausage)or fried dough. /Spišská Nová Ves district

Favourite meal: Baked thighs with potatoes cooked inthe oven (I last cooked this perhaps a week ago); Most common meal: Drop dumplings with potatoes. /Košice– environs district

Favourite meal: The children are very happy when wehave fried cheese and fries on the table – we can afford this only once a month.; Most common meal: Perkelt (creamy meat sauce) with drop dumplings – because

this is the cheapest, we can’t afford other stuff. Please,write down that even I know what is delicious, but without money... /Levice district

Favourite meal: Chicken baked in the oven with jacket potatoes – they last had it at the beginning; Most

common meal: Drop dumplings with cheese. /Levočadistrict

Favourite meal: Boiled sausages – they last cooked a week ago; Most common meal: Hadrimky – pancakes. /Bardejov district

Favourite meal: Fried chicken with potatoes – I last cooked it this month after benefits; Most commonmeal: Potato pancakes. /Košice – environs district

Favourite meal: Gója (potato-filled sausage); Most common meal: Fried dough – potato pancakes. They make them every day, because they don’t have money

for bread, in fact, they buy half a loaf of bread in themorning so the children have a mid-morning snack at school. /Bardejov district

Favourite meal: Potato balls with smoked meat and sauerkraut – they made this perhaps two weeks ago;Most common meal: Pancakes – they make them at leasonce a week. /Bardejov district

Favourite meal: We most liked fried meat, but we canonly afford it once a month; Most common meal: Soups(bean, lentil, tomato) with bread or pancakes. /NovéZámky district

Situations when the household cooks a favourite mealoften were rarer in the surveyed environment.A household with a better financial situation canafford them (meat dish) or one whose favourite dish isnot demanding; therefore they can prepare it moreoften even under unfavourable economic conditions:

Favourite meal: Stroganoff – I make it often becauseeveryone enjoys it (last time three days ago); Most common meal: Stroganoff. /Stará Ľubovňa district

Favourite meal: Drop dumplings with tomatoes/peppers.Drop dumplings with curd cheese; Most common meal:Drop dumplings. /Veľký Krtíš district

Favourite meal: Boiled frankfurters, ketchup a roll; Moscommon meal: Boiled frankfurters – the children very much want them. /Krupina district

The summer season entered into the favourite but especially the most commonly prepared meals at the



time of the survey. As was shown, households insummer contain more variety in their dining – theycook more vegetable dishes, when this is lessexpensive, or mushroom dishes, when the householdcan pick them themselves. It can therefore be

assumed that in the winter months food consumptionin many excluded households is even moremonotonous and contains still fewer vegetables:

Favourite meal: Mushroom soup (they cook it severaltimes in August); Most common meal: Drop dumplingswith cabbage, potatoes or curd cheese. /Prešov district

Favourite meal: Potato pancakes – bandurečníky (in our way), we last made them before social benefits.Potatoes are cheap but f illing food; Most common meal: Since it is summer, lečo (a tomatoes/peppers/onionsmix) or mushrooms with eggs is cooked most often.

/Prešov district Favourite meal: Gója (potato-filled sausage) (see thequestionnaire „Dining in V. Šariš“ for the recipe); Most common meal: Goulash with frankfurters and mushrooms. /Prešov district

Favourite meal: Gója (potato-filled sausage) – they cook this regularly, at least once a month, last timea week ago; Most common meal: Now in summer thereare a lot of vegetables, which we cultivate. We had enough zucchini – we make pancakes from them. Lečo(tomatoes/peppers/onions mix. /Bardejov district

Favourite meal: Roasted pork ribs with boiled potatoesand cucumbers or with red cabbage – they last prepared these after social benefits.; Most common meal: In this period vegetables are cheaper, so perhaps, like a lot of families, lečo (a tomato/peppers/onion mix) isconsumed, fried cauliflower or patty pan squash. /Prešov district

Among the surveyed households there were some whocultivated some crops or raised farm animals.52 Theydid not forget to emphasise the impact of this factor

on the structure of food consumption. What theycultivate is found most often on their menus:

Favourite meal: Roasted pork, steamed potato bread and red cabbage; Most common meal: Now we have potatoes from the garden, so we mostly make potato

pancakes, potato bun. They also have a lot of zucchini from which they make pancakes. /Trebišov district

Favourite meal: Steamed potato bread with red cabbagmade as sweet and sour and roasted pork meat (they cook this once a month). Potato salad and cutlets (the

last made this at Easter); Most common meal: They most often cook beans in different ways, because theycultivate them themselves and have enough of them.They often make pancakes, either potato or flour-baseThe sons like drop dumplings with tomatoes/peppersand sausage, so they cook this rather often. Every Saturday they bake a leavened cake – usually rolls with jam. /Trebišov district

Favourite meal: Gója (potato-filled sausage) – this ishis favourite, his mother makes it for him, who lives inthe same village; Most common meal: He cultivatesvegetables, so he often cooks something from potatoehe has his own meat (he raises pigs). Vegetable soup cooked most often, potatoes cooked in the oven and served with ketchup. Meat broth (when he has time),meat from the soup is cooked in the oven and rice prepared with it. He often goes for odd jobs, so now in summer he dines pretty often with people he works for(he is a mason). He has lunch at his mom’s place; hehelps her financially . /Trebišov district

Favourite meal: They have their own milk and meat (they raise pigs, cows and goats). The husband most likes drop dumplings with curd cheese and meat from

soup with this. The children most like spaghetti withmorcadella sauce and ketchup; Most common meal:They often cook drop dumplings with curd cheese or make pancakes. They have their own meat, so they cooit pretty often. At least once a week they make fried bread. /Trebišov district

Favourite meal: The family raises pigs and also havea goat, so they have their own meat and milk. The sonmost prefers pancakes with curd cheese; the mother likes everything, she’s not picky; Most common meal:They most often cook potato-based dishes. Semolina o pancakes. /Bardejov district

As Table 16 shows, among the favourite meals of thesurveyed Roma households calorific foodspredominated, with a total of up to 64%, while only11% preferred lighter dishes and one-quarter


112 52 The cultivation of vegetables was given by 13% of the surveyed households and 9% raised animals, though in segregated settlement this was only 5% (see Table 7)



declared meals with an average calorific value. Incontrast to this structure, among the most commonlyprepared meals in excluded Roma settlements lesscalorific meals were found in a larger range (23%),and also meals of average heaviness; the share of more calorific meals during the monitoring of themost frequently prepared meals dropped by nearly20%, the very calorific to 3%.

Reciprocally, it was found that favourite meals in thesurveyed environments are usually unhealthy: 76% of

those listed were unhealthy and only 6% healthy. Thestructure of the most commonly prepared foods fromthe viewpoint of healthy eating changed only slightly.The share of unhealthy meals remained high even for

the most commonly prepared meals (70%) andhealthy meals in the end declined, while only therepresentation of meals considered to be of averagehealth quality increased. Very healthy meals witha value of 7 did not occur at all either among favouritemeals or the most commonly prepared meals.

From a comparison of favourite and most commonlyprepared meals it followed that the majority of Romahouseholds from excluded settlements do not haveagreement in these two compared meals. Complete or

partial agreement according to all three monitoredcriteria was found among them in almost one-quarterand up to 77% differentiated these two meals, whilemore than half of them were completely different. The


Table 16Favourite and most common prepared meals in Roma households from excluded settlementsby caloric value (in %)

Favourite meal Most common meal 1 = low calorific food - -

2 2 33 9 20

4 = average 25 32

5 26 31

6 25 11

7 = very calorific food 13 3

Total 100 100


Table 17Favourite and most common prepared meals in Roma households from excluded settlementsby healthy meals (in %)

Favourite meal Most common meal

1 = very unhealthy food 12 32 24 31

3 40 36

4 = average 18 27

5 5 3

6 1 1

7 = very healthy food - -

Total 100 100



disproportion grew primarily in segregated settlements,where the favourite and most commonly prepared meal was completely different in 66% of households cases,while in case of the separated on the edge completedifference achieved 53% and among Roma households

concentrated within a municipality 41%. Thus, insegregated environments the difference between thefavourite and the most commonly prepared meals grewfurther; this means that in settlements completelydifferent types of foods are commonly consumed thanare actually preferred in a still greater range than in theother two excluded environments.

A comparison of the favourite and most common meal indicated that restraint in consumption orrelinquishing of the original range of needs in the

area of eating is a widespread phenomenon in thesurveyed environments, and with spatial segregationgrows even further, minimally in a certain period of months. Residents of segregated settlement can onlyto a small measure regularly prepare favourite meals.Therefore, among the replies the following general message was recorded:

Favourite meal: We have to cook what we have; we haveto manage in each situation; Most common meal: Nocomment. /Detva district

Summary:

Many of the meal plans recorded in the research probeshowed that poverty and material deprivation in thisenvironment is a widespread phenomenon. The dailyfare of many of the surveyed households does not conform to the nutritional value needed for healthydevelopment. The deprivation of many of the surveyedhouseholds is connected with their exclusion fromconsumption, even from the consumption of food.This means that not infrequently there is a dramatic

lowering in this environment of the level of living inregard to the social consequences of long-termunemployment. Minimally in a certain period of themonth before benefits come the characteristics of absolute poverty were indicated, when deprivationcomes near to a certain “physiological threshold”,beneath which the most basic need, such as food, isnot satisfied. Several of the meal plans were very poor

and monotonous; sometimes very uncertain andbordering on hunger.

At the same time the research probe showed that nutrition of Roma households from excluded settlemen

is on the whole not of very good quality. Their dailymenus contained a limited number of meals per day, novery diverse foods and with less focus on fruits andvegetables or dairy products. Non-nutritious or calorifmeals predominate in meal plans, while healthy foodsare more rare to exceptional.

After benefits, the variety of meals in most of thesurveyed households increased, but these are mainlycalorific and meat dishes that are added to meal plans. Although with the arrival of finances to the

household a great deal of their daily meals change,a large portion of them give priority to unhealthy anheavy foods, or social incomes are not suff icient forother types of meals. The situation before and afterbenefits is diverse in households, but a change of eating habits predominated, and a shift was recordeespecially in segregated settlements in the comparedtwo time periods of the month..


114

Graph 20Comparison of favourite and most commonmeals in Roma households from excludedsettlements (in %)


1 = completedifferent

2 = rather diferent

3 = ratheridentical

4 = completeidentical

53

24

17

6



An overall view at both meal plans showed that no great “feast” occurred after benefits, but meal plans inessence, at least after benefits, came close to normal eating. The missing number of meals per day wassupplemented; children received standard food items;

some households afforded themselves a favourite food –meat – and they eat a bellyful. Although the modes of food consumption found upon monitoring this aspect were diverse, from permanently deficit up throughpermanently standard, in course of the month arelatively large group combine a longer period of deficit eating with “normal” eating after the acquiring of incomes, particularly in households reliant exclusivelyon social benefits.

Even the monitoring of favourite and most common

meals identified the orientation to more heavycooking and non-quality meals in excluded Romasettlements. The research probe thus confirmed andin the examples of individual meals showed the dininghabits in this environment.

A comparison of favourite and most common mealsindicated that the restraint in consumption or therelinquishing of the original range of needs in the areaof nutrition is in the surveyed environment widespreadand grows along with spatial exclusion. Residents of

segregated settlements are able to prepare commonlyfavourite meals only in a small measure.

The tendency predominated in the eating habits of households that the more demanding favourite mealswere – mainly if they are meat-based meals – thenhouseholds can only afford them occasionally in thecourse of the month, and commonly cannot affordthem at all. Generally, they prepare a favourite meal only one time each month and do so after arrival of incomes into the family. The main meal on the meal

plan in the period after benefits and the favouritemeal were in the majority of cases identical. Throughmost of the month they experience a limitation infood consumption which also takes the form of clear-cut deprivation in nutrition.53

53 Because respondent households were at the same time prompted to share the method of preparing their favourite dishes, one of the side products of describingfavourite or most commonly eaten meals is a collection of recipes from Roma households. This makes up the independent Appendix no. 3 of this report.




116

Appendix 1 to Chapter 4:A comparison of meal plans of households from marginalised Roma settlements at two points of themonth, differentiated by the date of payment of benefits – before benefits and after benefits (the firsline shows the meal plan of the household before benefits and the second line, labelled “after” themeal plan after benefits)

BREAKFAST MID-MORN. SNACK LUNCHAFTERNOONSNACK

DINNER

1bread, butter, salami, tea,coffee

0 potatoes, meat 0 Haruľa (potato pancakes)

afterbread, rolls, margarine,tea, coffee

0 pickled beans 0 chicken, rice

2bread cooked in egg(children, adults onlycoffee)

bread, butter(children, adultsnothing)

soup, macaroni with meat (children in school)

bread with salamiand butter(children)

leftovers from lunch

after yoghurt and roll (children, adults only

coffee)

biscuits, apple, roll with meat spread

(children)

salad, cutlet, cake (childrenin school)

fruit potatoes, meat

3bread, butter, meat spread

bread, butter, hamchicken soup, baked chicken,potato mash

0 bread, frankfurters

after bread cooked in eggbread, meat spread,apple

meatless goulash 0 wrapped salami, potatoes

4 bread, butter 0 soup, potatoes 0uncooked foods, leftoversfrom lunch, nothing?

afterbread, butter, salami,tomatoes, pepper, yoghurt, biscuits, sweets

frankfurters, breadsoup, meat with potatoes orwith rice

0 drop dumplings with meat

6 bread, fried eggs, coffee 0 potato pancakes 0 bread, butter, tea

af ter bread, salami, tea, cof fee 0sour potato soup withcabbage

0 bread, frankfurters

7bread with butter, tea,coffee

0 Bean soup with smoked meat 0 bread cooked in egg

af ter bread, salami, tea, cof fee 0

Drop dumplings withsauerkraut and fried meat insmall cubes on top of dropdumplings

0Frankfurters and bread withmustard, tea.

8 bread, butter fruit Goulash 0 bread, meat spread

after bread, frankfurters fruit Bean soup, drop dumplingswith sauerkraut

0 Boiled smoked ribs, bread

9 roll with jamchildren – powderedmilk

Bouillon soup with pasta andpotato pancakes

0 bread with butter and salt

afterchildren yoghurt, parentssausage with bread

children – powderedmilk

Barley soup, boiled meat andpotatoes

0 leftovers from lunch

10 roll with butter

rolls and biscuits –only school-attending children,others nothing

drop dumplings 0 0



after roll with salami

only school-attending childrenhave this – roll andbiscuit

salad and cutlets 0 salami, sausage, bread

11 bread, bread rollssnack as always –children have pre-

paid bread rolls

pea soup, boiled dumplings

filled with potatoes

nothing – leftovers

from lunch

potato pancakes, tea

afterbread with butter,frankfurters

meat spread, plusbread rolls and tea

meat loaf (pork meat) withcheese, fries, tartar sauce

nothing – leftoversfrom lunch

bread, salami

12 0 0

Food from potatoes andflour: the family doesn’t havea large difference beforebenefits and after benefits,because they are so heavily indebt that they live more fromwhat other offer them. In theperiod before benefits theyeat from supplies of potatoesand flour.

0 0

afterbread, butter, salami, tea,coffee

0potatoes – in different ways(with cabbage, milk, pasta)

0 0

13

bread or roll with butter(if the young children arehere – grandkids, yoghurt)

0

boiled dumplings orsomething from potatoes –based on what they haveavailable at home

0 bread and butter

after

bread rolls with a spread,sausages boiled (if grandkids are here – yoghurt)

0 roasted meat with potatoes 0 boiled sausages, bread

14bread, meat spread,butter

roll legume soup, tea, bread 0 fries with ketchup, tea, bread

aftertheir meal plans don’t change after benefits

0 0 0 0

15bread with salami (withbutter, egg, meat spread),tea and honey

bread with ham andvegetables

vegetable soup, dropdumplings with meat

0 potatoes with sour milk

afterthey don’t receivebenefits – same meals

0 0 0 0

16 tea, fried dough 0 pasta with tomato paste 0 0 – leftovers

afterbread, rolls, strudel,butter, salami, tomato,peppers

biscuits, fruit fried cutlet, salad yoghurt rolls, butter, tomato,pepper/leftovers from lunch

17 pancakes, tea banana broccoli soup, steamed buns yoghurt fried dough

afterboiled homemadesausage

yoghurt drop dumplings with meat fruit salami, roll, meat spread

18 bread, butter 0 pasta with cabbage 0 bread

after bread, butter banana chicken legs with potatoes yoghurt salami, bread, rolls, butter,tomato, peppers, biscuits

19soup with pasta andpotatoes

0 soup, jam donuts, tea 0soup and jam donuts –leftovers from lunch




118

afterrolls, butter, cocoa,sausage

fruit, biscuitsroasted pork neck, cabbage,steamed bread

biscuits, yoghurt sausage, bread, mustard

20 rolls, frankfurters 0 drop dumplings 0 bread cooked in egg, tea

afterbread with butter and jam, tea

fruit soup, gója (potato-filledsausage), potatoes with

onion

yoghurt, biscuitsgója (potato-filled sausage)from lunch

21bread, rolls, milk cheese,ham, tomatoes,cucumbers

yoghurt sautéed meat and ricebread, rolls, butter,vegetables

cutlets, potatoes, egg salad

after open sandwiches yoghurt fish sticks, fries, ketchup yoghurt baked chicken, potatoes

22 bread, tea 0chicken soup, spaghetti withmorcadella

0 potato pancakes

afterfrankfurters with mustardand bread

0chicken broth, chicken, rice,salad


23 yoghurt, cocoa, breadwith chocolate spread,meat spread

fruit pasta with sauce and meat fruit, biscuits leftovers from lunch

aftervegetables, salami,bread, meat spread,frankfurters

yoghurt cutlets, potato mash fruit semolina, leftovers fromlunch

24bread, butter, salami,vegetables

apple soup – broth apple bread, butter, vegetables

afterbread, meat spread,sausage

fruit soup, grilled meat andpotatoes

0 leftovers from lunch, bread

25 bread with butter 0 Buttered drop dumplings 0 bread with butter, tea

afterbread with a spread withbutter, hunter’s salami,cocoa

yoghurt Hungarian goulash, steamedbread

0 frankfurters

26 coffee, cigarette 0drop dumplings withtomatoes/peppers

0 bread with butter

after salami, bread, bacon 0vegetable soup, bakedchicken, potato mash

0we warm up leftovers fromlunch, or bread and salami

27 0 bread with butter lentil soup, drop dumplings 0 Same as for lunch

after yoghurt, roll, biscuitsbread with salami,milk

fried pork cutlet, potatosalad, chicken soup

0 baked chicken with potatoes

28 nothing fried dougheither bean or lentil soup,drop dumplings

0 fried dough, tea

after yoghurt, butter, salami,bread

leftovers frombreakfast

chicken and potatoes 0sausages,salami, bread

29 nothing 0 bean soup, potatoes 0 leftovers from lunch

after yoghurt, bread, butter,salami


chicken, potatoes 0 sausages, bread

30bread with butter, salami,tea

at school baked chicken with potatoes 0 risotto

after rolls, cheese, ham, milk at school stuffed thigh, rice 0 pancakes

31 bread with meat spread 0 vegetable soup 0 bread with salami and tea



af ter bread spreadbread with meat spread

fried cutlets with potatomash, lemonade

small children –a wafer and alollipop, olderchildren – crispswith mama

again fried cutlets withpotato mash – as for lunch

32

challah bread with coffee,

baby – milk 0 chicken soup and soda 0 bread cooked in, baby – milk

afterbread with meat spreadand salami, coffee

0chicken in its juices withpasta

frankfurters withbread and ketchup

cake with curd cheese andmilk

33cheese, eggs, butter, tea,cocoa, bread

open sandwich withham and salami

lentil soup, steamed breadand tenderloin

fruit lentil soup from lunch

afterroasted knackwurst,boiled frankfurters,bread, vegetables

hot-dog or openbaguette sandwich

soup and baked chicken withpotato mash and fruit compote

fruit Topinky – toast with a spread

34open sandwiches, eggsboiled, vegetables, juice

fruit, pudding, fruit puree

creamy soup, skewers withpotatoes and garnish

vegetable salad semolina

after

scrambled eggs, boiled

frankfurters, bread, tea or juice

open sandwich, yoghurt

beef broth, potatoes androasted brisket fruit bread cooked in egg, tea

35Rolls – bread rolls andmargarine.

open sandwich roll (margarine plussalami)

Bryndza soup, noodles withpoppy seed

0 bread cooked in egg

afterham and eggs, bread withbutter, tomatoes

open baguettesandwich with ham

bean soup, fried chicken withrice

0 bean soup – from lunch

36 bread w ith margarine, tearoll with salami andmargarine

drop dumplings with cheese apple, roll bryndza soup

afteropen sandwich bread,bread cooked in egg

open sandwich roll,banana

cabbage soup, fried meat with potatoes

cabbage soup fromlunch with bread

knackwurst, mustard, bread

37 bread, real butter roll, margarine,green peppers spaghetti with ketchup 0 bread with salami

afterrolls with salami,scrambled eggs

open sandwich rollsnoodle soup, fried cheese,potato mash

banana, apple noodle soup – from l

38 fancy bread, butter, cocoa open sandwich roll goulash soup, bread 0 bread with meat spread

afterbutter, spread, eggs,frankfurters, knackwurst,bread, tea

0bryndza soup, roastedbrisket and steamed bread,cabbage

bread with a spread soup with bread

39bread and tea; father –coffee and a cigarette

adults nothing;older son (4 years)potatoes on peppers

potatoes baked in the oven,with ketchup

older sonsemolina; youngeris nursing

adults – leftovers fromlunch; son milk and potatomash, later yoghurt

afterfrankfurters, bread,mustard

children yoghurt and roll

chicken soup, rice andchicken bread, ham, milk leftovers from lunch

40potato pancakes, tea andmilk

child – puddingpotato soup, potatopancakes with stuffing

drop dumplingswith potatoes

same as afternoon snack –drop dumplings withpotatoes

after bread, ham, tea frankfurters, rollschicken soup, stuffedcabbage

frankfurters, bread leftovers from lunch

41 potato pancakes, teabread margarine –children to school

potatoes boiled sautéedonions

potato pancakes,tea

leftovers from lunch andpotato pancakes




120

afterpotato pancakes, bread,frankfurters

bread with a spreadand salami –children to school

tripe soup, pork meat withpotatoes

sausage, bread,mustard

soup from lunch, bread

42 milk, bread, margarine

children to school –bread with salamiand peppers, syrup

in water

tomato soup,noodles withcurd cheese

bread, omelette,tea

leftovers from lunch

afterfrankfurters, rolls,ketchup

children to school –rolls, ham, butter,syrup in water

vegetable soup, Frenchpotatoes

bacon, bread,mustard

sausages, bread, mustard

43 bread with lard 0 bean soup with bread 0bean soup with bread –leftovers from lunch

after bread, plums, syrup 0tomato soup, fried meat withpotatoes

0leftovers from lunch;children also had a small yoghurt

44 rolls, butter, milk 0 fried chicken, potatoes 0 potato pancakes, tea

after rolls, milk, butter 0 fried meat, potatoes 0 tea, fries

45 0 bread with lardwith drop dumplings withtomatoes/peppers

0 bacon with bread

afterbread with butter, hamsalami

0bean soup, perkelt (creamymeat sauce) and dropdumplings

0(Gypsy „bodák“), doughbaked on the stove

46 rolls, cocoapork scratchingswith bread

Children have lunch in theschool canteen

0 fried potatoes, tea

afterbread with butter, salami,tea

0 children – school canteen 0 fries, tea, bread

47 coffee bread with cheeseegg soup, drop dumplingswith cabbage

fruit roasted potatoes, fried egg

after coffee challah bread withbutter

chicken soup, Koložvárskacabbage

banana, children yoghurt

Koložvárska cabbage – fromlunch

48 they don’t eat breakfast bread with buttermixed soup, ribs withpotatoes

bread with lard dry bread

after bread with butter bread with butter drop dumplings with bryndza bread with lard bread with butter

49 bread with honey biscuitstripe soup, cabbage withmeat and steamed bread


after bread with salami biscuits goulash banana goulash from lunch

50 tea, bread nothing chicken wings nothing tea, buns

after tea and bread with lard bun chicken roll leftovers from lunch

51 bread, meat spread, tea 0 chicken, potatoes 0 potato pancakes

after bread, frankfurters 0 cutlets and potatoes 0 drop dumplings with cheese

52 coffee and cigarettes 0 bread with lard coffee jacket potatoes

after ham and rolls 0chicken in juices plus dropdumplings

lemonade, bunsbaked blood sausage withbread

53 0 0

son at school tomato soupand drop dumplings withcabbage; others breadcooked in egg




aftersalami, vegetables, rolls,tea

only children –bread, butter,salami, vegetables

son at school (sour soup andsteamed buns); at home –chicken broth, baked chickenwith potatoes

0roasted sausage, bread,mustard

54 bread and butter 0

children in school (vegetablesoup, meat and rice); adults

– pasta with tomato perkelt (creamy meat sauce)

children – baconand bread; adultsnothing

bread and butter

afterchildren – salami andbread; adults – coffee andcigarettes

bread with salami,biscuits

children in school soupbroth, vegetable mash withmeat; fried meat andpotatoes (adults and childrenat home)

0 scrambled eggs and bread

55 bread with lard, tea 0 pasta 0 bread cooked in egg

afterbread rolls, butter,salami, milk

0 pork or chicken meat 0 frankfurters

56 frankfurtersgoulash soup –boiled

goulash soup, biscuits, milk goulash soup goulash soup, cake

after frankfurters goulash soup pancakes goulash soup goulash soup

57 0 0spicy pepper stew andpotatoes

0 potato stuffing, tea

after rolls, butter, milk sweetsbaked chicken, rice,vegetables

0 frankfurters with mustard

58 bread, milk bread, salamimeat and floury foods – beef broth, beef with potatoes,applecake

bread, butter potato pancakes

af ter bread, milkbread, butter,salami

sautéed chicken, potatoes,pickled vegetables

bread, butter lef tovers from lunch

59 bread, butter, salami, tea 0drop dumplings with curdcheese

0 chicken meat with rice

after roll, butter, salami, tea roll with salamiroasted ribs, potatoes,cucumber

0potatoes in the oven withsalami

60

scrambled eggs withfreshly picked wildmushrooms, fried dough(dry)

0

mushroom soup with dropdumplings, boiled potatoes,fried mushrooms in anegg/flour/breadcrumb batter

0

roasted sausages, sweets forchildren, and father red wine(Milenka) and cigar tobacco– for wild mushrooms sold(8 euro)

after rolls, butter, salamibiscuits, rolls,lemonade

grilled chicken thighs, boiledpotatoes, cucumber salad

0 drop dumplings with cheese

61 bread cooked in egg yoghurt drop dumplings with cabbage 0 toast with egg

afterroll, salami, tomatoes,peppers

yoghurt, croissant chicken soup, friedcheesewith fries

fruit bacon or sausage, bread,tomatoes, lemonade

62 bread with meat spread 0 potato pancakes 0bread, meat spread, butter, jam

afterfrankfurters withmustard, bread

0 chicken cutlets, potatoes 0as lunch – chicken cutletsand potatoes

63rolls with butter andtomato

0 pasta with curd cheese 0 bread cooked in egg

afterfrankfurters, salami,cheese, bread rolls

0 baked chicken legs, potatoes 0 fries, ketchup, tartar sauce




122

64bread, bread rolls,cheese, butter, jam,coffee, tea

sweets risotto with chicken meat 0 risotto from lunch

afterbread rolls, cheese,butter, ham, tea, babyfood

0Hungarian goulash s steamedbread

fruit bread, ham, eggs, coffee, yoghurt

65rolls with butter, salamiand tea

biscuitsdrop dumplings with cottagecheese

0bread, butter, meat spread,cheese, tea, sweets

afterbread rolls, butter,salami, cheese

apple, sweetscutlets, potatoes, saladvegetable

0bread, cutlets from lunchand stuff from therefrigerator

66bread rolls, tea, butter, yoghurt, coffee

fruit pasta with cheese 0 pasta with cheese as lunch

afterbread, fish, butter, tea,coffee

sweets grilled chicken, potatoes 0fried dough and scrambledeggs with onion

67salami, bread rolls,butter, biscuits

biscuits risotto 0 bread, meat, tea

after salami, bread, butter,sweets

sweets chicken legs, rice, fruit compote

0 fish, bread

68 bread with butter 0potatoes with pickledcabbage

0 frankfurters with bread

after frankfurters with bread 0 baked thighs with potatoes 0 fried meat with rice

69 bread with butter and tea 0 boiled peas with potatoes 0fried thighs with dropdumplings

after bread with salami 0cutlets with potatoes,vegetable salad

0 baked thighs with potatoes

70 bread cooked in egg 0 drop dumplings with sauce 0 potato pancakes

after scrambled eggs 0 roasted meat with rice 0 risotto

71 bread, frankfurters, tea 0 baked chicken thighs,potatoes, cucumbers

0 drop dumplings or pasta witpoppy-seed

afterbread with butter andsalami

0 fried meat, potatoes 0cutlets, potatoes, cucumbersalad

72bread with butter andsalami

0 soup, potatoes, cutlet 0 leftovers from lunch

after sausage, mustard, bread 0 baked thighs, potatoes 0leftovers from lunch – bakedthighs and potatoes

73bread with butter andketchup

0pea soup, drop dumplingswith cabbage

0 bread with butter and tea

afterfrankfurters with

ketchup, bread0

roasted brisket, sauerkraut,

steamed bread0

leftovers from lunch –brisket and sauerkraut withsteamed bread


0cabbage soup, dropdumplings with cabbage

0leftovers from lunch, breadwith sugar

afterfrankfurters, rolls,mustard

biscuitsbean soup with sausagecutlets, potatoes

0sausage soup at lunch,mustard, bread

75frankfurters, salami,bread, bread rolls, yoghurt

0potato or flour-basedpancakes

0 rissole, potatoes



afterbread, cheese, yoghurt,salami

0vegetable soup or bean soupwith smoked meat

0 cutlets, potatoes pasta

76bread with cheese, withbutter

plums pasta with potatoes 0 pancakes from flour

after bread rolls, salami, butter 0 cabbage, sausage, cutlets 0 cutlets from lunch

77 cigarette and cof fee bread with a spread,tea

vegetable risotto breadwith jam,milk

from lunch – risotto

after cigarette and coffeefrankfurters,ketchup, rolls

chicken soup, potatoes andchicken meat from soup

frankfurters andbread

soup from lunch and others

78potato pancakes and tea;adults – plus Turkishcoffee

children – potatopancakes with syrupin water

vegetable soup withpotatoes, drop dumplingswith cabbage

bread with lard leftovers from lunch

afterbread, frankfurters,mustard

bread with a spreadand salami

stuffed cabbage, grilledchicken plus potatoes

the same as fromlunch

the same as from lunch

79potato pancakes withmargarine, tea, milk

0egg soup, drop dumplingswith cabbage

bread with lard andonion

potato pancakes with eggsoup from lunch

afterbread with salami andvegetables; adults coffeeand cigarettes

children – bread andfrankfurters

steamed bread, cabbage androasted pork ribs

bread, salami,butter

sausage with bread; children– rice pudding

80bread with butter andmilk

0 rice with milk – at mama’ssausage, bread – at odd jobs

meat, rice, vegetable salad –at odd jobs

after bread, sausage, mustard 0 stuffed cabbage – at mama’sfrankfurters, bread– at odd jobs

pumpkin mash, rissole – at odd jobs

81bread with butter, salami,tea

0 vegetable soup, mushrooms 0leftovers from lunch;otherwise rolls with butterand tea

af ter frankfur ters, bread, milk yoghur t boiled potatoes, fried cutlet,cucumbers

biscuits rolls, salami, lemonade

82 bread with butter, meat spread

0 baked chicken thighs,potatoes, cucumbers

0 fries with egg, cucumbers

afterfrankfurters, yoghurt,tea, bread

0 pork cutlets, potatoes applefrom lunch – cutlets andpotatoes

83 bread, butter, spread, tea 0 tomatoes/peppers roll with butter fries with ketchup

afterpudding, roll with salami,milk or lemonade

biscuitssoup, potatoes, sautéedmeat, cucumbers

0frankfurters, and leftoversfrom lunch – if any

84 bread and butter 0soup, potatoes andcauliflower

0 bread and butter

aftersalami, frankfurters,bread

biscuits potatoes with meat 0 sausage boiled and chilli

85 bread, ham, cheese,vegetables, tea, yoghurt

juice chicken soup, rice, bakedchicken, vegetable salad,cola

poppy-seed bun potato hash

afterbread rolls (rolls, Kaiserroll), frankfurters,vegetables, milk, cheese

baguettegoulash, bread, lemonade,pudding

yoghurt and roll French potatoes

86bread, butter, ham,cheese, lemonade

yoghurt, two rollsand biscuits

soup, potatoes and rissole,pickled cucumbers

frankfurters, breador salami, milk,ketchup

drop dumplings with meat,vegetable salad




124

after bread, butter, jam, juicetwo rolls with meat spread; or breadwith Nutella

noodle soup, goulash andrice

vegetables, bread,egg or fish spread

tripe soup, bread

87 bean mash, bread 0

soup from pork ribs with dropdumplings (without potatoes) (ribs for0.60 per kg)

0same as lunch – soup frompork ribs

afterchicken thighs, potatoes,salad cucumber

sweetsleftovers from breakfast;plus frozen pizza and frozenbuns

biscuitsfrankfurters, bread,mustard, ketchup

88 dry bread, tea 0instant soup with potatoes,dry bread

0 0

afterbread with butter, bacon,onion

coffeechicken soup with liverdumplings, boiled potatoes,chicken thighs

soup from lunch from lunch

89bread, butter, coffee,home-produced milk,

salami


snap-beans soup, jam donutssoup and jamdonuts from lunch

from lunch

after

bread, homemade spread(fish mix, salami, eggs),tea coffee; adults –smoked brisket

0instant goulash soup, grilledbrisket and potatoes

bread, salami,butter, fruit –apple

scrambled eggs with wildmushrooms (onion, eggs),bread

90 bread with butter, tea 0mushroom soup, dropdumplings with curd cheese

drop dumplings,leftover from lunch

scrambled eggs with wildmushrooms

afterbread, rolls with butter,meat spread, salami,cheese, milk, tea

same as breakfast chicken soup, fried chickencutlet, potatoes, vegetables

bread with meat spread, salami,vegetables

same as lunch – chickencutlet a potatoes

91 bread with lard bread with lard drop dumplings with cabbage bread with lardfrom lunch – drop dumplingswith cabbage

afterbread with butter, or withmeat spread, salami, yoghurt, tea, milk

similar as breakfast meat in different ways,potatoes, vegetables

bread with butter,meat spread,salami or ham

meat, potatoes, vegetables –from lunch

92 bread with butter, teabread with butter –as for breakfast

mushroom soup bread with buttermushroom soup from lunch,drop dumplings with cheese

afterbread or rolls with cheese,with butter, salami, sweet buns, milk, salad

similar as breakfast chicken meat, potatoes,vegetables

bread with butterand cheese,salami, fruit

meat and potatoes fromlunch

93 pancakes with lard, tea 0soup – chicken, dropdumplings with chicken meat

0drop dumplings with chickenmeat from lunch

after bread, butter, salami 0 soup, potatoes with meat 0

as lunch – potatoes with

meat

94 pancakes with lard 0 chicken with macaroni breadchicken with macaroni fromlunch

after bread with butter 0 meat, potatoes 0 roasted sausage, pancakes

95 bread with butter, tea 0bean soup, drop dumplingswith cabbage

0tomatoes/peppers withpancakes

after bread with butter, tea 0chicken soup, grilled chicken,potatoes

0 chicken with drop dumpling



96 bread, butter, tea 0vegetable soup, Frenchpotatoes


after bread, butter, ham 0 chicken, potatoes, cabbage 0 pizza

97 Bokeľa (Roma bread) 0potatoes, bokeľa (Romabread)

0potatoes, bokeľa (Romabread)

af ter bread, salami, butter, tea 0 meat, chicken, pasta, rice orpotatoes

0 Bokeľa (Roma bread)

98Bokeľa (Roma bread),bread

0potatoes, pasta or bokeľa(Roma bread)

0 bread

after bread, butter, tea 0meat – chicken, potatoes,rice

0 meat potatoes – from lunch

99we don’t have breakfast –only bread by itself

0 pasta or potatoes 0bread or bokeľa (Romabread)

after bread 0pasta with meat, chickenwith potatoes

0 bread or no dinner

100 bread, butter, tea children in school children in schoolsavoury scones at grandmother‘s

drop dumplings with perkelt (creamy meat sauce)

afterbread, salami, biscuits,tea

children in school children in school biscuits, sweets chicken, rice, bread, salami

101 0 0

husband goes through thevillage to help for food, weeat what he brings – but healways brings something

0 0

afterbread, salami, breadcooked in egg

yoghurt, banana 0bacon, onion,mustard

chicken in it juices, rice,cucumber

102

potato mash from dinner,water; the small boy (not quite 2 years old)something we have at

home – we try to have at least 1 yoghurt always

we don’t have a mid-morning snack at home; to work theytake bread with

butter and smokedribs

0 0smoked ribs, dry bread, tapwater

afteromelette with ham,

yoghurt, bread, tea

child – lemonades,biscuits, fruit;husband andmother to work –bread with ham,fruit

0child only – yoghurt, sweets

vegetable soup, pork meat inits own juice, potato mash

103coffee and tea, breadwith butter

0 pasta with sauce, baked cake 0leftovers from lunch, =r dropdumplings withtomatoes/peppers

aftersalami, bread, butter,coffee, tea

0soup, chicken meat, steamedbread, tomato sauce

savoury sconesfinish soup from lunch withmeat, leftovers from lunch

201bread, meat spread,peppers, salami tea

apple, biscuitsvegetable soup,chicken withrice, red beets, water

banana salad, fish

after 0 0 0 0 0

202 rolls, ham, butter 0 steamed bread tenderloin 0 leftovers from lunch

after rolls, butter 0 it depends 0 baked chicken, rice

203 0 0 meat, rice 0 varies

after Nesquik apple goulash soup biscuits pancakes





afterbread or rolls, butter,salami

fruit, biscuits chicken thighs, potato mash yoghurt potatoes, meat

220 pasta with cheese 0 soup, cake 0fried dough with sugar andcocoa

afterbread, butter, salami,

vegetables

yoghurt fried pork cutlet, potatoes,

salad, vegetable soup

fruit bread, salami, butter

221soup, fried dough – this isfor the whole day

soup, fried dough soup, fried dough soup, fried dough soup, fried dough

afterrolls, cheese, salami,butter, tomato

yoghurt baked chicken thighs, potatomash, pickled vegetables

fruit pasta with cheese and withpotatoes, with ketchup

222 fried dough, tea 0fried dough with oil, sugarand cocoa, instant soup withpasta

0pasta with oil and tomatopaste

after rolls, butter, tomato, tea yoghurt leavened cake with poppyseed and cacao

biscuits sausage, bread, mustard

223 „fried dough“, tea 0 pasta with ketchup 0leftovers from lunch, breadwith Rama margarine

afterbread, butter, salami,tomato, tea

biscuitsmeat cooked in its juices,potatoes

banana sausage, bread, mustard, tea

224bread with butter andcheaper salami

0 French potatoes 0 potato pancakes

afterscrambled eggs withbacon

open sandwichsoup, steamed bread withcabbage

0drop dumplings with curdcheese

225 bread, salami, butter 0 chicken soup, sauce, pasta 0 fried dough with jam

afterbread, ham, fish salad,cheese

0chicken soup, cutlets withpotatoes

cakecutlets from lunch withpotatoes

226 bread, butter, salami 0cabbage soup, potatopancakes

0 potato pancakes

after bread, salad, meat spread, salami

0 cutlets, potato salad 0 eggs, bread

227bread, butter, meat spread

0 pasta with curd cheese 0 potato pancakes

after vegetables, bread, ham 0chicken cutlets, rice,potatoes

0 same as for lunch

228 rolls, biscuits, pudding 0tomato soup, chicken liversand floured potatoes

0 drop dumplings with cheese

after rolls, pudding, salami 0 sauerkraut with meat balls 0 risotto

229 0 0 fried dough and potatoes 0drop dumplings andpotatoes

after salami, bread, butter,milk same as forbreakfast chicken soup, chicken withpotatoes 0 drop dumplings with bryndza

230 bread, butter, tea children in school lentil soup, drop dumplings 0 leftovers from lunch

after yoghurt, rolls, fruit,biscuits

in school chicken soup, fried chickenwith potatoes


231 bread, margarine, milk

To primary school with children –bread, butter,salami

tomato soup, drop dumplingswith curd cheese

potato pancakeswith sour cream

from lunch – drop dumplingswith curd cheese




128

afterbread, scrambled eggs,vegetables – tomato andpeppers

to school withchildren – rolls,ham, butter, tea

stuffed peppers and steamedbread

bread, bacon,cucumbers

stuffed peppersfrom lunchwith bread

232potato pancakes, tea;adults – coffee and acigarette

children juice andbreadwith jam

soup from a bone, potatohash

potato pancakes,lard, syrup-flavoured water

potato pancakes

afterbread, margarine andsalami; adults coffee andcigarettes

children to primaryschool – bread withbutter and salami,lemonade

chicken soup, dropdumplings from chicken meat

sausage, bread,tomatoes, peppers

sausage and bread, mustard

233bread, sausage, yoghurt,coffee

children to school –rolls, ham lemonade

potato soup with liver dropdumplings, sausage withtomatoes/peppers

pancakes with jambread with butter,vegetables

afterbread, ham, frankfurters,coffee

to school – rolls,ham, lemonade

roasted chicken livers, ricefrankfurters,bread, mustard

risotto with pork meat andvegetables

234bread with lard, tea,

coffee

with children toschool – bread with

a spread, peppers,tea

soup from a bone, pasta with

egg

bread with lard and

tomatoes

rice with milk

after roll, ham, tea, coffee

children – breadwith ham and syrupin water; grandma – yoghurt; adults –coffee

chicken soup, chicken thighs,rice

frankfurters, breadchicken legs and rice fromlunch

235 rolls, butter, milk bread with lard, tea vegetable soup barley gruel pancakes

after rolls and frankfurters bacon, bread soup from a bone, risotto same as for lunch bread with lard

236 bread with lard, tea 0sour potatoes, potatopancakes

0 same as for lunch

after frankfurters, bread, tea 0 goulash, bread 0 same as for lunch

237 potato pancakes, tea

children to school –no snack; others at home – potatopancakes and tea

potatoes on peppers 0 potato pancakes

after sausages, bread, ketchupbread, butter salami– and children toschool

soup, cutlets, potatoes sausages, breadleftovers from lunch pluspotato pancakes

238 potato pancakes, tea 0 drop dumplings with cabbage potato pancakesdrop dumplings, potatopancakes

afterscrambled eggs withbacon, bread

frankfurters, rollschicken soup, potatoes,chicken meat

bacon and bread frankfurters with bread

239 bread, lard, water 0 lentil soup, bread 0 lentil soup from lunch

after meat spread, bread 0macaroni with perkelt (creamy meat sauce)

0coffee, frankfurters andbread

240 cake, milkbread, butter,peppers

beef broth, Segedínskygoulash (creamy goulashwith sauerkraut) andsteamed bread

0 bread, frankfurters, mustard

after bread, egg, milk bread, butter, appletomato soup, fried meat,potatoes




241 coffee bread, bacontomato soup, roastedpotatoes

bread with butter eggs

after coffee roll, salamichicken soup, baked chickenand pasta

fruit leftovers from lunch

242

children – tea with butter;

parents – black coffee

children in school;

at home – breadwith butter

children in school; at home –

vegetable soup, potato hash potato hash

soup from lunch, butter and

bread, tea

afterchildren- cocoa, roll withcheese; adults – coffee

children – cocoabun, juice; at home– omelette

children – at school; potatosalad, fried cutlets

cutlets with breador with salad fromlunch

cooked bacon; childrensweets

243children – tea a breadwith butter; adults don’t have breakfast

children – they havelunch at school for 1euro; at home –bread with butter

children in school; vegetablesoup, drop dumplings

bread with butter bread cooked in egg

aftermilk, bread with salami –children

children – biscuitsand yoghurt; at home – bread withsalami

children in school; at home –chicken soup and bakedchicken

soup from lunchand chicken

roasted sausage

244 coffee, tea bread with buttervegetable soup, noodles withcabbage

from lunch,noodles withcabbage

bread cooked in egg

after rolls with ham yoghurt, fruit goulash soup, perkelt (creamy meat sauce), dropdumplings

steamed buns frankfurters with bread

245tea, coffee, bodák withlard (Gypsy bread)

only children inschool

bodák (Gypsy bread) andpotatoes on peppers;children – in school

potatoes onpeppers from lunch

bodák (Gypsy bread) withmeat spread

aftertea, coffee, roll withsalami

roll and bacon;children in school plus biscuits

stuffed peppers, steamedbuns; children in school

stuffed peppers,bread with salami

steamed buns, milk

246 coffee, tea bread with butter bean soup pancakes with jam eggs

after coffee, tea roll, ham, yoghurt vegetable soup, perkelt (creamy meat sauce) withpasta

fruit, cakedrop dumplings with curdcheese

247 tea, bread, butter 0 potato salad and cutlets 0 cocoa, bread

aftertea, bread, butter, salami,ham

0 chicken and rice 0 bread, ham, cheese

248 roll, meat spread, tea buns risotto semolina bread with butter

after rolls, butter, tea yoghurt cutlets with potatoes fruit bread with spread

249bread, butter or spread,

salami

roll with salami and

butterchicken meat with rice 0

leftovers from lunch, potato

pancakes

afterbread rolls with a spreador with butter, salami

open sandwich withsalami, fruit

chicken soup, pork thigh withcream sauce, pasta

leftovers fromlunch

drop dumplings with curdcheese or eggs

250

scrambled eggs withfreshly picked wildmushrooms, bread andtea

0 mushroom sauce and pasta same as lunch same as lunch

after bread, butter, sausages 0roasted sausages, boiledpotatoes

0 frozen steamed buns, tea




130

251 bread, soup 0 –scrambled eggs with onion 0 0

afterbread, butter, milk,bananas, apples

Same as forbreakfast

potatoes, roasted sausagesand blood sausages,sauerkraut

0leftovers from lunch withoutpotatoes, but with bread

252 0 0

dry bread, goulash soup with

two potatoes and dropdumplings

0same as for lunch – dry breaand goulash soup

after bread, salami, butter 0boiled potatoes, bakedcucumber, salad cucumber

0 from lunch

253bread, water, tea; youngest child – mother’smilk

0dry bread, instant goulashsoup with small pasta

rolls meat spread –store bought

father wine alone (winebrand – Milenka)

aftersalami, sausages, bread,bacon, lemonade

sweets – biscuitsand crunchy snacksof different types

multi-bean soup fromsmoked ribs, drop dumplingswith cheese

biscuits,lemonade, cake

pizza; father – wine

254 bread with lard 0tomato soup, potatoes ongreen peppers

leftovers fromlunch

bread cooked in egg, tea

afterrolls with ham, coffee; forthe children cocoa

yoghurt, biscuitsstuffed peppers, steamedbuns

fruit, biscuits roasted sausage

255 tea, Gypsy bread – bodák 0wild mushrooms with dropdumplings

0Bodák (Gypsy bread) with aspread


yoghurt stuffed cabbage biscuits, apple chicken with potatoes

256 soup sweetsfried dough with scrambledeggs

vegetables, bread from lunch

afterbread, ham, cheese,salami

0 goulash with bread 0 goulash from lunch

257 yoghurt, bread, breadrolls, tea 0

red cabbage with steamedbread 0 potato pancakes

aftermeat, yoghurt, cheese,bread rolls

0 cutlets with salad 0 salad with salami

258 bread, butter, tea 0 risotto 0 risotto from lunch

afterbread, butter, cheese,coffee

0 cutlets with potato salad 0 cutlets from lunch, bread

259bread rolls, yoghurt,coffee, butter

0 risotto 0leftovers from lunch –risotto

afterbread rolls, coffee tea,butter, cheese, salami

0 cutlets with potato salad sweets cutlets from lunch

260

rolls, salami, tea, cheese,

yoghurt 0 cutlets and fried dough sweets

from lunch – cutlets and

fried dough

afterbread rolls, ham, coffee,tea yoghurt

0 baked chicken, rice, potatoes sweets chicken from lunch

261bread, butter, tea, ham,vegetables

0 pasta with meat 0 bread with ham

afterbread, cheese, butter,tea, salami, vegetables

0 cutlets with salad 0 bread with ham

262 bread with butter 0 drop dumplings with cabbage 0 from lunch drop dumplings



after bread with salami 0 fried meat with potatoes 0 leftovers from lunch, bread

263 roll with salami 0 boiled dumplings 0 boiled dumplings from lunch


0steamed bred with cabbageand meat

0meat with cabbage fromlunch

264 bread with butter, tea 0drop dumplings withpotatoes (potato hash)

0 cutlets, potatoes, cucumbers

after bread with salami 0backed chicken legs withpotatoes

0 goulash a bread

265 bread with butter 0vegetable soup, rissole,potatoes

0 boiled potato dumplings

afterfrankfurters, bread,mustard

0backed chicken legs withpotatoes

0 sausage, bread

266bread, bread rolls, butter;children – yoghurt

0meat in its own juices,potatoes

dry rollsboiled potatoes withmayonnaise

after cake, jam donuts 0 soup, chicken cutlets 0gója (potato-filled sausage)

with pork scratchings

267bread or bread rolls,margarine, commonsalami

0 vegetable soup or bean soup 0 fried dough

afterfrankfurters, bread, breadrolls

0 sautéed meat 0 same as lunch

268 bread with ham 0 meat soup, potatoes 0 0

after yoghurt or pudding,bread rolls

0 cutlets and potatoes 0 bread, butter, salami

269 rolls, tea, butter, salami 0tomato soup,tomatoes/peppers

apple potatoes, mushrooms

after poppy-seed strudel, milk bread with salami chicken soup, baked chicken,potatoes, vegetable salad melon rolls, salami, meat spread,lemonade

270 rolls, spread, cocoa apple soup, pasta, meat, cucumber biscuits cake a tea

after milk, sweet buns fruit fish, potatoes, tartar sauce yoghurt frankfurters, bread, tea

271 bread with butter, tea 0vegetable soup, roastedpotatoes

bread with butterroasted potatoes from lunch,tea

after rolls, salami, milk fruit fried cheese, potatoes,tartar sauce

biscuitsfrankfurters with bread, tea,spread

272 0bread with butterand water withsyrup

bean soup, pasta with cheese 0 soup from lunch and bread

after yoghurt, rolls, milk, breadwith store-bought spread,hard salami

biscuits, lemonade chicken soup, friedcauliflower, mayonnaise andpotatoes

knackwurst, bread,mustard

fries with mayonnaise

273dry bread – and they eat this all day

0 0 0 0

after sweets, sausages, rolls 0barley soup, smoked ribs,potatoes

soup from lunchwith bread

soup from lunch with bread

274bread with butter or withlard

same as forbreakfast

goulash with potatoes andfrankfurters

again bread withbutter or lard

goulash from lunch




132

afterrolls, bread with butter,salami, yoghurt, milk

same as breakfast meat, potatoes, vegetablesbread with butterand meat spread,salami, fruit

from lunch – meat, potatoesand vegetables, fruit

275 bread with butter, tea same as breakfast mushroom soup, goulashwith sausage

same as breakfast – bread with butter

as for lunch – goulash withsausage

afterbread with butter andsalami, children yoghurt,milk

bread with butterand salami,vegetables, fruit

mushroom soup, fried porkcutlet, potatoes

as for mid-morningsnack – bread withbutter andvegetables andfruit

leftovers from lunch, pluscold foods – bread with meatspread or spread, vegetables

276rolls with butter andsalami, coffee

bread with butterand salami

mushroom soup, dropdumplings with curd cheese

as for mid-morningsnack – bread withbutter and salami

scrambled eggs withmushrooms

after

rolls with butter, cheeseslices, ham, vegetables(tomatoes, cucumbers),coffee

bread with butter,vegetables

fried chicken cutlet,potatoes, vegetables

bread with butterand ham

drop dumplings with cheese

277 bread, roll, butter, tea

children in school;

adults not used toeating it

pasta, meat 0 toast, tea

afterbread, scrambled eggs,tea

children in school;adults nothing

soup, pork meat, potatoes,cucumber

0 boiled potato dumplings, tea

278Kaiser roll, butter, salami,tea

children – in school;adults – no

soup, chicken thighs,potatoes


after bread, meat spread, teachildren in school;adults nothing

soup, potatoes, bakedchicken thighs, cucumber

0scrambled eggs, roastedsausage, bread, tea

279 bread rolls, butter, jam 0 potato mash with meat 0same as lunch – potato mashwith meat

after the same 0 0 0 0

280 bread, butter 0 potatoes, meat 0 same as lunch – potatoesand meat

after bread, salami, butterbread, salami,butter, cheese

meat with friesbread with salami,fruit

cheese with fries

281 bread rolls with butterchildren snack inschool

fries with cheese 0 bread rolls with butter


282boiled food – meat withpasta

0 gója (potato-filled sausage) 0leftovers frombreakfast and lunch

after no difference 0 0 0 0

283

milk, tea, bread with meat

spread

Child at school; at

home nothing vegetable soup, risotto, tea 0 potato mash, milk

after not difference 0 0 0 0

284 bread with butter and tea 0drop dumplings withcabbage, vegetable soup

0 toast with garlic, tea

afterroll with cheese andsalami, tea

0 potatoes, meat 0 bread cooked in egg

285 bread with butter, jam 0vegetable soup, chicken legswith macaroni

0 potatoes, milk




286tea, coffee, bread withbutter or lard

0soup with barley, dropdumplings

0leftovers from lunch – soupor drop dumplings

afterrolls, bread with salami,tea, coffee

0bean soup, macaroni withketchup

0 spaghetti with grated cheese

287 roll with butter andsalami, coffee a tea

0 chicken soup, spaghetti withpork meat

0 scrambled eggs, bread, tea


288meat spread bread, coffeeand tea

0bean soup, pork meat,potatoes, pickled vegetables

0bacon with onion and bread,tea


289bread with butter, salamitea

0soup, corallini pasta, roastedmeat

0drop dumplings with bryndzaand bacon



children in school;at home – nothing

children – in school; at home– soup, potatoes, chicken

0drop dumplings with bryndzaand bacon





134

Appendix 2 to Chapter 4:Favourite and most common meals of Roma households

FAVOURITE MEALS MOST COMMON MEALS

Baked chicken with rice

French potatoes

Thick soups (bean, lentil)

Salad and cutlet RisottoMeatless goulash

Steamed bread with dill sauceSteamed buns

Fish sticks and friesSour lentil soup

Drop dumplings with meat Potatoes with roasted meat

Potatoes with red peppers

Potato salad and pork cutletsPotato hashGoulash with sausage

Stuffed cabbage leaf Goulash (meat, potatoes with snap beans)Potato mash

Roasted brisket, potatoes. Pašvare – smoked ribs Drop dumplings with sauerkraut, Drop dumplings with curd cheese

he husband likes meat – mainly pork cutlets, The wife likes boileddumplings with potatoes or jam.

They most often cook (mainly if there is no money) browned pancakes

Cutlets a salad: this meal, however, is prepared only during benefits oran exceptional situation. “Paľané” drop dumplings

They also cook barley soup often

Cutlet a potatoesDrop dumplings with cabbage o with potatoes (they last cooked it on8.8.2011)Also risotto – Boiled dumplings with potatoes

Cutlets and saladDrop dumplingsBoiled dumplings

Soup broth (they last cooked it at the start of August) Bean soup

Mushroom soup (they cook it more times during August) Drop dumplings with cabbage, potatoes or curd cheese

Fried cutlet, salad or potato mash – we always cook this after support comes

Hungarian goulash with steamed bread

Sautéed meat with riceLeavened cake with apples, Granko chocolate powder or cocoa andbutter: I last cooked this last week

Drop dumplings „čuchané“Drop dumplings pasta

Fried pork cutlet and potato salad with mayonnaise (I always cook thisafter pay day – the eighth of the month)

Pancakes of „fried dough“ with cacao and sugar; or only buttered toeat in place of bread with bacon, sausages, meat.Chicken legs with pasta

Baked chicken and salad (I always cook this after support)Meatballs with sauerkraut Gója (potato-filled sausage) or fried dough

Segedínsky goulash with steamed bread (I last cooked this on pay day

– 15 August)

Gója (potato-filled sausage) – f lour-based

Gója (potato-filled sausage) – potato-based

Segedínsky goulash, steamed breadSautéed meat

Rice with sauce

Lentil mash Potato pancakes

Cutlets, saladDrop dumplings with bryndza

Chicken perkelt (creamy meat sauce)Pasta with some sauce and meat

Stuffed cabbageCutlets with potatoes

Grilled chicken with roasted potatoes






136

Goulash (at the beginning of the month) Pasta with cheese

Chicken: we last cooked it at the end of August (a month ago) Meat with sauce

chicken baked in the oven with jacket potatoes: we last had it at thestart of the month

Drop dumplings with cheese

Drop dumplings and perkelt (creamy meat sauce) Knackwurst with potatoes

Drop dumplings with meat and lečo (tomato/peppers/onion mix)Potato pancakes with chicken

Drop dumplings or pasta in different waysPasta flakes with French beans or beans

Fried cutlets (pork or chicken) with potato mashPasta with tomato sauceFried chicken with bread

Fried meat or cheese, fries, tartar sauce Imitation fish with fries

Pancakes Chicken on cream with macaroni

Drop dumplings with meat a with sauerkraut Sautéed chicken livers with riceChicken backs in perkelt (creamy meat sauce) and pasta

Roasted chicken meat with rice Stuffed pork intestines with bread or with pickled vegetables

Baked ribs with boiled potatoes, we add preserved fruit as a side Baked chicken wings with potatoes with pickled cucumbers

Cutlets from chicken meat (most often chicken thighs), potato salad orpotato mash

Different pastas with sauce or only with ketchup (so-called „dry“)Thick goulash ( without meat and with drop dumplings)

Fried cutlets with boiled potatoes and mixed salad: I cooked it afterbenefits on Sunday

Chicken in different ways – mostly with peppers and drop dumplings

Goulash with steamed bread Potato pancakes with pork scratchings

Chicken cutlets, potato salad Risotto

Hungarian goulash with beef and steamed bread (last time in August after benefits)Chicken cutlets with potato salad

Risotto

Homemade pizza: last time was perhaps a month ago Wide pasta with curd cheese or cheese

Stuffed cabbage leaf Chicken cutlets and potato salad

Cutlets with breadcrumbs Marikle – pancakes

Boiled sausages: they last cooked it a week ago Hadrimky – pancakes

Kyšky (potato-filled sausages): they last made it a month ago Drop dumplings with cheese

Risotto: they last cooked it three days ago.Boiled filled dumplings – the family prefers them with jam or withpotato filling

Segedínsky goulash with steamed bread (last time before 1 August) Potatoes with sour milk

Ducat buns (sweet buns with pudding) (they last cooked it at the endof July)

Meat soup – broth from pork bones

Baked thighs with potatoes (they last had it at the end of July) Boiled potatoes, we serve them with sour milk

Pork cutlets with boiled potatoes (after support)Baked chicken

Marikle (pancakes)

Cutlets and potatoes (we make this 2-3 times a month)Roasted meat on cabbagePasta with curd cheese or cabbage

Chicken cutlets a potatoes Flour-based pancakes and cabbage

Cutlet and potato saladDrop dumplings in different ways – with tomatoes/peppers, sausage,cabbage, curd cheese



Stuffed cabbagePotato pancakes – mariklePotatoes in different ways (soup with drop dumplings, sweet pepperswith lard)

Steamed potato bread with red cabbage made as sweet and sour androasted pork meat (they cook this once a month). Potato salad andcutlets (they last made this at Easter).

They most often cook beans in different ways, because they cultivatethem themselves and have enough of them. They often makepancakes, either potato or flour-based. The sons like drop dumplingswith tomatoes/peppers and sausage, so they cook this rather often.Every Saturday they bake a leavened cake – usually rolls with jam.

Gója – this is his favourite, his mother makes it for him, who lives inthe same village.

He cultivates vegetables, so he often cooks something from potatoes;he has his own meat (he raises pigs). Vegetable soup is cooked most often, potatoes cooked in the over and served with ketchup. Meat broth (when he has time), meat from the soup is cooked in the ovenand rice prepared with it. He often goes for odd jobs, so now insummer he dines pretty often with people he works for (he is amason). He has lunch at his mom’s place; he helps her financially.

Potato pancakes cooked on a skillet, buttered or filled with groundmeat Potato pancakes cooked on a skillet, buttered or stuffed groundmeat

Spaghetti is cooked most often, because the children like it best withketchup and sprinkled with grated cheese Potato pancakes –bandurečníky (in our way), we last made them before social benefits.

Potatoes are cheap but f illing. Since it is summer, lečo (atomatoes/peppers/onions mix) or mushrooms with eggs is cookedmost often.

Góje– the majority of Roma call it this, nowadays Roma cuisine is alsobeing modernised, so the most specifically these are stuffed intestines(we last made it two months ago).

Potato pancakes

Potatoes and roasted meat (they had it last week) Baked pasta

Stroganoff – I make it often because everyone enjoys it (last timethree days ago)

Stroganoff

Potato mash and roasted meat Steamed bread, cabbage, meat

Stuffed chicken and potato saladLiver-balls with sauerkraut or steamed bread, also with bread,cucumber and mustard.

Drop dumplings with cheeseInstant soup – most often goulash and French potatoes and meat (baked, fried, stuffed), or rice or more types of drop dumplings (withcabbage, with cheese, only with onion and peppers)

Stuffed cabbage leaf, sides are boiled potatoes, sometimes tomatosauce

Boiled potatoes or pasta, sauce with this

Gója (potato-filled sausage) Macaroni with sausage

Fried bread with mushrooms Drop dumplings with cabbage or with curd cheese

Gója (potato-filled sausage) (see the questionnaire „Dining in V.Šariš“ for the recipe)

Goulash with frankfurters and mushrooms

Fried cutlet, potato salad Most common dishes are drop dumplings with meat

The most favourite meal in our family is chicken with macaroni Most common dishes are pasta with meat or poultryTöltot káposzta – this is a Hungarian dish, I don’t even know what it iscalled in Slovak (stuffed cabbage leaf)

Drop dumplings with tomatoes/peppers with meat or sausage

We like meat in different ways Cutlets

Bokeľa (pancakes), everyone in the family likes this Bokeľa (pancakes)

We don’t have any special favourites, but the children like bakedchicken the most.Meat and bokeľa (pancakes)

Bokeľa (pancakes) – we make it most often instead of bread




138

Gója (potato-filled sausage) – we like the most but it is expensive:they last cooked it a year ago.

Bokeľa – baked Roma breadPasta or potatoes

Drop dumplings with tomatoes/peppersDrop dumplings with curd cheese

Drop dumplings

Boiled frankfurters, ketchup a roll Boiled frankfurters – the children very much want them

Baked chicken with stuffing, with this – rice a cucumbers Meat in its own juice with tomato paste, potato mash.Tomato sauce, steamed bread and different meatsSavoury scones with knackwurst

Drop dumplings made in different ways (cabbage, tomatoes/peppers,lentils, chicken meat)

Fried cheese, fr ies, tartar sauce (always once a week) Rice with meat – according to what we have at home

Cutlets a potato mash Baked chicken with rice

Risotto: we last cooked it the day before last. -

Potato steamed bread, cabbage a roasted pork neckDrop dumplings – with meat, cheese, bryndzaFried cheese and potatoes, rice in different ways

We have to cook what we have; we have to manage in each situation No comment

Drop dumplings with meat Roux-based soup

Sirloin sauce with steamed breadSteamed buns or pancakes – the children love it Sour soup

Fried cheese and chipsChicken with rice

Sour bean or lentilsSteamed filled buns

Smoked ribs a potatoesBean soup

Bean soup in different waysPasta with sauce

Bean soup with pasta flakesPancakes

Potato soupJam donuts

Fried meat with sauerkraut and leavened potato pancakes (frieddough)

Potatoes as potato hashBean soup with sauerkraut

Potato pancakes and fried pork ribsBean soup with pasta flakes

Potatoes with onion and sauerkraut Pasta with sauce

Roasted brisket and potatoes PastaString beans or potato soup

Sirloin sauce with steamed bread Sauce with steamed bread

Stuffed chicken with roasted potatoes Stir-fry with chips or rice

Grilled chicken with rice: they cooked it not long ago Drop dumplings

Cutlets and potatoes Potato pancakes

Drop dumplingsBean soup

Chicken a potatoes

Potato salad a fried chicken thighs. Goulash soup (instant)

Bean soup: we like it a lot, we make it two-times a weekMúčnik – cake doughPasta and meat with juice

Stuffed cabbage leaf: I cooked it last month after benefits Flour-based foods – buns, pancakes, jam donutsHoney-cream cake

Leavened cake with poppy seed – we all like this: I baked it afterbenefits

Ribs – we call this „pašvare“; we eat it with bread, potatoes or frieddough.

Steamed buns: I last made them last week.Jam donuts

Boiled ribs „pašvare“

Drop dumplings with curd cheese Pasta with tomato sauce

Cutlets with potatoes Fried dough with meat, and sweet with jam



Egg salad Chicken soup

Potato salad Pasta with curd cheese

Stuffed pepper Bean soup

Drop dumplings with chicken meat The most common dish I cook is pasta with cheese

Fried chicken with potatoes: I last cooked it after benefits this month. Potato pancakesThey have their own milk and meat (they raise pigs, cows and goats).The husband most likes drop dumplings with curd cheese and meat from soup with this. The children most like spaghetti with mortadellasalami and ketchup.

They often cook drop dumplings with curd cheese or make pancakes.They have their own meat, so they cook it pretty often. At least oncea week they make fried bread.

Gója (potato-filled sausage) (intestines stuffed with potatoes) Marikle – potato pancakes

Potato balls with smoked meat and sauerkraut: they cooked thisperhaps two weeks ago.

Pancakes: they cook it at least once a week.

Chicken legs with peaches and potato mashSpaghetti – the children like this the most: they cook it at least once aweek.

The family raises pigs and also have a goat, so they have their ownmeat and milk. The son most prefers pancakes with curd cheese; the

mother likes everything, she’s not picky.

They most often cook potato-based dishes. Semolina or pancakes.

Gója (potato-filled sausage) – they cook this regularly, at least oncea month, last time a week ago

Now in summer there are a lot of vegetables, which we cultivate. Wehad enough zucchini – we make pancakes from them. Lečo(tomatoes/peppers/onion mix)

Potato salad and cutlets Potato pancakes: they make them every day.

Segedínsky goulash a steamed bread Potato pancakes with tea.

We most like fried meat, but we can only afford it once a month. Soups (bean, lentil, tomato) with bread or pancakes.

Fried meat with potato salad: we make fried meat approximately everySunday, but the salad only for some kind of celebration. We can list steamed buns as our second-favourite dish.

We don’t make anything in particular, most frequently bean soup withmeat and fried bread

Segedínsky goulash with steamed bread Potato hashPotato salad and fried cutlet Boiled dumplings with curd cheese (we cook this most often)

Perkelt (creamy meat sauce) with potatoesRoasted potatoes – we make this most often before benefits without cream, only with milk.

Gója (potato-filled sausage) Pasta with egg

Drop dumplings with tomatoes/peppers and sausage (we last cooked it last week)

Budák – Gypsy bread (we bake this often when there is no money)

The children most like pancakes with jam and cocoa powderFor adults this is mainly meat with lečo (tomatoes/peppers/onions)and drop dumplings

Bean soup – sour: we always have this available and it is cheap food; it tastes best with Gypsy bread – bodák.Babro drop dumplings (when beans are left over)

Cutlets Jam donuts (once a week)

Cutlets from pork ( last time on Sunday) Drop dumplings with cheese

Drop dumplings with curd cheese Pork meat with creamy and pasta

Stuffed cabbage leaf Sauces (in summer mushroom most often) with potatoes or with pasta

Drop dumplings with cheese and meat Boiled potatoes with red pepper and onion sautéed in oil Soups – green bean or multi-bean from pork ribs

Cutlets from chicken meat, potato salad (last time we had it was theEaster holiday)

Boiled pasta with sauce and without meat, or only with ketchup withoil, or only with oil, or instant soup




140

Drop dumplings with cheese. Chicken cutlets most often from thighs)and potato salad;

Pasta “dry” (with oil and done, also with tomato paste or withpotatoes, instant soup, sauce for pasta – according to thepossibilities). Fried dough – dry with oil and sugar, tea with this; oftenthis is an all-day food

Gypsy góje (potato-filled sausage) Pasta with beans

Roma meatballs with sauerkraut Bodák – Gypsy bread

Baked pasta with meat (the last time this month) Cutlets with potato salad

Cutlets with potato salad Cabbage leaf stuffed with meat and rice

Vegetable risotto Hungarian goulash with steamed bread

Gója (potato-filled sausage) Chicken meat with potatoes

Stuffed cabbage leaf Marikle – fried dough

Cutlets with potato salad (last time a month ago) Risotto

Cutlets, boiled potatoes on the side Noodles with cabbage

Ducat buns (sweet bread with pudding (they made it two days ago) Baked thighs with potatoes or with bread

Cabbage soup Baked thighs with potatoes

Boiled dumplings filled with jam or potatoes Drop dumplings with potatoes – potato hash

Diced meat with rice and chips Potatoes with mayonnaise

Pork or chicken cutlets with chips Nalečniky – potato pancakes with pork scratchings

Pork or chicken cutlets Goulash, and gójePotatoes and cabbagePasta with cabbage

Roasted pork ribs with boiled potatoes and cucumbers or with redcabbage – they last prepared these after social benefits.

In this period vegetables are cheaper, so perhaps, like a lot of familieslečo (a tomato/peppers/onion mix) is consumed, fried caulif lower orpatty pan squash.

Stuffed baked chicken, potatoes a vegetable salad (favourite meal of the family)

French potatoes

Fried cheese, chips and tartar sauce

Usually thick soups: bean, vegetable, lentil. Meals are traditional as inother families.The children, however, ate chips and fried cheese every day. Theyprepare the menu according to what the kids eat and the financial situation.

Gója (potato-filled sausage) with bread, cucumber and mustardSnap-beans soup, for example beansPasta with sauce

Classic pork or chicken cutlets, potato saladPasta with juice or with tomato pasteBoiled potatoes

Gója (potato-filled sausage) Lentil mash with frankfurters and bread

Pašvare – smoked rib with a sauerkraut side dish, boiled potatoes Drop dumplings with fresh cabbage

Fried cutlet with pot atoes: prepared in the classic way. Stuf fed pepper and tomato sauce

Pork meat goulash with bread Drop dumplings – in different ways

Potato-based steamed bread, cabbage, pork brisket Risotto

Gója (potato-filled sausage) We try to change this, but we often cook potatoes.

Gója (potato-filled sausage) Gója (potato-filled sausage)

We don’t have a favourite dish. Meat with potatoes – we cook this most often



Steamed bread with meat We are trying to change

Bean soup (a week ago). Drop dumplings with cabbage and bacon.After delivery of food aid they cooked mainly pasta (macaroni, fusilli)with pieces of meat.

Bean soup Drop dumplings in different ways

Steamed bread, pork meat, cabbage Pasta with sauce and pieces of meat (macaroni, fusilli)

Goulash soup with pork meat and pot atoes, bread Past a with pork or chicken meat – according to the date

Hungarian goulash a steamed breadPork meat and sauce

Chicken with spicy pepper sauce with potatoes, cucumber

Stuffed cabbage Beans with– pasta flakes

Potatoes and cutlet, cucumbers Boiled dumplings with cheese

Baked pastaSteamed bread, pork meat, cabbage

Mash – beans, lentils, etc.

Note Recipes for individual dishes are given in Appendix 3.



B

“Babro” – drop dumplings (beans with past a):– beans cooked until soft, add the boiled noodle flakes and add sautéed onion. /Rimavská Sobota district

“Babro” drop dumplings:– when the beans are leftover, we boil pasta flakes to add to them and put sautéed onion on top. /Rimavská Sobota district

Bandurečníky (potato pancakes):– we boil the potatoes and properly drain them; we make them into a smooth mixture with lumps. We add flour until the dough is not too sticky.

We then cut out pieces of the dough, roll them out and cook them on the skillet on one side and then the other. We then put lard on them.Potatoes are cheap but filling. /Prešov district

Bodák – Gypsy bread:– prepared from finely milled flower, water and salt, we cook them on the stove top. /Rimavská Sobota district

Bodák – Gypsy bread:– prepared from finely milled flower, salt, baking powder and lukewarm water. Cooked on the stove top or in a skillet. /Rimavská Sobota district

Bokeľa:– pancakes from flour, water and baking soda. /Rimavská Sobota district

Bokeľa – baked Roma bread:– made from dough and only finely milled flour, baking soda and water are needed. /Rimavská Sobota district

Pork ribs, sauerkraut and leavened steamed bread:– steamed bread classically prepared; sautéed cabbage, sugar is added at the end. The pork ribs are seasoned and put into water and cooked in

the oven. /Trebišov district

Bryndzové halušky (drop dumplings with bryndza):– we mix grated potatoes into a mass with flour and we make drop dumplings. We add the bryndza to this (with cream), and pour on fat with pork

scratchings from bacon. /Košice environs district

Steamed buns:– I make them with leavened dough; I don’t fill the buns; I cook them plain and put jam on the plate, I sprinkle on either Granko (powdered

chocolate) or classic cocoa powder. /Spišská Nová Ves district

C

Pasta with sauce:– pasta is cooked in the classic way. The sauce consists of meat, soy cubes, poultry bones or giblets, sausages or salami. The base of the sauce is

oil, onion, meat, dried vegetable seasoning, salt; after frying water is added – according to how much pasta there is and household members. Ifit has flour, it thickens. /Spišská Nová Ves district

Pasta with tomato sauce or paste:– we mix the boiled pasta with the tomato paste. /Gelnica district

Pasta „dry“:

– pasta only with ketchup. /Gelnica district Pasta „dry“:– drizzle oil on the boiled pasta – and it’s ready. Also, with tomato paste or with potatoes, instant soup, sauce for pasta – according to

possibilities. /Gelnica district

Pasta with beans:– the beans need to be cooked in salted water; we season with garlic and strain them. We boil the pasta f lakes in the same water. We put the

cooked beans and pasta on the sautéed onions; we mix it and season with paprika and dried vegetable seasoning. /Rimavská Sobota district

Pasta with meat:– we make it with pork or chicken meat, according to the date. /Rožňava district


142

Appendix 3 to Chapter 4:Recipes from Roma households (recipes are arranged in alphabetical order while preserving the namegiven by the respondents):

RECIPES FROM ROMA HOUSEHOLDS



Pasta with sauce:– the sauce is with pieces of meat – sautéed meat on the onions and thickened; boiled macaroni or fusilli can be added to this. /Rožňava district

Pasta with cheese:– we boil the pasta, the kind we have; we mix it with cheese and add butter. /Levoča district

Pasta with cheese:

– macaroni, oil, cheese, acidophilus milk. I boil two pork knees, in a little water the cheese and I mix it. I add it to the macaroni and together withthe acidophilus milk and pour in hot oil. /Košice environs district

Pasta with curd cheese:– boiled pasta – we mix with curd cheese and add salt. /Košice environs district

Pasta with egg:– we boil the pasta, drizzle on oil or sautéed bacon and onion. We cook the eggs and put them on top of the pasta. /Rimavská Sobota district

Gypsy góje:– this is pork intestines stuffed with potatoes. The intestine needs to be cleaned very well and then filled with potatoes and cut into small pieces,

which we seasons with salt, black pepper, dried vegetables; we add marjoram, a little spicy paprika and a handful of rice. The intestine needs tobe boiled for about 30 minutes in water, and then baked until crunchy in a pot. /Rimavská Sobota district

Zucchini pancakes:– grated the zucchini, add seasoning and egg, when there is meat, then a little ground meat, flour and bread crumbs. The pancakes are cooked in

hot oil. /Trebišov district D

Homemade bean soup:– we boil the previously soaked beans, and when the beans are semi-soft; we throw in the sausage and cook it further. While it cooks we add

potatoes, bay leaf, garlic and we add a flour roux (2 tablespoons of flour, milk, 2 tablespoons of vinegar). When it boils, we finally add cookingcream. /Banská Štiavnica district

Homemade pizza:– we prepare the dough from flour, yeast, oil and salt. Let it rise and then put it into a pan; we put salami, bacon, eggs, cheese on the top and

bake it. /Košice environs district

Tripe with paprika and potatoes:– we cook the tripe in onions, we add lečo (tomato/peppers/onion mix), seasonings, and in the end cubes of potatoes. /Rimavská Sobota district

Ducat buns (sweet buns with pudding):– flour, barm, milk, vanilla pudding. We make small buns from the dough and we bake them on a cookie sheet. We make the vanilla pudding perthe instructions, and pour it over the buns which are put on a plate. /Bardejov district

Ducat buns (sweet buns with pudding):– flour, barm, sugar, milk, vanilla pudding. We make small buns from the dough and we bake them on a greased cookie sheet. We make the vanilla

pudding per the instructions, and pour it over the buns which are put on a plate /Bardejov district

Sautéed cabbage with roasted meat:– fresh head of cabbage, onion, black pepper, salt, oil, dried vegetable seasoning, red peppers. Leave the cabbage to sauté and slice the steamed

bread. I slice onion into a pan, add oil, seasonings, salt, and cook it until golden brown, and then I add cut cabbage and leave it for 30 minutes.Slice the pork loin, cook it in the pan and add the cabbage. /Trnava district

Sautéed meat:– we sauté the meat with vegetables, lečo (tomato/peppers/onion mix), bouillon, carrot, cream, seasoning. /Sabinov district

Sautéed meat with rice:– we sauté the meat on an onion base with vegetables. We add cooked rice to this, pickled vegetables or red beet root. /Spišská Nová Ves district

F

Imitation fish:– we wrap a mixture of chicken into a pancake, wrap this in an egg/flour/breadcrumb batter and fry in oil; serve with chips. /Veľký Krtíš district

Bean soup:– the pre-soaked beans are cooked for perhaps 1.5 hours, seasonings and diced potatoes are added. /Prešov district

Bean soup:– soup with pasta or potatoes thickened to sweet and sour; potato pancakes cooked in oil are also served with the beans. /Trebišov district



Bean soup:– cook the beans and when they are soft, we add potatoes, and we can also add bay leaf. When the potatoes are sof t, we mix an instant cheese

sauce in water; we add it to the soup and thicken with a roux (f lour water). /Spišská Nová Ves district

Bean soup:– in the evening soak the beans in pure water, in the morning drain them and put them into a pot together with the potatoes. When everything

has softened, add the roux (oil and f lour), cook it and it’s ready. If possible, add warmed up sausage or frankfurters or salami. Cut them into the

soup and also eat them with bread. At one time my son also put sugar in his soup and the mother vinegar. /Spišská Nová Ves district Bean soup:– beans, flour, eggs, salt, tomato paste, vegetables, dried vegetable seasoning. We place the pre-soaked beans into a pot, and then add the

cleaned vegetables, a bit of the dried vegetable seasoning and salt. We leave the beans to cook for 2 hours, when they are sof t and then fromflour and egg we make the dough and roll it into a circle; we cut it into small “flakes” and we add to the beans. We sauté the onions in a little oiland add red paprika and the tomato paste and we add this to the cooked beans. /Košice environs district

Bean soup and “marikle” (fried dough):– 0.5 kg beans, 1 carrot, 1 parsley, 1 onion, oil, 2 eggs, tomato paste. In place of dough we can add potatoes. /Košice environs district

Sour bean soup:– boiled beans thickened to white, vinegar. We always have this on hand and it is cheap food, they taste best with Gypsy bread – bodák. /Rimavsk

Sobota district

Beans with pasta flakes:– we mix the cooked beans with the cooked pasta f lakes; we mix in onion sautéed in fat. /Rožňava district

French potatoes:– we cook the potatoes in their skins; we then clean them and cut them into circles, which we place into a greased pan, alternating with

vegetables and sausages and boiled eggs. Perhaps after 20 minutes cooking we pour in the cream, to which we added a whipped egg and gratedcheese with seasonings. /Prešov district

G

Gója (potato-filled sausage):– for the recipe, see the questionnaire „Dining in Veľký Šariš“. /Prešov district Gója (potato-filled sausage):

– intestines stuffed with potatoes. /Revúca district

Gója (potato-filled sausage):– pork intestines stuffed with grated potatoes. /Revúca district. /Revúca district

Gója (potato-filled sausage):– we need for this pork intestines, potatoes, rice, onion, salt, black pepper, flour. Make a mixture, fill the cleaned trip, boil and then bake.

/Rimavská Sobota district

Gója (potato-filled sausage):– we add to the clean pork trip the filling – semi-course flour and salt and then we carefully roll the wet intestines in flour, so that the flour sticks

to the walls of the intestines. There can’t be too much f lour, because it lumps up and the intestines will break. Tie both ends up and boil it inwater (1 hour). We then put it into a roasting skillet, add oil and cook until crunchy. My children like this very much, too. /Veľký Krtíš district

Gója (potato-filled sausage):– buy the intestines already cleaned; wash them again and fill with grated potatoes which are seasoned. After boiling, bake them. /Trebišov district

Gója (potato-filled sausage):– pork intestines stuffed with potatoes, which are grated, seasoning and garlic added. These are boiled, and afterward baked in the oven.

/Trebišov district

Gója (potato-filled sausage):– fill the pork intestines with grated potatoes, to which were added salt, garlic and ground black pepper. They can be cooked in salted water and

after boiling back them or eat them as they are, boiled with tea. /Trebišov district Gója (potato-filled sausage):– clean the intestines so that on a spoon or hand turn it inside out and the inner and outer sides are beneath flowing water; some use salt to clean it,

too. The stuffing is a mass as with preparing potato pancakes. The intestines are filled to full thickness halfway along (close one end beforehandusing a toothpick so that the filling doesn’t leak out). Then close the other end and mash it, so that it is equally filled along both ends. Thus filled itis simmered in v salted water 1.5 to 2 hours. Then bake it. Serve it with bread, cucumber and mustard. /Spišská Nová Ves district

Gója (potato-filled sausage):– clean the intestines well and cut into about 30 cm pieces. Prepare the potato mix (as for potato pancakes); season the mix with garlic, black

pepper, salt. Fill the intestines with the mixture and boil in water for 1 to 2 hours. Bake the boiled sausage in the oven or on a hot pan. As a sidedish add bread. /Prešov district


144



Gója flour-based:– we wash and clean the intestines well. We mix coarsely milled flour with pressed garlic, salt and black pepper; we fill the intestines with this

mixture and put it in boiling water for 1 hour. We serve it with potatoes and pickled vegetables. /Spišská Nová Ves district

Gója potato-based:– we grate pot atoes, add pressed garlic, salt, pepper, a little finely milled f lour, dried vegetable seasoning and we make a thin dough. We fill the

washed out trip, tie it up with string and put it in boiling water for 1 hour. Then we can serve it directly or put it in the oven and bake it for about

half an hour. /Spišská Nová Ves district Góje:– nowadays Roma cuisine is also being modernised, so the most specifically these are stuffed pork intestines (. Clean the intestines and soak it

for half an hour in salt. We prepare the filling, which is made of dough from potato pancakes. We fill the intestines with it and boil it for perhapshalf an hour to an hour on a moderate f lame; be careful that the sausage doesn’t pop open or crack. Then we cook them f irst on one side, andthen the other. We serve it with bread and cucumbers. /Prešov district

Góje:– made from pork intestines. The intestine is properly cleaned and filled with potatoes, rice, sliced onion, garlic and we spice it a lot. It’s then

boiled for 20 minutes. We cook the intestines in an oven to crunchy. /Rimavská Sobota district

Potato hash:– cut the potatoes into tiny cubes, cook in onions, put the peppers in water and cook until sof t. Pasta, the best are large squares (flakes), boiled

in water. Then mix everything together and season with dried vegetable seasoning, salt and pepper. /Rimavská Sobota district

Grilled chicken with baked potatoes:– we season the chicken, and put into a greased baking pan together with potatoes and bake in the oven. /Košice environs district

Goulash:– sauté the onion in oil, we add pork meat cut into cubes, salt, spices, water and we cook it. Later we add potatoes and lečo

(tomato/peppers/onion mix). /Levoča district

Goulash:– fry 4-5 onions in hot oil, cut pork meat into cubes. When the onion is ready, add the meat, which is sautéed. Then add peppers, salt and black

pepper. When the meat is rather soft, add water and more seasoning, then carrots, parsley, kohlarabi and celery root. Let everything cook andthen add potatoes, lečo (tomato/peppers/onion mix) and finally marjoram. Serve with bread. /Rožňava district

Goulash soup:– 2 kg beef, 1 kg potatoes, 2 spoons of lard, 2 onions, spices, salt. /Poltár district

Goulash soup:– put potatoes to boil in a large amount of water; we add onion cut into small pieces and when the potatoes are semi-soft, we add inst ant goulash

soup, which was mixed beforehand, and oil. Let it cook and then we add do pasta to cook in the soup. /Spišská Nová Ves district

Goulash soup:– we make it with pork meat and potatoes, with bread as a side dish. /Rožňava district

Goulash soup – instant:– add instant soup into boiling water and cook it; we eat it with bread. /Spišská Nová Ves district

Goulash with steamed bread:– sauté and season the meat; we buy the steamed bread in a shop. /Sabinov district

Goulash with frankfurters and mushrooms:– sauté onion to golden brown, we add cleaned mushrooms and pour in 2 dcl of water; we add salt, bay leaf and dried vegetable seasoning. To the

cooking mushrooms we add cubes of potatoes and pour in water. When the potatoes are cooked, we add macaroni and sliced frankfurters, andleave it to cook a little; we season it with spices. /Prešov district

Meatballs with sauerkraut:– sauté the sauerkraut in oil with onion; we then add salt and ground spices. We grate the potatoes coarsely – as with drop dumplings. We add

finely milled flour, ground spices, garlic, salt. We make a thick dough, and roll it into balls and we press sliced sausage rounds into it and boil it in hot water for 15-20 minutes. Remove them, and we can butter them a little so they don’t stick together. We serve them with cabbage, and wecan add when cooking part of the sausages cut into squares and ground paprika to the cabbage. /Spišská Nová Ves district

H

“Hadrimky”:– boiled potatoes, flour, egg. To the boiled and mashed potatoes add an egg and flour, while the dough is still soft. Work the dough on a board

into the form of a cylinder and gradually cut 1.5 cm pieces, which we roll into circles. We bake them in the oven and then add butter or oil. /Bardejov district



Drop dumplings:– flour, milk, eggs, potatoes, salt. /Levoča district

Drop dumplings:– flour, water, salt, egg. /Veľký Krtíš district

Drop dumplings:

– flour, water, egg. Serve with cabbage, potatoes or curd cheese. /Prešov districtDrop dumplings:– course flour plus grated potatoes, mixed with water and egg. Drop dumplings are made with lečo (tomato/peppers/onion mix), sausage,

cabbage, curd cheese. /Trebišov district

Drop dumplings:– we prepare them with lečo (tomato/peppers/onion mix), and when we have the money, also with meat (perkelt – creamy meat sauce). Drop

dumplings are either flicked off or rolled, flour, raw potatoes, salt – and boiled in water. We flick them off of a spoon. /Veľký Krtíš district

Drop dumplings:– we need 4-5 potatoes, which we f inely grate; we add salt, semi-course flower and water. Mix everything well together. We get a dough which is

afterwards flicked from a spoon with a knife in small pieces into boiling water. The boiled drop dumplings are drained and optional ingredientsare added. /Rožňava district

Drop dumplings with bryndza with bacon bits:– grate half a kg of potatoes, a fistful of semi-course flour and finely milled flour, 250 g of bryndza, 20 dkg of bacon, 1 cup of cooking cream.

/Rimavská Sobota district

Drop dumplings “pasta”:– boil the potatoes whole or cut in half. When they are sof t, we add pasta to them to boil. When the pasta is boiled, we drain, and mash potatoes.

We add bryndza and fried bacon bits, then mix it well. /Spišská Nová Ves district

Drop dumplings “čuchané”:– the potatoes are grated and a dough is made as for normal drop dumplings – in the style of the “whites” /Spišská Nová Ves district

Drop dumplings “paľané”:– only flour and potatoes are needed to make it, lard for greasing. Add what is available in the household to the dumplings: diced bacon, curd

cheese, bread crumbs, etc. /Levoča district

Drop dumplings with bryndza:– we grate the potatoes and mix with flour and flick of f the drop dumplings into boiling water. We drain them and rinse with cold water, then mix

with sheep’s cheese and butter. /Spišská Nová Ves district

Drop dumplings with fresh cabbage:– prepare in the classic way. /Prešov distr ict

Drop dumplings with cabbage or with potatoes:– the potatoes are boiled, others are grated and mixed with flour (coarsely milled), add salt and make a mixture which is flicked into the water

with a knife. Drain the water and mix with boiled potatoes and sautéed bacon bits and onion. Salt as needed. /Bardejov district

Drop dumplings with cabbage or with curd cheese:– everyone knows the recipe for this dish. /Košice environs district

Drop dumplings with cabbage and bacon:– to the boiled drop dumplings we add sautéed cabbage and we top it off with sautéed bacon. /Rožňava district

Drop dumplings with lečo (tomato/peppers/onion mix) and sausage:– we make the drop dumplings from potatoes, flour and salt. We roast meat with sausage and lečo (tomato/peppers/onion mix) and put this over

the drop dumplings. /Rimavská Sobota district

Drop dumplings with meat:– make the drop dumplings; make the meat in perkelt (creamy meat sauce); we mix it and serve it with sauerkraut. /Veľký Krtíš distr ict

Drop dumplings with meat:– dough – we mix flour, egg, salt, water together and we boil it as drop dumplings in water. We slice the meat and fry it in onion, and then we add

a little water and cook until the meat is tender. /Lučenec district

Drop dumplings with meat:– I cut the meat into strips and fry them with onion. We clean the potatoes and grate them; we add flour and make a dough. We fry the meat and

season it with dry vegetable seasoning, vegetables, tomatoes, paprika; we add red peppers and remove it. We flick the dough into boiling waterand when the drop dumplings float up, we take them out and mix them. /Zvolen district


146



Drop dumplings with meat and lečo (tomato/peppers/onion mix):– I boil flour-based drop dumplings; I prepare the meat as with perkelt (creamy meat sauce), then we mix with the lečo. /Veľký Krtíš district

Drop dumplings with curd cheese:– semi-course flour, water, egg, salt, curd cheese, butter. We mix the flour with water and eggs and we make a dough. We push the dough through

a course sieve into salted boiling water, thus creating drop dumplings. We boil and drain them. We melt margarine and mix it with the dumplingsand curd cheese. /Bardejov district

Drop dumplings with cheese:– we grate the potatoes and we add flour and flick the dough into boiling water. We drain it and mix with cheese and salt. /Levoča district

Drop dumplings with cheese:– I grate the potatoes, and add salt and flour, and if I have them an egg. I push the dough through a sieve into the boiling water and af ter boiling,

drain them and rinse with cold water; I then mix them with cheese and with butter. /Trebišov district

Drop dumplings with cheese and with meat:– classic; the meat is pork or chicken wings. /Gelnica district

Drop dumplings with potatoes:– 1 kg of flour, potatoes, oil, salt, onion. we make a dough from the flour with warm water, so that it’s thin enough to make boiled drop

dumplings. We slice the potatoes and boil them and, when the drop dumplings and potatoes are cooked, we mix it all together and pour over theoil in which we sautéed the onion. /Košice environs district

Drop dumplings with potatoes:– flour, salt, potatoes, oil, onion. From the flour and with water we make a smooth dough and push it through a sieve into boiling water. The

potatoes are cut into cubes and we boil them in salted water, then drain them and mash them. The mashed potatoes we add to the boileddumplings and we pour the hot oil from sautéing the onions over the top. /Košice II district

Drop dumplings with potatoes – potato hash:– pasta, potatoes, oil, onion. We boil the pasta in salted water and drain it. We peel the potatoes, cut them into small cubes and cook them in

salted water. We drain the boiled potatoes and mix them with the pasta. We glaze onions in oil and we add red peppers. The onion and pepperswe mix with the potatoes and pasta. /Bardejov district

Drop dumplings with curd cheese:– we grate the potatoes and make a dough with flour, a little milk and from a spatula flick the dough into hot water. We boil a few of the

potatoes (3 to 4) and cut them into cubes. We mix the boiled drop dumplings with the potatoes and hot butter and we add curd cheese. /Košice environs district

Drop dumplings with curd cheese:

– we clean the potatoes, grate them and we add flour and egg; we salt them and mix. We slowly flick the dough into boiling water from a spatulausing a spoon. After boiling them we drain them and rinse them and sprinkle on curd cheese and pour sautéed onion over the top. /Sabinovdistrict

Holúbky (stuffed cabbage leaf):– we boil the rice, ground the meat and mix with rice, we fill the cabbage leaf and we boil it. /Sabinov district

Mushroom soup:– barley is boiled separately, onions and vegetables are cleaned and sliced; smoked meat is added and dried mushrooms. The barley is added to

the cooking soup and then it is ready to eat. /Prešov district

Mushrooms with egg:– clean the mushrooms, slice them, wash them and cook them. Once they are soft, we add eggs. /Prešov district

“Humer” and perkelt (creamy meat sauce):– meat in its juices (peppers and onion); and to this humer – drop dumplings (flour semi-course, water a salt). /Veľký Krtíš district

Thick goulash:– soup only as juices, meat is not necessary; a soft salami or sliced sausages will suffice, sometimes also drop dumplings are added. /Gelnica district

K

Cabbage soup:– 1 kg pork meat, half a kg of smoked meats, oil, 1 onion, 2 sacks of sauerkraut (1 kg), 2 two cans of tomato paste. /Poltár district

Cabbage soup:– cabbage, water, caraway seed, salt, potatoes, oil, onion. We cut the cabbage into cubes and put them in water, which we salted and we add

cubes of potatoes. When the potatoes are sof t, we make a roux – f inely sliced onions glazed in oil, and then we add a bit of flour and cook it; weadd this to the soup and let it cook. We can then serve it. /Bardejov district



Cabbage-filled pastries:– 1 kg of ground pork meat, 1 kg of beef, ground spices, 1 onion, 4 cloves of garlic, dried vegetable seasoning, half a kilo of rice. We boil the

cabbage leaves and we fill them with the ground meat with rice. /Poltár district

Steamed bread, cabbage, meat:– we buy the steamed bread from the shop; and we prepare the cabbage in oil with onion and cook the meat in the oven. /Stará Ľubovňa district

Macaroni with sausage:– we boil the macaroni then we add sautéed onions; we cut the sausage or frankfurters into small pieces, which we mix with tomato paste and the

macaroni. Season to taste, cooks in 8-10 minutes. /Prešov district

Barley soup:– ribs are used with potatoes and barley; everything is cooked together. /Levoča district

Chicken soup:– we boil the chicken, add frozen vegetables to the pot and we remove the chicken and bake it. We boil the rice and cut up the chicken. We boil

noodles bought in the shop separately in another pot and then we add them to the soup; we salt and pepper it to taste. /Trnava district

Chicken soup:– I need carrot and parsley, not frozen vegetables, chicken, dried vegetable seasoning, oil, noodles. I put water on the stove to boil and salt it

and add the vegetable seasoning, black pepper and put in the cut up chicken with the bones; I put in the vegetables and cook it, until thevegetables and meat are soft. I then add raw pasta, and these cook in the soup. I take the meat out of the soup because, no one likes it in thesoup; I put it on the side. /Trnava district

Chicken cutlets, potato salad:– we beat the cutlets then salt and season them, and wrap them in an egg/flour/breadcrumb batter and fry them. We boil the potatoes, peel themand cut them into cubes; we add salt and seasonings and then we add gherkin, mayonnaise and mix. /Sabinov district

Chicken with peaches and potato mash:– we lightly pound the chicken breasts and season them; they are placed on a sheet and a peach is placed on each one. A slice of cheese is placed

on top just before they f inish cooking. /Trebišov district

Chicken in pepper sauce:– we sauté the chicken meat in its juices; we serve it with potatoes, cucumber. /Rožňava district

Chicken perkelt (creamy meat sauce):– the classic recipe. /Košice environs district

Chicken in cream sauce with macaroni:– peppers, oil, sliced we sautéed onion, and then we add the meat and cook it. We add a little water, season to taste, and then add cream; we boil

the macaroni. /Veľký Krtíš district

Chicken:– chicken baked in the oven with jacket potatoes – also baked in the oven. /Levoča district

Baked chicken:– we salt and season the chicken and pour on oil and put it to bake in the oven. /Spišská Nová Ves district

Chicken with macaroni:– the recipe is easy – oil, onion, red peppers. We sauté it and then, we add the cut up chicken to a pot; we salt and season it to taste and add

a little water and let it cook for 35 minutes. In another pot we put tap water and we boil the past a. /Lučenec district

Leavened cake with apples, Granko or cocoa powder and butter:– we prepare a normal leavened dough, and roll it out flat in circle 15 cm in diameter and 1 cm thick. We add the f illing to this – it can be apples,

poppy seed, curd cheese, cocoa and even meat (ground meat or cut into small pieces and sautéed until soft on an onion and pepper base). Wefold the circle in half, and press it closed around the edge so that the filling doesn’t leak out. We then fr y in oil like a donut. /Spišská Nová Vesdistrict

Leavened poppy seed cake:– I roll the dough, pour on oil and then sprinkle in poppy seed mixed with sugar. When I have jam, I spread a bit on the bottom. I bake it in the

wood-burning stove. /Spišská Nová Ves district

Kyšky (stuffed pork intestines):– pork intestines, potatoes, salt, black pepper, pork fat, bacon. We clean the intestines well and fill them with grated potatoes, which we

seasoned. We put it in a pan greased with the pork fat and put bacon on top. We bake it for an hour. /Bardejov district

L

Langoše (fried dough):– finely milled flour, yeast, milk. Add tartar sauce or cream onto the langoše. /Trebišov district


148



Lečo (tomato/peppers/onion mix):– the process of preparation is simple; slice the vegetables, sauté them; we can add sausage or eggs. /Prešov district

Lečo (tomato/peppers/onion mix) with drop dumplings with meat or sausage:– dough is made from finely milled (00) f lour, a little salt and eggs that we mix together.

Lečo (tomato/peppers/onions mix) is from vegetables – tomatoes, peppers, onion. I add to the pot oil, all the vegetables together with meat and

we cook it until the meat is softened. We cook the dough in water, and we mix. /Lučenec district Lokše (fried dough):– the flour is mixed with water and baking soda; they are cooked on a dry pan. /Trebišov district Lokše (fried dough) (in place of bread):

- semi-course flour, milk, salt, baking powder. The dough is fried in oil or on a dry pan. Sometimes they also make them sweet. /Trebišov district

Lokše – “marikle” (fried dough):– prepared from finely milled flour, salt, water or milk and a little baking soda. They are cooked on a dry pan. /Trebišov district

M

Hungarian goulash a steamed bread:– we cook the pork meat with onions, we season it and add lečo (tomatoes/peppers/onions mix); served with steamed bread. /Rožňava district

Hungarian goulash s steamed bread:– pork shoulder, onion, garlic, ground paprika, tomato paste, 1 lečo (tomatoes/peppers/onions mix), water, salt, caraway seeds, f lour, yeast,

baking powder. We slice the onions and sauté them, we then add the diced meat. When the butter is semi-soft, we add the tomato paste, andwhen the mix is thickened, we add the garlic and the ground paprika; we add the lečo (tomatoes/peppers/onions) and cook until soft. We mix

the yeast with the salt and baking powder, we add water and let the dough rise, we then steam the bread. /Košice environs district

Hungarian goulash with steamed bread:– we dice the meat into cubes and sauté it with onion, we add salt, dry seasoning, caraway seeds, ground pepper, and then tomato paste and lečo

(tomatoes/peppers/onions mix), finally, we thicken it with flour. Sometimes I buy the steamed bread or make it at home – we steam theleavened bread dough. /Spišská Nová Ves district

Marikle (fried dough):– pancakes from flour, water and salt. /Sabinov district

Marikle (fried dough):– pancakes from water, salt, flour and baking soda which are cooked on a hot skillet. /Sabinov district

Marikle (fried dough):– 1 kg of course flour, salt, baking soda, water. /Košice environs district

Marikle (fried dough):– flour, oil, cream; mix and make a good dough and fry the pancakes in oil. Eat them with meat or sweet with jam. /Košice environs district

Marikle (fried dough):– they make them every day because they don’t have the money for bread – in fact, they buy a half-loaf of bread in the morning for the children to

take to primar y school. They make the marikle from flour, salt and water, a little bit of baking soda. They are cooked in the oven. /Trebišovdistrict

Marikle (fried dough) – dry:– water, salt, baking soda, flour and sugar. The dough is shaped into the shape of a pizza and is baked on both sides on the stovetop. It is then

greased with oil and sugar and served with tea. /Gelnica district

Marikle (fried dough) – with mushrooms::– the dough is prepared from selected flour; baking soda is added to the dough, along with egg (but the egg is not essential), salt and warm

water, until a dough is made. We roll out the dough and form it into a round shape about 30 cm in diameter and 0.5 cm thickness. Then we bakeit on a sheet and add butter or oil to the baked dough. We prepare fried mushrooms with scrambled egg. We fill in the fried dough with the

mushroom and egg mix and roll it up. /Košice environs district Marikle (fried dough)– dry: – I only mix the flour, baking soda and water and make a dough; I role out the pancakes and cook them on top of the stove on a skillet.

/Spišská Nová Ves district

Meat in cubes with rice and chips:– we cut the meat into cubes and sauté it in onion and season it. We boil the rice in water (instant rice in a sack). We slice the potatoes into chips

and cook them in a pan. /Sabinov district

Meat with sauce:– we salt and season the pork slices, and we add oil and water and cook until sof t. /Spišská Nová Ves district



Meat soup – broth:– pork bones, carrot, parsley, noodles, dried vegetable seasoning, black pepper. We boil the noodles and drain them. We put the pork bone with

water into a pot and we cook it until if boils strongly; then we add the vegetables and season the soup. We cook it on a moderate flame andwhen the meat is cooked, we turn off the soup. /Bardejov district

Meatballs in tomato sauce:– ground meat, rice, eggs, f inely milled flour, salt, tomato paste, sugar, milk. /Košice environs district

Meat broth:– traditionally; meat from soup is cooked in the oven and rice is prepared to go with it. /Trebišov district

Mexican beans:– cook the meat until semi-soft together with the vegetables; add lečo (a tomatoes/peppers/onion mix) and sausage. A pale roux is made and

sweet red peppers are added to it. We thicken the beans with the roux and chilli can also be added. As a side we cook pasta – macaroni. /Trebišodistrict

Milky sauce with rissole:– in a pot we boil water, cut the potatoes, add ground spices; we pour in milk, and we make a roux with flour and milk. We put the ground meat

into a pan and cook it for 5 in oil. /Trnava district

Cake:– cake dough with oil and fruit or jam on top and sprinkled with coconut. /Spišská Nová Ves district

N

Nalečniky – potato pancakes with cooked bacon bits:– we grate the potatoes and add eggs, a little flower and the bacon. We cook them in oil and serve them with sour milk. /Sabinov district

“Nokerle” (drop dumplings) with chicken meat:– oil, chicken, tomato paste, flour, eggs, salt, onion, red peppers, lečo (a tomatoes/peppers/onion mix), dried vegetable seasoning. We sauté th

onion in oil and we add pieces of cut chicken; we salt and season it and let it cook. When the meat is semi-soft, we add the lečo. At the end wethicken it with the tomato paste. „Nokerle“: we boil the prepared thin dough from flour dough. /Košice environs district

“Nokerle” (drop dumplings):– classic style. /Nové Zámky district

O

Buttered drop dumplings:– semi-course flour, salt, water – roll out the dough. I put the beans in water to cook and the potatoes. When they are cooked, I put in the drop

prepared dumplings. I make a roux using some of the drained water – this is the soup; and for the drop dumplings with beans and potatoes

I then add lečo (a tomatoes/peppers/onions mix). /Veľký Krtíš districtPancakes:– they are made from flour, sugar, butter and salt. All is mixed together and the dough is cooked in the shape of pancakes. They are eaten with

jam or with butter and milk or water is drunk with them. /Gelnica district

Baked chicken wings:– we clean the wings, then season and salt them; we put them in a baking pan and drizzle on oil. We add pieces of apple and bake them. We

prepare the potatoes, which we boil; we drain them and put them in the oven, but before that pour on oil and salt and pepper. After baking bothdishes, we serve them together with gherkin. /Sabinov district

P

Savoury scones with knackwurst:– make the dough for the scones, mix in the knackwurst cut into small cubes. Upon baking it will have the taste of knackwurst. /Veľký Krtíš distric

Pancakes:

– f inely milled flour, 3 eggs, milk, grated apple (2 apples), vanilla, baking powder. /Veľký Krtíš districtPancakes:– they are also made from lightly bubbly water is used instead of water. To the water they add eggs, flour, sugar, a little salt and baking powder.

Everything is well mixed and baked in a pan. They are f illed with jam, curd cheese or Nutella. /Trebišov district

Pancakes with jam and cocoa powder:– we prepare them traditionally – milk, egg, flour, sugar. /Rimavská Sobota district

Steamed buns:– we mix the dough and make buns from them; we steam the buns for 15 minutes, according to the smell and colour we know when they are done.

Put them on the plate, add ground sugar, cocoa powder, but not poppy seed because the children don’t like it, or with jam. /Trnava district


150



Pašvare – smoked ribs with sauerkraut:– we prepare the cabbage, rib and water and put into a pot. We let it cook until the smoked rib is sof t. We season it to taste; side dish – boiled

potatoes. /Prešov district

Roasted pork, potatoes and steamed bread and red cabbage:– mash the boiled potatoes, add course flour and egg. Shape them into small rolls which we cook in salty water. We make the red cabbage sweet

and sour. We season the meat, pour in water and put it in the oven to bake. /Trebišov district

Baked chicken with stuffing:– stuff ing from rolls and vegetables, fill the chicken and tie it shut; Bake it. Serve with rice and cucumbers. /Krupina district

Baked chicken and salad:– I wash the chicken, then salt it, sprinkle on caraway seeds and drizzle on oil. I bake it whole in the oven. For the salad I cook the potatoes in

their peel, strain them into a slicer, I add cubes of sour gherkin, boiled eggs, onion, salt, ground pepper, mayonnaise or tartar sauce (I buy this;I don’t make mayonnaise at home). /Spišská Nová Ves district

Baked meat on cabbage:– we put the sauerkraut in a pan, and put the tenderized meat on top; we season it and put it in the oven. /Košice environs district

Baked ribs:– we wash the pork ribs season them and pour on a little oil; we add water and bake it in the oven. We make sure to baste the ribs in the juices it

releases; I always baste until the meat is soft. We serve them with boiled potatoes and cucumbers or red cabbage. /Prešov district

Baked thighs:– I put oil into a pan and then wash the sauerkraut. We place the seasoned thighs on the cabbage and put it in the oven. We serve with pot atoes orwith bread. /Bardejov district

Baked thighs with potatoes:– chicken thighs, oil, salt, peppers, caraway seeds. We put the seasoned thighs into a baking pan and put them in the oven. We serve them with

boiled potatoes. /Bardejov district

Baked thighs with potatoes baked in the oven:– 2 kg of thighs, 5 kg potatoes, onion, salt, oil, spices, peppers. We peel the potatoes, slice them into wheels; we place them in a pan; we put the

thighs on top of the potatoes. We put 2 dcl of oil into a cup and to this we add salt, pepper and paprika; we mix it and pour everything on thethighs. We bake it for an hour in the oven. /Košice environs district

Liver balls:– liver, course flour, garlic, sausage or salami in cubes, dried vegetable seasoning, egg, curr y seasoning. We work it into a thick mass which we

spoon into boiling water. Sauerkraut or steamed bread as a side dish; they also taste well with bread, cucumber and mustard. /Gelnica district

Perkelt (creamy meat sauce) drop dumplings and “bodák (Gypsy bread)”:– classic preparation; through summer and in the fall we also add green pepper and tomatoes to the perkelt; in the winter we put in cream.

/Levice district

Boiled dumplings:– the dough is prepared from – eggs, flour, salt. The filling will either be potatoes or jam. We pour sautéed bacon bits on the top with the bacon

fat. /Gelnica district

Boiled dumplings:– semi-course flour, water, salt, oil, onion or bacon. The flour is mixed with water and a pinch of salt and is kneaded into a dough. This is rolled

out on a rolling board and cut into small squares to which the filling is placed. The family prefers jam or potato filling (boiled potatoesmashed). The squares are folded over into triangles and the edges are strongly pressed together so that the filling won’t come out. The rawdumplings are thrown into boiling water, which was salted beforehand. Af ter cooking, they are removed from the water and greased in friedbacon bits or onion. /Bardejov district

Boiled dumplings:– flour, eggs, potatoes, bacon, salt. /Levoča district

Boiled dumplings:– semi-course flour, water, salt, oil, onion, bacon. We mix the flour with water, and we add a pinch of salt and we shape the dough. We roll it out

on a board and cut it into small squares, to which we added the f illing – jam or potato mash. The squares are folded into triangles and the edgesstrongly pressed so that the filling doesn’t leak out. We put the raw boiled dumplings in boiling water, which we salted. After cooking, we drainthe boiled dumplings and butter them with sautéed bacon bits or onion. /Bardejov district

Boiled dumplings with cheese:– classic boiled dumplings butter and we add cheese. /Rožňava district



Boiled dumplings with potatoes:– coarsely milled flour, salt and water. Make the dough, roll it out and cut it with a knife into squares, to which the potatoes are added. We close

them and boil them in salted water until they all float to the top. They are buttered with oil and eaten. /Bardejov district

Boiled dumplings with curd cheese:– from flour and we prepare the dough; we roll it out and f ill will potato mash. We cook the filled squares in water. We sauté bacon and pour it

over the boiled dumplings. We put curd cheese or bryndza with cream on the top. /Rimavská Sobota district

Potato pancakes:– we boil the potatoes, drain them and make them into a potato mash without lumps. We add salt to this mash, 1 egg and we slowly add finely

milled flour until the dough is no longer sticky. From the dough we cut pieces and roll them into the size of the skillet on which they will becooked. We grease the cooked pancakes with lard or we fill them with ground meat. /Prešov district

Pancakes – “fried dough”:– we mix semi-course flour (1 kg), baking powder (1 sack) or baking soda (1 teaspoon) and water. We work up a semi-thick dough, and we roll out

pancakes about 20 cm in diameter and 1 cm thick. We cook them in a pan on the stove. After cooking, we put oil on them; we can also tear theminto smaller pieces and sprinkle cocoa powder and sugar on them. Or only greased in place of bread – with bacon, sausage or meat. /SpišskáNová Ves district

Potato pancakes:– 1 kg potatoes, onion, garlic, 1 egg, ground spices, semi-course flour, oil. We grate the raw potatoes and we add all of the ingredients and cook

them in hot oil. /Košice environs district

Pancakes from flour and cabbage:– the pancakes are made from flour, water and baking soda or sour milk. We mix a mass of dough and then we cook them in a pan or on the oven.

/Sabinov district

Stuffed cabbage:– semi-boiled rice, ground meat, eggs, tomato paste, spices, oil. Mix everything together and wrap up in the leaves, which are scalded

beforehand. Then boil it all together. /Košice environs district

Stuffed cabbage:– 1 head of cabbage, salt, 1 kg of rice, 1 clove of garlic, 5 eggs, 1 kg of ground meat, spices, 1 onion, 2 tomato paste. /Košice environs district

Stuffed cabbage:– the filling is wrapped into a cabbage leaf – ground meat, spices, barley. /Rožňava district

Stuffed cabbage:– rinse the rice, ground meat, sautéed onion, tomato paste, sweet red peppers. The meat is mixed with the rice, and the sautéed onions are

added; the red peppers are added at the end. Everything is seasoned. The cabbage is scalded in hot water, then taken out and filled with thestuffing; then put it in a pot and add seasoned water, and at the end the tomato paste is added. /Trebišov district

Stuffed cabbage:– unpeel the cabbage leaves and scald them in hot water. Into these we will wrap rice mixed with ground meat, tomato paste, sautéed onion,

pressed garlic and seasonings. Put the f illing in the cabbage leaves and roll up the leaves and put them in a pot. Pour in the water, to which weadd oil and dried vegetable seasoning. /Trebišov district

Stuffed cabbage:– half a kg of pork meat, half a kg of rice, onion, sweet red paprika, tomato paste, half a dcl of oil. We boil the rice and add the ground meat,

chopped onion sprinkled with sweet paprika; mix everything together and a half kg of tomato paste. We fill the scalded leaves with meat and wecook them for perhaps 1 hour and 10 min. Before cooking we pour in the tomato paste. /Michalovce district

Stuffed peppers:– ground meat, rice, peppers, tomato paste, onions, cream, oil garlic, salt, spices, red paprika, eggs, sugar. We mix the boiled rice with the meat

and we add all of the ingredients except the cream and tomato paste. We mix it well. We sauté the onion in oil and add the ground red paprika;

we pour in half the water. While it heats up we put the filling into the peppers; when the water begins to boil, we put the peppers in it. We mixthe cream with a little flour and add it to the cooking peppers, along with the tomato paste. We season it with sugar. /Košice environs district

Stuffed peppers:– we clean out the core of the peppers and we put the filling inside; this consists of ground meat, precooked rice, eggs and spices. We add a little

flour to the mix so that it thickens. We fill the peppers and we cook them in tomato sauce for perhaps 20 minutes on a modest flame. Tomatosauce – roux, tomato paste or ketchup a water. /Prešov district

Stuffed chicken and potato salad:– chicken filled with stuf fing from 10 rolls, 3 eggs, salt and dried vegetable seasoning, garlic; we put it on the grill and we sprinkle on grilling

seasoning. /Gelnica district


152



Potato-filled sausage:– we clean out the pork intestines and prepare the f illing –we grate the potatoes f inely and add flour, seasoning, salt and then fill the intestine.

We tie this up at both ends and boil it. After boiling, we take it out of the water and gently cook it in lard. We serve with bread or with pickledvegetables. /Sabinov district

Stuffed baked chicken, potatoes and vegetable salad:– stuffing – rolls, perhaps 3 eggs, salt, garlic, black pepper, onion, green parsley. We wash the chicken and fill it with the stuffing; we put it in

a pan and salt and season it and we add a little water which we use to baste the chicken as it cooks; we can also add more water to prevent scalding. The water we add also has a little olive oil in it. We make pot ato mash from boiled potatoes. /Prešov district

Roasted stuffed brisket:– we season the ground pork meat– red paprika, dried vegetable seasoning, spices, salt – and we mix it together. We cut out a hole in the meat, fill it

and then close it with wooden sticks. We put it on a greased pan, salt and season it and put it in the oven to bake. /Banská Štiavnica district

Stuffed cabbage leaf:– according to the classic recipe of the “whites”. /Spišská Nová Ves district

Stuffed cabbage leaf:– ground meat with rice as a filling for cabbage leaves. /Gelnica district

Stuffed cabbage leaf:– fill the scalded cabbage leaves and tie them shut. Filling: boiled rice mixed with ground meat, eggs, seasoning. We put the stuffed cabbage

leaves at the bottom of a higher pot and pour water over them. It cooks for an hour and as a side dish are boiled potatoes, sometimes even

tomato sauce. /Spišská Nová Ves district Pounded pork meat in cream with pasta:– we cut the meat into flat sliced and braise them in a pot. We add broth from meat bones to the meat and salt and season it and add cream and

flour which we mixed together. After thickening we take of f the stove; we boil pasta as a side dish. /Sabinov district

Chicken soup:– we need chicken meat, bouillon, two carrots, oil and pasta. /Sabinov district

Soup – broth:– the broth is made with chicken backs, seasoned, and pasta added. /Prešov district

Fried meat with sauerkraut and leavened fried dough:– we cut the pork ribs into small pieces and sauté them on the onion together with red paprika and spices. When the meat is nearly cooked, we

add sauerkraut. /Michalovce district

R

Ribs – we call this „pašvare“:– we salt the cleaned ribs and put them in hot water, to which we add peppercorns, dried vegetable seasoning and news, allspice. Bay leaf can

also be added. We cook for perhaps one hour. We eat this with bread, potatoes or fried dough pancakes. /Spišská Nová Ves district

Roasted chicken meat with rice:– we cut the chicken meat (breasts) into flat pieces, season them and pour on oil and put them to bake in the oven. Wash the rice and then cook

it. After cooking it, I drain it and add the prepared meat. We add in broth and serve it. /Sabinov district

Noodles with cabbage:– sauté the onion in oil and add the cabbage to it; cook until sof t. The noodles are cooked separately and mixed with cabbage. /Bardejov district

Cutlets:– batter the meat in an egg/flour/breadcrumb batter and fry in hot oil. /Trebišov district

Cutlets:– cut the meat into slices and batter in an egg/flour/breadcrumb batter. They are fried and boiled potatoes are served as a side dish. /Bardejov

district Cutlets:– we pound the cutlets from pork shoulder, salt them, season them and wrap them in an egg/flour/breadcrumb batter and fry them in oil. We boil

the potatoes. /Sabinov district

Cutlets and salad:– the classic way. /Košice environs district

Cutlets and salad:– for cutlets we need pork meat, eggs, f lour, breadcrumbs; for the salad mayonnaise, potatoes and salad mix. Season with spices and salt – as

needed. /Levoča district



Cutlets and salad:– meat, bread crumbs, eggs, flour; potatoes, mayonnaise, peas, cucumber, salt. /Levoča district

Cutlets and potato salad:– classic preparation. /Trebišov district

Cutlets and potato salad:– classic cutlet in an egg/flour/breadcrumb batter. Potato salad – mayonnaise, potatoes, pickled gherkin, hard-boiled eggs. /Trebišov district

Cutlets and potatoes:– chicken cutlet fried in an egg/flour/breadcrumb batter. /Bardejov district

Cutlets and potatoes:– we pound the meat, season it and wrap in an egg/flour/breadcrumb batter and fry it. To this we serve boiled potatoes chips. /Košice environs district

Cutlets with breadcrumbs:– we pound the cutlets batter them and fry them. /Sabinov district

Cutlets with potatoes:– I pound the chicken meat, salt and season it and then I wrap in an egg/flour/breadcrumb batter and fry it in oil. /Košice environs district

Cutlets from chicken meat:– most often chicken thighs; to this potato salad or potato puree, sometimes boiled potatoes covered in the oil from frying; we mix with raw onion and

sprinkle on vinegar. /Gelnica district

Risotto:– cook the rice, leave the frankfurters and vegetables to cook, mix it all and add pickled vegetables. /Zvolen district

Risotto:– chicken meat, mushrooms, vegetables (frozen). Sauté the onion and add the rice with the vegetables; season it and cook until soft. /Bardejov district

Risotto:– we boil the rice, cu the meat as for goulash and boil it. We season it and we add lečo (tomatoes/peppers/onion) and mix it all together. /Sabinov

district

Risotto:– I cook the rice and the meat with vegetables separately. When it is cooked, I mix it together and serve it. /Detva district

Risotto:– oil, rice, peas, carrot, onion, salt, black pepper. We cut the meat into cubes and sauté them in oil and onion; we then add water. We add the peas,

carrots and season to taste. We pour in water and cook it. When everything is cooked to soft, we mix with the rice which we previously cooked on theoven – we sauté onions and we add rice and water (for 1 cup of rice, 1.5 cups of water), we cook until soft. /Bardejov district

Risotto with meat:– pork shoulder, frozen vegetables, rice, oil onion, spices, ground paprika. We sauté the diced onion and add the cut pieces of meat; we salt and season

and let it cook. We mix it with the cooked rice. /Košice II district

Roma balls:– 2.5 kg of raw potatoes, 2.5 kg of boiled potatoes, half a kg of sausages, pork cracklings, 5 eggs, 2 heads of garlic, 2 onions, oil, spices, dried

vegetable seasoning, salt. We mix it and form from the mass small or large balls, which we roll in finely milled flour and cook in salted boiling water;we also add 2-3 spoonfuls of vinegar. It cooks for 15 minutes. We sauté the onions in oil and pour them over the cooked balls. We serve it withsauerkraut. /Rimavská Sobota district

Fish fingers and chips:– we fry them in the classic way. /Detva district

Rice with sauce:– chicken breast and cream sauce. /Sabinov district

SSegedínsky goulash:– oil, onion, pork meat cut into cubes, sauerkraut, cream for cooking. Sauté the onion and then add in the meat. Season to taste; we add sauerkraut

and sauté it further. We then add the cream and let it cook. We serve it with steamed bread. /Bardejov district

Segedínsky goulash and steamed bread:– sauté the pork meat on onions and when it is just about ready, add the sauerkraut, then the tomato paste, thicken it with finely milled flour mixed

with milk. The steamed bread is leavened – purchased ready. /Trebišov district

Segedínsky goulash, steamed bread:– they make leavened homemade steamed bread – they prepare the yeast in the morning and make the dough for lunch. /Sabinov district


154



Segedínsky goulash with steamed bread:– we cook the meat on the onion and spice it; we add the sauerkraut and bay leaf and let it cook together until soft. We thicken it with flour and cream

and we serve it with steamed bread. /Rimavská Sobota district

Segedínsky goulash with steamed bread:– we sauté the meat in oil with onions and add salt, paprika, caraway seed, ground pepper and tomato paste. When the meat is semi-soft, we add the

cabbage – fresh or sauerkraut. When the cabbage is soft we thicken with f lour and we add the cream. I buy the steamed bread. /Spišská Nová Ves

district Potatoes casserole:– we slice the raw potatoes and add pepper, salt and dried vegetable seasoning.We put on top boiled and sliced eggs, and pour over the cream. We bake

it in the oven. Before benefits we often make it without cream and only with milk. /Rimavská Sobota district

Meatless goulash:– potatoes and knackwurst; eaten with bread. /Zvolen district

Soda cake:– flour, salt, half of a sack of baking powder, 1 spoon of baking soda. The dough is rolled out and cooked as pancakes. I make this in place of bread.

/Veľký Krtíš district

Sirloin on cream with steamed bread:– prepare the beef – as a whole piece we boil it together with the vegetables (carrot, celery root, parsley). The boiled meat we then cut into slices; we

remove the vegetables from the water and add water and season – salt, dried vegetable seasoning, bay leaf. We thicken it with a roux, cream and weadd vinegar at the end. /Rimavská Sobota district

Š

Salad and cutlet:– potatoes, mayonnaise, vegetables, meat, eggs, flour, bread crumbs. /Zvolen district

Wide pasta with curd cheese or cheese:– we boil the pasta, drain it and mix in curd cheese or cheese; we add sautéed bacon on the top. /Košice environs district

Pasta flakes with French beans or with beans:– boiled pasta flakes; there can also be boiled and mashed potatoes; the cooked beans or French beans are mixed in and greased with sautéed bacon.

/Veľký Krtíš district

Jam donuts:– I make the dough from yeast, flour, eggs, salt and sugar; after it rises and from it I fry the donuts in oil; I then add sugar. /Trebišov district

Lentil mash with frankfurter:

– wash the lentils and put them in water to cook. After cooking them we add a roux and season it. We heat the frankfurter in a pan and add to the lentil mash. Serve with bread. /Prešov district

Lentil mash:– we put the pre-soaked lentils (at least 2 hours before cooking) in a pot of water and cook them; we add the bay leaf and salt. We make the roux in

another pan and we add fat to it and cook it. We add sour milk, mix and we add it to the lentils and season. /Prešov district

Spaghetti:– when they are short of money they make spaghetti with oil and seasoned with salt and ketchup. They most like it with ground meat and mushrooms.

/Trebišov district

Spaghetti with ketchup:– boil the spaghetti perhaps 8-10 minutes. Drain it and pour ketchup and grated cheese on top. /Prešov district

Knackwurst with potatoes:– cook the knackwurst and boil the potatoes. /Veľký Krtíš district

T Töltot káposzta (stuffed cabbage leaf):– this is a Hungarian dish; I don’t even know what it is called in Slovak (stuffed cabbage leaf). It is necessary to cook the cabbage leaves in boiling

water. We prepare the meat – ground meat season it, put the meat into the cabbage leaves and wrap it up. We then put nicely place the meat wrappedwith cabbage into a pot and pour in water and let it boil. At the end we add the tomato paste and the sliced cabbage. We eat it with bread. /Lučenecdistrict

V

Egg salad:– we slice the boiled eggs and add mayonnaise. /Sabinov district



Boiled sausages:– we boil the sausages in water and serve with mustard. /Bardejov district

Boiled ribs – „pašvare“:– we most like smoked ribs. We wash them and boil them for 1 hour; we add salt, dried vegetable seasoning, black peppercorns, and allspice. We serve i

with potatoes or with bread, and mustard and horseradish. /Spišská Nová Ves district

Boiled potatoes:– we boil the potatoes, drain them and mash them. We sauté onions in butter or oil and we mix this into the potatoes. We serve them with sour milk.

/Bardejov district

Boiled potatoes with red peppers:– boiled potatoes with red peppers and onion sautéed in oil. /Gelnica district

Boiled potatoes (or pasta) with sauce:– we add oil, onion, vegetables and meat to a pot in that order (most often chicken wings, thighs, giblets or sausage, frankfurters, salami). We add

pepper and, dried vegetable seasoning, paprika and salt. We pour in water and cook until the meat is soft. It is thickened with water and flour or withsoft cheese (Karička; a favourite cheese for drop dumplings). /Spišská Nová Ves district

Fried chicken with potatoes:– one chicken, potatoes, oil, eggs, bread crumbs. We de-bone the chicken, batter the meat in egg/flour/breadcrumb batter and fry it; we make broth

from the bones. /Košice environs district

Fried pork cutlet and potato salad with mayonnaise:– we roll the cutlets in flour, egg and breadcrumbs and we fry them. We boil the potatoes in the peeling and press them into cubes; we then add hard-

boiled eggs, carrots, peas, pickled gherkin, onion, salt and mayonnaise. /Spišská Nová Ves district

Fried cutlet and salad (or potato mash):– we batter the cutlet in egg/flour/breadcrumb batter and we fry them. Salad: we boil the potatoes in their peelings and clean them, slice them or push

them into cubes; we can add only boiled eggs and mayonnaise or tartar sauce. /Spišská Nová Ves district

Fried cutlet and potato salad:– I batter the meat (flour, egg, bread crumbs) and fry in oil. Potato salad – I boil the potatoes, eggs, vegetables, tartar sauce or mayonnaise; I mix

everything together and add salt as needed. /Lučenec district

Fried cutlet with potatoes:– prepared in the classic way. /Prešov district

Fried cheese, chips, tartar sauce:– everyone knows the recipe. /Detva district

Fried cheese, chips and tartar sauce:

– we clean and slice the potatoes and we bake them in a hot pan. We cover the cheese in flour, egg and bread crumbs, and we fry it. We serve it withtartar sauce or ketchup. /Prešov district

Z

Baked pasta:– we cook the pasta; we cut the sausage and prepare the eggs for pouring over the top and the vegetables. We then put everything into a pan and bake

it. /Stará Ľubovňa district

Roasted ribs:– we prepare the pork ribs by separating them, salting them and seasoning them; we pour on lard or oil and put them in the warmed-up oven. After

they are roasted, we take them out and serve with boiled potatoes, on which we pour the fat from the baking pan. As a side dish we add fruit compote /Sabinov district

Thick soup from a roux:– carrot, onion, dried vegetable seasoning, potatoes, flour, oil. I put water into a pot and I put the vegetable in to boil and sprinkle in dried vegetable

seasoning. When this is cooked I clean the potatoes and cut them into cubes and put them in the pot. When the potatoes are ready, I add oil, to the

pot and flour and cook it. I put it in the soup and finish cooking it. And we eat. /Zvolen district

Potato mash and roasted meat:– we prepare the potatoes and boil them; when they are read, then we add milk, cheese and butter and we sprinkle them with chopped onion. We first

wash the meat, season it and put it in the oven. We chop onions and put it in the oven. /Stará Ľubovňa district

Potato-based steamed bread with red cabbage:– we make the cabbage sweet and sour; to this roasted pork meat. /Trebišov district

Potato-based steamed bread and sauerkraut:– the boiled, cooled potatoes are mashed and egg and flour are added. A ball is made from the dough and smoked meats are put in it. They are boiled in

water for perhaps 10 minutes. The sauerkraut is cooked in onion and red paprika is added. /Trebišov district


156



Potato-based steamed bread, cabbage and roasted pork neck:– you’ll find the recipe at www.sk-recepty. /Detva district

Potato-based steamed bread, cabbage, pork brisket:– cabbage is sautéed and the meat baked. /Rožňava district

Potato pancakes:

– the boiled potatoes are mashed and after cooling, eggs and course flour are added. They are cooked in a dry pan, and we like them best with lard andwith tea. /Trebišov district

Potato pancakes:– we mash the boiled potatoes, and mix in course flour and egg. They are cooked on the oven top, and then greased with lard. They eat them with tea.

/Trebišov district

Potato pancakes:– grated potatoes, flour, garlic; mix everything and fry the pancakes. /Prešov district

Potato pancakes:– clean the potatoes and we then add, garlic, flour, eggs and black pepper. Mix everything well and cook the pancakes on both sides in hot oil. /Prešov

district

Potato pancakes with pork scratchings:– we grate the potatoes, then salt and season them; we add a little flour and egg and we cook them in oil. /Sabinov district

Potato salad:– we sliced the boiled potatoes, vegetables and eggs into cubes and add pickled gherkin, mayonnaise and we season it. Let it sit. /Košice environsdistrict

Potato salad and cutlets:– we boil a half a kg of potatoes in their peeling and clean them after boiling; we add the peas and carrots, half a cup of pickled gherkin, 5 boiled eggs,

1 cup of mayonnaise and tartar sauce, salt and pepper. We fly about 2.5 kg of pork loin. /Rimavská Sobota district

Potato salad and cutlets:– they prepare it in the classic way; they make the cutlets from de-boned chicken thighs. /Trebišov district

Potato salad and fried chicken thighs:– we de-bone the thighs (and make soup from the bones), and salt the meat. We roll it in flour, egg and breadcrumbs and fry them. We boil the potatoes

in their peels, press them into cubes, and add hard-boiled eggs, vegetables, gherkin, onions and mayonnaise. /Spišská Nová Ves district

Potato salad and fried cutlet:– we prepare it traditionally; we slice the boiled potatoes, egg, onion, cucumbers, and we add the peas and carrots, mayonnaise, whipping cream,

pepper. We make the cutlets from pork meat. /Rimavská Sobota district

Potatoes and roast meat:– we peel the potatoes and then boil them; we clean and season the meat and cook it on the stovetop. /Stará Ľubovňa district

Potatoes and cutlet:– we boil the potatoes and fry the pork cutlets, and we serve them with cucumbers. /Rožňava district

Potatoes with red peppers:– We pour onions sautéed in red sweet peppers and oil over the potatoes. /Detva district

Potatoes with mayonnaise:– we mash the boiled potatoes, salt them and mix them with mayonnaise. /Sabinov district

Potatoes with milk:– we boil the potatoes, drain them and mash them. We cook onion in oil or butter and mix it with the potatoes. We serve with sour milk. /Bardejov

district Ž

Žemľovka (Brown betty):– litre of milk, 1 challah bread or rolls, 2 sacks of vanilla sugar, 5 eggs, 1 Hera lard, 4 apples, 1 curd cheese. We warm the milk, sprinkle on the

sugar and egg yolks. We moisten the challah bread in the milk and place in a greased baking pan, crumble the curd cheese and grate the apples– arrange in layers and bake. /Poltár district

Note The recipes are arranged by name and the order of the foods as were given by the respondents. The same dish can be located in several places – based on what it is called.



According to theoreticians, the modern world isorganised on the principle of paid work, from whichthe standing and importance of an individual and theliving level of his family derives. Exclusion from theworld of paid work weakens the position of anindividual, and the living level of his family shiftsbelow the borderline of poverty and material need.Long-term unemployment is often labelled as “theticket to the world of poverty and need” Mareš, 2002,pg. 75), and the preceding sections have brought a great many empirical proofs of this. Income from

support and benefits only covers the basic life needsof a family with difficulty, which has the result that it drives such families into debts. The longer a person isunemployed, the worse his financial situation and theexistential situation of his family become.

According to the monitoring of incomes andexpenditures of Roma households from excludedsettlements, the income and expenditure level wasdetermined to be exceptionally low (UNDP, 2011). It ischaracterised by low incomes, low expenditures andsubsequently a minimal financial difference betweenthem. The average monthly income per household inexcluded environments was 597.60 euro, which in thecalculation per household member meant 112.75 euro(for the Slovak Republic the calculation of averagemonthly income per household member was on thelevel of nearly 350 euro, thus, three-times higher).The average monthly expenditures of excludedhouseholds according to the monitoring was 552.99euro per household and 104.34 per one member

(average expenditures for the Slovak Republic wereagain approximately three-times higher – nearly 308euro per household members). Thus, the differencebetween incomes and expenditures achieved on

average 44.61 euro per excluded householdand 8.41 euro per one member (the difference of incomes and expenditures in the calculation for theSlovak Republic achieved more than 42 euro per onehousehold member). The worse balance was recordein households without a working member where therwas at least one young child and for the group of multi-member households.

For all groups of Roma households from excludedsettlements, it applied that if they did not borrowa sum of money in the course of the month, theirfinancial balance would be even worse. Since theanalysis moved on the level of averages, it can beconcluded that in each compared group (according tthe number of members and children and the numbeof working members) a significant portion of thehousehold exists for whom the income did not sufficfor the monthly “needed” expenditures and they hadto resort to loans. In the course of the monitoredmonth, excluded households borrowed on averagea sum of 34.29 euro (6.47 euro per household

member), which made up 5.7% of the total monthlyincome for these households.

On the other hand, the financial situation of households would be more favourable in the course othe month if they were indebted to a lesser extent.Payments for loans during the month were ina notable portion of households higher than therecorded difference between incomes andexpenditures. If households did not have to pay backloans and debts, their budgetary balance would be

more positive or expenditures would be on a higherlevel. As was shown, the sum paid back per themonitored month was higher than the sum borrowedon average one household paid back in the course of


158

5. INDEBTEDNESS OF ROMA HOUSEHOLDS

FROM EXCLUDED SETTLEMENTS54

54 We recall a note from the introductory section: from the character of the research it follows that the presented numerical values serve exclusively for comparativepurposes – for comparing differences between differently deřned groups of excluded Roma households; they decidedly do not correspond to the quantitative rangthe given value attribute in excluded Roma communities.



the month loans and debts in a volume of 57.87 euro(per one member this was 10.92 euro), which made up10.5% of the total monthly expenditures. The share of new loans in monthly incomes was two-times lowerthan the percentage share of the paid back amount in

monthly expenditures (5.7% versus 10.5%).

In relation to the expansion of loans in the scope of excluded households, during the month a total of 27% of households supplemented their own total income with new borrowed sum. At the same time, theborrowed sums were relatively varied: the smallest sum of a loan calculated for the entire monitoredmonth achieved 20 euro and the highest 1,000 euro(for the purchase of a vehicle in the given month); thenext “highest” sum of a loan had a significantly

smaller value (388 euro and it was a loan for repair of a dwelling; and then 214 euro). The surveyedhouseholds predominately borrowed in the monitoredmonth sums in the tens of euro, sometimes evensmaller portions. The average of loans calculated perone surveyed household achieved 34.29 euro; theamount of the loans calculated as the average in thosehouseholds which actually borrowed a sum of moneyrepresented 127.00 euro.

On the other hand, loan repayments were in the scope

of the monitored sample of households from excludedRoma settlements a great deal more widespread; inthe course of the monitored month, 68% of themmade some repayment of loans or debts. The amount of the repayment was also relatively varied: theinterval of the mentioned financial sums began with10 euro and stopped at 431 euro. The averagerepayment for the entire surveyed sample was57.87 euro per household and the average expendedsum (for those households which during the month

actually made a repayment) exceeded 85 euro.A comparison of the range of borrowing and payingoff of debt among excluded households as well as theborrowed and paid back sum during the monitored

month indicated that the overall indebtedness of households is higher than the monthly result, andmany debts are from older data. Data on the rangeand amount of the monthly repayment of debts andloans testifies to the high measure of indebtedness of

households from marginalised Roma settlements.The borrowing of financial resources in the course of a month is an instrument or method which toa significant measure helps excluded Romahouseholds sustain a more even balance of incomesand expenditures. But among them are householdswhich still cannot manage, where despite loans, theirbudgets still move in negative values – on average perhousehold and per household member. A strategyfounded on operative loans is widespread in the

surveyed households, but it is not always able tofinancially balance out a deficit budget.

Several qualitative and quantitative studies provideanswers regarding how households in excludedsettlement came to be indebted. A survey of the livingconditions of Roma households, for example, showedthat part of the reason for creating debts is theinability to pay fees for housing.55 From the beginningof the year, 29% of surveyed Roma households met with the situation in which they were not capable, due

to financial difficulties, to pay rent, and more than20% of them experienced this repeatedly. Togethermore than 41% of them (28.8% repeatedly) hada problem with regular payments for electricity,28.2% (19.9% repeatedly) for the supply of waterand 29% (24% repeatedly) for heating.56 Oncea household becomes incapable of making payment for a service associated with housing, the situation isusually repeated, which testifies to the growth of debt(UNDP, 2012, pgs. 187-188). As the cited sourcenotes, Roma households had also problems withpaying for food: 38% of them signalled sucha situation repeatedly and 8.6% as a one-timeoccurrence (together 46.6%, while from the general population only 6%), and in the case of segregated

55 Data collection within this research ran at the end of 2010 (UNDP, 2012).56 In households of the geographically near general population the occurrence was markedly lower – around 4%.





I was at the doctor with my son, who is two and a half years old; he had a temperature and cried in the night... I went to see the doctor in town by bus (one way 0.50 cents). I didn’t have money for medicine, so I borrowed from my sister (10 euro).

I last went to see a doctor with my younger daughter (ten years old), she had a temperature... I didn’t havethe money so I had to borrow from the family. I borrowed 10 euro, and the medicines cost 6 euro. I didn’t have to pay anything for the journey, becausethe doctor is here in the village...

I go to see the doctor most often with the smallest boy (eighteen months old): he’s used to coughing; he getsa temperature and we have to go. It often happens that I don’t have the money and then I borrow approximately 10 euro from the family. When the older boy (four years old) is ill and I need medicines for both, I borrow 15 euro... It was necessary to go see a doctor with the youngest member of the family (five-year-old daughter), becauseher stomach ache would not go away. The mother went to see the doctor with the little girl... The parents had toborrow 10 euro for medicine...

Last time seeing the doctor: an internist, orthopaedic,neurology....Paid 30 euro for medicines, travelled by bus. He borrowed from relatives for the trip.

The head of the family had pain in his teeth, he paid

10 euro for the examination – he had to borrow fromrelatives....the bus cost two-times 1.20 euro.

Another source of debts found in Roma households wasin loans for the repair of a dwelling. Households whichhad a chance to get a loan (they had a steady incomeexceeding the life minimum for a family), use this oftenfor the purpose of improving the quality of theirhousing. If a household was unsuccessful with a request for a loan in standard official banking institutions, it then resorted to the services of non-banking subjects –

with many negative consequences for the household’sbudget and its financial situation (the growth of debtsin consequence of late payments, executor proceedingsand the like). The research also recorded participants inthe microloan programme of the organization ETPSlovensko, which helped them improve their dwelling:

We last reconstructed the bathroom. We borrowed 1,000 euro, which I’m repaying at 42 euro a month. We

bought a bathtub, a toilet, tiling, wall tiles and anautomatic washer...

Two years ago they put a fireplace into the house...They took out a loan for 2,000 euro.

They insulated the entire house; they borrowed

5,000 euro (a retired grandmother). They had a masterbuilder from the village; it’s not finished yet...

Replaced three wooden windows with plastic onesbecause they were not insulated... Three windows witha complete offer cost 890 euro... Because we didn’t have success with the bank, a non-banking company provided a 1,000 euro loan. And in the instalment for 36 months at 40 euro a month it comes out to1,450 euro. The bank didn’t provide the financingbecause our income does not achieve the life minimum for a family. The leftover money was invested into

clothing for the children, paint and painting – roughly for three rooms 40 euro.

We changed the windows three years ago; we both stillworked then. We borrowed 2,000 euro, since then wehaven’t made any modifications. We also painted allthe rooms then.

I built my house myself from money saved, froma private savings scheme (so-called ́ Včielka´ or ‘Bee´)and the building saving account. After using it up I wasconnected to the IDIA savings programme, which was provided by ETP Slovensko. Then I continued in

a microloan programme where I took out an interest- free loan which I am now paying back...

We did a reconstruction of rooms from microloans whichwere offered by ETP Slovensko. We managed to improveour housing...

The roof leaked and it was necessary to modify thebathroom and the toilet. I took out a microloan throughETP Slovensko in the amount of 1,160 euro. For thementioned money I bought material...We did all thementioned work ourselves...

As was mentioned above, the source of indebtednessof Roma households, or the reason for arranging loanfrom non-banking subjects, are often arrears forenergy or services associated with housing. They werealso found in the scope of the situational analysis –high arrears payments for heating or electricity wererecorded for the payment of which the householdwent into debt. One of the stories found indicated the



“non-standard” origin of such indebtedness, forexample, drawing electricity illegally from aneighbour, which strongly evoked the usurer’sapproach to a dependent family without thepossibility of checking the actual use of energy:

Meters for the radiators (they listed among the desires– author’s note) because we have large arrears payments for heating.

We last had a problem with the electricity. The annual statement came and we had a large undercharge. So I had to take out a small loan of 500 euro and pay for theelectricity so that the kids were not in the dark. (I gavethe money to a neighbour from who I get electricity.)

In the end consequence in the scope of the situational analysis loans were mentioned also when describing

the wishes for the family – as an inaccessible financial service for a family without a working member. Forfulfilling their own desires, for example from the areaof housing or the image about the future of theirchildren, many households would need a mortgage ora loan; however, the absence of a work incomepractically destroys any such possibility for them.They are more likely to get into disadvantageous loansfrom different non-banking subjects or from usurers,who often times worsens a stressed financial situation

of excluded households even further: If I were to find some real work, I would earn more and we could get a loan and buy a better house.

That my sons find good wives; but mainly that they areemployed and can become independent (they have twunemployed sons age 20 and 22 years). They need momoney; they wanted to put a new facade on the house they would take out a loan for this, but they must work(there are four adults in the family without work, threchildren still attending primary school).

We need a new facade on the house and a roof, but so long as my husband isn’t working, we can’t takeout a loan.

Loans were also inclined to be among the desires of a family in one other position: this was the desireafter completion of an executor’s proceeding to whicthe household is exposed as well as the desire that thhousehold absolve itself of debt or the circle of usury

Health for the family; employment in the place of habitation; a new roof, completion of an executor’s proceeding and better social certainty.

For safe movement of the family in public; that usurerdidn’t exist or even benefits in material need – only work and pay (compulsory).

All of the presented associations indicate that debts anindebtedness are not an unknown phenomenon in thesurveyed excluded environments. In contrast, theyconfirm that without work incomes households often

are unable to cover even their own basic needs, whichcompels them to borrow and subsequently get intodebts; upon the loss of capability of the household to


162 Note The table presents the calculation for all 192 households.

Table 17Indebtedness of Roma households from excluded settlements by amount of debt and type of housing (in %

Segregatedsettlements

Separated on the edgeof a municipality


Total

0, not given 31 32 35 33

1 – 100 euro 12 7 3 7

101 – 200 euro 9 7 9 8201 – 300 euro 7 6 7 6

301 – 500 euro 3 14 2 7

501 – 1 000 euro 14 14 10 13

1 001 – 1 500 euro 12 10 7 10

1 501 – 3 000 euro 5 5 10 7

3 001 and more euro 7 5 17 9

Total 100 100 100 100



pay back the debts, this leads to executory proceedings.But not only households reliant on social incomes haveand must pay back loans; households with a workincome which took advantage of the possibility to get a loan and realise their ideas – for example, regardinghousing – also have them.

From all of the surveyed Roma households, not quiteone-third were without debts (or did not respond to thequestion on household debts), while the remainingmore than two-thirds of households listed some amount of debt. The indebted sum ranged from 12 euro to30,000 euro; most often the sum given was 1,000 euro,followed by 1,500 euro, and then 200 euro. Together28% listed debts in the amount up to 500 euro, while23% were in the zone from 500 to 1,500 euro and 16%of them had debts of over 1,500 euro.

But the structure of households according to theamount of debt differed more significantly for the groupaccording to the type of housing. While representationof households without debts was almost the same in all of the excluded households (the mentioned one-third),the filling of the individual zones differed. Insegregated settlements the smaller sums of debtspredominated: a total of 31% of these households had

a debt to 500 euro, while 12% of cases had a sum up to100 euro inclusively. In the group representingseparated settlements the share of debts to 500 eurowas 34%, but the interval from 300 to 500 euro had thestrongest representation (14%); for the group of concentrated within a municipality the lowest debts to500 euro occurred in total on a level of 21% and debts to

100 euro were only minimal (3%). On the other hand,approximately one-tenth of households in segregatedand separated environments had debts over 1,500 euro,and for the group of Roma households concentratedwithin a municipality this was 27%.

Each of the excluded environments has households withdifferent amounts of debts – from low up to the highest sums – and the amount of debt in concentratedenvironments grew. This was also confirmed by theaverage sum owed which is shown in Graph 21. The

average amount of debt for segregated settlementsachieved more than 1,127 euro, for separatedsettlements on the edge 1,188 euro and for the group ofhouseholds concentrated within a municipality 3,500euro. At the same time the graph presents the loanedsum, i. e. the amount in euro, which the householdloaned to another household, which also has a growingtrend in association with the shift to concentrated

Graph 21Average amount of debt and the provided loan of the surveyed households from excluded settlementsby type of housing (in euro)

Segregated settlement Separated on the edge Concentrated within a municipality Total

Note The graph presents the average indebtedness of households and loans provided by household only for the portion of households

which listed some sum; in the case of debts, n = 130, and in the case of loans provided n = 25 (with such a small set for loans the listed sums are only orientational).

1 127,55

368,00

1 188,52

838,00

3 500,29

2 050,67

4 000

3 500

2 500

2 000

1 500

1 000

500

0

Debt

Loan1 845,51



settlements. The presented sums of offered loans areonly orientational, because from the overall sample of households only 13% were able to loan money toanother household; the remaining 87% could not provide such a service.57

It was also shown that the amount of debt was muchgreater for households with a working member(3,904.95 euro) than for households without a workingmember (1,492.99 euro). This is confirmation of thefact that households with a stable work income aremore able to get loans and for higher sums. Theresearch probe at the same time recorded that approximately half of the households from an excludedenvironment had worked up a payment calendar for thedebts. At the time of the research, approximately 8% of

the surveyed households had a special recipient as part of its social incomes.

Summary:

Empirical data from different empirical sourcesconfirmed in terms of averages the stressed or deficit financial budget of excluded Roma households. Thesmall incomes to these households cause a low level of expenditures and do so even with expenditures coveringthe most basic needs, such as food and housing. A large

portion of households have problems paying for basicneeds for its members and some of them are unable todo this despite frequently borrowing money. The worst balance was recorded in households without a workingmember, those with at least one young child and inmulti-member households.

From a comparison of total incomes and expenditures of excluded Roma households which managed to get recorded during one month, it followed than on averagethey are more or less equal. The remainder from the

entire sum of incomes after subtracting total expenditures came out low (44.61 euro per household),and if a sum borrowed during the course of the month isnot included in the total incomes the remainder is evenmuch smaller (10.32 euro per household and not even 2

euro per one member). But if households were not indebted and didn’t have to make loan repayments, theremainder of incomes would be on average 60 eurohigher, or excluded Roma households could increasetheir other expenditures by this sum.

The amount of income influences the principle way of managing households and the “width” of the period ofthe month through which they have financial resourceavailable in a certain volume. The low overall incomes the same time mean surviving most of the month withvery small sums of disposable financial resources. Withhouseholds with the lowest incomes this means morethan half a month with a sum lower than 10 euro per onmember. With such financial resources decisions onhousehold consumption are markedly limited, and

covering basic needs and unexpected basic expenditurcan also be endangered – households go into debt in aattempt to provide them.

The research probe into excluded settlement indicatedthat households from excluded Roma settlements areindebted to a high degree. Their debts originatedifferently; often the way is unpaid rent for housing orfor services or energy associated with housing. But thealso borrow for the securing of necessary healthcare, fmaking modifications to a dwelling or for the purchase

of food. Typically, debts for these household arise due tsatisfying basic needs or at least minimal consumption

At the same time, it was shown that a large portion of these households has a payment calendar worked up fothe liquidation of their debts. But as research assistantin the field pointed out, in several respondent households having a payment calendar, many familiesare unable to observe it. The research probe alsorecorded a certain group of families which had a speciarecipient for a portion of their social benefits. In some

households an executor’s proceeding was imposed upotheir inability to pay debts; in the end this occurred inseveral households. The chances of some familiesgetting out from under their debts in some realistic timperiod was in practically negligible.


16457 The amount of a provided loan moved from 20 to 8,000 euro; in 7% of households this was a loan to 200 euro inclusively. Only 6% of the surveyed households were

able to loan a higher sum.



A qualitative probe was focused on a more detailedrepresentation of three selected life situations which areassociated with the most basic needs – health, housingand food consumption. It was shown that although thesituation in excluded Roma settlements differed toa certain measure, a broad group of households livehere which experience a high measure of deprivation foreach of these basic needs and in many households thedeprivation is combined. They encounter limitedfinancial, spatial or social accessibility of healthcare;securing the needs for housing is not only on a low level,

but sometimes even deeply below it, and theyexperience on a daily basis limitations or evendeprivation in consumption of food. The life strategiesfor the monitored areas are also varied: some continueto battle and search for solutions, while others areresigned to the situation (for healthcare, modificationsto a dwelling and the like). In the foundations of deprivation and poverty stands the absence of workincomes caused by deep and long-term exclusion fromthe labour market. The lack of f inancial resources for the

provision of basic needs leads to indebtedness andfurther indebtedness of these households.

Such is the real life of Roma households in excludedsettlements. Do any desires and yearnings influencethem? Do they have desires at all and if so, what kind?A question thus focused also became a component of the research. Desires especially aimed at one’s ownfamily were monitored, and what they would desire forimproving life in their settlement was recordedseparately.

6.1. Desires for own family 58

Upon surveying the wishes for one’s own family anabsolute predominance of households from excluded

settlements gave some sort of response; only 3% didnot respond to the question. A smaller group listedonly one desire, but the majority presented combinedwishes. Their contents were related to various spheresof life, from material things up through general values. On the basis of the summary score, work andemployment finished in first place.

In the course of the analysis it was heard several times, and it couldn’t be otherwise, that the range of unemployment and its length are in the surveyed

environments exceptionally high. General theoriesabout this state not only the impact on social institutions and processes but also on the position of the unemployed and their social behaviour. We hereinparaphrase again the words of Czech sociologist P. Mareš, because our discourse in the case of theunemployed Roma population ignores the impacts onthe social behaviour of individuals, or reduces it to thestatement that the “Roma don’t want to work”. But when the absence of employment changes the statusof a person and his roles, this creates for him an

anomic situation, inevitably evoking his reaction to itunemployment is therefore the subject of measuredand intuitive life strategies, and its content isinfluenced culturally and by the duration of unemployment. With longer periods of unemploymenta person gradually becomes accustomed to his/hersituation and his reactions to the living situation areadapted to it (Mareš, 2002, pg. 103).

Professional texts note that unemployment is not a welcomed state; therefore people try to get out of it as

soon as they can. And if they do not manage to do so,they try to survive and to live in the new situation,especially with mass and concentrated long-termunemployment. As was mentioned above, life strategies

58 We recall a note from the introductory section: from the character of the research it follows that the presented numerical values serve exclusively for comparativepurposes – for comparing differences between differently defined groups of excluded Roma households; they decidedly do not correspond to the quantitative rangeof the given value attribute in excluded Roma communities.

6. NEEDS AND DESIRES IN THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE FAMILY

AND SETTLEMENTS



with long-term unemployment are varied, and at thesame time they can mutually intersect and replace oneanother. On one hand, this is the mentioned restrainingin consumption and relinquishing the original range of needs (adaption to the situation) or resignation and

apathy; on the other hand is the searching for anactive starting point and non-conforming methods orpersisting in attempts to integrate into society. Theplacing of work and employment in first place amongdesires for the family can signal that many of theexcluded Roma households have not given up theirdesire for paid work, at least in speaking about it.59

The findings to a significant measure controvert themyth that “the Roma don’t like to work”.

From the submitted responses, nearly 28% of the

surveyed households invoked work and employment indifferent associations. The desire to connect to thelabour market was given independently or incombination with other desires, and different aspectsof work activity were emphasised along with it.A general desires for work and employment took, forexample, such a form:

•that we find work

•employment – everything derives from this

Some respondents desired work for themselves or forall adult members of the households, others only forits male members. To a certain measure, then, themarked influence of gender stereotyped ideasregarding the role of men and women, which are inthe environments of excluded Roma communitiesrelatively strong, were expressed here. The surveysconfirmed that men are broadly perceived, relativelyspeaking, as the family provider and the role of women is linked more with care of home and hearth(The Image..., 2012). Households not only desire work

for the family father but also for sons or sons-in-law:•that the father has employment with an income;

that the wife could devote herself to the family and household more

•work for the head of the family – so far they livethrough drawing mama´s pension, but when she passes away, her income will be sorely missed

•for work for my husband and two adult sons, becausit’s difficult to live from social benefits (two paren

and two adult sons are unemployed)•for work – so that father and son (eighteen years ol

unemployed) work and the family would then havea larger income

•that my husband and son have proper work and theour financial income will change and we could repaand improve our home

•that adult children find work somewhere; that my husband is healthy; a larger flat – we have 11 childreat home (our adult childrenalso live with us)

•that my son and husband find work – my son isa trained electrician and cannot find work; to buy plastic windows

•that their son-in-law find work, likewise the adult children want to work; they have everything they want; they only desire health and more money

•that we are all healthy, that I don’t have to go withthe children to see the doctors; that they learn welland that my husband find a job, that he get selecteat least for activation work; that we get a municiparental flat

The side emphasised in expressions of interest in paiwork was the permanence of work, the permanence oemployment. This is telling in relation to the fact thahouseholds have more experience with temporary oroccasional jobs which decidedly to not bring thedesired effect – a permanent income and certainty.At least on the level of desires, they expressed theneed for stable employment; sometimes with theaddition that at least for one member of the family:

•permanent employment – at least for one person

from the family •for more permanent work and security

•for work and a stable income (both parents areunemployed)


16659 Persisting in attempts to become a part of the mainstream of society can lead to repeated řnding of new employment on the formal, ofřcial labour market, but with

failure this effort can have the form of preserving rituals conřrming the status of the unemployed (e.g. going to the labour ofřce), the idea of which evaporates(neither the unemployed nor even the work ofřce now do not really believe in the return to the labour market) (Mareš, 2002, pg. 105).



The desire for work nearby confirms in its own way the“stickiness” of excluded settlements. Several respondents especially emphasised the accessibility of work in the near vicinity. Equally, the problem wasmentioned of possible accessibility of low

qualification work – they are aware of the lack of qualification and accepted it as it is:

•employment in the nearby surroundings

•employment near the settlement and pay (there arethree adults, parents and a nineteen-year-old sonand all are without work, despite having completed their schooling)

•that they weren’t desperate to find work and withlow qualifications and they didn’t have to fear for their housing, work, subsistence; that they didn’t have problems existing, that they were not hungry and could pay for everything like other people

The desire for work also took the form for its improvedfinancial evaluation, that is, better earnings. In sucha context the request for becoming involved in theprocess of labour was connected not infrequently withthe peace and security which a work income brings.Desire thus expressed at the same time implicitlyindicates the great measure of uncertainty and stresseswhich households excluded from the labour market are

permanently exposed to in their attempts to cover theirbasic household needs. The above citation whichspeaks about work as a prerequisite for removing fearsregarding housing and sustenance, for removingexistential problems and hunger and for strengtheningthe ability to pay for everything like other people in theend expresses this very explicitly and in detail:

•I desire a good job with good pay

•better financial provision; permanent work

•for peace; for better f inancial possibilities of

employment •for work; to experience less stress – for peace

•for my own room; and mainly for work, for security

The improving of the financial situation of thehousehold and securing resources for a better life alsotook the form of general desires. People in excludedRoma settlements are aware that it is work activity that

opens up the path for a better living situation. Again,at the same time this sent the signal from the oppositeside that social benefits do not provide security andthe provision of needs for the life of the households:

•they desire work and finances

•to find work, so that there is more money

•work, so that we improve our financial situation

•a job, so that we improve our financial situation

•for work, so that we have something to live from

Many households connected the desire for work withthe future and education of children, by which theyallude to two levels. They desired work for themselvesso that they can offer the children a better educationand future. The second level was emphasising theeducation of the children, which could help themsecure better application regarding work and life.

•that the children are healthy, that we always work and know how to provide the children witheverything

•to finish the facade on the house; that the children finish school and find work, likewise the adultswould like to work

•for health; that my son finish school and finds work and marries well

•that my children can study at secondary school and inthe future at university, and so they can help tobecome employed like their parents and start a family

•that at least the children have work and a normal life

•own housing; employment; not to owe anyonemoney; that the children have a clear future – a goodeducation and as a result employment; when they have learned, let them have more pay; if they don’t want to study, let them dig and tidy up

Otherwise, the desires for work were even more

specific in the sense of approximating the method of expending the acquired work incomes. They werepredominately connected with the chance to invest into improving the quality of housing and tofurnishing a flat. As the responses indicated, theywould need a work income, for example, to renew thefacade on a house, for new furnishings in a dwelling,for building a bathroom, for plastic windows or



insulation, but also for the purchasing of a betterhome or flat. The responses also indicated theproblem of inaccessibility of loans for householdswithout a work income. A stable work income isa prerequisite for the provision of a mortgage – the

huge exclusion from the labour market closes sucha possibility for residents of excluded settlements:

•our life would certainly be better if we found work;then we could afford more: a new facade on thehouse and a fence

•they would certainly need work; if they had enoughmoney they would buy a new bed and wardrobes for the bedroom

•they have only a little money; they would like new furniture, a bathroom and work

•for the family – that my husband always has work and for the children sufficient education and obviously health; at home I would desire plastic windows and insulation

•If I were to find some real work, I would earn moreand we could get a loan and buy a better house

•That my sons find good wives; but mainly that they are employed and can become independent (they have two unemployed sons age 20 and 22 years).They need more money; they wanted to put a new facade on the house –they would take out a loan for

this, but they must work (there are four adults in the family without work, three children still attending primary school)

The combination of work and a flat, housing was givenrelatively often in the desires for the family:

•money – if we had work; and a family house (to livein our own)

•employment, a three-room flat

•employment; housing

•for a larger flat and for work •for a larger flat (four live in a house with one room

and a kitchen, without a bathroom; for work

•for nice housing; for work

•to finish the house; work – employment (both parents are unemployed despite completingvocational school)

•a good house; work after maternity leave

Several responded added to these two – a flat andwork – even more general desires, such as healthgenerally, or they stated a combination of several anvery diverse desires (for more examples, see Append1 to part 3.6):

•that everyone is healthy; that I f ind more work •that we continue to be healthy; that we find

employment

•health, work; a two-room flat (five live in a one-room flat)

•for a better flat; health; that my husband againhas a job

•improving our housing; for finding employment nearby, at least one member of the family; and toimprove our income

•health for the family; employment in the place of habitation; a new roof, completion of an executor’s proceeding and better social certainty

•happiness, health, work; food aid, a better house

•A toilet in the house; permanent employment,health for the whole family; employment for my husband

More general desires related to housing finished witapproximately the same level of choices, which ina large measure indicated the fact that they werepresented relatively often together with the desire foemployment for members of the family. Similarly as ithe preceding case, it was presented independentlyand in combination, and emphasis was placed on itsdifferent sides. Residents of excluded settlementsprimarily wanted better and newer housing, or normhousing with standard furnishings:

•for better housing

•for better and nicer housing

•to have normal housing•we desire new housing

•our whole house desires a new home; themunicipality promised to build social flats

•we desire good housing; an independent yard for thchildren

•for a new house with a bathroom and bath; that wedidn’t have to pay high rent


168







•for another place of habitation – I have bad neighbours

•that I could leave and live elsewhere, outside theRoma community

•that the entire family live far away, somewhere in

a village where there is peace and quiet; that my father not always leave home, leave my mother

•we would like to live in the village (they live separated, outside the village) in a family housewhich would have a bathroom, gas heating and new furniture; mostly we desire health and more money

•to move to town (Vranov district)

•to have a solitary house near nature

A very frequent desire for the family was health,

whose percentage score on the level of about one-quarter put it in third place. It is as if this general desire was in contradiction with the findingsregarding the last time seeing a doctor (part 3.2).On one had they put great importance on health,while on the other hand they of ten gave up seeinga doctor or using prescribed medicines. From themany previous examples, it follows that the desire forhealth is often given in combination with employment and/or housing. It also occurred, however, as anindependent desire, or in other combinations. The

following examples at least to represent all suchresponses:

•for health

•health, only health

•health for family

•health for the family is the most important thing

•that my son is healthy; that a bone marrow donor is found for my son

•only for healthy children and healthy both parents

•health for my children, my husband and me

•health; joy from life and family

•for health and peace

•health; my own social flat

•for health – I a semi-invalid pensioner; I want healthmost of all for my family; but obviously we would want for money – we could use more money

•health; love; a larger house or a two-room heated flat (they have 1 room)

•only that the children are healthy; our own brick house; and more money

•well, we would need more things, but first of all that

we are healthy; if I can dream, then a bathroom, too•health; a better house, to have light and heat

•that my children are health and our f inancialresources increase; to repair the roof

•mainly health for my family; satisfaction with livingin the family; to renovate the bathroom

From other desires for the family, a better level of living had an even stronger representation. Theywanted more money; they desired that their own

households to get into the circumstances necessary tocover the basic needs of its members. They expressedthe desire to be “like other people” or to live “the waya person should live”. A specific segment in this blocwas the desire for liquidating debts:

•for more money

•more finance; a new bathroom

•more financial resources; to add on one more room(they live in a house with 2 rooms and all the furnishings); to reconstruct the bathroom

•I desire more money; and we would like to havea larger house

•that we have plenty of money (I no longer believe inchanges; how long am I here and has it changed?!) I would be glad if this was ours (they live in anillegally occupied portable hut) and I could pay (rent), with ...even for 50 euro

•to live and to have the basic things necessary for life

•that living conditions would improve; that we beginto live the way we should live

•for a family house; and to have money for a better life

•that we have what others have; to have our ownhouse (they live in a wooden house without a bathroom which they got from the municipality)

•the normal life of a family – food, water,a bathroom, electricity, a television, a washingmachine; to not owe anyone money; and mainly health



•the payment of all of our debts (for electricity and water) and health for my wife and for me

The last group was made up of other desires.Among them were family wishes such as the birth of

a healthy child, the starting of a family by a singleindividual and the desire of a solitary older couple tonot live alone at home. Singular desires were a driver’slicense for the husband, a car or the return of a husband from prison:

•that we have a healthy baby born; that we completethe repair of our home

•for another child; I want a boy (they have two girls,age 6 and 8); one more room (four live in a two-room house with a bathroom)

•I’m divorced and live alone; I would need a partner,but I don’t want to marry anymore

•that we were not home alone (an older married couple – septuagenarians)

•that my husband get a driver’s license

•to have my own house; and a car

•for a large house, so that everyone had their ownbed; our own electricity, but mainly health, and that my husband return from prison

According to the research probe, findings regarding

desires for the family were varied, but to a great measure they reflected the real living conditions.Work was not only found very of ten among thedesires for the family in the responses of Romahouseholds, but it was approached at from different sides. Once the content and character of the workwas emphasised, its spatial accessibility or a formal work contract; other times the result of work – awork income. A large portion of Roma householdsperceived a work income as one path to better living

conditions and to a minimal life security. Many of thefamilies also specified the use of potential workincomes – they would like to invest into improvingtheir housing conditions and strengthening their lifesecurity, families with children to their educationand the future.

The “work” desires to a larger or smaller measureconfirmed all of the existing knowledge regarding the

work activities in excluded communities. We recall thhuge unemployment, the instability of jobs which aravailable to them, the absence of job opportunities ithe nearby surroundings, the inaccessibility of permanent places for the unqualified labour force an

the like. Therefore, their desire to find a job is in thesurveyed environments strong with the parental generation, and also has an important place in thedreams of the future for children.

Excluded Roma households devoted a great deal of attention to different aspects of housing – theirdesires were very often linked with this particular areof life. If all of the individual sides associated withhousing (better, larger, own housing, modifications dwellings, the supplementing of furnishings and the

like) were to be combined, they would together be infirst place among the desires for the family. Thismeans that deprivation in housing in the surveyedenvironments is exceptionally strong.

Desires for the health of family members and animprovement of the financial situation and the livinglevel were also found to be frequent personal familydesires. The absolute predominance of stated desireshad the character of common, basic items necessaryfor life; certain above-standard desires were really

only exceptional.

6.2. Desires focused on the placeof habitation

With desires focusing on the place of habitation thesituation ended up rather markedly different compared with what respondents emphasisedregarding their own families. One difference was thefact that as much as 15% of the surveyed households

were unable to present anything for improving life inthe community. In contrast, several expressed thedesire to leave the settlement to live elsewhere (seeabove). This could indicate a higher measure of resignation to the condition of life in the municipalitand a loss of trust in the possibility of improvement.

On the other hand, approximately 6% of the surveyehouseholds stated that they don’t need anything in


172



the settlement, because they have everything theyneed for life there. And these were primarilyhouseholds from excluded communities concentratedwithin a municipality which gave expression of thistype in the larger range (16% among concentrated

and only 2-3% for segregated and separatedsettlements). Expressions of satisfaction had sucha form, for example:

•we are on the whole satisfied; we have what weneed here

•they are satisfied; they have what they need here

•we have everything we need in the village

•otherwise, nothing is missing in the village

•we are satisfied with the village

•I have no idea what; indeed, we haveeverything here

•we have everything here in the village; nothing islacking; it’s enough that we are healthy becausemedicines are expensive

The remaining nearly 80% of Roma households gave at least one proposal for a change in their settlement of habitation. Desires aimed at the local place of habitation generated, the as with desires for thefamily, generated work in first place. Nearly 15% of

those asked desired more work opportunities for theresidents of their settlement. The desires were tellingabout the gigantic lack of jobs in the surroundings;the responses indicated a trend toward the worseningof the situation in employment. In the desires theycommented on the possible reopening of productionin plants which offered them a chance at employment in the past, or opening new manufacturing, wherethey would employ the Roma. Several respondent households indicated the inaccessibility of properwork – they are able to f ind odd jobs, but no onewants to employ them on contract. The desire to earnmoney by work and not get by on social benefits wasrepeatedly heard; they would like to earn their “ownbread” with work:

•work

•more opportunities for employment for the residents

•that there would be the opportunity to work here

•more work for those who don’t have it

•more work opportunities, because 95% of residentshere are unemployed

•there is no work opportunity here; it’s necessary totravel a long way from home for work

•that there was some work, because they don’t evenwant us in the f ields anymore

•the creation of work opportunities – we used to work at the cooperative farm

•here all of us in the village would desire to openthe plant and employ us

•to renew production in XY (a former plant in thevillage); this is mainly about employment

•to renew the glass works production, which was stillworking five years ago

•job opportunities on regular employment relations•there are no job opportunities here; people don’t

have any place to be employed; I always find something – I’m a mason, but no one wants to giveme a contract, so I work odd jobs (officially unemployed)

•if there was more work here, at least in the district town a new factory could start up; my husband isa mason; he earns on odd jobs, but no one wants to give him a work contract (now in the summer heworks enough and our son-in-law helps him; they

have enough work)•work for others, especially for the men

•work at least for the men; a water main, gas

•work for other Roma; a football pitch for the children

•work for the Roma; and that the village put in roadsand pavements

•peace and quiet; that people not live rough, but at least live modestly and not from social benefits

•that children not live in poverty and want, that they have social and legal security; this means that they live like they used to and there were no unemployed,that they work for their daily bread; that they can getan education without fees and support from the stat

•For safe movement of the family in public; that usurer’s didn’t exist or even benefits in materialneed – only work and pay (compulsory)

•mainly the construction of social flats and more jobopportunities



But here the similarities with the wishes for the familyend; the second most common desire was from thesphere of infrastructure for the place of habitation.Excluded Roma households relatively often desiredpavements or roads – to complete, improve or asphalt,

repair them. Several emerged from the detailing of the real situation when in the case of rain they must literally walk in mud. Where there are no roads, thereis no transport – to bring or to strengthen transport from a settlement to a village or town, or at least a school bus to take children to school – these werealso among the desires of households from excludedcommunities:

•a road, roads

•better roads

•asphalt roads•pavements – we walk up to our knees in mud

•pavements, because everywhere there is a great dealof mud; a water main and to have our own electricity

•to repair the pavements

•when it rains, there is a lot of mud here; we would need a road

•there is a lot missing in our village, most a road tothe cemetery would be necessary to build

•pavements; repair of the basement in the housingblock – the wall gets damp

•repair the roads so that there is no mud when it rains; public lighting

•asphalt roads, the lighting of the settlement

•an asphalt road, a water main, a food shop

•that they repair the road already; a bus to town(2.5 km distant from the settlement)

•a bus to school, an asphalt road

•that the children have a school bus (2.5 km from

village)•more connections to the village; those who have

a car don’t need this

As can be seen from the citations already presented,the desires of excluded households were alsoconnected with other types of technical infrastructure. As was heard in one response –

everyone wants what they don’t have. This wasprimarily sewerage in the place of habitation (8%)which they desired; further a water main and waterlines (5%), public lighting and the hooking up of electricity (4%), or the hooking up of gas and gas

lines (2%). Some “lacked” only one type of technicainfrastructure, but very often the requestsaccumulated. They saw in their completiona prerequisite of improved hygienic habits in thesettlement and increased safety:

•lighting (many times)

•repair of the lighting, because in the evening it’sa catastrophe

•streetlamps in the settlement

•the bringing in of electricity (they don’t haveelectricity at all)

•sewerage, sewerage (many times)

•sewerage everywhere

•everyone wants what we don’t have – that we couldhave sewerage

•a water connection

•a water main and gas

•a water main and a gas line

•a water main and pavements around the shack

•sewerage, gas, heating

•improving of hygiene (they live in a settlement without water and sewerage – perhaps 1.5 km fromthe village)

A relatively large group of responses related to theenvironment in which excluded households live. Thedesires were aimed in part at neighbours andcohabitation with neighbours (8%) but also at thelarger cleanliness in the surroundings (8%), behind

which the human factor is also primarily hidden.Respondent households desired better neighbours,more normal, more understanding or more culturedpeople. They would like to live in a peaceful and quiet environment where things will not be destroyed orstolen, where adults would not argue or children not fight, where drugs would not be sold. Many expressedtheir own desire for great cleanliness in the


174



surroundings – in the settlement, on the street or inthe housing block – where the removal of the disorderor, for example, the function of a caretaker could helpremedy this. According to one of the responses thedisorder arises also near the source of public water. The

responses indicated that many residents of excludedsettlements are not satisfied with its environment:

•normal people – cohabitants

•better neighbours

•the mentality of people – that they were not bad to others

•new, better and more understanding neighbours;that they began in the village to begin buildingrental flats for our adult children

•a cleaner environment, waste removal, more cultured neighbours

•peace, quiet, not hardships; and cleanliness

•that drugs stop being sold here, that children stop fighting, adults stop arguing, that things stop beingdestroyed, that the thievery stop

•fewer bad people; a larger flat (five live in a two-room flat in a housing block)

•that people not argue; sewerage

•for greater cleanliness

•greater cleanliness in the settlement •cleanliness on the street

•improving our surroundings

•that the public source of water which is near our home be removed or redone; everyone who doesn’t have water in their home or shack goes there towash, and a lot of waste stays behind; f ilth and standing water are lef t there, it doesn’t flow away and it gives off a smell

•that those who dirty the flats went elsewhere to live,

because they give us a bad name•order, a vegetable patch

•to tidy up the surroundings, insulate the f lat;a caretaker

•to improve the block of flats, the entrance; to paint it

•this is tough to do; they would like to live like peoplein the village, in nice houses with pavements

A great deal of attention is devoted to children;facilities and spaces for children, where they couldplay, obtained more than 11% of the choices. Thesewere mainly playgrounds or different climbing framesor slides, different attractions for children. According

to the strength of the desire, the facilities of excludedsettlements with the possibilities for children tospend leisure time came out very def icient. We notethat this is despite the fact that in excludedsettlements the child element of the population is themost strongly represented. The possibilities for Romachildren in these environments for games andmeaningful use of free time are significantly limited(a limited right of children for development):

•playgrounds for children (many times)

•a playground for children in the village•that a playground for children be put here

•climbing frames (many times)

•more climbing frames for children

•slides

•slides for the children; what can I want here, just what we have

•more attractions for children

•more space and places where children could play

in peace•playing fields, balls

•playing fields for children and benches

•so, for our Roma children, a playing field; and repaired roads where the Roma live

A significant portion of the community desires relatedto services of different types, and again the influenceof the real situation was expressed – they emphasisedin their responses those things that were missing in

the village. Several of the households would welcomea shop with food in the settlement or in the nearbyvicinity so that they didn’t have to travel a great distance when shopping, which is a problem generallybut especially in winter. With the purchase of foodstuffs, one other aspect was underlined: thedesire for affordable groceries. Although they hada grocery store in the village, due to the high prices



they go shopping in the more distant town. A request for a shop with food for the poor was repeatedlyrecorded, at least one with basic foodstuffs:

•a shop with food

•a shop with food (it is in the village 3.5 km distant)

•a shop near the settlement (they have one now inthe village – perhaps 1 km away)

•they have good cohabitation, they would only wish for a shop with food near the settlement – this is theworst in winter (they live on a hill)

•in the village they have everything; they don’t haveto travel to see a doctor – they have one in thevillage; but the food in the shops are pretty expensive, so we go to Tesco or Kaufland in thedistrict capital to do the shopping (20 km)

•better cohabitation; affordable food, and for the family with a very low income – mainly basic foodstuffs (bread, flour, sugar); e.g. and anaccessible price for getting rid of waste wood –cleaning the forest after operations or extraction

•to not wait for benefits in material need, but for a pay check; a shop with food for poorer people

•a job; affordable prices for daily foodstuffs

From other services excluded Roma households most desired a kindergarten directly in the settlement or

for Roma kindergarten – for Roma children. Fromeducational facilities a school directly in thesettlement (all nine years of primary school) alsooccurred among the replies. Several expressed thedesire for closer healthcare services so that they donot have travel to see a paediatrician or a familydoctor or for examinations. As was shown in section3.2, the need for commuting for healthcaresignificantly complicates its accessibility. Anoccasional desire was to have postal services close by.

Among services, the request for a community centrein the village or hygienic facilities with showers wasalso heard:60

•a kindergarten

•a kindergarten, because they wouldn’t have to takethe child to the village

•a kindergarten for Roma children

•the establishing of a Roma kindergarten

•that we had in the village a school for grades 1-9

•a doctor in the village (they currently haveto walk 7 km)

•that we didn‘t have to walk to town with thechildren, that they build here a hospital (healthcarcentre)

•we would like to have a doctor and a hospital closer

•to repair the roads; a family doctor

•a doctor in the place of habitation (they currently

travel 14 km); a school (the children travel 8 kmto school)

•a paediatrician, a post of fice, a school

•that there was a paediatrician here, a post off ice,a kindergarten and school

•an asphalt road, a doctor, a school

•a community centre

•I’m happy with the village, but I would like it if wehad a community centre here

•a hygiene centre with showers, a water main and hot water

Like the desires for a change in the habitation of excluded settlements, housing was also found ina relatively large measure, but with a different focusThis was mainly the desire to build social or rental flats, especially with an emphasis on flats for youngRoma families (8%). The responses indicated thegreat immediacy of the housing problem in thesurveyed environments. It was shown that young

families in impoverished, excluded environments haeffectively only two possibilities: either “remainbeneath the wings” in the parental family, which


176

60 For context we mention that overall 43% of the 192 surveyed households from 131 excluded settlements had experience with a community centre in the settlemen(38% a functional CC and 5% a non-functional one). In regard to the working of some aid non-prořt organization in the settlement, 41% knew of some, while theremaining 59% did not know of any such activities in their settlement. A det ailed description of the “facilities” of excluded settlements with CC ser vices or NGOsappears in the updated Atlas of Roma Communities (data collection 2012 – 2013).





Summary:

According to the empirical findings, work was foundamong the desires for the family in the responses of Roma households not only the most often but was

approached from different sides. Once the content and character of the work was emphasised, its spatial accessibility or a formal work contract; other timesthe result of work – a work income. A large portion of Roma households perceived a work income as onepath to better living conditions and to a minimal lifesecurity. Many of the families also specified the use of potential work incomes – they would like to invest into improving their housing conditions andstrengthening their life security, families withchildren to their education and the future.

The “work” desires to a larger or smaller measureconfirmed all of the existing knowledge regarding thework activities in excluded communities. We recall thehuge unemployment, the instability of jobs which areavailable to them, the absence of job opportunities inthe nearby surroundings, the inaccessibility of permanent places for the unqualified labour force andthe like. The desire to find a job is in the surveyedenvironments strong with the parental generation,and also has an important place in the dreams of the

future for children.

Excluded Roma households devoted a great deal of attention to different aspects of housing – theirdesires were very often linked with this particular areaof life. This means that deprivation in housing in thesurveyed environments is exceptionally strong.A general desire for health of family members and animprovement of the financial situation and the livinglevel were also found to be frequent personal familydesires. The absolute predominance of apparent desires had the character of common, basic itemsnecessary for life; certain above-standard desires werereally only exceptional (a car, a PC for the children).

Desires aimed at improving life in the settlement of habitation were relatively varied; however, thespecific things lacking in the settlement predominated among them. Great emphasis was

placed on job opportunities in the surroundings andflats for young families; they wanted a more peacefuand cleaner environment within the settlements, andthey desired the completion of its technological infrastructure – primarily roads and sidewalks.

A considerable group of desires was associated withchildren: they cited the need for leisure-time facilitieor furnishings for children, like playgrounds and othequipment for games; kindergartens in thesettlements were often requested. In addition,a variety of requests were recorded for services –according those missing in the settlement. Romaresidents from excluded settlements were also lackinin cultural events, and they expressed through desiran interest in improving relations with the majority.

Many desires of Roma households implicitly gavetestimony about the poor conditions of housing andtheir ties to the labour market. Exclusion from thelabour market at the same time means exclusion fromthe possibilities to improve housing. As section3.3 about housing showed, many surveyedhouseholds live in very disadvantageous conditionsand there are too few solutions to their housingsituation. They do not have the financial resources fothe purchase of a flat or house – exclusion from the

labour market closes off such a possibility. At thesame time exclusion from the labour market for themmeans exclusion from loans and mortgages; several respondents emphasised that without work – stablework – they can’t get loans.

For many from the households the vicious circleclosed: exclusion from the labour market and theabsence of normal work opportunities; even simplephysical survival on social benefits – securing food –is problematic. Exclusion from the labour market (no

infrequently despite a skill or completed education) the same time squanders the possibilities of adult children to become independent and establish theirown household. This subsequently expands theparental family and leads to further overcrowding inalready overcrowded dwellings. The capability of aduchildren to become independent is in excludedenvironments slim. What must happen in the next


178



generation, when the housing space will still furthernarrow, is a difficult to predict. If we look at theliterature, the huge deprivation brings unrest andreduces social conciliation.

Although families cumulate resources and make upinsuff icient resources with self-help and mutual relief,these are not enough for overcoming the deficit.Despite the willingness and skilfulness regarding self-help solutions, the deep deficit of work incomes alsocloses off this possibility. Therefore, it is not surprising that housing was found to be the secondmost common area of wishes for one’s family and thedesire for housing for children in the settlement of residence also ended up relatively strong.

Many excluded settlements lack standardtechnological infrastructure, and this beginswith roads and pavements. The lack of roads andtransport make spatial exclusion still deeper.On one hand the request for improved hygienic

relations in excluded settlements is talked about, but the existing technological infrastructure oftendoesn’t create even the basic foundations for change.When searching for solutions it is important toremember the variety – each environment is differentand requires different priorities. The desire to liveotherwise and the desire to work is, despitethe situation of long-term unemployment, alsostill present.



Education of children and a better future for them

for a good future for the children

that we are healthy, and that our daughter has a better life than we have (they have one daughter age 19 years)

that the children finish school

health and a decent household; higher education for the children

for a holiday with the family and a new swimming pool in the yard; we are preparing the children a lot to attend a gymnázium (grammar school)

that the children are healthy, that we always work and know how to provide the children with everything

own housing; employment; not to owe anyone money; that the children have a clear future – a good education and as a result employment; whenthey have learned, let them have more pay; if they don’t want to study, let them dig and tidy up

to f inish the facade on the house; that the children f inish school and find work, likewise the adults would like to work

for health; that my son f inish school and finds work and marries well

that my children can study at secondary school and in the future at university, and so they can help to become employed like their parents andstart a family

that at least the children have work and a normal life

Employment, work

that we find work

employment – everything derives from this

permanent employment – at least for one person from the family

employment in the nearby surroundings

for more permanent work and security

that they weren’t desperate to f ind work, also with low qualification and they didn’t have to fear for their housing, work, subsistence; that theydidn’t have problems existing, that they were not hungry and could pay for everything like other people

for work; to experience less stress; for peace

for peace; for better financial possibilities of employment

that the father f ind employment with an income; that the wife could devote herself to the family and household more

work for the head of the family – so far they live through drawing mama´s pension, but when she passes away, her income will be sorely missed

for work for my husband and two adult sons, because it’s difficult to live from social benefits (two parents and two adult sons are unemployed)

for work and a stable income (both parents are unemployed)

I desire a good job with good pay

employment near the settlement and pay (there are 3 adults, parents and a 19-year-old son and all are without work, despite having completed

their schooling)they desire work and finances

to find work, so that there is more money

work – so that we improve our financial situation

employment so that we improve our f inancial situation

for work so that we have something to live from

for work – so that father and son (18 years old, unemployed) work and the family would then have a larger income


180

Appendix 1 to Chapter 6:Desires for the family

None given, doesn’t know 3%



that my husband and son have proper work and then our f inancial income will change and we could repair and improve our home

our life would certainly be better if we found work; then we could afford more: a new facade on the house and a fence

if I were to f ind some real work, I would earn more and we could get a loan and buy a better house

better financial provision; permanent work

money – if we had work; and a family house (to live in our own)employment, a three-room flat

employment; housing

for a larger flat and for work

for a larger flat (4 live in a house with one room and a kitchen, without a bathroom); for work

for nice housing; for work

to f inish the house; work – employment (both parents are unemployed despite completing vocational school)

a good house; work after maternity leave

that my son and husband f ind work – my son is a trained electrician and cannot find work; to buy plastic windows

that their son-in-law find work, likewise the adult children want to work; they have everything they want; they only desire health and more money

that my sons f ind good wives; but mainly that they are employed and can become independent (they have 2 unemployed sons age 20 and 22 years). They need more money; they wanted to put a new facade on the house – they would take out a loan for this, but they must work (there are4 adults in the family without work, 3 children still attending primary school)

that adult children find work somewhere; that my husband is healthy; a larger f lat – we have 11 children at home (adult children also live with us)

for the family – that my husband always has work and for the children sufficient education and obviously health; at home I would desire plasticwindows and insulation

that we are all healthy, that I don’t have to go with the children to see the doctors; that they learn well; and that my husband find a job, that heget selected at least for activation work; that we get a municipal rental flat

that everyone is healthy; that I find more work

health, work; a two-room flat (five live in a one-room flat)

they would certainly need work; if they had enough money they would buy a new bed and wardrobes for the bedroom

for my own room; and mainly for work, for security

for a better flat; health; that my husband again has a job

they have only a little money; they would like new furniture, a bathroom and work

that we continue to be healthy; that we f ind employment

improving our housing; for finding employment nearby, at least one member of the family; and to improve our income

health for the family; employment in the place of habitation; a new roof, completion of an executor’s proceeding and better social certainty

happiness, health, work; food aid, a better house

a tolilet in the house; permanent employment, health for the whole family; employment for my partner

Housing – better, larger, independent

we desire new housing

for better housing

for better and nicer housing

all my family desires a new home; the municipality promised to build social flats

to have normal housing

we desire good housing; an independent yard for the children

for a new house with a bathroom and bath; and that we didn’t have to pay high rent



for a house where I can live like a decent person, to have heat and water for bathing

as we are eight living in one room which also serves as a kitchen, room and children’s room, I very much desire better housing with a kitchen; westill live with my parents

for a new flat or a house where we have electricity and water (they have a house with one room and without a bathroom; they don’t haveelectricity or water)

a larger flat

a multi-room flat; we have only a one-room flat

for a two-room flat

for a larger house (they live with two small children in one room without a bathroom)

for a larger house, because we have big children and few rooms (three children age 12 through 16; 1 room and a kitchen)

a new and larger flat (7 live in a one-room tenement house, 5 of whom are children age 5 to 22 years)

a separate room for the children

for separate rooms for the sons – they are adults now (two sons age 25 and 28 years, live with their parents; they live in one room with a kitchen,without furnishings, not even electricity)

that I secure a room for my daughters (two daughters age 5 and 7 years), that we have water in the house

for a room of my own

for a room of my own (they are 5 and live in two rooms)

more rooms (six live in one room without a bathroom and kitchen); a separate kitchen; a repaired chimney

they would like their own house or flat; they complained that the municipality promised them social flats but aren’t doing anything

for my own house

the building of a new house

for my own house

for my own family house

to have my own family house

to live in a family houseto finish building a family house – our own

to own a legal house (they live in a house built illegally; it has one room, a bathroom and water, and electricity illegally)

to settle the property and legalise the building (they live in a house which is an illegal building)

that we have our own family house, that the children have their own room

the purchase of a flat for our daughter who has a serious boyfriend; we would like to buy a flat within about 30 km of our home

the purchasing of a home for our son (they have 2 sons, 15 and 21 years old)

for a house, for our daughters and for us; health for the whole family

for independent housing only with my son – a flat (a single mother lives with her parents); I’m on maternit y leave and I don’t have any incomethat would let me afford it

Modification to housing and furnishing of a flat

modification of the flat

for a new roof

we would like a new roof

for repair of the roof

for repair of the roof on the house

replace the roof covering and for central heating


182



We need a new facade on the house and a roof, but so long as my husband isn’t working, we can’t take out a loan

a floating floor, tiles in the kitchen, repair of the toilet; the facade, the gutter pipes

that a water line be brought into the house

if we had a real bathroom, we would be very happy

reconstruction of the house, but mainly that we have a bathroomthey would like to buy the neighbouring land and build on a room, in which would be a children’s room and living room

for a flat, where they will have a bed and a bathroom and a kitchen

a bathroom, a toilet

the building of a bathroom and a toilet in the house

a bathroom; that we have water in the house, that we don’t have to carr y water from the neighbours

after a bathroom and gas heating

electricity and water

water; that we also have electricity in the house; to properly repair our roof

a bathroom, water, a source of heat in the households

a bathroom, to repair the house both outside and inside

quality housing – a bathroom most of all and a toilet; to run to a toilet at night, and mainly in winter, is terrible

for hot water in the bathroom, another source of heating the rooms; more space for living

Households furnishings

new furnishings for the house (bedroom, kitchen)

furnishings for the house

new furniture

my own bed

for my own bed

a sofa, beds, a floorsupplementing the furnishings of the flat, external plaster on the f amily house, which we don’t have; and health for the family

for a new television – the old one broke down

for a computer

we would like a computer for the children – for learning and for fun

for health and that we lack nothing; the children would like a computer

A change of place of habitation

to move to town (Vranov)

to have a solitary house near nature

for another place of habitation – I have bad neighbours

that I could leave and live elsewhere, outside the Roma community

that the entire family live far away, somewhere in a village where there is peace and quiet; that my father not always leave home, leave my mother

we would like to live in the village (they live separated, outside the village) in a family house which would have a bathroom, gas heating and newfurniture; mostly we desire health and more money

Health

health

for health



health, only health

a healthy family

health for the family is the most important thing

that my son is healthy; that a bone marrow donor is found for my son

only for healthy children and healthy both parentshealth for my children, my husband and me

health; joy from life and family

for health and peace

well, we would need more things, but first of all that we are healthy; if I can dream, then a bathroom, too

health; my own social flat

mainly health; better housing

for health – I a semi-invalid pensioner; I want health most of all for my family; but obviously we would want for money – we could use more mone

health; love; a larger house or a two-room heated flat (they have 1 room)

only that the children are healthy; our own brick house; and more moneyhealth; and to get the bathroom in order

health; a better house, to have light and heat

that my children are health and our financial resources increase; to repair the roof

mainly health for my family; satisfaction with living in the family; to renovate the bathroom

To improve the level of living

for more money

more finance; a new bathroom

more financial resources; to add on one more room (they live in a house with 2 rooms and all the furnishings); to reconstruct the bathroom

I desire more money; and we would like to have a larger house

that we have plenty of money (I no longer believe in changes; how long am I here and has it changed?!) I would be glad if this was ours (they livein an illegally occupied portable hut) and I could pay (rent), with ...even for 50 euro

to live and to have the basic things necessary for life

that living conditions would improve; that we begin to live the way we should live

for a family house; and to have money for a better life

that we have what others have; to have our own house (they live in a wooden house without a bathroom which they got from the municipality)

the normal life of a family – food, water, a bathroom, electricity, a television, a washing machine; to not owe anyone money; and mainly health

the payment of all of our debts (for electricity and water) and health for my wife and for me

Others

that we have a healthy baby born; that we complete the repair of our homefor another child; I want a boy (they have two girls, age 6 and 8); one more room (four live in a two-room house with a bathroom)

I’m divorced and live alone; I would need a partner, but I don’t want to marry anymore

that we were not home alone (an older married couple – septuagenarians)

that my husband get a driver’s license

to have my own house; and a car

for a large house, so that everyone had their own bed; our own electricity, but mainly health, and that my husband return from prison


184







so, for our Roma children a playing field; and repaired roads where the Roma live

Flats – social, for Roma, for young families

new flats

rental flats

rental flats for Roma familiesmore new flats for young families

construction of flats for our adult children (we are three families with children living in a two-room flat – a total of 15 people)

that the municipality begin to build rental flats for Roma, that our children could live decently; my son-in-law is employed, but he doesn’t havea place to live; he lives in a self-built dwelling, and he can’t properly rest there – he is a boiler man and he has to get up at 3 to 4 in the morning

that the municipality begin to build rental flats of lower standard, so that our children have somewhere to live when they begin to start their ownfamilies

that the municipality also build flats for those Roma who live in shacks; the settlement will look better

construction of new rental f lats for our adult children, so that they don’t have to live with us or in shacks when they are used to better; cleanercorridors in the housing block

to build social flats with a bathroom and more rooms

housing blocks, a water main

repair the roads, flats for young couples, pavements and sewerage

housing blocks; public lighting; a playground for children

Cultural spaces and events

a place where Roma could meet, something like a cultural salon

a room where young people can gather

more green; a leisure-time centre for children and adults

a playground for children; spaces where children could spend free time during bad weather

more cultural events for the Roma

Shop (affordable food), kindergartens, schools, healthcare centre

a shop with food

a shop with food (it is in the village 3.5 km distant)

a shop near the settlement (they have one now in the village – perhaps 1 km away)

they have good cohabitation, they would only wish for a shop with food near the settlement – this is the worst in winter (they live on a hill)

in the village they have everything; they don’t have to travel to see a doctor – they have one in the village; but the food in the shops are prett yexpensive, so we go to Tesco or Kaufland in the district capital to do the shopping (20 km)

better cohabitation; affordable food, and for the family with a very low income – mainly basic foodstuffs (bread, f lour, sugar); e.g. and anaccessible price for getting rid of waste wood – cleaning the forest af ter operations or extraction

to not wait for benefits in material need, but for a pay check; a shop with food for poorer people

Services – others

a kindergarten

a kindergarten, because they wouldn’t have to take the child to the village

a kindergarten for Roma children

the establishing of a Roma kindergarten

that we had in the village a school for grades 1-9

a doctor in the village (they currently have to walk 7 km)

that we didn’t have to walk to town with the children, that they build here a hospital (healthcare centre)



we would like to have a doctor and a hospital closer

to repair the roads; a local doctor

a doctor in the place of habitation (they currently travel 14 km); a school (the children travel 8 km to school)

a paediatrician, a post office, a school

that there was a paediatrician here, a post office, a kindergarten and school an asphalt road, a doctor, a school

a community centre

I’m happy with the village, but I would like it if we had a community centre here

a hygiene centre with showers, a water main and hot water

Environment – neighbourhood, cleanliness, order, safety

normal people – cohabitants

better neighbours

the mentality of people – that they were not bad to others

new, better and more understanding neighbours; that they begin building rental flats for our adult children in the village

a cleaner environment, waste removal, more cultured neighbourspeace, quiet, not hardships; and cleanliness

that drugs stop being sold here, that children stop fighting, adults stop arguing, that things stop being destroyed, that the thievery stop

fewer bad people; a larger flat (five live in a two-room flat in a housing block)

that people not argue; sewerage

for greater cleanliness

greater cleanliness in the settlement

cleanliness on the street

improving our surroundings

that the public source of water which is near our home be removed or redone; everyone who doesn’t have water in their home or shack goes there

to wash, and a lot of waste stays behind; f ilth and standing water are left there, it doesn’t flow away and it gives off a smell that those who dirty the flats went elsewhere to live, because they give us a bad name

order, a vegetable patch

to tidy up the surroundings, insulate the flat; a caretaker

to improve the block of flats, the entrance; to paint it

this is tough to do; they would like to live like people in the village – in nice houses, pavements

Relations with the majority population

good relations with the “whites”

a better approach to the Roma

that in the village they don’t judge people when they don’t know what kind of live they have at home

that we get along with our neighbours in the nearby vicinity as Roma

Others

anything can be bought, but we don’t have any money

peace for the family, health; another life than now – social security

meters for the radiators because we have large arrears payments for heating

a functioning broadcast system – nearby


188



According to the professional literature, social exclusion is “a process which limits the individual,

families and groups or entire local societies in theiraccess to resources that are necessary forparticipation in the social, economic and political lifeof a society... In association with this process accessto institutions and services, social networks andopportunities for development which are commonlyaccessible to the majority society is then forbidden topeople for a significant period” (Pierson, 2002,pg. 7). Social exclusion is expressed in different areasof life; the cited author, for example, differentiates:

poverty and low income; limited access to the labourmarket; thin or non-existing social networks; housingand life in the context of locality; exclusion fromservices (Pierson, 2002, pg. 7-8).

The research probe into households from excludedsettlements recorded all types of exclusion: limitedaccess to healthcare, low quality of housing, self-helpand mutual help with a family and locality whensolving common life situations, the indebtedness of households and limited access to the labour market.

On the basis of the research findings, it is possible tostate that members of many surveyed householdsfrom a spatially excluded environment do not share inequal measure the material and non-material sourcesof society and in their distribution and redistribution;this often leads to their “striking separation from theusual life style of the common population”(Mareš, 2000, pg. 285-286).

Seeing a doctor and the accessibility

of healthcareIn Roma communities medical care for children isgiven priority over adults. Adult members of ahousehold see a doctor usually only with more seriousillnesses, and they do not consult a physician withcommon illnesses such as colds or stomach problems.Aside from colds and respiratory illnesses, problemswith the digestive system, such as, for example,

stomach ache, vomiting and diarrhoea, are alsoamong the common illnesses in Roma children.

Preventive check-ups and vaccinations in excludedsettlements are almost solely a matter for children;adults predominately go for control only upon thefinding of more serious illnesses.

The compiled cases of the last time seeing a doctoralso indicated several barriers in access to medical care in a significant portion of marginalised Romacommunities. Spatial exclusion itself immediatelyestablishes problems with access to medical care.The majority of recorded cases had standard medical

services relatively distant, whether this is apaediatrician or a family doctor for adults; with theaccessibility of an emergency room or hospital treatment or hospitalisation the distance of healthcare deepened still further.

For overcoming the distance to medical care familiesfrom excluded settlements must expend special efforts.In the conditions of poor financial situation of manyexcluded Roma households going to see a doctor on foois not uncommon; in several cases they overcome a

journey of some kilometres even with an ill child or withtheir own illness. Only a few from excluded householdshave their own vehicle available, and a relativelyfrequent strategy is using a passenger car of someonefrom the neighbourhood. Such a journey to see a doctoris either an accompanying activity of the vehicle ownerto a distant location, or the household renting the carfor the purpose of an urgent journey to see the doctor.Then to pay the costs they mainly borrow, and evencases of usury or working off of debts accrued for

transport were found. Public transport is also a problemfor households from excluded settlements when goingto see a doctor, because for some settlements, it is not accessible at all or excluded households cannot afford itfor financial reasons.

But problems of marginalised communities do not endwith spatial limitations in the accessibility of medical care. The poor economic situation complicates the

7. PRINICPLE FINDINGS



accessibility and quality of care for many of thesehouseholds. Not only are financial resources not available to a large portion of excluded Romahouseholds for transport to see a doctor, but also forfees and prescribed medicines, which forces families

to borrow or leads to giving up and a limitation of needed treatment.

The quality of housing and modificationsto a dwelling

As was shown, with households from excludedcommunities, aside from the consequences of spatial segregation of the place of habitation itself, which arein several cases fatal, there are many others and they

have a negative impact on the possibilities of integration into the individual area of the public sphere– housing in poor quality dwellings, which oftencomplicates the hygienic situation of households, isadded to the image of their living conditions.

This qualitative research probe confirmed the findingsfrom quantitative surveys – a much higherconcentration of non-standard dwellings (not brickhouses and flats in housing blocks) in segregatedenvironments. According to a subjective evaluation

brick family houses and housing blocks in excludedsettlements are of varying quality – from excellent tovery poor for life, and non-standard dwellings arealmost exclusively connected with disadvantageousconditions. The monitoring of the official status of a dwelling also indicated that the deeper the spatial exclusion of the place of residence, the higher theoccurrence of unoff icial buildings. At the same time,unofficial (so-called “black”) buildings significantlymore often take the form of dwellings of non-standard building materials, and in the case of brick

houses they are less frequent in excluded settlements.Critical opinions evaluating the living conditions fromthe side of residents of such dwellings themselves isstrongly linked with illegal buildings, which take theform most often of non-standard dwellings insegregated or separated settlements. Unofficial buildings arise more easily in segregated settlements;at the same time these are not homes of the standard

type and the residents of such dwellings themselvesdon’t see their living conditions in a positive light. Tlinking of these aspects indicates that the building oa non-standard dwelling in segregated environmentis for its residents a starting point for poverty; this is

for many poor households from excludedenvironments the only way they are able in the givenfinancial and social situation to provide a “roof overthe head” and to fulfil one of the most basicconditions for life.

The methods of acquiring a dwelling in an excludedsettlement determined on the basis of the researchprobe are relatively different and they are different according to the type of settlement and to the type odwelling. This could indicate that the processes

leading to segregation or separation of housing are ireality varied. It occurs by buying a dwelling inexcluded environments, further by building a dwellinin such settlements or by inheriting a house fromparents, by occupying an abandoned dwelling, but also by allocation of housing from a municipality.Households which got their current dwelling from thmunicipality occurred in all three types of excludedsettlements, with the highest share in the scope of separated settlements on the edge of a municipality

The findings indicate that municipal flats for thesocially weak are not infrequently located outside of a municipality – predominately on its edges.

The situation from the viewpoint of the type of dwelling, methods of acquiring it and the ownershiprelation regarding a dwelling seem to be very disparain excluded settlements. With many of the surveyedhouseholds the formal status of the lived-in flat ordwelling was not clear, which in and of itself does notcreate a good starting point for housing stability and

the quality of life for a household and its members. Tsubjective evaluation of living conditions, which werethe most unfavourable for segregated settlements annon-standard dwellings, confirmed this.

The research probe repeatedly and in detail showedthat Roma households from excluded settlementsoften inhabit non-quality dwellings, and the situatiois the worst for segregated settlements. Not only are


190



non-standard dwellings or shacks concentrated insegregated settlements, but they often remainwithout the most basic facilities. But problems withdwellings were found in all three types of excludedenvironments; in each of them households were found

living in dwellings not corresponding with the criteriaof quality, whether the size of the home or flat wasinvolved or its over-crowdedness or deficiencies inbasic technical furnishings. Cases were not unusual inwhich individual deficiencies were combined together– over-crowdedness with poor technical furnishings,etc. The quality of housing of many households fromexcluded settlements showed marked deficits andlagged significantly behind the common standards of housing in Slovakia.

The majority of EU countries have accepted some typeof housing policy which should support thedevelopment of housing, its accessibility and ensurea minimum quality of housing defined throughminimal standards. Many of the conditions of housingfound in excluded Roma settlements decidedly do not satisfy standards. The unavailability of water indwellings and the absence of sewerage, problems withenergy and methods of heating lag far behind anystandard – even minimal standards. Over-crowded

housing and limited space for its residents reduceschances at any development. The widespreadoccurrence of a situation when each member of a household not only does not have his or her ownroom but not even his or her own bed is alarming.

The recorded stories of the last modification to adwelling pointed to three basic associations:maintenance of a dwelling predominates over moreprinciple improvements in the quality of dwelling; formany households even basic maintenance of a f lat or

house is financially inaccessible; an absolute majorityof housing modifications are done by the householdsthemselves, or with the help of relatives and friends,while paid services are used only exceptionally. Eventhe latest modifications carried out in the current dwelling did not indicate a stronger trend towardimproving the existing quality of the housing inexcluded settlements.

Questions relating to social housing or integrationplay a key role in the social policy of the EU.The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EuropeanUnion in Chapter IV article 34 states: “In order tocombat social exclusion and poverty, the Union

recognises and respects the right to social andhousing assistance so as to ensure a decent existencefor all those who lack suff icient resources, inaccordance with the rules laid down by Community lawand national laws and practices” (Charter..., 2007)..In association with housing the central governmentsof states, which develop their own housing policies,are primarily responsible. Slovakia faces manychallenges in this regard, for example, how to renewthe housing fund, how to plan and resolve theexpansion of towns and villages, how to support sustainable development, but also how to help the young and disadvantaged groups. Households fromexcluded settlements decidedly belong to adisadvantaged group, as indicated by all of themonitored parameters of housing quality. Thefindings cry out for principle measures in the interestof correcting the existing status, especially inassociation with the demographic development of thispart of the population and with the growing need forflats for the growing trend in the number of newly

established families and their slender chances of obtaining housing themselves.

One of the most important factors influencingmethods of housing in the Roma population in generais their territorial distribution, or the measure of theirconcentration in individual regions. But aninseparable part of their housing is also the characterof the settlement – whether of the settlement orurban type.

The characteristics of housing for the Roma, accordingto P. Navrátil on the basis of an analysis of thesituation in Czech Republic, are as follows: theconcentration of Roma residents in the objectionableold housing fund in the ownership of the state;segregation practices of municipalities, impossibilityof renting a flat in another location due to racial prejudices of the owners; the origin of ghettoes;



illegal occupancy of flats, housing in f lats without a rental contract (Navrátil, 2003, pg. 124). It can bestated that in Slovakia these not only apply in full measure, but ultimately there are a great many moresegregation practices.

Eating habits in Roma communities

Many of the meal plans recorded in the research probeshowed that poverty and material deprivation in thisenvironment is a widespread phenomenon. The dailyfare does not conform to the nutritional value neededfor healthy development. The deprivation of many of thesurveyed households is connected with their exclusionfrom consumption, even from the consumption of food.This means that not infrequently there is a dramatic

lowering of their level of living in regard to the social consequences of long-term unemployment. Minimally ina certain period of the month before benefits come thecharacteristics of absolute poverty were indicated, whendeprivation comes near to a certain “physiological threshold”, beneath which the most basic need, such asfood, is not satisfied. Several of the meal plans werevery poor and monotonous.

On the basis of the examples of the menus, it ispossible to summarise that food consumption of Roma

households from excluded settlements does not appear overall to be of particularly high quality.A relatively large proportion of the meal planscontained before benefits a small number of meals perday, little variety, monotonous foods more focused onflour-based and potatoes-based dishes than on fruitsand vegetables or dairy products. Households werealso found which minimally in the period beforebenefits suffer a lack of food. Sometimes the meal plan took the real form of one hot meal per day.

Before benefits, a certain portion of excludedhouseholds had an exceptionally monotonous diet.

After benefits the variety of meals in the majority of the surveyed households grew, but these are to a large

extent calorific and meat dishes which are added tothe meal plan; healthy foods were rarer. Beforebenefits poor quality, monotonous meals without nutritional value and after benefits heavy andcalorific meals – such could be evaluated the eating

habits of a large portion of Roma households fromexcluded communities.

According to the warning doctors, the consumption foods with a high content of animal fats leads toincreased occurrence of overweight and obesity,which have as a consequence health problems,primarily of the circulatory system.61 If smoking andthe giving up of going to see a doctor, which was notat all unusual (primarily for adults) among residentsof excluded Roma settlements, are then factored in,6

this can have an effect in earlier and higher mortalit

According to some meal plans differences in eatinghabits were expressed between children and adults, well as school-attending children and those remaininat home. In adults a tendency was expressed towardgiving preference to children, to whom they give foomore often and of a different type. As was shown, foexample, dairy products and fruits were not addedeven after benefits in all excluded households withchildren. The second dimension represents the

recorded difference in the diets of children attendinschool and other household members. In somehouseholds the difference recorded in the eating of school-attending children in comparison with those home received (especially before benefits – theylacked a mid-morning snack, the meals were lesshealthy), the programme of school dining appears asa step in a good direction.

An overall view on both menus at the same time showthat after benefits no great “feasting” took place. Fo

the most part, at least after benefits the meal plan omany households became only standard: a mid-morning or afternoon snack was added, they allowchildren to have biscuits, yoghurt or fruit; some


19261 As Chapter 2 describes, it is this very type of illness that is most widespread in the surveyed environments.62 See also more in Chapter 2 of this study.



households permitted a favourite meal, they indulgedin a favourite meat – in short they eat a bellyful.Although modes of eating discovered during themonitoring of this aspect varied from permanentlydeficit to permanently standard, a relatively large

group combine in the month a longer period of deficit eating with “normal” eating even after receipt of incomes – especially with households reliant exclusively on social benefits.

Even the view through the monitoring of favourite andmost commonly eaten meals identified theorientation to more heavy cooking and non-qualitymeals in excluded Roma settlements. The researchprobe thus confirmed and in the examples of individual meals showed the dining habits in this

environment.

The tendency predominated in the eating habits of households that the more demanding favourite mealswere – mainly if they are meat-based meals – thenhouseholds can only afford them occasionally in thecourse of the month, and commonly cannot affordthem at all. Generally, they prepare a favourite meal only one time each month and do so after arrival of incomes into the family. The main meal on the meal plan in the period after benefits and the favourite

meal were in the majority of cases identical. Throughmost of the month they experience a limitation infood consumption which also takes the form of clear-cut deprivation in nutrition

Indebtedness of householdsfrom excluded settlements

Empirical data from different empirical sourcesconfirmed in terms of averages the stressed or deficit

financial budget of excluded Roma households. Thesmall incomes to these households allow only a lowlevel of expenditures and do so even withexpenditures covering the most basic needs, such asfood and housing. A large portion of households haveproblems paying for basic needs for its members andsome of them are unable to do this despite frequentlyborrowing money. The worst balance was recorded in

households without a working member were therewas at least one young child, and in multi-member households.

From a comparison of total incomes and expenditures

of excluded Roma households which managed to get recorded during one month, it followed than onaverage they are more or less equal. The remainderfrom the entire sum of incomes after subtracting total expenditures came out low (44.61 euro perhousehold), and if a sum borrowed during the courseof the month is not included in the total incomes theremainder is even much smaller (10.32 euro perhouseholds and not even 2 euro per one member). If households were not indebted and didn’t have to makeloan repayments, the remainder of incomes would be

60 euro higher, or excluded Roma households couldincrease their other expenditures by this sum.

The amount of income influences the principle way of managing households and the “width” of the period of the month through which they have financial resourcesavailable in a certain volume. The low overall income atthe same time means surviving most of the month withvery small sums of disposable financial resources. Withhouseholds with the lowest incomes this means morethan half a month with a sum lower than 10 euro per

one member. With such financial resources decisions onhousehold consumption are markedly limited, andcovering basic needs and unexpected basicexpenditures can also be endangered – households gointo debt in an attempt to provide them.

The research probe into excluded settlement indicatedthat households from excluded Roma settlements areindebted to a high degree. Their debts originatedifferently; often the way is unpaid rent for housingor for services or energy associated with housing. Butthey also borrow for the securing of necessaryhealthcare, for making modifications to a dwelling orfor the purchase of food. Typically, debts for thesehousehold arise due to satisfying basic needs or at least minimal consumption.

At the same time, it was shown that a large portion of these households has a payment calendar worked up



for the liquidation of their debts. But as researchassistants in the field pointed out, in several respondent households having a payment calendar,many families are unable to observe it. The researchprobe also recorded a certain group of families which

had a special recipient for a portion of their social benefits. In some households an executoryproceeding was imposed upon their inability to paydebts; in the end this occurred in several households.The chances of some families getting out from undertheir debts in some realistic time period waspractically negligible.

Desires for the family and requestedchanges in the settlement

According to the empirical findings, work was foundamong the desires for the family in the responses of Roma households not only the most often but wasapproached from different sides. Once the content and character of the work was emphasised, its spatial accessibility or a formal work contract; other timesthe result of work – a work income. A large portion of Roma households perceived a work income as the onlyway to better living conditions and to a minimal lifesecurity. Many of the families also specified the use of

potential work incomes – they would like to invest into improving their housing conditions andstrengthening their life security, families withchildren to their education and the future.

The “work” desires to a larger or smaller measureconfirmed all of the existing knowledge regarding thework activities in excluded communities. We recall thehuge unemployment, the instability of jobs which areavailable to them, the absence of job opportunities inthe nearby surroundings, the inaccessibility of permanent places for the unqualified labour force andthe like. The desire to find a job is in the surveyedenvironments strong with the parental generation,and also has an important place in the dreams of thefuture for children.

Excluded Roma households devoted a great deal of attention to different aspects of housing – their

desires were very often linked with this particular areof life. This means that deprivation in housing in thesurveyed environments is exceptionally strong.A general desire for health of family members and animprovement of the financial situation and the living

level were also found to be frequent personal familydesires. The absolute predominance of stated desireshad the character of common, basic items necessaryfor life; certain above-standard desires were reallyonly exceptional (a car, a PC for the children).

Desires aimed at improving life in the settlement of habitation were relatively varied; however, thespecific things lacking in the settlement predominated among them. Great emphasis wasplaced on job opportunities in the surroundings and

flats for young families; they wanted a more peacefuand cleaner environment within the settlements, andthey desired the completion of its technological infrastructure – primarily roads and sidewalks, but also sewerage, water mains and the like.A considerable group of desires associated withchildren: they felt the need for leisure-time facilitiesor furnishings for children, like playgrounds and othequipment for games; nursery schools in thesettlements were often requested. In addition,

a variety of requests were recorded for services –according those missing in the settlement. Romaresidents from excluded settlements were also lackinin cultural events, and they expressed through desiran interest in improving relations with the majoritypopulation.

Many desires of Roma households implicitly gavetestimony about the poor conditions of housing andtheir ties to the labour market. Exclusion from thelabour market at the same time means exclusion from

the possibilities to improve housing. As section3.3 showed, many surveyed households live in verydisadvantageous conditions and there are too fewsolutions to their housing situation. They do not havthe financial resources for the purchase of a flat orhouse – exclusion from the labour market closes off such a possibility. At the same time exclusion from thlabour market for them means exclusion from loans


194



and mortgages; several respondents emphasised that without work – stable work – they can’t get loans.

For many from the households the vicious circleclosed: exclusion from the labour market and theabsence of normal work opportunities; even simplephysical survival on social benefits – securing food –is problematic. Exclusion from the labour market (not infrequently despite a skill or completed education)at the same time squanders the possibilities of adult children to become independent and establish theirown household. This subsequently expands theparental family and leads to further overcrowding inalready overcrowded dwellings. The capability of adult children to become independent is in excludedenvironments slim. What must happen in the next

generation, when the housing space will still furthernarrow, is a difficult to predict. If we look at theliterature, the huge deprivation brings unrest andreduces social conciliation.

Although families cumulate resources and make upinsuff icient resources with self-help and mutual relief,these are not enough for overcoming the deficit.Despite the willingness and skilfulness regarding self-help solutions, the deep deficit of work incomes alsocloses off this possibility. Therefore, it is not

surprising that housing was found to be the secondmost common area of wishes for one’s family and thedesire for housing for children in the settlement of residence also ended up relatively strong.

Many excluded settlements lack standardtechnological infrastructure, and this begins withroads and pavements. The lack of roads and transport make spatial exclusion still deeper. On one hand therequest for improved hygienic relations in excludedsettlements is talked about, but the existing

technological infrastructure often doesn’t create eventhe basic foundations for change. When searching forsolutions it is important to remember the variety –each environment is different and requires different

priorities. Despite the situation with long-termunemployment, the desire to live otherwise and thedesire to work is also still present.

The relatively great desire, differently motivated, of excluded Roma households for economic integrationand stable jobs in the areas around their habitationsinspires the question: why is there such desperatelyhigh unemployment in excluded environments? Asidefrom the lack of work opportunities in the regions withexcluded settlements there are also the individual andsocial impacts of long-term unemployment. Since theworld of modern society is organised on the principleof paid work, from which the standing and importanceof an individual and the living level of his familyderives, the situation of long-term unemployment of

members of a households leads to several consequences which the professional literature hasdescribed rather well. In the mentioned perspective othe “key position of paid work” in society long-termunemployment has the following possible effects: it destroys the work ethic and contributes todemotivation of the unemployed to seek a place onthe labour market, which in the end leads to hisdefinitive exclusion from this market; it devastateshuman capital of the unemployed, because the

unemployed persons not only cannot maintain it, but they cannot even innovate their own work capabilitiesand qualifications; at the same time, long-termunemployment stigmatizes the unemployedand evokes in him distrust of potential employers,who can instinctively explain the fact that certainindividuals are long without work as a personal defect(they have unusable qualifications, a lack of workhabits, are unreliable, querulous, lazy or have otherproblematic characteristics); long-termunemployment represents in a work organized on the

principle of paid work an identity crisis for a person(Mareš, 2002, pg. 75). The consequences are hugeand many in discussions about the situation of Romahouseholds often disrespect or ignore them.



The questionnaire for the research probe with theworking name of “situational accounts” containeda battery of questions which related to different characteristics of specific settlement habitation sites,thus the specific space for the life of marginalisedRoma communities (MRC). The distance from thehome municipality and from the district centres wasmonitored, along with basic infrastructure within themunicipality and in the marginalised settlements, theaccessibility of basic facilities and services, thepossibilities of transport and community work in the

settlement.The assigning of such indicators to the survey hadseveral objectives. Aside from zooming in on thespecific condition in settlements and on an outline of the intervals in which the facilities the settlementslived in by Roma communities move, this was the needfor some attributes in statistical classifications duringthe analysis of incomes and expenditurestrategies and behaviour, as well as an attempt toverify some indicators and their comprehensibility for

researchers before the repeated monitoring of Romasettlements with the name “Atlas of RomaCommunities”. There was decidedly no ambition tocarry out a representative survey of marginalised

Roma settlements; the research activity had the formof a research probe into Roma settlements accessibleto the selected collaborators.

Structure of the sample of surveyedsettlements by territory and typeof spatial exclusion

Overall, field collaborators (researchers) managed trecord the situation in 151 spatially excluded

settlements (a list of their names is in theappendix). Together they visited 125 towns andvillages in Slovakia from six regions and 25 districts.Within some villages or towns several Romasettlements are found,63 therefore, the number of Roma settlements is higher than the number of municipalities visited. The distribution of thesurveyed Roma settlements in terms of covering theterritory of Slovakia is detailed in Table 1. The KošiceRegion was represented by the most settlements (58followed by the Prešov Region with 45 settlements

and the Banská Bystrica Region with 42 settlementsThe territory of western Slovakia was represented bysix marginalised Roma settlements out of the total number of 151.


196

APPENDIX: ACCESSIBILITY OF BASIC INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICE

FOR RESIDENTS OF MARGINALISED ROMA COMMUNITIES

Table ISurveyed Roma settlements by regions and districts

Number of districts Number of MRCTrnava Region 1 2

Nitra Region 2 4Banská Bystrica Region 9 42

Prešov Region 5 45

Košice Region 8 58

Total 25 151

63 Near some villages even three segregated Roma settlements arose; on the territory of some towns are several concentrated Roma settlements or a combination of settlements on land affiliated with one village – they have a segregated settlement outside the village or on its edge and a concentrated community within the village



The captured sample of marginalised Romasettlements was differentiated according to type of spatial exclusion. Researchers labelled approximately30% of them as being a segregated settlement, while

another 38% of the surveyed settlements qualified asseparated on the edge of a municipality and theremaining 32% was made up of marginalisedcommunities concentrated within a village or town.The relatively balanced resulting representation of theindividual types of spatial exclusion created thepossibility for mutual comparison of the individual types of housing from the viewpoint of equipping withbasic infrastructure and the accessibility of basic civicfacilities.

Distance of surveyed settlementsfrom the home municipalitiesand centres

The research probe again confirmed that the situationof marginalised Roma settlements in Slovakia ismarkedly varied in terms of the distance from thehome municipality. On one hand such settlements area component of the interior geographical space of a village or town, but they also arise outside municipal

residential areas and do so at different distances fromthe municipality. On the basis of the classification of researchers, a total of approximately 40% of settlements of the surveyed sample resided in the“interior” territory of a municipality, and the

remaining 60% was more or less distant from thehome municipality. The interval of the distancesbetween the settlements and the home municipalitywas relatively broad: from 200 metres to 5 kilometres.

As Table II shows, all settlements designated byresearchers as segregated settlements were at a certain distance from the home municipality, andthis distance was the same as that for the sample of surveyed settlements as a whole (from 0.2 to 5 km);the average distance was more than 1.6 km. AmongRoma settlements separated on the edge of amunicipality 23% were given zero distance from themunicipality, and for 77% of them a certain spatial distance was declared; this was from 0.2 to 2 km, and

the average stated distance was just over 1 kilometre.Among Roma settlements declared by researchers assettlements concentrated within a municipality againfor a small group a certain distance do themunicipality was listed. Researchers considered 6% ofsettlements as concentrated within a municipality butlisted for them a distance from the municipality fromhalf to one kilometre (average 0.8 km). Specif icallythese were cases of settlements which belonged tomunicipalities in a much “expanded”geographic space.64

From the viewpoint of the third objective of thisresearch activity, i.e. the verification of indicators torepeated mapping of Roma communities, it isnecessary to point out the importance of a very exact

64 It was probably diff icult for them to determine which of the spatially expanded parts still consists of territory in the municipality. Specifically in this research probe,these were the municipalities of Vyšné Slovinky, Kokava nad Rimavicou and Gelnica.

Table IISurveyed Roma settlements by type and stated distance from the home municipality (in % and km)

Settlements with zerodistance from homemunicipality (in %)

Settlements spatiallydistant from homemunicipality (in %)

Interval of distances(in km)

Average distance(in km)

Total 40 60 0.2 – 5.0 1.33- from this settlements labelled as:

segregated 0 100 0.2 – 5.0 1.61

separated on the edge of a municipality 23 77 0.2 – 2.0 1.05

concentrated within a municipality 94 6 0.5 – 1.0 0.83



and detailed defining of the individual types of Romasettlements, as well as a detailed definition of what isconsidered to be the residential areas of a municipality and when a settlement is outside of

them. In this regard it will be necessary to giveresearchers very exact instructions, possibly also withspecific examples and in written form.65

According to the estimated distances from the district town the surveyed sample of Roma settlements weredivided into a ratio of 15% to 85%. Thus, 15% of thesurveyed settlements were linked directly to thedistrict town and the remaining 85% weregeographically distant from the district town.Naturally, the distance from this well-known

administrative junction, where the more demandinghealthcare and social services or unemployment services are usually located, was very diverse. Theinterval of the distances had a span exceeding 50kilometres (from 1.2 to 54 km). On average for theentire sample of surveyed Roma settlements thedistance from the district town represented more than18 kilometres.

Segregated settlements were least often linkeddirectly to the district town (10% of them belonged

administratively to the district seat), and in the caseof separated and concentrated settlements this was6% and 9% more. Roma settlements separated on the

edge were according to the research probe on averagnearest to district towns (not quite 16 km), and forsegregated settlements or those concentrated withina home municipality the average distance for the

district town was near to 20 km.Although the research probe carried out was unable tpaint an overall picture regarding the distribution ofRoma settlements from administrative district centres, the data indicated that they more oftenoriginate at more distant spaces, and that one-tenthto one-fif th of them is directly near district towns. Tmajority of residents of excluded settlements arespatially distant from a district town, some even bytens of kilometres.

Table IV indicates that in approximately one-fif th of the surveyed Roma settlements researchers identifiesome physical (natural or man-made) barrier betweethe Roma settlement and the home municipality; theremaining 81% was listed without a barrier. Differentypes of barriers occurred in the responses and not infrequently they were combined. Overall the proberecorded 10 types of barriers, or combinations of them. Most are related to segregated Romasettlements (10 types of barriers recorded), and then

settlements separated on the edge of a municipality(5 types found with them). For Roma communitiesconcentrated within a municipality which were


198

65 In the scope of this research probe, detailed training of researchers took place, but they did not receive instructions in written form. Also, in the scope of the trainwhat constituted municipal residential area or outside of municipal area was not defined, which with some types of “arr angement” of villages or towns in space coulead to an unclear interpretation and the subsequent designation. But as was mentioned above, the probe did not have the ambition to replace mapping, but morehelp identify weak indicators for repeating the “Atlas of Roma Communities” monitoring. For further processing of data, the characteristics of settlements were notmodified; the designation of type as was identif ied by the researchers remained in place.

Table IIISurveyed Roma settlements by type and stated distance from the district town (in % and km)

Settlements with zerodistance from thedistrict town (in %)

Settlements spatiallydistant from district town (in %)


Average distance(in km)

Total 15 85 1.2 – 54.0 18.27- from this settlements labelled as:

segregated 10 90 1.2 – 47.0 19.93

separated on the edge of a municipality 19 81 2.0 – 54.0 15.95

concentrated within a municipality 16 84 3.0 – 45.0 19.22



included in the research probe the field assistants didnot list any physical barriers.66

Watercourses were most often listed as a barrier:a stream or river (sometimes together with a bridge)occurred in tens of settlements, and in another two awatercourse was recorded together with a main roador a railway line. The second most commonly listedbarrier was a railway line; one was listedindependently in the case of five surveyed Romasettlements, and with one settlement together with awatercourse. Roads were also ranked among the most frequent barriers (a regular road or a high-speed one)with a total of 6 settlements, 4 of which were listedindependently and 2 in combination with anotherbarrier – a stream or a forest. The following were alsolisted as a natural or manmade barrier betweena Roma settlement and the home municipality withinthe research probe: a meadow, a field, a forest aloneor a forest with a railway tunnel, or more distance.

Surveyed Roma settlements by

furnishing with basic infrastructureAnother area which was the focus of attention withinthe research probe was the covering of the surveyed

settlements with technological networks which areranked among the basic civic furnishings of a place of habitation. The research logbook contained a total of eight items of technological furnishings, three relatedto the road network (pavements, roads within the placeof habitation and between the settlement and thehome municipality); the others consisted of: sewerage,an electric main, public lighting, a gas main and a watemain. As Table V shows, no technological infrastructurehad one-hundred percent coverage recorded; with eachtype a group of settlements was found which do not have the given infrastructure available. An electricity

main and a paved road between the settlement and thehome municipality were recorded in the most settlements: 96% of the surveyed settlements had anelectricity main and 93% had a paved road leading tothe settlement. Approximately three-quarters of thesurveyed settlements had paved roads within the placeof housing (77%), a water distribution network (75%)and public lighting within the settlement (73%).Othertechnological infrastructure occurred in the surveyedsettlements a great deal less: paved sidewalks withinthe place of housing was recorded in just over half of them (54%), sewerage in less than half (48%) andsettlements equipped with a gas networks were theleast (only 38%).

Table IVSurveyed Roma settlements by type and stated barrier between the settlement and the homemunicipality (in % and numbers)

Settlementswithout barriers stated

(in %)

Settlementswith a stated barrier

(in %)

Number of typesof barriers

(number)

Most frequentbarrier

(frequency)

Total 81 19 101. stream or river (12-x);2. railway line (6-x);3. road (6-x)

- from this settlements labelled as:

segregated 53 47 10

separated on the edge of a municipality 86 14 5

concentrated within a municipality 100 0 0

66 Here it is necessary to mention that during the training of researchers for data collection no special attention was paid to specifying or deřning spatial barriers orobstacles; the logbook only presented in the form of e xamples in parentheses a wall, a stream and a railway line. The researchers, however, were invited to recordanything that to them that appeared to them as a barrier. Such an approach was deliberate; it aspired at obtaining the broadest scale of possibilities for further moredetailed research, so that barriers already know could possibly be supplemented.



The situation differs significantly according to the typeof settlement involved in terms of spatial exclusion.The worst infrastructure was confirmed to be insegregated settlements, and this applies for all eight types of infrastructure monitored. While all of thesettlements concentrated with a municipality werecovered by electricity mains, 5% from separated on theedge of a municipality and 7% of segregatedsettlements from the surveyed sample did not haveelectricity. Although on average 93% of the surveyed

settlements had a paved road connecting thesettlement to the home municipality, in the case of concentrated this was 96% and in segregated andseparated 91% (thus 9% of settlements did not havea paved road connecting it to the home municipality).A great difference was manifested also with thecoverage by other road networks. A total of 98% of concentrated settlements had paved roads within theplace of habitation, but only 65% and 69% of separatedand segregated settlements had them. The differencewas even greater for paved sidewalks within the place

of habitation: 86% of concentrated settlements hadthem in comparison with 46% and 31% for theremaining two types of settlements. Thus, nearly 70%of the surveyed segregated settlements did not havepaved sidewalks within their place of habitation.A similar proportion to the disadvantage of segregatedsettlements was also confirmed with other types of infrastructure: 58% of segregated settlements did not

have sewerage, while in separated and concentratedsettlements this was not quite half; 38% of thesurveyed segregated settlements did not have a watermain, while among separated settlements this was 30and in concentrated within a municipality only 8%;up to 40% of segregated and 35% of separatedsettlements did not have public lighting, while fromthose concentrated within a municipality this was only4%; and 78% of segregated and 72% separatedsettlements were without a gas line, while among

concentrated within a municipality this was 35%.

The type of spatial exclusion is decidedly defined onthe basic of the equipping of settlements withtechnological networks and infrastructure. Romacommunities are often settled in places without basitechnological support for quality housing, ortechnical infrastructure is brought into thesesettlements in a smaller range or not at all. The fact that some settlements, even those concentratedwithin a municipality, are without basic civic facilitie

can indicate on one hand that Roma settlements arecreated right in those regions and municipalitieswhere the overall infrastructure is weaker ormarginalised, or they do not have the financial orother prerequisites for full technological infrastructure. Cases are also known of disconnectinof some concentrated settlements from someinfrastructure networks – for different reasons.


200

Note The table presents the percentage share of settlements for which the researchers recorded the presence of the given furnishings.

Table VSurveyed Roma settlements by type and furnishing of basic infrastructure (in %)

Infrastructure in the place of housing Total

from this settlements labelled as

segregatedseparated on the edgeof a municipality

concentrated withina municipality

Paved sidewalks in the place of housing 54 31 46 86Paved roads in the place of housing 77 69 65 98

Paved road between settlement and municipality 93 91 91 96

Sewerage 48 42 51 51

Electricity main 96 93 95 100

Public lighting 73 60 65 96

Gas main 38 22 28 65

Water main 75 62 70 92





surveyed Roma settlements with sewerage installedhad at least one household which was not connectedit; in 57% of the surveyed settlements with a gas line,at least one family lives without being connected tothe gas network; and finally in 17% of the surveyed

settlements with electricity installed at least onehousehold lives without an electricity connection.

Both indicators used also suggest that thephenomenon of not connecting or not utilisinginfrastructure, despite its being available in thesettlement, is overall more frequent in segregatedsettlements. But it was recorded even in Romasettlements concentrated within a municipality; in thecase of non-connection to the water network it was inthe end highest for concentrated settlements(36% of concentrated settlements within amunicipality with water mains had at least onehousehold without a connection to the public watersource versus 25% for segregated settlements) andwith connection to sewerage the same as forsegregated settlements (32% of settlements withsewerage, but with at least one family without aconnection). This may be a consequence of problemsduring the assigning of concentrated parts of smallervillages according to technological furnishings:

a village has the given infrastructure network, but inthe excluded part of the village it is not accessible(it is not installed at the site of residence of Romahouseholds; they did not build a connection point orthey are for various reasons disconnected fromdrawing on the given commodity – from the supply of water or electricity or the like).

Individual deficits in technological infrastructure forthe surveyed settlements were combined differently.With the parallel monitoring of five basic

technological networks (without sidewalks androads), 17 combinations of individual deficits can beformed. A total of 28 settlements in the sample werefully equipped with all five surveyed technological networks, which was less than one-fifth (18.5%); inthe remaining more than 80% of settlements someitems or several items from basic infrastructure waslacking. The most numerous in the surveyed sample of

Roma settlements were represented by those whichlacked only a gas main (nearly one-fifth), and insecond place were settlements which lacked onlysewerage (20 settlements; more than 13% of the totnumber). Gas and sewerage together were lacking

from 15 settlements, while 14 settlements werewithout gas and public lighting. According to the totnumber, settlements which at the same time did not have a water main, a gas main and sewerage followe(13 settlements), and then settlements only with anelectricity main – water, gas, public lighting andsewerage were all lacking (12 settlements). Othercombinations of deficiencies in settlements wererepresented less often. Four settlements from thetotal sample of Roma settlements did not have evenone of the monitored five technological distribution mains.

In summary, aside from the sample of 28 surveyedsettlements with complete infrastructure (none werelacking) and the 4 settlements which were lacking alfive technological networks, the distribution by thenumber of deficient furnishings was as shown in Tab7. Approximately one-third of the surveyedsettlements were lacking one type of technological infrastructure, while one-quarter were lacking two

types, 13% three types and nearly 9% of them hada deficit of 4 types.

The research probe confirmed that the equipping of Roma settlements with technological infrastructure ioverall relatively low, and this is not a very goodfoundation for achieving a standard quality of life fothe households living in such settlements. At thesame time the great diversity of marginalised Romasettlements in relation to the furnishings of technological infrastructure was confirmed.

For settlements lacking a public water main, thesource they used for obtaining drinking water wasspecially surveyed. According to the responses of researchers the replacement source for drinking watewas most often public or a community well; this waslisted in 19 settlements. Wells were tracked without specification or without spatial or ownershipdetermination (for example, in one’s own yard, one’


202



own well, etc.) which researchers declared with 14 of the surveyed settlements. With five settlementsa community water main with one tap or hydrant oroutlet was listed, and in the case of four settlementsa spring or stream was recorded. Specific expressionsof the source of drinking water contained thefollowing statements: public well in the settlement;

public common well; one water tap for the entiresettlement; one connection in the settlement –everyone draws on it; in the settlement is one outlet;a common hydrant in the settlement; own well; well in

the yard; well near the house; they have a well anda water main there; a public source of water; up tonow village wells – a non-running water main; aspring – underground; a spring for undergroundwater; a forest spring; a stream; a well and a river; oragain a public well and packaged mineral water.68

The research probe confirmed that the accessibility of drinking water in several Roma settlements isa problematic affair. Not all residents of Slovakia havethe right to access safe drinking water without problems.

Table VIISurveyed Roma settlements by cumulated deficit in the furnishing of basic infrastructure(numbers and in %)

Combination of missing furnishings for 5 items(number of missing items – sewerage, electricity main,

public lighting, gas main, water main)

Number Share in %

0 – has all five technological networks 28 18.5

1 – lacks only a gas main 28 18.5

1 – lack only sewerage 20 13.2

2 – lacks a gas main and sewerage 15 9.9

2 – lacks a gas main and public lighting 14 9.3

3 – lacks a water main, gas main and sewerage 13 8.6

4 – lacks a water main, gas main, public lighting and sewerage 12 7.9

2 – lacks a water main and sewerage 5 3.3

3 – lacks gas, public lighting and sewerage 4 2.6

5 – lacks all five networks 4 2.6

2 – lacks sewerage and public lighting 2 1.4

1 – lacks only public lighting 1 0.72 – lacks a water main and gas 1 0.7

3 – lacks a water main, gas and public lighting 1 0.7

3 – lacks a water main, sewerage and an electricity main 1 0.7

3 – lacks a water main, public lighting and sewerage 1 0.7

4 – lacks gas, public lighting, sewerage and an electricity main 1 0.7

Total 151 100.0

Number of lacking types of infrastructure in summary:

no items lacking 28 18.5

1 item lacking 49 32.5

2 items lacking 37 24.6

3 items lacking 20 13.2

4 items lacking 13 8.6all 5 items lacking 4 2.6

68 In the report we present speciřc statements about sources of drinking water with the hope that they can help with the surveying and specifying of logbooks andquestionnaires for preparing the MRC monitoring.



For future measurement of the technical equipping of spatially excluded Roma settlements it is possible onthe basis of the research probe to recommend a more

detailed identification of the individual facilitiesforming the basic technological infrastructure of settlements in relation to the “seat”. First of all, it will be necessary to strictly differentiate and trackseparately the equipping of the home municipality andthe equipping of the specific Roma settlement, whichis necessary to define exactly whether this is forexample one street in the village or one housing block.Second of all, it is equally essential to use a much moredetailed scale for mapping the equipping withtechnological infrastructure rather than only stating

the presence or absence of the given equipment ina settlement. The scale should be more detailed, forexample, with an estimated connection of householdsof Roma settlements to a specific network, or themonitoring should be supplemented by a real survey of the status of all households living in a settlement.

Surveyed Roma settlements by spatial accessibility of basic services

The research probe into spatially excluded Romasettlements attempted to capture their heterogeneityalso by the accessibility, more exactly the spatial accessibility of basic services. To do so, themonitoring of 13 types of public services whichrelated to the fields of education, different types of healthcare services, the possibilities for buyinggroceries and other goods, the possibilities of

communication with basic offices, postal and culturaservices were integrated into the research. For eachindividual service or facility whether they were

accessible directly in the settlement, in the homemunicipality or in a more distant municipality wasrecorded; the distance to the service from the place habitation was also presented – in kilometres.

Only 6% of the surveyed Roma settlements hada kindergarten directly in the settlement, while 86%of them stated the home municipality as the site of tkindergarten facility and with 8% still another, moredistant municipality (Table VIII). The average distancbetween the settlement and the place of the nearest

functioning kindergarten achieved not quite 2 km,while the interval of given distances was relativelywide – from 200 metres to 15 kilometres. The verysmall share of kindergartens directly in the settlemenwere typical for all three types of settlements – thisapplied the same for segregated and separated as weas for concentrated Roma settlements within amunicipality. The higher average distance to thiseducational service and the significantly broaderrange of the interval of the distance to a kindergartefor settlements concentrated within a municipality

may indicate that many Roma settlementsconcentrated within a municipality originate in verysmall villages without basic facilities with serviceswhich are spatially distant from a village or town withfunctioning facilities for the given service.69 Thehighest average distance for concentrated settlemenis repeated with the majority of the monitored serviceof civic facilities.


204

In the settlement (in %)

In the homemunicipality(in %)

Further(in %)


Averagedistance(in km)

Total 6 86 8 0.2 – 15.0 1.89- from this settlements labelled as:

segregated 4 87 9 0.2 – 5.0 2.06

separated on the edge of a municipality 7 88 5 0.2 – 3.0 1.09

concentrated within a municipality 6 84 10 0.5 – 15.0 3.86

Table VIIISurveyed Roma settlements by type and stated distance from a kindergarten (in % and km)



As Table IX shows, a primary school for the first through fourth years directly in the excludedsettlement belonged to the minority of the sample:

only 7% of the surveyed settlements had one. Themajority of them had the closest primary school forthe first through fourth years in the homemunicipality; approximately one-tenth had oneelsewhere. The average distance of theseeducational facilities expressed in kilometres wasmore than 2 km; the smallest given distance was200 metres and the largest up to 15 km. Eveneducation of the first degree of primary school ended up in the scope of the surveyed sample the

most distant to settlements concentrated within

a municipality (more than 4 km); the averagedistance for segregated settlements achieved2.3 km and for separated on the edge of

a municipality 1.3 km.

Primary schools of the second degree are, accordingto the research probe, still more distant from theperspective of marginalised Roma communities.On average up to 40% of the surveyed settlementshad a school for older school-attending childrenoutside of the home municipality. A well-knownpractice was confirmed: when the first years of primary education are still accessible to smaller

villages, they do not have the capacity for fulfilling

69 At least such types of settlements – Roma settlements concentrated within a municipality which lacks facilities with services in general and are spatially distant froman “equipped” village or town – managed to get captured in the scope of this research sample. On the other hand, in segregated settlements another circumstancecan have an inŖuence: if they are spatially distant from a home municipality without facilities for a service, and roads lie in the direction to a village equipped withthat service, their distance from the home municipality to the service can paradoxically draw near.

In thesettlement

(in %)

In the homemunicipality

(in %)

Further(in %)

Intervalof distances

(in km)

Averagedistance

(in km)Total 7 82 11 0.2 – 15.0 2.25


segregated 7 82 11 0.2 – 8.0 2.33



Table IX Surveyed Roma settlements by type and stated distance from an elementary school, grades 1-4(in % and km)

In thesettlement (in %)


Further(in %)



Total 4 56 40 0.2 – 16.0 4.11


segregated 0 71 29 0.2 – 15.0 3.54separated on the edge of a municipality 5 49 46 0.2 – 10.0 3.38


Table X Surveyed Roma settlements by type and stated distance from an elementary school, grades 5-9(in % and km)



and operation of all nine years.70 At the same time theaverage distance from the settlement to the primaryschool of second degree ranged from 100 metres up to16 kilometres, and on average this was 4.1 km.

For the possibility of shopping for residents of marginalised Roma settlements attention was devotedto two types of shops – with food and with othergoods. In relation to spatial accessibility of a foodshop (Table XI), 18% of the surveyed sample of marginalised settlements had one directly in thesettlement; the remainder had a food shop availablein the home municipality. In the context of all thirteen monitored services this was the most

accessible one overall. The average distance to a fooshop was 1.2 km, and with the measure of exclusionto segregated environment this distance wasmoderately extended (to 1.6 km for segregated

municipalities).

For shops with other goods a rather significantlydifferent situation was shown – in this case in up toone-quarter of the surveyed settlements the residenhad to travel outside the home municipality to do thshopping. The average distance for all settlementswas approximately 4 kilometres, and the largest measured distance to a shop with different goods wa24 kilometres (Table XII).


206

70 Since the research probe into the equipping of excluded Roma settlements formed only a supplement to the two main research activities, attention was not devotein it to the question of assigning children to special education schools or the placement of Roma children and children of the majority population to different educational facilities. Despite the fact that simple spatial accessibility of compulsory education was followed, certain signals managed to be captured in thisregarding a more complicated situation with education in excluded settlements. Some of the řeld assist ants pointed out that: “in villages are special primary schoofor years 1-9; common primary schools only for years 1-4.” For preparing the monitoring of MRC this means to survey facilities of settlements and accessibility of education in more detailed divisions, i.e. for each degree of primary school education to monitor common and special school separately, as well as the existence ofspecial classes at common primary schools and the like. With a combination of schools the level of their attendance by individual groups of children (Roma and themajority population) should be captured.



Further(in %)


Average distanc(in km)

Total 4 71 25 0.1 – 25.0 3.89


segregated 0 87 13 0.1 – 25.0 2.85



Table XIISurveyed Roma settlements by type and stated distance from a shop with various goods (in % and km)



Further(in %)




segregated 20 80 0 0.1 – 5.0 1.60



Table XISurveyed Roma settlements by type and stated distance from a shop with food (in % and km)



Three types of healthcare services were covered in thesurvey: the distances to a local doctor, a paediatricianand to a dentist were surveyed. The situation in theirspatial accessibility was relatively balanced; however,

excluded settlements had a local doctor nearby (TableXIII). Approximately three-fif ths had a local doctor inthe home municipality (only 3% directly in thesettlement); the residents of the two-fifths of settlements behind it had to travel outside the homemunicipality. The average distance for the entiresurveyed sample came out to be nearly 5 km; however,settlements were recorded from which it wasnecessary to travel 19 km to see a local doctor. Thesame highest distance was also found with a

paediatrician (Table XIV), but the average distancewas a kilometre longer.

Dental services came out from the survey of spatial accessibility of healthcare as the most distant. More

than half of the surveyed Roma settlements had thisservice further than in the home municipality; theyhad to travel a distance of 6 km on average for adentist. In the case of all three healthcare services

segregated Roma settlements were without anyrepresentation of such services directly in thesettlement, though more often than the other twogroups they had the given service in the homemunicipality; however, to reach a service they had onaverage to overcome approximately the samedistance. In each of the surveyed types of MRC a groupwith problematic access to basic healthcare serviceswas recorded.71

Among the very distant services for residents of

marginalised Roma settlements was the possibility of withdrawing money from a cash point machine. Onlya small group of the surveyed sample of Romasettlements had a cash point machine directly in the



Further(in %)




segregated 0 69 31 0.5 – 17.0 4.22



Table XIIISurveyed Roma settlements by type and stated distance from a local doctor (in % and km)



Further(in %)



Total 1 49 50 0.2 – 19.0 5.57


segregated 0 58 42 0.5 – 17.0 5.06



Table XIVSurveyed Roma settlements by type and stated distance from a paediatrician (in % and km)

71 For more details on the strategy of overcoming problems with the distance of healthcare services, see Section 3 of this research report.



settlement (this was usually in a town environment);on the other hand for 60% a cash point machine werefurther away then the home municipality. The averagedistance to such a facility exceeded 8 km, and the

longest recorded distance was 27 km.

According to the results, postal services were alsoamong the sporadic services located directly in the placeof habitation; the majority had it accessible in the homemunicipality (more than 70% of settlements), whileresidents of one-quarter of the surveyed Romasettlements had to travel outside the home municipalityfor postal services. On average a post office was morethan 3 km distant from the settlements, though in somesettlements this was as much as 24 km.

Primacy in the distance of marginalised Romasettlements from the basic 13 compared servicesclearly belonged to the office of labour, social affairsand family. Although the individual district officescreated branch workplaces bringing social services oremployment services closer to the place of habitation

of clients, for many residents of excludedcommunities they still remain spatially distant. Theaverage distance was found to be on the level of 12 km, and the highest recorded distance was 39 km

Together three-quarters of the surveyed Romasettlements had services provided by the offices of labour, social affairs and family other than in thehome municipality. These are services to whichmarginalised Roma communities are exceptionallyconnected, about which the high measure of unemployment and the high measure of social reliance found for excluded Roma settlements areboth telling (UNDP, 2012). With some settlements thdistance differed: social services were, thanks to theestablishing of branch worksites spatially moreaccessible, while employment services, whichremained in the district seats, also remainedexceptionally distant spatially.

Two areas of culture were also included in the list of surveyed services – these were facilities for possiblecultural and religious experiences. It was show that


208



Further(in %)




segregated 0 56 44 0.5 – 25.0 5.59



Table XVSurveyed Roma settlements by type and stated distance from a dentist (in % and km)



Further(in %)

Intervalof distances(in km)

Average distanc(in km)

Total 3 37 60 0.2 – 27.0 8.03


segregated 0 53 47 0.5 – 27.0 6.18



Table XVI

Surveyed Roma settlements by type and stated distance from a cash point machine (in % and km)



marginalised Roma settlements only occasionally havea cultural centre within their space (none fromsegregated settlements). A cultural centre waspredominately located in the home municipality (we

recall – for many segregated settlements still relatively distant spatially); one-tenth of the sampleof settlements even had the nearest cultural centre inanother village. The average distance to sucha cultural facility was approximately 3 kilometres,with the largest recorded distance of 24 km (TableXIX). But in the scope of the research other forms of access to cultural facilities for residents of MRC werenot monitored (the potential carrying out of their owncultural activities, possible participation in organisedactivities, ultimately even the actual functioning of such facilities), nor the actual use of these facilitieson their part. In the scope of the mapping of MRC,

these aspects of cultural exclusion/separation couldbe monitored in a more detailed design.

In relation to church, this belonged on the basis of the

survey results as among the most accessible facilities,and with an average distance of 1.6 km, it ranked rightbehind a food shop and was more accessible thana kindergarten (Table XX). Overall as much as 96% of the surveyed Roma settlements had a church in thehome municipality, and a small group had one directlyin the settlement. The potential possibility forpracticing religious faith according to the data foundseems to relatively broad for excluded communities;however the membership of a church to a specificchurch organisation, or even the predominatingreligious faith in the surveyed settlements was not monitored in the research probe.72



Further(in %)




segregated 0 76 24 0.5 – 13.0 3.19



Table XVIISurveyed Roma settlements by type and stated distance from a post office (in % and km)



Further(in %)




segregated 0 27 73 1.0 – 36.0 11.89



Table XVIIISurveyed Roma settlements by type and stated distance from an office of the Slovak Office for Work,Social Affairs and Family (in % and km)

72 Therefore, the diffusion of such needs among residents of marginalised Roma communities is not known, similarly as the equivalence of religious membership of a church in the settlement with the religious faith predominating among its residents.



According to the data gathered, the off ices of labour,social affairs and family are the most distant in theoverall summary to residents of spatially excludedRoma settlements, and behind them was the

possibility of taking money from a cash point machine. On the other hand, in terms of averages theyhad a shop with food and a church closest to them. Ingeneral, from a comparison of individual regions, thelargest distance from public services occurred in theNitra Region and the Banská Bystrica Region.

Recommendations in connection with the mapping of marginalised Roma communities in this area couldfocus on the following aspects: when monitoring thespatial accessibility of basic services it will be

advantageous to instruct researchers in regard todetermining distance – for example, through thekilometres presented in the travel timetables fora direct connection from the place of habitation to

a municipality with the nearest service used;a specification and detailed instructions are alsonecessary to direct at an ambiguous or multivalent situation, e.g. if a special primary school is in the

home municipality but a regular primary school is inthe neighbouring one, or a situation differentiates fothe first and second levels of education. In the case settlements with such a structure of schools, it will bnecessary to specify the approach to resolving thesituation – whether to leave for recording several possibilities or to lean to the larger occurrence.

Surveyed Roma settlementsby possibilities of transport

The preceding section presented several factsexemplifying the spatial distance of many servicesnecessary for daily life in marginalised Romasettlements,73 which brings up the question of


210



Further(in %)




segregated 9 91 0 0.2 – 5.0 1.88



Table XX Surveyed Roma settlements by type and stated distance from a church (in % and km)



Further(in %)




segregated 0 91 9 0.5 – 13.0 2.60



Table XIX Surveyed Roma settlements by type and stated distance from a cultural centre (in % and km)

73 Nearly every survey focused on this environment has also pointed out the separation or distance of excluded Roma settlements from basic services – educational,healthcare, cultural, social and the like (UNDP, 2005, 2011,2012; World Bank 2012; CVEK 2011).



accessibility to transport. Settlements isolated anddistant from services are in general with the securingof the needs of a family reliant to a high measure ontransport connections, or on personal transport. Inregard to the second possibility, the low level of

incomes found (see part 3 of the f inal report), as well as the worse economic situation in households livingin marginalised Roma settlements (UNDP, 2012)warrant the assumption of households from thesesettlements being less equipped in terms of their owntransport resources. All of these contexts led to thequestions regarding the accessibility of publictransport to be included in the research probe that was carried out.

As Table 21 presents, from the total sample of

marginalised Roma settlements included in the surveywith 73% had confirmed regular transport from thesettlement, and 27% did not give any such possibility.Accessibility of public transport directly ina settlement varied significantly by the type of settlement: the settlements most cut off fromtransport possibilities were connected with separatedRoma communities on the edge of municipalities andwith segregated settlements (40% and 34%), whilefrom settlements concentrated within municipalitiesthis was only 8%. According to the type of transport bus transport was the most accessible in marginalisedsettlements (52%), and was followed bya combination of bus and railway transport (10% of settlements). Exceptionally, a train was the only typeof transport recorded; 10% of settlements declared

use of city mass transit (settlements on the edgeor within a larger town).

However, even the declared accessibility of publictransport in a settlement did not automatically mean

suff icient coverage by transport resources. Aside fromthe fact that using public transport represents anadditional burden for the financial budget of households, mainly those with more members, thenumber of transport connections in some settlementswas markedly limited. The given range of connectionsin the course of the day with individual settlementswas from 2 to 18 for segregated settlements, from 3 to20 for settlements separated on the edge of a municipality and from 2 to 30 for settlementsconcentrated within a municipality. The smaller

number of transport connections was significantlymore frequent in segregated settlements, anda higher number of connections per day were linkedwith settlements concentrated within a municipality.The overall accessibility of public transport and itsfrequency during the day was in segregatedsettlements smaller, which contributes to thedeepening of their spatial exclusion.

Only a minimum of settlements (6%) listed special busconnections for transport of children to school. Sucha service occurred moderately more frequently (8%)for children from settlements concentrated withina municipality and from segregated settlements (7%)while children from settlements separated on theedge of a municipality knew it the least.

There is regular

transport (in %)

Number of

connections(range; %*)

Transport

children toschool (in %)

Interval of

distances tostop (in km)

Average

distance to stop(in km)

Total 73 2-30; 16% 6 0.1 – 3.0 0.4


segregated 67 2-18; 9% 7 0.2 – 3.0 0.6

separated on the edge of a municipality 60 3-20; 9% 4 0.1 – 1.0 0.5

concentrated within a municipality 90 2-30; 31% 8 0.1 – 1.5 0.3

Table XXISurveyed Roma settlements by type and stated possibilities for transport (in % and km)

Note *After the semicolon is the percentage share of municipalities which gave in response to the question on the number of connections per day a non-specific reply of the type “a lot”, “regular transport”, etc.



Another problem, even with the existence of transport connections, which speaks about the overall accessibility of public transport, may be the distanceto the nearest stop. On average for the entire sample,this represented 0.4 km, and for segregated

settlements came out the highest (0.6 km). Theinterval of recorded distances to the nearest stop forpublic transport was broadest for segregatedsettlements (from 200 metres to 3 kilometres), andfor separated and concentrated settlements themaximum distance from a stop ranged on the one-third to one-half level.

All of the indicators used pointed to the lowest accessibility of public transport in those marginalisedRoma settlements, which had limited spatial

accessibility to public services. Such f indings indicatethe multiple marginalisation of some settlements,primarily segregated settlements.

Community work in a settlement

The last circle of indicators attempted to capture thevolume of community work in the scope of thesurveyed settlements. For this purpose the presenceof community centres in the surveyed settlements wasmonitored, along with the working of non-profit

organisations in their space, with special attentiondevoted to work with Roma children.

According to the empirical findings a total of 43% of the surveyed settlements had some experiencewith community centres, and in the majority of themthere was a community centre functioning at the timeof the survey; only 7% declared a non-functioningfacility. The differences according to type of settlement were not great; the activities of communitycentres were only moderately higher in segregated

settlements (46% versus 40% for separated andconcentrated settlements). Helping non-governmental organisations (NGO) developed theiractivities in not quite 40% of the surveyedsettlements, and 60% of the sample were ranked assettlements without such aid. Among the three typesof settlements segregated settlements recorded theleast experience with the work of NGOs.

The expansion of activities for children frommarginalised Roma communities moved inapproximately equal proportions as with thepreceding two aid subjects – two-fifths of settlemenconfirmed work with Roma children and in three-

fifths the occurrence of such activities was missing.The finding indicates that subjects working in specifisettlements are active in the framework of a broaderspectrum of activities; if some aid or support subjectfound in settlements and is developing its activities,they are devoted not only to helping adults but gradually specialise also in working with children.

With activities intended for children the submittedform requested specification of the subject which isworking in this field. The majority of responses gavegeneral activities of different clubs with schools,leisure-time centres, youth clubs, extracurricular cluactivities or community centres (low-threshold andwithout specifications) and churches. From the moreconcrete names of organisations working withchildren of MRC, the following list was generated frothe respondent households and collaborators:Quo Vadis, the Roma association „Odényi“, the civicassociation (OZ) OZ Nová cesta, ETP Slovensko, NavoNagle, OZ Romix, OZ Venézia, KZRS, the Roma OZ

„Vo farebnom svete“, OZ Regionálny rozvoj rómskejkultúry, the Christian Centre, Church of the Brethrenthe Salesians, the Evangelical Church has amongRoma children the club “Besiedka”,the Archdiocese charity.

A positive report from the research probe intomarginalised Roma settlements is the presence of direfield work in these communities. A look at Table 22,however, indicates that despite the assumption of moderate over-evaluation of the share of settlements

with helping subjects, settlements in which no help warecorded still form a majority. The sad story is thefinding of non-functional community centres, whichcould be a result of the existing setup of support andfunctioning of f ield social work on one hand, or themisuse of resources or improper choice of implementinorganisation on the other. In relation to work with Romchildren, there are in Slovakia settlements with severa


212



possibilities,74 but also those where activities of thistype are not organised. And according to the empirical

findings, these made up the majority.

Excluded Roma communities essentially need direct work in the field to overcome the vicious circle of poverty and social exclusion. All surveys repeatedlycarried out in these environments come to sucha conclusion. Responsible institutions and thedecision-making sphere in Slovakia should finallyresolve the permanent sustainability of communitywork in marginalised Roma communities (mainlyfinancial) and set selection criteria for projects of

field workers not according to the secondarycharacteristics (connections, lobbying), but accordingto the positive results in the field.

In relation to the prepared mapping of MRC, it wouldbe worth considering supplementing the surveying incommunities by the specific names of successful non-profit organisations and community centres directlyin the field and from dif ferent stakeholders, whichcould help identify organisations and subjectssuitable for support. With unsuccessful projects, such

as, for example, non-functioning community centres,recording the “story” of the facility and why theactivity ended unsuccessfully could be of help.

Summary

The research probe into 151 marginalised Romasettlements confirmed the significant diversity of these settlements in Slovakia and pointed to possibleproblematic aspects of mapping them.

Roma settlements in Slovakia are differentiated by thedistance from the home municipality and the type of spatial exclusion. They have very different equippingof basic technological infrastructure, and foundamong them are settlements without anyinfrastructure, others lacking several technological

networks and still others only one network, whilea portion of the settlements are fully equipped withinfrastructure. Great heterogeneity was recorded alsoaccording to the accessibility of basic civic andcultural services. For many marginalised settlementskindergartens and primary schools for the first degreeof education are spatially distant, and for the seconddegree of education children from these settlementsmust overcome a still greater distance. Residents of many excluded settlements must resolve the great spatial distance with healthcare services or with

necessary shopping for the household. On averageoffices of labour, social affairs and family, where theyare often clients as a consequence of high

Community centre in the settlement Aid NGO Activities for children

Functional Non-functional No Yes No Yes No

Total 36 7 56 37 63 40 60


segregated 42 4 54 31 69 37 67

separated on the edge of a municipality 33 7 60 39 61 46 54

concentrated within a municipality 33 8 59 41 59 45 55

Table XXIISurveyed Roma settlements by type and stated opportunities for transport (in % and km)

Note The presented data on the working of community centres and NGOs in marginalised Roma settlements may be moderately over-evaluated in comparison with reality, because collaborators recruited for data collection were in fact from the circle of the aid

professions. It can therefore be assumed that they visited preferentially the places of their own operations.

74 At the same time with some of the surveyed settlements the activities of several subjects were found: club activities on the premises of a school combined witha working leisure-time centre, community centres, social workers, church or Roma and non-Roma non-prof it organisations. From specific club activities, thefollowing were recorded: singing, music or dance clubs (traditional Roma dance, hip-hop, etc.), computer and Internet clubs, sports activities of dif ferent focus(football club, etc.), cooking and sewing courses for young people, artistic workshops and the like.



unemployment and social dependency, are the most distant for them. Even the shifting of some officesfrom a district town deeper into the region of thedistrict was unable to eliminate the spatial distance.They must also overcome large distances for the

possibility of withdrawing money from a cash point machine, and postal services and transport servicesare also problematic for some settlements. Althoughin many settlements community centres began tooperate or non-profit organisations began to developtheir activities in them, a large portion of settlementsstill do not have such opportunities.

The prepared mapping (ATLAS of Roma communities2013), which is able to capture the situationof marginalised Roma communities in an exhausting

way, should in the interest of better and more qualityresults devote attention to the following areasand problems:

• The type of spatial exclusion is in somesettlements difficult to clearly determine;therefore it will be necessary to define exactly theindividual types of Roma settlements; at the sametime to define in detail the residential areas of a municipality – when a settlement is withina municipality or on its edge and when it is outside

a municipality. In the course of training,researchers must receive exact instructionswith specific examples given and this must bein written form.

• The research probe recorded different types of objects presented as barriers between a settlement and the home municipality, which in somesettlements were combined; before the mappingpossible types of barriers require detailedspecification; this should not be left to thearbitrary decision of researchers. Their trainingshould devote attention to a segment with thedefining of obstacles and barriers.

• It was found that field collaborators described indifferent ways the source of drinking water insettlements without a (functioning) water main;replacement sources of drinking water should be

also clearly defined in the logbooks andquestionnaires prepared for mapping.

• The carrying out of the probe into groups of Romsettlements also ran into problems in theexactness of measuring of the technological equipping of settlements; a clearer and moredetailed identification of facilities of infrastructure in relation to the “settlement” wershown to be necessary. Specifically, this meansexact differentiation of the equipping of the hommunicipality and that of the Roma settlementswhich belong to it; at the same time it is necessato use a detailed and exact scale for measuringfacilities; this should be based either on qualifiedestimates of the share of connected households i

a settlement to the individual networks or themapping of settlements should be supplementedby a survey of the actual state of connectiondirectly in the households (at least randomlyselected within the settlements).

• The research probe did not devote special attentionto the known problem of assigning children tospecial education schools or segregation in schoolsbut only to the spatial accessibility of compulsoryeducation; several signals managed to be captured

in this regard about the complicated situation withthe education of children in excluded settlements;on the basis of them, it is possible to recommend fomonitoring the furnishing of settlements and theaccessibility of education using a scale in the most detailed segmentations. To track both degrees of primary education separately for common andspecial education schools, to supplement thesurveying with special classes at schools, to recordwith a combination of different types of schools in

a settlement also the composition of the children athe individual schools.

• Pilot measuring of the spatial accessibility of bascivic services also pointed to some problem areasfor examining it seems advantageous torecommend the teaching of researchers regardinthe determining of distances, for example,through kilometres listed in travel timetables for


214



direct connections from settlements tomunicipalities with the nearest useful service, orequip them with an aid for estimating thedistance. In reality multivalent situations couldalso occur (for example, some service is in the

home municipality and also in another, but whichcould be closer to the settlement, etc.); for thesecases it is necessary to specify the process of resolving the situation (to employ several possibilities or a majority occurrence). With someservices this would require supplementingaccessibility to the given facility with thepossibilities of its use (for example, a cultural centre, a church and the like.).

• The lower accessibility of public transport for

residents of marginalised Roma settlements canlead to a deepening of exclusion and the multiplemarginalisation of some settlements; aside fromthe challenge for the decision-making sphere for

thorough consideration of the impacts of cancelling connections on additional marginalisation of regions, this empirical findingalso inspires towards methodological recommendations; the mapping of MRC should

strengthen the segment regarding transport opportunities for settlements.

• The lingering low coverage of marginalisedsettlements by community work directly in thefield is a challenge for solving its long-termsustainability and expanding it to a wider circle of settlements; the prepared mapping of MRC couldcontribute to fulfilling this aim by identification oforganisations and subjects suitable for support of direct working in settlements (to supplement the

surveying with the names of non-profit organisations and community centres by goodresults from practice, or by reasons forunsuccessful projects).



MRC SETTLEMENTS – LIST (name of village or town – district)

1. Zvolen – Zvolen

2. Detva I (family houses) – Detva

3. Detva II (housing blocks) – Detva

4. Vrbnica I – Michalovce

5. Michalovce: Mlyn(ská) I (housing blocks) – Michalovce6. Hnojné – Michalovce

7. Závadka I – Gelnica

8. Roškovce – Levoča

9. Sveržov – Bardejov

10. Petrovany – Prešov

11. Rudňany I – Spišská N. V.

12. Markušovce I – Spišská N. V.

13. Jarovnice – Sabinov

14. Medzany – Prešov

15. Turňa nad Bodvou – Košice okolie ( surroundings)

16. Hrušov – Veľký Kr tíš

17. Moldava nad Bodvou I – Košice okolie

18. Moldava nad Bodvou II – Košice okolie

19. Šaca – Košice 2

20. Trnava I – Trnava

21. Trnava II – Trnava

22. Banská Štiavnica – B. Štiavnica

23. Kokava nad Rimavicou – Poltár

24. Zlatno – Poltár

25. Klenovec – Rimavská Sobota

26. Hnúšť a – Rimavská Sobot a

27. Čeľovce – Trebišov

28. Slovenské Nové Mesto – Trebišov

29. Čerhov – Trebišov

30. Michaľany – Trebišov31. Bíňa – Nitra

32. Čata – Levice

33. Rimavská Sobota – R. Sobota

34. Bystrany – Spišská N. V.

35. Spišské Podhradie: Rybníček – Levoča

36. Žehra – Spišská N. V.

37. Pôtor – Veľký Kr tíš

38. Dačov Lom – Veľký Kr tíš

39. Bušince – Veľký Kr tíš

40. Modr ý Kameň – Veľký Kr tíš

41. Sklabiná – Veľký Kr tíš

42. Veľký Kr tíš – V. Kr tíš43. Ostrovany – Sabinov

44. Richnava – Gelnica

45. Veľký Blh – Rimavská Sobota

46. Ražňany – Sabinov

47. Sabinov I – Sabinov

48. Kecerovce I – Košice okolie

49. Šarišské Michaľany – Sabinov

50. Kružľov: Gerlachov – Bardejov


216



51. Lukov I – Bardejov

52. Lenar tov I – Bardejov

53. Gerlachov – Bardejov

54. Rožkovany – Sabinov

55. Družstevná pri Hornáde – Košice okolie

56. Milpoš – Sabinov

57. Hraň – Trebišov

58. Hrčeľ I – Trebišov

59. Kuzmice – Trebišov

60. Vojčice – Trebišov

61. Prešov: Solivar (Pod Hrádkom) – Prešov

62. Prešov: Stará tehelňa – Prešov

63. Prešov: Tarasa Ševčenka – Prešov

64. Stará Ľubovňa I – S. Ľubovňa

65. Stará Ľubovňa: Podsadek – S. Ľubovňa

66. Gelnica – Gelnica

67. Vyšné: Slovinky – Spišská N. V.

68. Veľký Šariš – Prešov

69. Ruská Nová Ves – Prešov70. Fiľakovo: mesto – Lučenec

71. Nitra nad Ipľom – Lučenec

72. Fiľakovské Kováče – Lučenec

73. Rimavská Baňa – R. Sobota

74. Rimavská Píla – R. Sobota

75. Čelovce I: osada – Veľký Krtíš

76. Cerovo – Krupina

77. Krupina – Krupina

78. Čelovce II: obec – Veľký Krtíš

79. Lúčky – Michalovce

80. Iňačovce – Michalovce

81. Slavkovce – Michalovce82. Malčice – Michalovce

83. Žbince – Michalovce

84. Michalovce – Michalovce

85. Sobrance – Sobrance

86. Rankovce – Košice okolie

87. Jasov – Košice okolie

88. Tor ysa I – Sabinov

89. Drienovec – Košice okolie

90. Lastovce – Trebišov

91. Nižný Žipov – Trebišov

92. Trebišov – Trebišov

93. Kamenín – N. Zámky94. Pohronský Ruskov – Levice

95. Bátka – R. Sobota

96. Včelince – R. Sobota

97. Abovce – R. Sobota

98. Radnovce – R. Sobota

99. Kráľ – R. Sobota

100. Hostišovce – R. Sobota

101. Doľany: Rožkovce – Levoča



102. Spišský Hrhov – Levoča

103. Žakarovce – Gelnica

104. Jaklovce – Gelnica

105. Margecany – Gelnica

106. Mária Huta – Gelnica

107. Rimavská Seč – R. Sobota

108. Jesenské – R. Sobota109. Krivany – Sabinov

110. Pečovská Nová Ves I – Sabinov

111. Malcov – Bardejov

112. Snakov – Bardejov

113. Hrabské – Bardejov

114. Kurov – Bardejov

115. Uzovské Pekľany – Sabinov

116. Lipany – Sabinov

117. Olejníkov – Sabinov

118. Slovinky: Nižné – Spišská N. Ves

119. Gelnica: Háj – Gelnica

120. Mirkovce – Prešov121. Žehňa – Prešov

122. Tuhrina – Prešov

123. Gemerská Hôrka – Rožňava

124. Hucín – Revúca

125. Jelšava I – Revúca

126. Plešivec: osada I – Rožňava

127. Plešivec: osada II – Rožňava

128. Čoltovo – Rožňava

129. Pašková – Rožňava

130. Detva III (housing blocks) – Detva

131. Zvolen II (separated) – Zvolen

132. Detva IV (houses – separated) – Detva133. Detva V (family houses – separated) – Detva

134. Detva VI (housing blocks – separated) – Detva

135. Vrbnica II – Michalovce

136. Michalovce: Mlyn(ská) II (shack) – Michalovce

137. Závadka II (concentrated) – Gelnica

138. Rudňany II – Spišská N. Ves

139. Rudňany III – Spišská N. Ves

140. Markušovce II – Spišská N. Ves

141. Moldava nad Bodvou III – Košice okolie

142. Sabinov II (settlement) – Sabinov

143. Kecerovce II – Košice okolie

144. Šarišské Michaľany II – Sabinov145. Lukov II – Bardejov

146. Lenartov II – Bardejov

147. Hrčeľ II – Trebišov

148. Stará Ľubovňa II – S. Ľubovňa

149. Torysa II – Sabinov

150. Pečovská Nová Ves II – Sabinov

151. Jelšava II – Rožňava


218



Andal o dživipen. Košice: ETP Slovensko – Centrum preudržateľný rozvoj 2009.

Atlas rómskych komunít na Slovensku 2004. Bratislava:S.P.A.C.E., IVO a KCpRO.

Dáta o ľudských právach rómskych žien. BanskáBystrica: Kultúrne združenie Rómov Slovenska 2009.

EU SILC, 2011: Zisťovania o príjmoch a životných podmienkach. Bratislava, Štatistický úrad SR 2011.

FILIPOVÁ, J. – VALNÁ, S., 1995: Prístupy k def inovaniua meraniu chudoby. Ekonomický časopis, 43, 118-129.

FRA – UNDP, 2012: The situation of Roma in 11 EU Member States – Survey results at a glance.

Hodnotiaca správa o výsledkoch 1. etapy Programu podpory zdravia znevýhodnenej rómskej komunity zaroky 2007 – 2008. Bratislava: Úrad verejnéhozdravotníctva SR 2008.

Charta základných práv Európskej únie Charta základných práv Európskej únie. Wien: FRA.

Chudoba Rómov a sociálna starostlivosť o nichv Slovenskej republike. 2002, Bratislava: Svetovábanka, S.P.A.C.E, INEKO a OSI.

IVANOV, A., 2012: Making Inclusive Truly Inclusive. In:Development and Transition. Opportunities for Roma Inclusion. Issue 19. June, 2012. Bratislava: UNDP.

KUSÁ, Z., 2011: Bytová politika a dostupnosť bývaniana Slovensku. In: Gerbery, D., (ed.) Potrebujeme sociálny štát? Niektoré úvahy (nielen) o verejnej

politike. Bratislava: FES.

MAREŠ, P., 2002. Nezaměstnanost jako sociální problém. Praha: SLON.

MUŠINKA, A., ed., 2012; Podarilo sa: Príklady úspešných aktivít na úrovni samospráv smerujúcich k zlepšeniu situácie Rómov. Prešov: Prešovská univerzitav Prešove, Ústav rómskych štúdií.

MUŠINKA, A., – BENČ, V., (eds.), 2011: Pokrízováobnova SR: Zvyšovanie zamestnanosti a inklúzia Rómov

Prešov: Slovenská spoločnosť pre zahraničnú politiku,Prešovská univerzita a Úrad vlády Slovenskejrepubliky.

Národný akčný plán sociálnej inklúzie (NAPs/INCL)2004 – 2006, Bratislava: MPSVR SR 2006.

Národná správa o stratégiách sociálnej ochrany a sociálnej inklúzie pre roky 2006 – 2008, Bratislava:MPSVR SR 2008.

Národná správa o stratégiách sociálnej ochrany a sociálnej inklúzie na roky 2008 – 2010, Bratislava:MPSVR SR 2010.

Oznámenie Komisie Európskemu parlamentu, Rade,Európskemu hospodárskemu a sociálnemu výboru aVýboru regiónov zo dňa 5.4. 2011. Rámec EÚ prevnútroštátne stratégie integrácie Rómov do roku 2020.KOM(2011) 173 v konečnom znení.

Obraz rómskej ženy . Zvolen: Quo Vadis, 2012.

PIERSON, J., 2002: Tackling Social Exclusion. London:Routledge.

Program podpory zdravia znevýhodnených komunít na Slovensku na roky 2009 – 2015. Bratislava: Úradverejného zdravotníctva SR 2009.

SCHEFFEL, D., 2009: Svinia v čiernobielom. Slovenskí Rómovia a ich susedia. Prešov: Centrumantropologických výskumov.

Stratégia SR pre integráciu Rómov do roku 2020,

Bratislava: Úrad vlády SR.STRIEŽENEC, Š., 1996: Slovník sociálneho pracovníka.Trnava: AD.

ŠKOBLA, D. – LEONČIKAS, T. – ŠTĚPÁNKOVÁ, M., 2008:Etnicita ako štatistický ukazovateľ pri monitorovaní životných podmienok a diskriminácie. Bratislava:UNDP/FES.

LITERATURE



UNDP, 2002: The Roma in Central andEastern Europe: Avoiding the Dependency Trap.Regional Human Development Report .Bratislava: UNDP.

UNDP, 2006: Správa o životných podmienkach rómskychdomácností na Slovensku. (J. Filadelfiová – D. Gerbery– D. Škobla) Bratislava: UNDP/FES.

UNDP, 2012: Správa o životných podmienkachrómskych domácností na Slovensku 2010.Bratislava: UNDP.

UNDP, 2012b: Nejasný výsledok: Pomohli projekty ESF Rómom na Slovensku? Zistenia z analýzy projektov

v rámci OP ZaSI v programovom období 2007-2013.Bratislava: UNDP.

UNDP, 2013: The Housing Situation of RomaCommunities. Analysis of the UNDP/WB/EC RegionalRoma Survey Data. (Tatjana Peric) Bratislava: UNDP.

VAŠEČKA, M. – REPOVÁ, I., 2000: Inštitucionálna bázariešenia rómskej problematiky na Slovenskuv súčasnosti. Bratislava: International Organizationfor Migration.

WORLD BANK, 2011: Protecting the Poor andPromoting Employability. An assessment of the sociaassistance system in the Slovak Republic.


220



Documents

A situational analysis of selected aspects of the living standards of excluded Roma households in Slovakia