![[ Visit Client Website ]](images/banner.gif)
Background and Purpose: The aim of this analysis sought to answer two research questions: 1) What is the social construction and power typology of ‘the immigrant’? and 2) Is family-unity a core value of our immigration policy debates? Our federal immigration policy primarily emphases immigrant family relationships (to citizens or legal permanent residents). The family unity framework represents a value-laden family sustainment model which persists despite highly polarizing political debates. These debates have recently begun to challenge the United States core commitment to support incoming immigration through a family-based immigration policy.
There is a dearth of social work research which systematically explores the ways in which ‘the immigrant’ and family-based immigration policy debates are socially constructed. Think-tank centers have substantial power in the policy-making arena. Using the policy process theory of Social Construction of Target Populations, the commentary of think-tank contributing authors were analyzed to determine the placement of ‘the immigrant’ on a four-quadrant matrix (adapted from Sabatier and Weible, 2014).
Methods: A systematic review of the top ten U.S. think-tanks were completed using the ranking system of McGann’s “2017 Global Go To Think Tank Index Report”. Each think-tank website was searched using the search terms: family-based immigration, family unity, ‘chain migration’, immigration and immigrant. The timeframe for content searches were constrained to January 2016 through March 2018. Content was reviewed and plotted on the matrix to determine the social construction and political power of ‘the immigrant’ (i.e., deserving or undeserving [of policy benefits]) and situated in the aforementioned theory. To address the second research question, each commentary piece was uniquely coded if it addressed, in any capacity, family unity as a framework for immigration policy.
Findings: Each content piece reviewed from the think tanks websites are plotted on a Social Construction and Power Typology matrix. Over one hundred think-tank commentaries were analyzed and plotted. Several themes emerged from the findings including a reoccurring social construction of ‘the immigrant’ as positively constructed but lacking political power, interestingly excluding focus on the strength of ‘the immigrant’. Notable exceptions to this construction were evident in several think-tanks which appeared to publish commentary classifying ‘the immigrant’ in the “deviant” position of the matrix. The volume of publications of these pieces (over one thousand content pieces on one think-tank website) may represent a saturation of this “deviant” social construction unto the policy-making arena. Additional thematic findings to be presented.
Conclusion and Implications: The way a target group is socially constructed has significant impact on the types of benefits or burdens that the group are afforded. Social workers must be cognizant of the socially constructed positioning of the vulnerable groups for which we are ethnically responsible to advocate. Understanding the social construction of ‘the immigrant’ as reported by think-tanks can aid social workers in appropriating resources that increase the positive social construction, and thereby the power, of ‘the immigrant’ to influence the policy-making process.