Search

Summary: This study contributes to the ongoing efforts to address systemic inequality within social work by examining Canadian social workers' attitudes toward immigrants who are permanent residents (PR), refugees, temporary residents (TR), or undocumented immigrants. Using a cross-sectional design with a convenience sample (n = 653), we explore how social workers' attitudes toward immigrants vary in relation to (a) respondents' demographics, (b) contact with immigrants, (c) perceptions of equal opportunities among immigrants, (d) perceptions of deservingness for immigrants with different legal statuses, and (e) the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on these attitudes. Findings: While Canadian social workers generally express positive attitudes toward immigrants, there is a slightly stronger endorsement for PR and refugees to access public services compared to nonstatus (NS) immigrants and TR. Social workers who identify as conservative or have limited contact with immigrants are more likely to perceive NS immigrants as potential criminal threats or burdens on the healthcare system. Significantly, a majority of respondents feel that their social work training inadequately prepares them to work effectively with immigrants. Applications: Canadian social workers advocate for principles of diversity, inclusion, and commitment to social justice. However, perceptions regarding which immigrants deserve access to social services vary based on legal status, suggesting a limitation in social workers' professional mandate. The study discusses implications for social work education and training, emphasizing the need to address and unsettle systemic racism within the profession. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As part of a national survey on social workers' attitudes toward immigrants and immigration (N=4,499), we collected information on respondents' perceptions of immigrants as threats and respondents' views on structural inequality as it pertains to immigrants' opportunities for success. Contrary to the Council on Social Work Education's Educational Policy and Accreditation Standards stating the need for social workers to understand the existence and functioning of structural forces of inequality, nearly a third of our respondents denied that immigrants are disadvantaged compared to U.S.-born citizens, and more than a third denied that disadvantage is related to race, ethnicity, or national origin. Those who denied disadvantage were more likely than those who did not to see immigrants as threats. We provide interpretations for these findings and offer some recommendations for social work research and education geared toward deepening practitioners' knowledge of the structural barriers faced by immigrants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines how the right to sponsor family members' immigration is framed by migrant caregivers in relation to Canadian legislation and political rhetoric. We focus on official immigration policy and political rhetoric between 2014–2018, a period when Canada imposed stringent language and education requirements on migrant workers seeking permanent residence. By examining how political rhetoric frames migrant caregivers as not earning "enough" to migrate with their families, we illustrate how lawmakers promote tolerance for differential inclusion within multicultural discourse. Migrant caregivers, the majority of whom originate in the Philippines, similarly employ market-based values to position themselves as deserving the right to sponsor their family members' immigration. They also draw upon traditional ethics of reciprocal obligation, however, to frame their relationship to Canadian employers and the state in ways that reconstruct the terms of multicultural citizenship in Canada. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines how nongovernmental service providers navigate devolutionary trends in Canada, in both immigration control and integration policy, when responding to migrants who come to them for help and support. Drawing upon conceptualizations of citizenship as a 'negotiated relationship' (), I explore how social service providers, who work amidst a complex interplay of federal, provincial, and local policies, can influence both who is deemed worthy of social membership and what rights an individual can successfully claim from the state. Empirically, this article focuses on observation of community meetings and conversational interviews with service providers in violence against women shelters in Toronto, Ontario, Canada's most populous and diverse city. While service providers navigate different levels of government to advocate for women's rights to seek safety from abuse, I argue that both individual service providers and the organizations in which they work monitor and constrain the degree to which they openly challenge state authority to restrict immigrants' 'right to have rights' (, 296). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Devolutionary trends in immigration and social welfare policy have enabled different levels of government to define membership and confer rights to people residing within the political boundary of a province or municipality in ways that may contradict federal legal status. Drawing upon theories of postnational and deterritorialized citizenship, we examined the legal construction of social rights within federal, provincial, and municipal law in Toronto, Ontario. The study of these different policy arenas focuses on rights related to education, access to safety and police protection, and income assistance. Our analysis suggests that the interplay of intra-governmental laws produces an uneven terrain of social rights for people with precarious status. We argue that while provincial and municipal governments may rhetorically seek to advance the social rights of all people living within their territorial boundaries, program and funding guidelines ensure that national practices of market citizenship and the policing of non-citizen subjects are reproduced at local levels. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]