Social Work with Immigrants

Juliet Cheetham

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2022
• ISBN:
  9781000549355
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Medicine
• Subtopic: Health Care Delivery

People whose work brings them into contact with immigrants and their families are concerned about the serious personal and social problems they may face in establishing themselves in Britain. Originally published in 1972, Juliet Cheetham here explores the origin and nature of these difficulties and discusses the contributions and limitations of social work in meeting the needs of immigrants, their relatives and some of the organizations involved with them at the time.

Drawing on her own field experience, the author deals with fundamental issues in race relations, together with the problems of poor urban areas in which most immigrants have settled. She also considers the backgrounds of some of the main immigrant groups, their family structure, and the pressures and anxieties they experience in moving into a new environment. She examines as well the special skills and understanding that social workers in this field need to develop.

This is a perceptive study which raised fundamental questions about the values, objectives and methods of social work at the time. Even today it will also provide social workers with a stimulus to re-think the basis of some of their activities.

This book is a re-issue originally published in 1972. The language used, and assumptions made, are a reflection of its era and no offence is meant by the Publishers to any reader by this re-publication.

1 Some definitions and problems

Migration is central to human experience. The search for a promised land which would be a refuge and a home for the poor and oppressed and the opportunities of gaining wealth and power by colonial expansion have always drawn people to seek their fortunes outside their native countries. This has been achieved by the settlement of under-developed territories, by the sale of labour in countries whose expansion depended on manpower they did not possess themselves, and by conquest and exploitation. All migrants experience some hardship, and even when they are welcomed and needed, their presence is usually accompanied by tensions which can become the concern of politicians and administrators. In recent years, social workers in many countries have also been concerned with immigrants and this has involved them not only with their welfare but also, implicitly or explicitly, with the protection of those interests of the receiving society which may be threatened by newcomers. American and Israeli experience provide numerous examples of these dual and sometimes conflicting preoccupations. British social workers are now also facing these challenges and it is their contact with immigrants with which this book is chiefly concerned.

For centuries Britain’s wealth of natural resources, her expanding industries, and to some extent her liberal, political, and religious ideals have attracted those whose security has been threatened in their native countries.

Attitudes towards these immigrants and the treatment they have received have been influenced by Britain’s perception of the reasons for their migration, her view of their social and cultural background and, most important, her understanding of the kind of contribution they were likely to make to their new country.

At various times public concern has been expressed about the number of immigrants coming to the UK and the conditions in which they chose or were forced to live. The Aliens Act of 1905, designed to restrict the entry of poor Russian and Polish Jews, and the Commonwealth Immigrants Acts of 1962 and 1968 are indications that the initial sympathy extended to victims of political or religious persecution or the notion of the rights in Commonwealth citizenship are tempered very much by Britain’s perception of what appear to be her own immediate interests. In the latter case the loss of imperial power and the reassessment of the role of the Commonwealth contributed to a perception of these interests largely in domestic terms. Although the economic contribution of immigrants to Britain has been recognized, there has also been considerable alarm about the consequences of the presence, mainly in urban areas, of large numbers of coloured people coming mainly from the ‘New’ Commonwealth, that is all Commonwealth countries with the exception of Australia, Canada, and New Zealand. This concern has been present in demands both for the strict control of immigration, particularly that of coloured people, and for policies to protect and promote their interests. The following chapters will show how muddled these measures have been, and how this confusion has been reflected in the contact social workers have had with immigrants.

The shape of these policies and the priority they assume must be understood in the context of assumptions about the rights and needs of immigrants and their place in British society. Although some of these attitudes are present in any country which has experienced immigration on a large scale, others arise directly from the philosophy and beliefs which have traditionally permeated British social policies and are further influenced by her experience of imperial power.

Some conceptual frameworks

1. The immigrant as a stranger The simplest and most unsophisticated view of the immigrant is that of the stranger lost in an alien but not necessarily unwelcoming world, who will, in the course of time, find his feet in his new situation. This perception, often including the assumption that the immigrant will return soon to his native country, asks that some allowance should be made for unfamiliarity with the customs of a new country and for the reserve and possible mild antipathy of the native population in the face of this. The onus is on the newcomer to find a place for himself in society, even if only on its fringes. If he does not return home, it is assumed that he, or anyway his children, will gradually assimilate to the new country. These assumptions, which rely very much on laissez-faire principles, underly the assertions, characteristic until the last decade of British policy towards immigrants, that no special efforts should be made to meet their needs. They ignore the many social and economic pressures which militate against the acceptance of the ‘stranger’ as an equal, especially if his cultural background is very unfamiliar, and also the wishes of some immigrants to preserve their national identity at the same time as they press for equality of treatment. This perception of immigrants will be blind to the various attempts which are nearly always made, consciously or unconsciously, to exclude them from sharing the rights and privileges enjoyed by the majority of the native population.
2. Immigrants and the working class Another perception of the immigrant is of a person whose recent arrival and willingness to take any employment, no matter what its conditions, place him, at least temporarily, in the lowest strata of society, so sharing their frustrations and deprivations. This view is well founded in fact. Traditionally, immigrants, many of whom are unskilled, have sought and accepted a role as a replacement labour force living in the least favoured areas vacated by those who are successfully pursuing better jobs and living conditions. However, because of their industry and their willingness to endure considerable hardship in their efforts to establish themselves socially and economically, many immigrants to Britain, especially those from Europe and Ireland, have achieved a substantial degree of social mobility. This achievement has lessened fears about the formation of a permanent alien working-class minority and accounts for the view that any problems that immigrants might experience, because of their similarity with those of the deprived working class, demand the same treatment.
   Most studies of coloured or white immigrants and the areas in which they first settle have revealed not only hardships and deprivations shared with the poor working class but also the way in which the presence of immigrants draws attention to these problems. Some have also shown how the demands of urban life and competition for the scarce resources of the most deprived areas lead to an inevitable conflict of interests and the exclusion, sometimes deliberate, of some of the weakest members of society from a share of the few good things of life and their exploitation by the more powerful. Amongst those falling behind in this struggle will be families with young children, unsupported mothers, and other people whose personal circumstances and poverty leave them with little bargaining power. Those who are unfamiliar with urban life and have problems of adjustment in a new society will also be vulnerable.
   There are, however, other factors which ensure that some immigrants have little chance of improving their circumstances. The most potent of these is discrimination which excludes them, more or less permanently, from all but the most menial and poorly paid jobs, the worst housing, and consequently the most inadequate amenities and social services. In a competitive and deprived environment this discrimination has its roots in beliefs that some people, perhaps because of the way they conduct their lives, or because as newcomers they should be at the end of the queue for employment, housing, and welfare, are not fit for or should not share in the rights and privileges hoped for but infrequently received by the rest of the community. Groups of people who are readily identifiable, especially if they are unfamiliar, can also serve as useful scapegoats, and because they are seen as the cause of the ills of society, they are still further excluded from its benefits.
   Most immigrants are to an extent identifiable and so can expect to experience discrimination, the ill effects of which are often tempered by their resilience and perseverance. In time, their increasing familiarity with the life of their new country and their adaptation to it makes many immigrants, and certainly their children, indistinguishable from the rest of the community. However, those immigrants who are coloured and therefore the most easily identifiable may continue to experience discrimination and exploitation whatever their personal circumstances and however long their stay in the new country. As a result, they and their children can be firmly trapped in a deprived environment from which it is hard to escape both because they are barred from superior employment and housing and because their surroundings provide few opportunities for advancement.
   Evidence of the extensive discrimination experienced by coloured people is irrefutable. In an illuminating book, Rex (1970) has argued that this prejudice arises partly because of certain stereotyped views concerning their incapacity to achieve social advancement. Consequently, they are seen as outside and beneath the stratified system of society. Sometimes these views have their roots in beliefs about the innate inferiority of certain races but, in a European context, they are most often the inheritance of colonialism and slavery whose systems of dominance and control over black people were largely incompatible with ideas about their actual or potential equally with the white races.
   Mason (1970) has described how the differences in various colonial systems have influenced contemporary perception and treatment of colonized people. For example, the paternalism of British colonialism, which saw its subject people as eventually maturing sufficiently to run their own affairs and benefiting from adopting some of the laws and traditions of their masters, can still be detected in attitudes towards immigrants in the UK. However, no colonial system has escaped, and most have encouraged, the age-old association of blackness with inferiority. In a country like Britain, with such a recent imperial history, few people can be unaware of this association.
   It has also been argued that some people are especially likely to be racially prejudiced if their personalities predispose them towards aggression, particularly against minority or unfamiliar groups, a reliance on strict control of individual freedom, and severe sanctions for deviant behaviour. This group will include some who feel they have failed in many important respects in their emotional and social lives and who will be tempted to see the presence of newcomers as contributing to their failure. Since these personality traits are present to some extent in all people and cannot be associated exclusively with one distinguishable group, this view of prejudice cannot, on its own, account for the many different ways in which it will be expressed, including the active discrimination of one group or individual against another. This can most usefully be understood in the context of the social and economic environment.
   The presence of coloured immigrants in the most deprived areas, drawing attention to the problems of the inner city and highlighting the struggle for scarce resources and the inevitable conflict, together with certain views of coloured people as alien and inferior, should, therefore, temper the relatively optimistic view that they are members in all important respects of the poor working class and likely only temporarily to face discrimination which hampers their social mobility. There is airead; some evidence that coloured people, whether they are old established immigrants or born in the UK are finding it difficult or even impossible to achieve the acceptance and social and geographical distribution which would normally be expected given the length of their residence in Britain.
   There are some serious problems inherent in this perception of coloured people as potentially the weakest, most deprived, and most frustrated members of the poor working class. If it became clear that the extent of discrimination against them was such that they were particularly at risk of being trapped indefinitely in a vicious circle of poor opportunity and poor attainment, special measures which positively discriminated in their favour might be necessary, either to prevent their entry into this vicious circle or to help them to escape from it. Because such treatment would be resented and envied by poor whites, the tension between them and coloured people could be increased. Consequently, there are as yet few demands for the privileged treatment of coloured people and any special efforts that are made on their behalf are not usually openly acknowledged or encouraged. The emphasis is on reducing actual or potential conflict between white and coloured people both by focusing on their common problems and uniting them in solving these and by restricting the over-all numbers of coloured people in Britain. Some efforts, so far largely unsuccessful, have also been made to prevent their concentration in some of the poorest areas. It is not yet clear how successful these policies will be and in spite of the obvious dangers of such measures, if the emergence of a grossly deprived and frustrated coloured minority seemed likely, its special and priority needs would have to be recognized and met.
3. Immigrants and minority groups The third perception of immigrants is as members of minority groups, aware of their separate identity, with their own internal hierarchy, and anxious to preserve their own cultural traditions. Such groups may have a degree of self-sufficiency which involves them only in minimal contact with the native community. They ask for little more than the right to work and to be left in peace to pursue their own way of life. Some Jewish, Pakistani, and Indian immigrants can be seen as following this pattern of self-sufficiency and voluntary isolation. But after the earliest stages of migration, competition and conflict with the wider environment tend to increase. Few immigrants who are aware of their own national or cultural identity will consciously seek assimilation with the native community. More usually, with the rising expectations that come after a few years settlement in the new country, they ask for the civil rights, and social and economic benefits accorded to the native population as well as respect for their own traditions and measures to safeguard them.

Although there is a risk that focusing on minority groups will encourage the view that some people are potentially always an alien irritant in society, in many respects, this view of immigrants is an attractive one. It underlies one of the most popular definitions of integration not as a process of assimilation involving the loss by immigrants of their own national characteristics and culture but as ‘equal opportunity accompanied by cultural diversity, in an atmosphere of mutual tolerance’ (Jenkins, 1966). However, it cannot be assumed that ‘mutual tolerance’ and cultural diversity will accompany each other if one group feels deeply that its own interests will thereby be threatened. It is probably more realistic to expect conflict between groups seeking some degree of acceptance and equality of treatment and those who are anxious for various reasons to exclude them from this, and to explore ways of reducing or managing that conflict. This is achieved sometimes by reducing the economic and political power of the weaker groups and sometimes by providing a legal framework for the expression of conflict and sometimes by providing for social and economic equality. It can also mean fostering each group’s awareness of its own identity and interests so that it can negotiate with the other from the basis of some security. Such security may arise from feelings of confidence associated with membership of organizations offering full acceptance to their members, a familiar environment and objectives which are immediately sympathetic to them.

In recent years policies affecting immigrants in Britain have been accompanied by some attempts to allow for the needs and wishes of different immigrant groups although there is a prevailing assumption that their children will not want or be able to maintain these distinctions to any great extent. Immigrants are expected to abide by the laws of the country and to accept some of its customs, although the extent to which they should be required to do this is frequently a matter of dispute. When the security and protection of minority groups are seen as providing their members with a springboard into the wider community, they are now usually welcomed and accepted by those who bear responsibility at local and national level for policies affecting immigrants. However, if minority groups are seen to be encouraging membership and cohesion largely for the purpose of pursuing their own exclusive interests, they frequently give rise to considerable anxiety.

The popularity of each of the three perceptions we have been considering depends partly on prevailing social and economic philosophies. Each one has something to contribute to an understanding of immigrants and the treatment they receive. It is not always easy to see which is most influential in determining British attitudes and policy, including those of social workers, although currently the view of coloured immigrants as particularly vulnerable members of the working class seems to predominate. This is reflected both in the expectations that they, like all who share the deprivations of life in the poorest areas, will benefit from the extra efforts made to alleviate them, and in the assumption that they place an added strain on the social services and so their numbers should be restricted. At the same time, attempts have been made to protect the interests of coloured people in legislation designed to decrease discrimination. In recent years it has also proved increasingly helpful to understand immigrants in the context of their different national and cultural backgrounds and to be aware of the implications of the maintenance of these special identities in Britain.

The role of social work

The future of immigrants and their children depends largely on far reaching policies designed to alleviate the problems of the most deprived members of society whatever their social background. These policies involve the redistribution of resources, the planning and rebuilding of some urban areas, and the safeguarding of the rights of minority groups. The contribution of social work to these policies and to the welfare of immigrants is a small but important one.

Firstly, social work should be concerned to help the small minority of immigrants with serious personal or social problems. It is unlikely that the number of these will be large, partly because many immigrants belong to the twenty to thirty-five age group, which makes few demands on the social services, and partly because of the resourcefulness and perseverance which characterize most immigrant groups. None the less, the strains of migration are great and the following chapters will describe some of the problems of living in the poorest areas, of loss and adjustment to a new society of which newly arrived immigrants are acutely aware, and the conflict they experience in their families and with the native population. Social work has something to offer in the alleviation of these difficulties. One of its strengths lies in a flexibility of approach arising from the importance attached to understanding the particular circumstances surrounding individual problems and the development of personal relationships with those who need help. This sometimes makes it possible for social workers to adapt or interpret general policies to meet individual needs in a realistic and helpful way.

Another and more general contribution of social workers should be the provision of information about the problems facing minority groups and the adequacy or inadequacy of the social services which exist to solve them. Social workers are often amongst the first of those in authority to know of these difficulties, and in the course of their work some...