Women,Migration and Social Work

Abstract

Recent events in the United Kingdom have implications for the migration of women. Migrant women feature significantly in the staffing of the National Health Service and the social care sector, both currently under economic and political pressure. International labor mobility is also evident in the social work profession, though transnational social workers constitute only a very small proportion of the workforce. The recent vote to leave the European Union (EU) raises questions about the trend from recruitment of social workers from English-speaking countries to those from the EU. The role of social workers in relation to migrants is considered.

In June 2016, 52% of the British population voted to leave the European Union (EU). The majority of voters in Northern Ireland and Scotland voted to remain posing challenges to developing a “United Kingdom” (UK) response to the democratic decision to leave, popularly known as “Brexit.” There were all sorts of reasons for the way the majority of (English) people voted, but a significant one related to “immigrants” and a desire for “control” of national borders. One result of the vote has been an increase in ethnically and racially motivated tensions and a deep sense of insecurity on the part of people (particularly from other EU countries) who have made their homes in the UK but not necessarily acquired British citizenship.

However, the vote and resulting policy process will also have particular consequences for women and for health care and social work in the UK. Migration in its various forms (and not least labor mobility) has traditionally seen a majority of men on the move, but increasing numbers of women have been evident in migration statistics since the latter half of the 20th century (Ross-Sheriff, 2011). The UK has been a destination of choice for many women seeking work in the health and social care sectors, although this trend has also been evident in other European countries (Christensen and Guldvin, 2014; Triandafyllidou and Marchetti, 2015). Notwithstanding increasing regulation of immigration, the UK “National Health Service” has relied heavily on recruits from abroad to fill posts in traditionally female occupations such as nursing and physiotherapy. This situation has been even more pronounced in relation to the care of vulnerable adults, particularly older people, in their own homes or in residential facilities. There are currently serious concerns about financing and staffing across the health and social care sectors. These concerns relate in part to the state of the national economy allied to the political preference for privatized and outsourced services. However, they also reflect increased demands on the services related to demographic realities. These include the longevity of “war babies” and the postwar generation, a high proportion of whom are women who are increasingly in need of medical treatment and/or residential care due to frailty related to degenerative physical and/or mental conditions.

The issues outlined above have a direct bearing on the work of only a minority of social workers (employed in health-care settings or adult services), but there are also direct consequences or implications for “international social workers” themselves. Britain has experienced a shortage of “homegrown” social workers over at least the last couple of decades, particularly in the area of child protection services. This shortage has been addressed in part by the recruitment of qualified social workers from abroad, who now form an admittedly small proportion of this workforce. Early in the 21st century recruits came primarily from English-speaking countries, such as the United States and a range of Commonwealth countries. Anecdotal evidence at the time suggested that such recruits fell into two broad categories—mainly young women motivated by adventure, professional ambition, and perhaps connecting with distant relations and slightly older (and often experienced) men and women who were seeking both work opportunities and the chance to relocate their families to an apparently more stable and tolerant society than countries they were leaving. Of course, these are “sweeping generalizations” since there were no studies questioning the motivations of such immigrants at the time, but there were intimations that a minority of this latter group would have fallen into the refugee category (due to fear of persecution; e.g., related to political beliefs, ethnic identity, or sexuality) if they had not sought the exit opportunity offered by overseas recruitment.

The picture with regard to employment of social workers trained outside the UK has changed over the last decade as control of immigration has been tightened. Accordingly, relatively more social workers from EU countries have taken advantage of the “free movement of labor” provisions of the single market, particularly since job opportunities in their own countries have declined or disappeared: The economic crises affecting countries such as Greece, Spain, and Romania, have made sustaining or developing social work services even more difficult than in the UK. This has “shifted the balance” in terms of the British workforce, particularly in places such as London (Lyons and Hanna, 2011). People recruited in the last few years are more likely to be white and to speak English as a second (or third, etc.) language. This may have reduced the amount of racial diversity in the workforce, and it may also have put more strain on international social workers trying to communicate in the face of dialects and slang in use in particular communities and the jargon prevailing in organizations. The effect of Brexit on this trend remains to be seen, but, in general, it seems likely that the opportunities for social workers “from abroad” to work in the UK will be reduced.

The prevailing anti-immigration attitudes might seem strange given the history of the UK: Apart from historical conquests, the UK has offered shelter to people fleeing war and persecution over many centuries and actively recruited workers from former colonies from the 1950s on, leading to considerable diversity within the national population. However, it is more understandable in the context of the Islamophobia, evident in many Western societies. Nationally, many Asian families (of all religious persuasions or none) are well settled in racially diverse or predominantly white local communities. However, there are some towns (or areas in them) where, for socioeconomic and other reasons, there are high concentrations of people from the Asian subcontinent. It is sometimes from these communities, where patriarchal traditions persist, that young, mostly male, second generation immigrants have been recruited by Muslim extremists. Despite the wider processes of racism and prejudice impacting on these communities, and the isolation and lack of opportunities experienced by women, blame is sometimes laid on mothers who are seen as having “failed to integrate” into the wider society (e.g., by learning English and/or working outside their homes) and being unable to resist the more powerful influences of male relatives and religious leaders. Fears about homegrown terrorism as well as the nationalist and austerity agendas of right-wing politicians have fostered both increasingly hard-line policies controlling all forms of immigration as well as a very limited response to the Syrian refugee crisis. The extent to which the social work profession in the UK has risen to current challenges is debatable. The public services, including health and education, have been increasingly drawn into the monitoring and control of immigration and resistance to such policies by social workers have tended to be sporadic and through channels other than professional bodies. A minority of social workers have been involved in resettlement work when small groups of refugees arrive in local areas (national policies dictate dispersal rather than concentration) and some work in the voluntary sector providing residential or therapeutic services to selected asylum seekers, but this is not yet an area in which the profession has asserted itself in terms of policy challenges or services.

Given the foregoing—and accepting that population mobility is a global phenomenon which the UK cannot resist—there are various possibilities for social workers to play a larger role in this field. A major advance would be efforts not just to challenge policies that attempt to “keep people out” or to plead the case for letting in particular groups (including social and care workers) but to contribute to cultural shifts through attitudinal change in particular communities and society as a whole. Immigrants—including asylum seekers and international social workers—need to be viewed as a resource rather than a threat or a burden and efforts made to build on the experiences and strengths which they bring. Some people already have qualifications needed in the health and social care sectors—and the wider economy—which need to be properly assessed. Efforts then need to be made to help migrants “convert” their experience and qualifications into ones which are compatible with British systems and standards (which might in any case need to be reviewed). Currently, such efforts are small scale and usually within the education and voluntary sectors, but social workers could learn from some of their European colleagues (about the wider roles which social workers undertake) as well as seeking out opportunities for interprofessional working in the education as well as the health-care services. Most British social workers will have been educated in the values of human rights and social justice, and feminist and internationalist perspectives will also be familiar to many, but these need to be (re)activated in relation to engagement with issues and practices in the field of migration.