Pub Date : 2020-01-19DOI: 10.1080/00377317.2020.1706414
María del Mar Fariña
ABSTRACT This article will first present and then apply an Integrated Sociopolitical and Psychological Analysis Model, ISPA, to examine the complexity of social class and social class— consciousness in an intra-ethnic clinical relationship and treatment process. The analysis will show how the internalization of dominant and subjugated sociopolitical discourses that conflate social class, race, ethnicity and culture, compounded the client’s existing psychological conflict and associated mental health symptoms. It will then discuss why the Integrated Sociopolitical and Psychological Analysis Model is a needed approach in direct clinical practice.
{"title":"Why Can’t I Be Latina, Female, and Professional? Clinical Implications of Social Discourses that Render Class Invisible","authors":"María del Mar Fariña","doi":"10.1080/00377317.2020.1706414","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00377317.2020.1706414","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article will first present and then apply an Integrated Sociopolitical and Psychological Analysis Model, ISPA, to examine the complexity of social class and social class— consciousness in an intra-ethnic clinical relationship and treatment process. The analysis will show how the internalization of dominant and subjugated sociopolitical discourses that conflate social class, race, ethnicity and culture, compounded the client’s existing psychological conflict and associated mental health symptoms. It will then discuss why the Integrated Sociopolitical and Psychological Analysis Model is a needed approach in direct clinical practice.","PeriodicalId":45273,"journal":{"name":"SMITH COLLEGE STUDIES IN SOCIAL WORK","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00377317.2020.1706414","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43843561","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-17DOI: 10.1080/00377317.2020.1716598
Shinwoo Choi, Suzie S. Weng, Hyejoon Park, Jooyoung Hong
ABSTRACT This study explores the moderating role of Ethnic and Racial Identity (ERI) in the relations between perceived racial discrimination and Asian immigrants’ psychological distress. Using survey data from 2,059 Asian immigrants in the United States, we found that perceived racial discrimination significantly predicted higher psychological distress. In addition, ethnic and racial identity (ERI) moderated the relations between perceived racial discrimination and psychological distress. Unexpectedly, ethnic and racial identity did not buffer Asian immigrants the negative mental health effects of perceived racial discrimination. The association was moderated, but in a negative way. Implications for practice is discussed.
{"title":"Counter-Effects of Ethnic and Racial Identity (ERI) as a Buffer against Perceived Racial Discrimination among Asian Immigrants","authors":"Shinwoo Choi, Suzie S. Weng, Hyejoon Park, Jooyoung Hong","doi":"10.1080/00377317.2020.1716598","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00377317.2020.1716598","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study explores the moderating role of Ethnic and Racial Identity (ERI) in the relations between perceived racial discrimination and Asian immigrants’ psychological distress. Using survey data from 2,059 Asian immigrants in the United States, we found that perceived racial discrimination significantly predicted higher psychological distress. In addition, ethnic and racial identity (ERI) moderated the relations between perceived racial discrimination and psychological distress. Unexpectedly, ethnic and racial identity did not buffer Asian immigrants the negative mental health effects of perceived racial discrimination. The association was moderated, but in a negative way. Implications for practice is discussed.","PeriodicalId":45273,"journal":{"name":"SMITH COLLEGE STUDIES IN SOCIAL WORK","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00377317.2020.1716598","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41873762","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-01-15DOI: 10.1080/00377317.2020.1715751
A. Daftary
ABSTRACT This research study investigates the experience of college educated Mexican-American young adults (ages 18–29) with an unauthorized immigrant nuclear or extended family member. Of the 11 participants, eight are U.S. citizens (either naturalized or U.S. born citizens) and three currently had or were in the process of gaining protection through DACA at the time of the study. A semi-structured interview protocol was utilized for each in-depth interview. The 11 interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed through thematic analysis. Findings emphasize the structural barriers to education, health care, job opportunities, and travel that affect unauthorized Mexican immigrants and their family members.
{"title":"Restrictions and Barriers Confronted by Mexican Americans with Unauthorized Immigrant Family Members","authors":"A. Daftary","doi":"10.1080/00377317.2020.1715751","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00377317.2020.1715751","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This research study investigates the experience of college educated Mexican-American young adults (ages 18–29) with an unauthorized immigrant nuclear or extended family member. Of the 11 participants, eight are U.S. citizens (either naturalized or U.S. born citizens) and three currently had or were in the process of gaining protection through DACA at the time of the study. A semi-structured interview protocol was utilized for each in-depth interview. The 11 interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and analyzed through thematic analysis. Findings emphasize the structural barriers to education, health care, job opportunities, and travel that affect unauthorized Mexican immigrants and their family members.","PeriodicalId":45273,"journal":{"name":"SMITH COLLEGE STUDIES IN SOCIAL WORK","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00377317.2020.1715751","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42034009","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-02DOI: 10.1080/00377317.2019.1706318
J. Everett
We are living through turbulent times in the nation’s history. Faced with many serious problems that range from the effect of climate change on our environment, the rise in gun violence especially mass shootings, humane immigration policy, education and election integrity, we are being challenged to dig deep into our souls and to struggle with the nuances of different policy positions. Each of these are serious policy issues with long histories and new complications. Policy issues are always two-sided issues that reflect value choices and political power. Neither set of value choices is the right one or the wrong one, each has intrinsic worth and significance, because the choices we make today will effect the future. Over the last four years, we’ve been challenged to examine the pros and cons of the policies put forth by the Trump Administration beginning with the travel ban imposed on Muslims from five predominately Muslim countries, an Executive Order directing federal funding for the construction of a wall along the Mexico and US border and calling for an end to the abuses of parole and asylum provisions of immigration law and building facilities to hold undocumented immigrants near the Mexican border. Later we were jolted into an alternative reality of zero tolerance policies and the separation of Latina children from their families, the official policies of the Department of Homeland Security and the Trump Administration. Many of these policies violate the very ethical standards that social workers pledge to follow, creating ethical and moral dilemmas for those who work with the populations directly affected. Now Donald Trump is the third sitting President who has been impeached by the House of Representatives, where a majority of the representatives are Democratic. The President has been charged with two articles of impeachment: one on abuse of power, the other obstruction of Congress. The first pertains to Trump’s attempt to get the President of Ukraine to announce an investigation of Joe Biden, the President’s political rival, Biden’s son Hunter Biden and Burisma, a Ukrainian gas production company. House Democrats accuse the President of betraying public trust by withholding $391 million in military aid to Ukraine in exchange for the investigation. They further argue that the President placed his own interests above those of the country. He was seeking to serve his own interests rather than those of the country. In doing so, Trump abused his power as President. Obstruction of Congress was the second charge. Trump defied subpoenas to provide testimony issued to members of his Administration and refused to release documents requested by the House Intelligence Committee. Presidents are not immune from responding to subpoenas. The full House will vote on the impeachment charges in the next week; if a majority favors the charges then the Senate will hold a trial. The Republicans counter these charges by arguing that the President did nothing
{"title":"Editorial","authors":"J. Everett","doi":"10.1080/00377317.2019.1706318","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00377317.2019.1706318","url":null,"abstract":"We are living through turbulent times in the nation’s history. Faced with many serious problems that range from the effect of climate change on our environment, the rise in gun violence especially mass shootings, humane immigration policy, education and election integrity, we are being challenged to dig deep into our souls and to struggle with the nuances of different policy positions. Each of these are serious policy issues with long histories and new complications. Policy issues are always two-sided issues that reflect value choices and political power. Neither set of value choices is the right one or the wrong one, each has intrinsic worth and significance, because the choices we make today will effect the future. Over the last four years, we’ve been challenged to examine the pros and cons of the policies put forth by the Trump Administration beginning with the travel ban imposed on Muslims from five predominately Muslim countries, an Executive Order directing federal funding for the construction of a wall along the Mexico and US border and calling for an end to the abuses of parole and asylum provisions of immigration law and building facilities to hold undocumented immigrants near the Mexican border. Later we were jolted into an alternative reality of zero tolerance policies and the separation of Latina children from their families, the official policies of the Department of Homeland Security and the Trump Administration. Many of these policies violate the very ethical standards that social workers pledge to follow, creating ethical and moral dilemmas for those who work with the populations directly affected. Now Donald Trump is the third sitting President who has been impeached by the House of Representatives, where a majority of the representatives are Democratic. The President has been charged with two articles of impeachment: one on abuse of power, the other obstruction of Congress. The first pertains to Trump’s attempt to get the President of Ukraine to announce an investigation of Joe Biden, the President’s political rival, Biden’s son Hunter Biden and Burisma, a Ukrainian gas production company. House Democrats accuse the President of betraying public trust by withholding $391 million in military aid to Ukraine in exchange for the investigation. They further argue that the President placed his own interests above those of the country. He was seeking to serve his own interests rather than those of the country. In doing so, Trump abused his power as President. Obstruction of Congress was the second charge. Trump defied subpoenas to provide testimony issued to members of his Administration and refused to release documents requested by the House Intelligence Committee. Presidents are not immune from responding to subpoenas. The full House will vote on the impeachment charges in the next week; if a majority favors the charges then the Senate will hold a trial. The Republicans counter these charges by arguing that the President did nothing ","PeriodicalId":45273,"journal":{"name":"SMITH COLLEGE STUDIES IN SOCIAL WORK","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00377317.2019.1706318","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44580196","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-02DOI: 10.1080/00377317.2019.1704586
Lea Tufford, Ellen Katz, Cassandra Etherington
ABSTRACT This exploratory study set out to examine the impact of weekly mindfulness practices on Year 4 Bachelor of Social Work students’ ability to develop attentional processes, therapeutic presence, and empathy in classroom-based role-play scenarios and practicum placements. Participants (n = 24) received a brief, 10– 15 minute mindfulness practice each week at the start of class. Individual interviews were conducted (n = 9) following completion of the course and thematic analysis was used to surface salient themes. Findings were grouped into the following themes: (1) benefits of mindfulness; (2) challenges of mindfulness; (3) mindfulness practices; (4) readings; (5) instructor factors; (6) future mindfulness practice; and (7) knowledge transfer. Our findings suggest undergraduate social work students can elucidate the benefits of mindfulness practice but struggle transferring these benefits to clinical practice.
{"title":"BSW Student Perspectives on the Utility of Brief, Classroom-Based Mindfulness Practices","authors":"Lea Tufford, Ellen Katz, Cassandra Etherington","doi":"10.1080/00377317.2019.1704586","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00377317.2019.1704586","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This exploratory study set out to examine the impact of weekly mindfulness practices on Year 4 Bachelor of Social Work students’ ability to develop attentional processes, therapeutic presence, and empathy in classroom-based role-play scenarios and practicum placements. Participants (n = 24) received a brief, 10– 15 minute mindfulness practice each week at the start of class. Individual interviews were conducted (n = 9) following completion of the course and thematic analysis was used to surface salient themes. Findings were grouped into the following themes: (1) benefits of mindfulness; (2) challenges of mindfulness; (3) mindfulness practices; (4) readings; (5) instructor factors; (6) future mindfulness practice; and (7) knowledge transfer. Our findings suggest undergraduate social work students can elucidate the benefits of mindfulness practice but struggle transferring these benefits to clinical practice.","PeriodicalId":45273,"journal":{"name":"SMITH COLLEGE STUDIES IN SOCIAL WORK","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00377317.2019.1704586","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41797209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-02DOI: 10.1080/00377317.2019.1706316
J. Drisko, A. Friedman
ABSTRACT Evidence based practice [EBP] has had a strong influence on social work practice, research, and education. EBP is a multi-step process for health care decision making which includes relevant research findings in treatment planning together with the client’s preferences and clinical expertise. An empirically supported treatments [EST] is a designation for treatments for a given disorder that have met specific standards for research quality. ESTs are often part of the EBP process but are not identical to it. This article reports results from a review of relevant 200 articles from the Social Work Abstracts database, showing social workers fail to distinguish the two concepts, and often fail to define them fully and clearly. More published reports conflate ESTs with EBP than correctly distinguish the two concepts. Recommendation to strengthen future social work publications, practice and education are offered.
{"title":"Let’s Clearly Distinguish Evidence-based Practice and Empirically Supported Treatments","authors":"J. Drisko, A. Friedman","doi":"10.1080/00377317.2019.1706316","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00377317.2019.1706316","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Evidence based practice [EBP] has had a strong influence on social work practice, research, and education. EBP is a multi-step process for health care decision making which includes relevant research findings in treatment planning together with the client’s preferences and clinical expertise. An empirically supported treatments [EST] is a designation for treatments for a given disorder that have met specific standards for research quality. ESTs are often part of the EBP process but are not identical to it. This article reports results from a review of relevant 200 articles from the Social Work Abstracts database, showing social workers fail to distinguish the two concepts, and often fail to define them fully and clearly. More published reports conflate ESTs with EBP than correctly distinguish the two concepts. Recommendation to strengthen future social work publications, practice and education are offered.","PeriodicalId":45273,"journal":{"name":"SMITH COLLEGE STUDIES IN SOCIAL WORK","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00377317.2019.1706316","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48794928","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-02DOI: 10.1080/00377317.2019.1702344
R. Varghese, Hye-kyung Kang
ABSTRACT Clinical social work educators have a critical role in defining clinical social work and conveying their understanding through their teaching. While there have been a few conceptual articles that have defined clinical social work, there is little empirical research conducted on this topic. In this study, we asked 15 social work faculty teaching advanced clinical social work practice how they defined clinical social work, particularly what core concepts, principles, and theories or frameworks that guided clinical social work. The results indicate that participants conceptualized clinical social work drawing upon the concept of person-in-environment and the therapeutic relationship. Furthermore, participants identified teaching a range of psychological theories but emphasizing a psychodynamic orientation. Furthermore, participants identified multi-level analysis and a commitment to diversity and social justice as important concepts that they wanted students to recognize about clinical social work. This article, through the voices of clinical social work faculty, challenges the field of clinical social work to define what their commitment to social justice means and reflect on how we are responding to criticisms and moving forward as a field.
{"title":"Essential Knowledge for Clinical Social Work Practice: Social Work Faculty Perspectives","authors":"R. Varghese, Hye-kyung Kang","doi":"10.1080/00377317.2019.1702344","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00377317.2019.1702344","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Clinical social work educators have a critical role in defining clinical social work and conveying their understanding through their teaching. While there have been a few conceptual articles that have defined clinical social work, there is little empirical research conducted on this topic. In this study, we asked 15 social work faculty teaching advanced clinical social work practice how they defined clinical social work, particularly what core concepts, principles, and theories or frameworks that guided clinical social work. The results indicate that participants conceptualized clinical social work drawing upon the concept of person-in-environment and the therapeutic relationship. Furthermore, participants identified teaching a range of psychological theories but emphasizing a psychodynamic orientation. Furthermore, participants identified multi-level analysis and a commitment to diversity and social justice as important concepts that they wanted students to recognize about clinical social work. This article, through the voices of clinical social work faculty, challenges the field of clinical social work to define what their commitment to social justice means and reflect on how we are responding to criticisms and moving forward as a field.","PeriodicalId":45273,"journal":{"name":"SMITH COLLEGE STUDIES IN SOCIAL WORK","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00377317.2019.1702344","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48640368","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-10-02DOI: 10.1080/00377317.2019.1704146
Wendy E Shaia, David O. Avruch, K. Green, Geneen M. Godsey
ABSTRACT Recent social science data identifies white supremacist racism, neoliberal economic policies and cisgender-heteropatriarchy as three primary systemic engines of traumatic outcomes at the individual level. Social work pedagogy, however, fails to identify such experiences as socially-engineered trauma (SET). Lacking an explicitly anti-oppressive pedagogy, social workers attend to micro-level traumas while ignoring the macro forces leading to trauma exposure among certain populations. The term socioeducation is introduced as a method for discussing macro social systems with clients to support trauma recovery, with the goal of catalyzing client and worker participation in social justice movements seeking to disrupt oppressive systems.
{"title":"Socially-Engineered Trauma and a New Social Work Pedagogy: Socioeducation as a Critical Foundation of Social Work Practice","authors":"Wendy E Shaia, David O. Avruch, K. Green, Geneen M. Godsey","doi":"10.1080/00377317.2019.1704146","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00377317.2019.1704146","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Recent social science data identifies white supremacist racism, neoliberal economic policies and cisgender-heteropatriarchy as three primary systemic engines of traumatic outcomes at the individual level. Social work pedagogy, however, fails to identify such experiences as socially-engineered trauma (SET). Lacking an explicitly anti-oppressive pedagogy, social workers attend to micro-level traumas while ignoring the macro forces leading to trauma exposure among certain populations. The term socioeducation is introduced as a method for discussing macro social systems with clients to support trauma recovery, with the goal of catalyzing client and worker participation in social justice movements seeking to disrupt oppressive systems.","PeriodicalId":45273,"journal":{"name":"SMITH COLLEGE STUDIES IN SOCIAL WORK","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2019-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00377317.2019.1704146","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47035973","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-04-03DOI: 10.1080/00377317.2019.1686929
M. McCardle, Susan Bliss
ABSTRACT Although over 60 years have passed since federal policy was developed to create a more integrated school system, Black and Brown children in the US are still learning in schools where they are almost completely segregated from their White peers. The impact of segregation in schools is well documented, and outcome data continues to demonstrate significant racial disparities in educational achievement among our children. While structural racism accounts for much of the lack of progress in this area, unconscious beliefs may also play a role in the intractability of segregation, and segregation may lead to greater implicit bias. The current study examined the relationship between levels of diversity in school and community, beliefs about segregation, and implicit racial bias. Findings suggest that implicit racial bias was significantly higher for those who were educated in communities with lower levels of integration. In order to truly impact segregation, social workers must consider the complex interplay between societal factors and unconscious factors which both serve to perpetuate the staggering lack of equity in educational opportunities in this country.
{"title":"Digging Deeper: The Relationship between School Segregation and Unconscious Racism","authors":"M. McCardle, Susan Bliss","doi":"10.1080/00377317.2019.1686929","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00377317.2019.1686929","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Although over 60 years have passed since federal policy was developed to create a more integrated school system, Black and Brown children in the US are still learning in schools where they are almost completely segregated from their White peers. The impact of segregation in schools is well documented, and outcome data continues to demonstrate significant racial disparities in educational achievement among our children. While structural racism accounts for much of the lack of progress in this area, unconscious beliefs may also play a role in the intractability of segregation, and segregation may lead to greater implicit bias. The current study examined the relationship between levels of diversity in school and community, beliefs about segregation, and implicit racial bias. Findings suggest that implicit racial bias was significantly higher for those who were educated in communities with lower levels of integration. In order to truly impact segregation, social workers must consider the complex interplay between societal factors and unconscious factors which both serve to perpetuate the staggering lack of equity in educational opportunities in this country.","PeriodicalId":45273,"journal":{"name":"SMITH COLLEGE STUDIES IN SOCIAL WORK","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00377317.2019.1686929","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45720222","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-04-03DOI: 10.1080/00377317.2019.1682432
Eunjung Lee, Rupaleem Bhuyan
ABSTRACT Applying selected psychoanalytic constructs from Freud and Klein to recent pervasive rhetoric around anti-immigration in the United States, we conducted a critical discourse analysis of media and policy representations of immigrants in recent news coverage in the United States regarding the Trump Administration’s response to (1) asylum claims related to domestic violence and gang violence and (2) undocumented immigrants. We illustrate how feared bad object/immigrants are constructed alongside the imagined good object/nationalism, as exemplified by Trump’s motto – “Make America Great Again” (MAGA). We argue how this paranoid-schizoid position reifies racism veiled under nationalism and discuss how social workers could work together toward the depressive position re-imagining America-as-the-whole.
{"title":"Politics of Fear versus Global Anxiety: A Critical Analysis of Recent US Anti-Immigration Policies from Psychoanalytic Perspectives","authors":"Eunjung Lee, Rupaleem Bhuyan","doi":"10.1080/00377317.2019.1682432","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00377317.2019.1682432","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Applying selected psychoanalytic constructs from Freud and Klein to recent pervasive rhetoric around anti-immigration in the United States, we conducted a critical discourse analysis of media and policy representations of immigrants in recent news coverage in the United States regarding the Trump Administration’s response to (1) asylum claims related to domestic violence and gang violence and (2) undocumented immigrants. We illustrate how feared bad object/immigrants are constructed alongside the imagined good object/nationalism, as exemplified by Trump’s motto – “Make America Great Again” (MAGA). We argue how this paranoid-schizoid position reifies racism veiled under nationalism and discuss how social workers could work together toward the depressive position re-imagining America-as-the-whole.","PeriodicalId":45273,"journal":{"name":"SMITH COLLEGE STUDIES IN SOCIAL WORK","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2019-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/00377317.2019.1682432","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48468480","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：