TY - JOUR
AU - Green, Belinda, A
AB - Abstract This article argues that further enhancement of critical social work education and practice is needed to counter politicised and restrictive policies towards people seeking asylum in advanced globalised market economies. This means social workers giving more emphasis and prominence to the role of neoliberalism rather than solely focusing on the adverse moral and mental health impacts of state responses. Drawing on current debates and practices within critical social work and seven years’ experience in the Australian refugee sector, this article will demonstrate the punitive and deterrent configurations adopted by states like Australia to respond to people seeking asylum. The article then highlights the importance of social workers critically analysing historicised discourses which normalise such people as ‘dangerous’, ‘illegitimate’, ‘othered’ and a ‘burden’. Further interrogation of the social and cultural logic(s) of neoliberalism which serve to justify the former discourses will also be included. Finally, reflections on a range of strategies and solutions will be presented for critical social work educators and practitioners to resist and subvert neoliberalism and to secure better outcomes for people seeking asylum in Australia and elsewhere. Asylum seekers, Australia, critical social work, immigration, neoliberalism Asylum seekers: defined and lost In the post-September 11 context of advanced globalised market economies, the issue of immigration with particular reference to refugees and asylum seekers has become highly politicised and contentious (see Sales, 2002, 2007; Grove and Zwi, 2006; Every, 2008; Phillimore, 2009; Masocha and Simpson, 2011; Nagel, 2016). People seeking ‘asylum’ is a result of war, occupation, human rights persecution and can be systematic in nature. They are often required to make protracted journeys across the world with the hope of finding a country which offers protection or ‘asylum’. Countries, which are legally bound to offer asylum, including most advanced globalised market economies (United Nations High Commission for Refugee (UNHCR), n.d.), have willingly ratified the United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (1951) and the Protocol Relating to the Treatment of Refugees (1967). Although there are many people seeking protection who face a range of challenges (United Nations High Commission for Refugee (UNHCR), 2017), this article will utilise a case study of the Australian state’s response to people seeking asylum by boat. Seeking asylum in this way is a particular sore point in some advanced globalised market economies due to the pejorative representation of such people in public discourses and debate (Nipperess and Clark, 2016, p. 196), resulting in an increased hardening of these policies over the last twenty years (see United Nations High Commission for Refugee (UNHCR), 2015). Such people are often more restricted in terms of access, equity and service provision compared with asylum seekers arriving by plane with a ‘valid’ visa (Nipperess and Clark, 2016). Additionally, and as explained later, there is also a pressing need for social workers to further interrogate why governments persist with such policies and practices considering their negative impacts on asylum seekers’ human rights and mental health. Evidence shows that many people seeking asylum have been exposed to forms of trauma relating to violence, deprivation and complex loss (Victorian Foundation for Survivors of Torture Inc (VFST), 1998, pp. 15–20; Miller and Rasco, 2004; Bowles, 2005, pp. 253–255). These experiences alongside information about the asylum seeker process the overall absence of a queue (Phillips, 2015; Refugee Council of Australia, n.d.) and the very low statistical likelihood (less than 1 per cent annually; see Phillips, 2015) that most people will gain entry to a resettlement programmes like Australia due to a lack of access to formal protection processes are all notably removed from dominant public discourse and political debate. Such misrepresentations correlate with the ideas held by many workers and students and volunteers the author encountered while providing social work education for a peak service in the Australian refugee sector between 2010 and 2017. Participants often lacked an understanding of the category of ‘asylum seeker’ including its legal ramifications and heterogeneous nature while failing to critically situate its politicised and pejorative connotations within wider state sponsored discourses relating to inequality and marginalisation in global and domestic terms. These experiences form part of the author’s impetus for this article. Additionally, the author’s experience of working in frontline counselling and case management during this time highlighted the intrusion of neoliberal forces, where social workers are often caught between the discourses of ‘care’ and ‘control’ (Robinson, 2013, p. 5; Carey, 2015, pp. 2407–2408; see also Baines and van den Broek, 2017). This reinforced what others (see Houston, 2012, p. 520; Garrett, 2013; Gray et al., 2015; Hyslop, 2018, p. 21) have argued about the importance of social workers understanding the rules and structures of neoliberalism when engaging in emancipatory work. A critical social work response to neoliberalism In response to the above complexities, a critical social work (CSW) lens to evaluate the role of neoliberalism in restrictive policies related to people seeking asylum is needed. CSW is an umbrella term to describe a set of approaches which draw on modernist and critical theories, post-modern and post-structural thought to engage in a politicised process alongside marginalised and oppressed peoples in order to promote both personal and structural change (Dominelli, 2008; Pease and Nipperess, 2016, pp. 4–5; see also Allan et al., 2009; Garrett, 2013; Gray and Webb, 2013; Payne, 2014). CSW encourages interrogating the role of the state (Mullaly, 2007, p. 25), undertaking intersectional analysis (Baines, 2017, p. 10) and scrutinising the place of power relations in reinforcing oppression and marginalisation (Allan, 2009, pp. 40–41). In the neoliberal context, the state’s role is to facilitate ‘profitable capital accumulation’ (Harvey, 2005, p. 7) both in the domestic and international sphere while installing a militarised apparatus to protect private property and the market (Harvey, 2005, p. 2). This economic order has generated a range of socio-cultural implications that are often under analysed (De Lissovoy, 2012, p. 739). Some scholars have argued that neoliberalism generates greater uncertainty (Garrett, 2010, pp. 340, 346; Wallace and Pease, 2011, p. 133; Carey, 2015, p. 2411) within ‘an atomised society in which individuals are culturally disconnected from one another and from fundamental social institutions’ (Saunders, 2002; Harvey, 2005, p. 76; Western et al., 2007, p. 402; see also De Lissovoy, 2012, p. 741). Saunders (2002, pp. 75–82) asserts that such ‘logics’ have negative implications on cultural diversity and collectivist egalitarian principles, whereby neoliberalism endorses a ‘re-emergence of survival and traditional values’ (Inglehart and Baker, 2000 as cited in Western et al., 2007, p. 409), which renders people who are disadvantaged or seeking entry into neoliberal states as ‘threatening’ and ‘unwanted’ (Garrett, 2010, p. 347). Institutionalised and public forms of racism such as restrictive immigration policies are therefore normalised while structural inequalities based on class, race, ethnicity, gender, religion, etc. are attributed to ‘individual’ failure rather than the material and relational work of pre-existing and historicised power relations (see Western et al., 2007, p. 402; Garrett, 2010, p. 347; De Lissovoy, 2012, p. 741). While there is a plethora of literature related to neoliberalism and its impacts on the field of social work (Garrett, 2010, pp. 340, 324; Pollack and Rossiter, 2010, p. 160; Wallace and Pease, 2011, pp. 133–135, 137; Carey, 2015, pp. 2409, 2413, 2419; Baines and van den Broek, 2017, p. 131; Baines, 2017, p. 3), there remains scepticism that it is a dominant force in the contemporary space. Some argue that it ‘has become a generic term of deprecation describing almost any economic and political development deemed to be undesirable’ while lacking an overall clear definition (see also Peck and Tickell, 2002; Thorsen and Lie, 2007, p. 9). Although there remains contention on how visible or dominant neoliberalism is as a practice, concept or ideology, rather than trying to rectify it as a ‘monolithic and unilineal phenomenon’ (Subramanian, 2014, p. 73), greater inquiry into its socio-cultural nuances and how ‘neoliberal regimes insert themselves into pre-existing social, economic and political constellations’ (Subramanian 2014, p. 104) is needed. This includes building on social workers and others’ scholarship on the racialised and historical restrictive trajectories endemic to immigration policies in states such as Australia (Jupp, 2002; see Briskman and Cemlyn, 2005, p. 715) and accentuating the ways they are regurgitated through the neoliberal gaze. Imposing detention without context or consequence: state responses to people seeking asylum Using Australia as a case study, this section analyses the congruence of neoliberal development with punitive and deterrent measures adopted by states towards people seeking asylum including ‘detention’. The Australian immigration detention system emerged in the mid-1970s in response to people who overstayed their visas, principally those from the UK (Crock et al., 2006, p. 26), the Indochinese’s exodus as a result of war and occupation by the USA and its allies in the contestation of control over the Vietnamese state. The policy of ‘mandatory’ detention was implemented by the Keating government in 1992 with bipartisan support through the ‘Migration Amendment Act 1992’ (Phillips and Spinks, 2013). As noted by the Joint Standing Committee on Migration Regulations (as cited in Phillips and Spinks, 2013), ‘mandatory detention was initially envisaged as a temporary and “exceptional” measure’ in response to certain global events including the Cambodian genocide and the Tiananmen Square protests in China. With the ‘Act’ officially coming into effect on 1 September 1994, mandatory detention was extended to all people who arrived in Australia without a valid visa. Initial restrictions on how long people could remain in such facilities were eventually abolished to enable indefinite detainment (Phillips and Spinks, 2013). This period of the late 1980s and 1990s also marked another shift in Australian public policy. This shift was ‘underwritten by two principles: liberalism and marketisation’ which in turn ‘define neoliberalism’ (Western et al., 2007, p. 402). The implementation of neoliberal policy began in earnest during the former Hawke-Keating period and was fast tracked during the leadership of John Howard (Western et al., 2007, p. 402). These two periods also marked a further hardening of immigration policies related to people seeking asylum. During the late 1990s and early 2000s amendments to the 1958 Migration Act enabled the Australian government to introduce the Pacific Solution and Temporary Protection Visas (Phillips and Spinks, 2013). As noted by Phillips and Spinks (2013), the Pacific Solution meant that: Christmas Island, Ashmore and Cartier Islands and the Cocos (Keeling) Islands were excised from Australia’s migration zone, meaning that non-citizens arriving unlawfully (without valid documentation) at one of these territories were not able to make a valid application for a visa to Australia, including Protection Visas, unless the bar on the visa application process was lifted at the discretion of the Minister. The Pacific Solution was officially dismantled in 2008 with the recognition of the policy’s physical and psychological harm alongside a change in government (Phillips and Spinks, 2013). However, in 2012 with an increase of arrivals due to the fall out of US-led invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, the policy hardened yet again. Migration amendments disallowed anyone who arrived by boat to seek permanent protection in Australia. The justification was a result of an estimated 1,100–1,200 people drowning in their attempt to seek protection in Australia. According to Amnesty International (2016, p. 10) ‘the Australian government has argued that punitive deterrence measures are necessary to save lives’. Amnesty argue that ‘the humanitarian justification for the policy is a gross and cynical misrepresentation’ (Amnesty International, 2016, p. 10). This is particularly astute given that Australian Border forces have been found turning back boats in open waters and recent deaths in detention due to a series of departmental mishaps (Australian Human Rights Commission, 2017, pp. 2–3). More recently the contractual co-opting of more economically, politically and socially vulnerable nation states (such as Cambodia, Papua New Guinea and Nauru) to house particular cohorts of people seeking asylum, that is, those who arrived by boat after 12 August 2012, has also been attempted by both the Liberal/Nationals Coalition and Labour party (Australian Human Rights Commission, 2017). Amnesty International has highlighted corporate profit-driven complicity in such state-sponsored ventures (Amnesty International, 2016, 2017). Such policy measures are dubious even in reference to acting as an effective constraint. As noted by a range of sources (Menadue et al., 2011; United Nations High Commission for Refugee (UNHCR) (Tan, 2011); Sampson et al., 2015), there is lack of real evidence to suggest that mandatory detention deters people from seeking asylum, instead adversely impacting on their mental health and human rights. Detention minus mental health and human rights For the last seventeen years, the impacts of Australia’s mandatory detention have been a source of moral concern and enquiry for a range of human rights’ organisations. In their most recent report, the Australian Human Rights Commission (2017) have raised concerns about the lack of judicial review for detainees and indefinite detention particularly for those with negative security assessments or those who have had their visas revoked based on character assessments (pp. 2–3). Other issues include the heightened risks of people being returned to their homelands while still being in danger of persecution alongside changes to both the screening and refugee determination processes and a curtailing of free legal advice (Australian Human Rights Commission, 2017, pp. 2–3). As noted by Triggs (Australian Human Rights Commission, 2017), some of these practices ‘could all lead to breaches of Australia’s non-refoulement obligations’ (p. 3) under international law. The Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) report raises concerns about the conditions and treatment of people in third country processing zones including Nauru and Manus Island in Papua New Guinea where living circumstances remain below international standards. A lack of transparency and independent monitoring of such conditions have also been cited, alongside reports of physical and sexual assault and a lack of ‘durable’ solutions for those people found to be refugees (Australian Human Rights Commission, 2017). In tandem with the human rights’ literature, the field of Australian psychiatry and psychology has developed a clinical evidence base that highlights the adverse mental health impacts for people in Australian mandatory detention (Steel and Silove, 2001; Silove et al., 2007; Newman et al., 2008; Coffey et al., 2010; Triggs, 2013). The former evidence suggests that depression, stress headaches, difficulties sleeping and symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder mark some of the symptomology of people detained within Australian and offshore detention facilities (Australian Human Rights Commission, 2017). As noted by Brooker et al. (2016), immigration detention can both exacerbate pre-existing mental health issues and generate new ones, while producing extreme behaviours not normally seen in other clinical settings including the proliferation of self-harm, riots, hunger strikes, learned helplessness and powerlessness (pp. 3–4). This evidence alongside direct and public criticism from the United Nations itself (see United Nations General Assembly Human Rights Council, 2017; United Nations High Commission for Refugee (UNHCR), 2017) has not improved the Australian government’s policy and praxis. This means that while important, assertions of collective responsibility and humanitarian principles alongside highlighting the adverse mental health impacts of such policies may be insufficient in mobilising political change or shifting public consensus. Further interrogating the socio-cultural ‘logic’ of neoliberalism and its conflation with historicised ‘othering’ discourses discussed below may assist in explaining why. The construction of the ‘asylum other’ Understanding the ways in which people seeking asylum are constructed as an incursion and a threat on state sovereignty and security alongside an economic liability on local resources including the welfare state (Huot et al., 2016, pp. 132–133) is important to critical social work education and practice. Such constructs have even been noted among Australian social workers’ perceptions of people seeking asylum (see Masocha, 2015). The historical lineage of othering the ‘poor’ dates back to the Elizabethan period in the UK with the establishment of the Poor Law in 1601. As noted by Golightley and Holloway (2016, p. 1), the creation of the English Poor Law in 1834 further entrenched the idea of a ‘deserving’ and an ‘undeserving poor’. Such ideas have become further normalised through austerity measures in welfare states such as Australia and elsewhere (see Altreiter and Leibetseder, 2015; Hyslop, 2018). As noted by Webber (2006, pp. 80–81), the vilification of welfare recipients particularly the unemployed has contributed to notions of the poorer classes in Australia being ‘increasingly demonised, isolated and thus disadvantaged’ (Webber, 2006, p. 82). When it comes to people seeking asylum by boat, the former ideas of being undeserving are often conflated with constructions of the ‘other’. Othering results from: taken for granted assumptions embedded within discourses that inform policy… perpetuating systems of domination and oppression that may favour powerful groups and increase the disadvantage of minority groups (Huot et al., 2016, p. 131). Using Grove and Zwi’s (2006) discursive conceptual framework of ‘othering’, Huot et al. (2016) highlight the ways in which particular forms of language about people seeking asylum evoke ideas of ‘threat’ (p. 133), being ‘uninvited’ (p. 133) and ideas of states being ‘overburdened’ (p. 133) by immigration. As noted by Cheong et al. (2007), policy and public perception of migration in advanced globalised market economies have now been ‘framed in relation to terrorism, crime, unemployment and religious fundamentalism’ (p. 34). Masocha and Simpson (2011) assert that such discourses are ‘underpinned by xenoracism’ (p. 5). These ideas are juxtaposed against neoliberal ideals of economic prosperity and ‘justify’ the maintenance of regulated borders where mobility is only possible for the dominant that in turn constrain, using overt state-sponsored militarism and violence, the movement of the dominated (see Bauman, 1998, p. 69). Further to this, Akbari and MacDonald (2014) argue that in responding to people seeking asylum, advanced globalised market economies have abandoned collective humanitarian principles. Every’s (2008) discourse analysis of Australian political debates towards such people highlights how binaries embedded in liberal definitions of humanitarianism which include ‘costs to self’ versus ‘duty to others’ and ‘reason versus emotion, moderation versus excess and pragmatism versus idealism’ are utilised to limit humanitarianism (p. 210). Neoliberalism—the real leaky boat As noted earlier, the economic order of neoliberalism has generated a range of socio-cultural implications which seek to uphold the former discourses. A ‘new punitiveness’ has emerged (see Pratt et al., 2005; Webb, 2006; Reisch, 2013), whereby ‘particular sections of the population (those regarded as ambiguously “troublesome” or ambiguously out of place)’ are ‘secured’ in ‘zones of varying degrees of confinement and supervision’ (Garrett, 2010, p. 347). Wacquant (2001) has highlighted a correlation between the ‘penal state’ and neoliberalism. This includes an increase in the number of jails, incarceration, pre-emptive and direct restraint and enforced compliance. ‘Troublesome’ and ‘out of place’ populations, that is, people seeking asylum by boat require regulation, control and incarceration over and above socio-economic and political inclusion. The ‘the penalisation of poverty’ is useful in understanding the way neoliberal states are managing ‘the lower end of the social structure of advanced societies’ (Wacquant, 2001, p. 401). Baines and Waugh (2019, p. 1) point to the concept of ‘white fragility’ to explain this growing phenomenon of ‘punitiveness’. ‘White fragility’ means those from the dominant and principally ‘white’ classes are resistant to critique, leadership or social change from subordinated groups. There is also a tendency to ‘blame’ the victims and use other methods of silencing to maintain dominant power relations (DiAngelo, 2011). While continuities of historicised racist and structural subordination by ‘whites’ including British occupation and colonialisation of First Nations people, the White Australia policy (see Stephenson, 1997) and the more recent emergence of ultra-right fascist nationalist movements in Australia and elsewhere are relevant (Baines and Waugh, 2019), it is important to further interrogate how such discourses and practices are regurgitated through the discursive lens of neoliberalism. Pollack and Rossiter (2010) argue that punitiveness and white fragility are strengthened by the absence of ‘morality’ in the neoliberal gaze. The authors argue that the ‘common good’ is now measured through the prism of economic rationalism, whereby ‘proper management, calculations of return and risks and cost/benefit analyses …supplants the notion of the moral’ (p. 158). The authors adopt Foucault’s term of ‘governmentality’ and ‘responsibilisation’ (Pollack and Rossiter, 2010, p. 159) to describe the new forms of self-regulation and subjectivity embedded within neoliberalism whereby ‘social problems are incorporated into the economic calculus, they are no longer social; there are simply failing individuals who have misused their “freedom”’ (Pollack and Rossiter, 2010, p. 159; see also Hyslop, 2018). Such ideas are enhanced by an anti-intellectual strain in neoliberal logic which conveniently attempts to silence formulated critique that seeks to highlight the continuities of intersectional and structural racism(s) and disadvantage. Maglen’s (2007) analysis of the debates between the Australian government and the Australian medical profession concerning the earliest mental health studies on mandatory detention is an example. The author highlights the ways that the Howard government used popularist and anti-intellectual rhetoric to negate the adverse impacts of mandatory detention on people seeking asylum. Maglen (2007, p. 55) argues that the government asserted an idea that: elite or esoteric professional knowledge excluded “ordinary Australians” from the political and/or decision-making process. Rather, these elites worked for the “special interest” of pressure groups such as aboriginal organisations, trade unions or refugee advocacy organisations that marginalized “ordinary Australians”. In the process, so this thinking held, taxpayers’ money was siphoned off from the community and these groups were being granted special privileges. The “untruths” told by the elites assumed that the public were “not smart enough” to make informed political choices on their own and would believe anything when presented in the language and structures of the elites (p. 55). This view was further reinforced by Howard in an interview on a Melbourne radio station in 2003 where he said: ‘I understand that people in the community don’t like being told what they should believe. They like to be able to make up their own minds’ (as cited in Maglen, 2007, p. 55). Such assertions reinforce neoliberal doctrine where individualism and self-governance mask institutionalised racism and the value of collective action and specialist knowledge. These socio-cultural realities of neoliberalism not only have implications for people seeking asylum but also for the wider citizenry. Through such a doctrine, citizens not only lack solidarity for people seeking asylum, but also unwittingly for one another and future generations to come. ‘Othering’ discourses of people seeking asylum serve to detract from the enforcement of neoliberalism in everyday life. Such concerns over people ‘invading’ means that voters worry less about the rising inequalities and polarities of class or the rupturing of their own political and civil rights. In Australia, this includes the creation of anti-terrorist laws (Hocking, 2003; Williams, 2011), an overall decrease in workplace rights, anti-unionism, casualisation and contracting of labour and other features of neoliberal state intervention (Western et al., 2007). Additionally, the impacts of privatisation and corporatisation of the healthcare, education and electricity sectors, the rising costs of housing, food and the rolling back of the welfare state (Western et al., 2007) can be diminished in light of a common threat epitomised as burdensome and troubled ‘others’ who ‘violate’ ‘our’ sovereign borders. Subversive and resistant strategies for critical social work education and practice As argued by Giroux (2010), neoliberalism is a ‘powerful pedagogical force that shapes our lives, memories and daily experiences, while attempting to erase everything critical and emancipatory about history, justice, solidarity, freedom and democracy itself’ (p. 51). These de-politicising tendencies of the neoliberal age create both a dilemma for social workers (Briskman and Cemlyn, 2005, p. 714) and an important opportunity. The political project of social work’s ‘confluence of interactional process and socio-political context’ (Hyslop, 2018, p. 24) within neoliberal states is potentially thwarted by aspects of the discipline itself. This includes social work’s diverse nature, the emphasis on an evidence base in the neoliberal domain versus the applied realities of social work praxis alongside the various non-exclusive theoretical and practical dimensions of the discipline (Plaith, 2006; Healy, 2012; Hyslop, 2018, pp. 23–24). However, as bearers of a counter force ‘configured by a critical human discourse that focuses on human worth, redemption and the structural barriers that militate against substantive equality’ (Hyslop, 2018, p. 23), critical social workers are well placed to resist the concealment of such ideals in advanced globalised market economies. This includes students and practitioners analysing the historical underpinnings of ‘neoliberalism’, its relationship to nineteenth century classic liberalism and the recurring demarcation of linking socio-economic disadvantage with ‘moral depravity’ and the need to both punish and control such people (Hyslop, 2018, p. 22). In line with this article, Hayes’ (2005) work in the UK showing the links between the racialisation of immigration law to issues of social cost and ‘burden’ of welfare provision is useful to build on (p. 117). Social work educators should also encourage reflections on the implications of neoliberalism for advanced globalised market economies including the demise of political and civil rights or the economic impediments for both ‘vulnerable’ citizens and future generations. This promotes important connections between the ‘self’ and the ‘other’ and endorses critical reflective practices (see Fook, 2007; Macfarlane, 2016). Drawing on existing and relevant forms of critical social work curricula for this discussion, Marlow’s (2014) adaption of a just practice model to encourage a social justice framework for students in New Zealand to reflect on the place of meaning, context, power, history and possibility when engaging with people from refugee backgrounds is useful. Such ideas correlate with author’s use of postcolonial and subaltern historical analyses in social work education which includes interrogating the place of ‘power’, ‘privilege’, ‘representation’, ‘culturalism’ and ‘othering’ while supporting Australian audiences to critically evaluate socio-economic and political global power relations and their relationship to conflict, war and human rights persecution (see Anderson, 2017; Green, 2018). The work of Al-Makhamreh et al. (2012) in Jordan highlights the importance of what the writers refer to as ‘political competency’ for social workers to ‘promote the expansion of cultural knowledge and resources with the view towards advocating and safeguarding the rights of refugees’ (p. 1076; see also Berc, 2018). Valtonen’s (2001) adaption of the societal participation construct to address barriers and adopt an anti-oppressive practice to strengthen the inclusion of refugees within the Finnish social work context is also relevant. Consistent with other findings (see Briskman and Cemlyn, 2005; Briskman et al., 2008; Nipperess and Clark, 2016; Gwilym, 2017), direct activism and collective action is also necessary for resistance and subversion of neoliberalism but also to sustaining critical social workers’ morale and solidarity with each other and relevant interest groups including people seeking asylum. A notable and significant contribution include the Australian Council of Heads of Schools of Social Work’s inquiry on the treatment and experiences of people seeking asylum in Australian detention centres which culminated in a book by Briskman et al. (2008). CSW approaches are also needed in social work research, policy, case management and front-line engagement. As argued by Hölscher and Bozalek (2012), social workers must critically reflect on the material, social and relational aspects of working alongside people from refugee backgrounds while foregrounding the potential injustices experienced by the former communities through a ‘reflexive engagement with our own implication in these structural and relational constellations’ (p. 1095). As noted by a cross-section of studies in advanced globalised market economies, CSW direct practice incorporates the micro, messo and macro levels of people’s experience with a focus on social inclusion, community approaches, trust and respect (see Powell, 2001; George, 2002; Potock-Tripodi, 2002). Critical social workers aim to build a bridge between the service users’ world, community group and bureaucracies (see Valtonen, 2001, p. 959; Nash et al., 2006, p. 358). This includes using knowledge of ‘evidence-based assessment processes’, mental health discourses, immigration processes and other relevant systems to carefully craft written and verbal responses that subvert the dominance of neoliberal tendencies in the social and human services (Hyslop, 2018, p. 27), while being aware of the overemphasis of trauma and ‘its conflation with managerial discourses that specify individually focused approaches to practice’ (Westoby and Ingamells, 2010, p. 1759). Utilising counselling models that acknowledge not only the ‘psycho-social’ but the ‘structural’ impacts the resettlement context or country of asylum has on people’s ‘emotions, sense of self and capacity for agency’ (Allan, 2015, p. 1699) is also relevant. Conclusion The above strategies are by no means exhaustive and are troubled in themselves by the rising prominence of neoliberalism in social and human services whereby students and practitioners may be trained in CSW, but face difficulties in implementing such practices in the workplace. However, it should be noted that some social workers have already sought to contest and resist state responses towards people seeking asylum by boat. This includes raising attention to the ethical issues of working within detention facilities (see Briskman et al., 2012) and the role of social work in a policy context that is ‘hostile’ to the disciplines’ values and international human rights framework (Kenny et al., 2002 as cited in Briskman and Cemlyn, 2005, p. 714). Additionally, scholarship has already highlighted the need to further social work education analysis of the racialised and historicised trajectories of Australian immigration policies (Briskman and Cemlyn, 2005, p. 715). This is useful but there remains a pressing need to further politicise and contextualise these policies and practices in the contemporary setting. This article has demonstrated the importance of interrogating existing and historicised hegemonic power relations and their conflation with neoliberalism in states’ disavowal of people’s human rights and mental health. Consideration was also given to how to secure better outcomes for people seeking asylum through critical social work frontline practices in Australia and elsewhere. Acknowledgements I wish to acknowledge Professor Donna Baines and reviewers for their suggestions and comments for this article. References Akbari A. H. , MacDonald M. ( 2014 ) ‘ Immigration policy in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States: An overview of recent trends ’, International Migration Review , 48 ( 3 ), pp. 801 – 22 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Altreiter C. , Leibetseder B. ( 2015 ) ‘ Constructing inequality: Deserving and undeserving clients in Austrian social assistance offices ’, Journal of Social Policy , 44 ( 1 ), pp. 127 – 45 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Allan J. ( 2009 ) ‘Theorising new developments in critical social work’, in Allan J. , Briskman L. , Pease B. (eds), Critical Social Work: Theories and Practices for a Socially Just World , 2nd edn , Crows Nest , Allen and Unwin . Allan J. ( 2015 ) ‘ Reconciling the “psycho-social/structural” in social work counselling with refugees’ , British Journal of Social Work , 45 ( 6 ), pp. 1699 – 716 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Allan J. , Briskman L. , Pease B. (eds) ( 2009 ) Critical Social Work: Theories and Practices for a Socially Just World , 2nd edn , Crows Nest , Allen and Unwin . Al-Makhamreh S. , Spaneas S. , Neocleous G. ( 2012 ) ‘ The need for political competence social work practice: Lessons learned from a collaborative project on Iraqi refugees—The case of Jordan ’, British Journal of Social Work , 42 ( 6 ), pp. 1074 – 92 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Amnesty International ( 2016 ) Island of despair: Australia's ‘processing’ of refugees on Nauru, available online at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/asa12/4934/2016/en/ (accessed May 25, 2019). Amnesty International ( 2017 ) Treasure Island: How companies are profiting from Australia's abuse of refugees on Nauru, available online at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/asa12/5942/2017/en/ (accessed May 25, 2019). Anderson T. ( 2017 ) Countering War Propaganda of the Dirty War on Syria , Damascus, Syria, New Dalmoun Press . Australian Human Rights Commission ( 2017 ) Asylum Seekers, Refugees and Human Rights. Snapshot Report, 2nd edn, Sydney, Australian Human Rights Commission, available online at: https://www.humanrights.gov.au/our-work/asylum-seekers-and-refugees/publications/asylum-seekers-refugees-and-human-rights-0 (accessed May 25, 2019). Baines D. ( 2017 ) ‘An overview of anti-oppressive practice: Roots, theory, tensions’, in Baines D. (ed.), Doing Anti-oppressive Practice Social Justice Social Work , 3rd edn , Novia Scotia , Fernwood Publishing . Baines D. , van den Broek D. ( 2017 ) ‘ Coercive care: Control and coercion in the re-structured care workplace ’, British Journal of Social Work , 47 , pp. 125 – 42 . Baines D. , Waugh F. ( 2019 ) ‘Resistance, white fragility and late neoliberalism’, in Baines D. , Bennett B. , Goodwin S. , Rawsthorne M. (eds), Working across Difference and Inequity in Social Work and Policy Studies , London , Red Globe Press . Bauman Z. ( 1998 ) Globalization , Oxford , Polity Press . Berc G. ( 2018 ) ‘ Croatian experience with the refugee crisis on the Balkan route and possible implications for social work practice and education ’, Journal of Human Rights and Social Work , 4 ( 1 ), pp. 63 – 73 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Briskman L. , Cemlyn S. ( 2005 ) ‘ Reclaiming humanity for asylum seekers: A social work response ’, International Social Work , 48 ( 6 ), pp. 714 – 24 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Briskman L. , Latham S. , Goddard C. ( 2008 ) Human Rights Overboard: Seeking Asylum in Australia , Melbourne , Scribe . Briskman L. , Zion D. , Loff B. ( 2012 ) ‘ Care of collusion in asylum seeker detention ’, Ethics and Social Welfare , 6 ( 1 ), pp. 37 – 55 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Bowles R. ( 2005 ) ‘Social work with refugee survivors of torture and trauma’, in Alston M. , McKinnon J. (eds), Social Work Fields of Practice , 2nd edn, South Melbourne, Victoria , Oxford University Press . Brooker S. , Albert S. , Young P. , Steel Z. ( 2016 ) Challenges to Providing Mental Health Care in Immigration Detention, Global Detention Project Working Paper No. 19, pp. 1 – 24 , Geneva, Global Detention Project. Carey M. ( 2015 ) ‘ The fragmentation of social work and social care: Some ramification and a critique ’, British Journal of Social Work , 45 ( 8 ), pp. 2406 – 22 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Cheong P. H. , Edwards R. , Goulbourne H. , Solomos J. ( 2007 ) ‘ Immigration, social cohesion and social capital: A critical review ’, Critical Social Policy , 27 ( 1 ), pp. 24 – 49 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Coffey G. J. , Kaplan I. , Sampson R. C. , Tucci M. M. ( 2010 ) ‘ The meaning and mental health consequences of long-term immigration detention for people seeking asylum ’, Social Science and Medicine , 70 ( 12 ), pp. 2070 – 9 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed Crock M. , Saul B. , and Dastyari A. ( 2006 ) Future Seekers II , Cambridge , Federation University Press . De Lissovoy N. ( 2012 ) ‘ Conceptualizing the carceral turn: Neoliberalism, racism and violation ’, Critical Sociology , 39 ( 2 ), pp. 739 – 55 . DiAngelo R. ( 2011 ) ‘ White fragility ’, International Journal of Critical Pedagogy , 3 ( 3 ), pp. 54 – 70 . Dominelli L. ( 2008 ) Anti-Racist Social Work , 3rd edn , Basingstoke , Palgrave . Every D. ( 2008 ) ‘ A reasonable, practical and moderate humanitarianism in the Australian asylum seeker debates ’, Journal of Refugee Studies , 21 ( 2 ), pp. 210 – 29 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Fook J. ( 2007 ) ‘The theoretical frameworks underlying critical reflection’, in Fook J. , Gardner F. (eds), Practising Critical Reflection: A Resources Handbook , Maidenhead , Open University Press . Garrett P. M. ( 2010 ) ‘ Examining the “conservative revolution”: Neoliberalism and social work education ’, Social Work Education , 29 ( 4 ), pp. 340 – 55 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Garrett P. M. ( 2013 ) ‘Mapping the theoretical and political terrain of social work’, in Gray M. , Webb S. (eds), The New Politics of Social Work , New York, NY , Palgrave . George U. ( 2002 ) ‘ A needs-based model for settlement service delivery for newcomers to Canada ’, International Social Work , 45 ( 4 ), pp. 465 – 80 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Giroux P. ( 2010 ) ‘Neoliberalism, pedagogy, and cultural politics: Beyond the theatre of cruelty’, in Leonardo Z . (ed), Handbook of Cultural Politics and Education , Rotterdam , Sense Publishers . Golightley M. , Holloway M. ( 2016 ) ‘ Editorial ’, British Journal of Social Work , 46 ( 1 ), pp. 1 – 7 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Gray M. , Dean M. , Aglias K. , Howard A. , Schubert L. ( 2015 ) ‘ Perspectives on neoliberalism for human service professionals ’, Social Science Review , 89 ( 2 ), pp. 368 – 92 . Gray M. , Webb S (eds) ( 2013 ) The New Politics of Social Work , New York, NY , Palgrave . Green B. ( 2018 ) Cultural Competence in Working with People from Refugee Backgrounds , 2nd edn , Carramar , NSW Service for Treatment and Rehabilitation of Torture and Trauma Survivors . Grove N. J. , Zwi A. B. ( 2006 ) ‘ Our health and theirs: Forced migration, othering, and public health ’, Social Science and Medicine , 62 ( 8 ), pp. 1931 – 42 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed Gwilym H. ( 2017 ) ‘ The political identity of social workers in neoliberal times ’, Critical and Radical Social Work , 5 ( 1 ), pp. 59 – 74 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Harvey D. ( 2005 ) A Brief History of Neoliberalism , Oxford , Oxford University Press . Hayes D. ( 2005 ) ‘Social work with asylum seekers and others subject to immigration control’, in Adams R. , Dominelli L. , Payne M. (eds), Social Work Futures: Crossing Boundaries, Making Connections , London , Palgrave Macmillan . Healy K. ( 2012 ) Social Work Methods and Skills: The Essential Foundations of Practice , Basingstoke , Palgrave Macmilian . Hocking J. ( 2003 ) ‘ Counter‐terrorism and the criminalisation of politics: Australia’s new security powers of detention, proscription and control ’, Australian Journal of Politics and History , 49 ( 3 ), pp. 355 – 71 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Hölscher D. , Bozalek V. G. ( 2012 ) ‘ Encountering the other across the divides: Re-grounding social justice as a guiding principle for social work with refugees and other vulnerable groups ’, British Journal of Social Work , 42 , 1093 – 112 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Houston S. ( 2012 ) ‘ Reviewing the coming crisis in social work: A response to Longhofer and Floersch ’, Research on Social Work , 22 ( 5 ), pp. 520 – 2 . Huot S. , Bobadilla A. , Bailliard A. , Laliberte Rudman D. ( 2016 ) ‘ Constructing undesirables: A critical discourse analysis of “othering” within the protecting Canada’s immigration system act ’, International Migration , 54 ( 2 ), pp. 131 – 43 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Hyslop I. ( 2018 ) ‘ Neoliberalism and social work identity ’, European Journal of Social Work , 21 ( 1 ), pp. 20 – 31 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Inglehart R. , Baker W. E. ( 2000 ) ‘ Modernization, cultural change, and the persistence of traditional values ’, American Sociological Review , 65 ( 1 ), pp. 19 – 51 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Jeffrey D. ( 2007 ) ‘ Radical problems and liberal selves: Professional subjectivity in the anti-oppressive social work classroom ’, Canadian Social Work Review , 24 ( 2 ), pp. 125 – 39 . Jupp J. ( 2002 ) From White Australia to Woomera: The Story of Australia’s Immigration , Cambridge , Cambridge University Press . Macfarlane S. ( 2016 ) ‘Education for critical social: Being true to a worthy project’, in Pease B. , Goldingay S. , Hosken N. , Nipperess S. (eds), Doing Critical Social Work: Transformative Practices for Social Justice , Sydney , Allen and Unwin. Maglen K. ( 2007 ) ‘ Inside truths: “Truth” and mental illness in the Australian asylum seeker and detention debates ’, Monash Bioethics Review , 26 ( 4 ), pp. 47 – 65 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed Masocha S. ( 2015 ) ‘ Construction of the “other” in social workers’ discourses of asylum seekers ’, Journal of Social Work , 15 ( 6 ), pp. 569 – 85 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Masocha S. , Simpson M. K. ( 2011 ) ‘ Xenoracism: Towards a critical understanding of the construction of asylum seekers and its implications for social work practice ’, Practice , 23 ( 1 ), pp. 5 – 18 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Menadue J. , Keski-Nummi A. , Gauthier K. ( 2011 ) A New Approach. Breaking the Stalemate on Asylum Seekers and Refugees, Occasional Paper No. 13, Sydney, Centre for Policy Development, available online at: https://cpd.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/CPD-Refugee_Report_Web.pdf (accessed May 25, 2019). Miller K. , Rasco L. ( 2004 ) The Mental Health of Refugees: Ecological Approaches to Healing and Adaptation , Mahwah, NJ , Lawrence Erlbaum Associates . Mullaly B. ( 2007 ) The New Structural Social Work , 3rd edn , Toronto , Oxford Press . Nagel C. ( 2016 ) ‘ Southern hospitality? Islamophobia and the pollicization of refugees in South Caroline during the 2016 election season ’, Southeastern Geographer , 56 ( 3 ), pp. 283 – 90 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Nash M. , Wong J. , Trlin A. ( 2006 ) ‘ Civic and social integration—A new field of social work practice with immigrants, refugees and asylum seekers ’, International Social Work , 49 ( 3 ), pp. 345 – 63 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Newman L. K. , Dudley M. , Steel Z. ( 2008 ) ‘ Asylum, detention, and mental health in Australia ’, Refugee Survey Quarterly , 27 ( 3 ), pp. 110 – 27 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Nipperess S. , Clark S. ( 2016 ) ‘Anti-oppressive practice with people seeking asylum in Australia: Reflections from the field’, in Pease B. , Goldingay S. , Hosken N. , Nipperess S. (eds), Doing Critical Social Work: Transformative Practices for Social Justice , Sydney , Allen and Unwin. Payne M. ( 2014 ) Modern Social Work Theory , 4th edn , Basingstoke , Palgrave Macmillan . Pease B. , Nipperess S. ( 2016 ) ‘Doing critical social work in the neoliberal context: Working on the contradictions’, in Pease B. , Goldingay S. , Hosken N. , Nipperess S. (eds), Doing Critical Social Work: Transformative Practices for Social Justice , Sydney , Allen and Unwin . Peck J. , Tickell A. ( 2002 ) ‘ Neoliberalizing space ’, Antipode , 34 ( 3 ), pp. 380 – 404 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Phillimore J. ( 2009 ) ‘Restrictionalism vs liberalism? The rupture between asylum and integration in the EU’, in Salah M. (ed.), Assimilation, Multiculturalism or Integration in Europe , London , Trentham . Phillips J. ( 2015 ) Asylum Seekers and Refugees. What Are the Facts? Canberra , Parliament of Australia , available online at: https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1415/AsylumFacts (accessed May 25, 2019). Phillips J. , Spinks H. ( 2013 ) Immigration detention in Australia, available online at: https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/library/prspub/1311498/upload_binary/1311498.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf#search=%22library/prspub/1311498%22 (accessed May 25, 2019). Plaith D. ( 2006 ) ‘ Evidence-based practice: Current issues and future directions ’, Australian Social Work , 59 ( 1 ), pp. 56 – 72 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Pollack S. , Rossiter A. ( 2010 ) ‘ Neoliberalism and the entrepreneurial subject: Implications for feminism and social work ’, Canadian Social Work Review , 27 ( 2 ), pp. 155 – 68 . Potocky-Tripodi M. ( 2002 ) Best Practices for Social Work with Refugees and Migrants . New York, NY , Columbia University Press . Powell F. ( 2001 ) The Politics of Social Work , London , Sage . Pratt J. , Brown D. , Brown M. , Hallsworth S. , Morrision W. ( 2005 ) ‘Introduction’, in Pratt J. , Brown D. , Brown D. M. , Hallsworth M. S. , Morrision W. (eds), The New Punitiveness: Trends, Theories and Perspectives , Cullompton , Willan . Refugee Council of Australia (RCOA) (n.d.) Are People Seeking Asylum ‘Queue Jumpers’?, available online at: https://www.refugeecouncil.org.au/queue-jumpers/ (accessed May 25, 2019). Reisch M. ( 2013 ) ‘ Social work education and the neo-liberal challenge: The US response to increasing global equality ’, Social Work Education , 32 ( 6 ), pp. 715 – 33 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Robinson K. ( 2013 ) ‘ Voices from the front line: Social work with refugees and asylum seekers in Australia and the UK ’, British Journal of Social Work , 44 ( 6 ), pp. 1602 – 20 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Sales R. ( 2002 ) ‘ The deserving and the undeserving? Refugees, asylum seekers and welfare in Britain ’, Critical Social Policy , 22 ( 3 ), pp. 456 – 78 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Sales R. ( 2007 ) Understanding Immigration and Refugee Policy: Contradictions and Continuities , Bristol , The Policy Press . Sampson R. , Chew V. , Mitchell G. , Bowring L. ( 2015 ) There Are Alternatives: A Handbook for Preventing Unnecessary Immigration Detention, (revised), Melbourne, Victoria, International Detention Coalition, available online at: https://idcoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/There-Are-Alternatives-2015.pdf (accessed May 25, 2019). Saunders P. ( 2002 ) The Ends and Means of Welfare: Coping with Economic and Social Change in Australia , Cambridge , Cambridge University Press . Silove D. , Austin P. , Steel Z. ( 2007 ) ‘ No refuge from terror: the impact of detention on the mental health of trauma-affected refugees seeking asylum in Australia ’, Transcultural Psychiatry , 44 ( 3 ), 359 – 93 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed Steel Z. , Silove D. M. ( 2001 ) ‘ The mental health implications of detaining asylum seekers ’, Medical Journal of Australia , 175 , 596 – 9 . Google Scholar PubMed Stephenson P. ( 1997 ) ‘ Race, whiteness and the Australian context ’, Motspluriels , 1 ( 2 ), available online at: http://motspluriels.arts.uwa.edu.au/MP297ps.html (accessed May 25, 2019). Subramanian D. ( 2014 ) ‘ From monopoly power to deregulated markets: The travails of a state-owned firm (ITI Ltd) ’, Contributions to Indian Sociology , 48 ( 1 ), pp. 73 – 102 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Tan V. ( 2011 ) UNHCR Urges States to Avoid Detaining Asylum Seekers , available online at: https://www.unhcr.org/news/makingdifference/2011/5/4dcbef476/unhcr-urges-states-avoid-detaining-asylum-seekers.html (accessed May 25, 2019). Thorsen D. E. , Lie A. ( 2007 ) What Is Neoliberalism ?, pp. 1–21. Oslo, Department of Political Science, University of Oslo, available online at: http://folk.uio.no/daget/neoliberalism.pdf (accessed May 25, 2019). Triggs G. ( 2013 ) ‘ Mental health and immigration detention ’, Medical Journal of Australia , 199 ( 11 ), pp. 721 – 2 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed United Nations General Assembly Human Rights Council ( 2017 ) Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Human Rights of Migrants on his Mission to Australia and the Regional Processing Centres in Nauru, available online at: https://www.undocs.org/A/HRC/35/25/Add.3 (accessed May 25, 2019). United Nations High Commission for Refugee (UNHCR) ( 2015 ) ‘ Beyond detention: A global strategy to support governments to end the detention of asylum-seekers and refugees 2014–2019 ’, International Journal of Refugee Law , 27 ( 2 ), pp. 375 – 89 . Crossref Search ADS United Nations High Commission for Refugee (UNHCR) ( 2017 ) Global Report 2017, available online at: http://reporting.unhcr.org/sites/default/files/gr2017/pdf/GR2017_English_Full_lowres.pdf (accessed May 25, 2019). United Nations High Commission for Refugee (UNHCR) (n.d.) States Parties to the 1951 Convention and 1967 Protocol, available online at: https://www.unhcr.org/protect/PROTECTION/3b73b0d63.pdf (accessed May 25, 2019). Valtonen K. ( 2001 ) ‘ Social work with immigrants and refugees: Developing a participation based framework for antioppressive practice ’, British Journal of Social Work , 31 ( 6 ), pp. 955 – 60 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Victorian Foundation for Survivors of Torture Inc (VFST) ( 1998 ) Rebuilding Shattered Lives , Brunswick , Victoria Foundation House for Survivors of Torture Inc . Wacquant L. ( 2001 ) ‘ The penalisation of poverty and the rise of neoliberalism ’, European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research , 9 ( 4 ), pp. 401 – 12 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Wallace J. , Pease B. ( 2011 ) ‘ Neoliberalism and Australian social work: Accommodation or resistance? ’, Journal of Social Work , 11 ( 2 ), pp. 132 – 42 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Webb S. A. ( 2006 ) Social Work in a Risk Society: Social and Political Perspectives , New York, NY , Palgrave Macmillan . Webber R. ( 2006 ) ‘Poverty: The impact of government policy on vulnerable families and older people’, in Serr K. (ed), Thinking about Poverty , Leichardt , The Federation Press . Western M. , Baxter J. , Pakulski J. , Tranter B. , Western J. , van Egmond M. , Chesters J. , Hosking A. , O'Flaherty M. , van Gellecum Y. ( 2007 ) ‘ Neoliberalism, inequality and politics: the changing face of Australia ’, Australian Journal of Social Issues , 42 ( 3 ), pp. 401 – 18 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Westoby P. , Ingamells A. ( 2010 ) ‘ A critically informed perspective of working with resettling refugee groups in Australia ’, British Journal of Social Work , 40 ( 6 ), pp. 1759 – 76 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Williams G. ( 2011 ) ‘ A decade of Australian anti-terror laws ’, Melbourne University Law Review , 35 ( 3 ), p. 1136 . © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The British Association of Social Workers. All rights reserved. This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model)
TI - Drowning In Neoliberal Lies: State Responses Towards People Seeking Asylum
JF - The British Journal of Social Work
DO - 10.1093/bjsw/bcz070
DA - 2020-04-01
UR - https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/oxford-university-press/drowning-in-neoliberal-lies-state-responses-towards-people-seeking-H4CwFjqABE
SP - 1
VL - Advance Article
IS - 
DP - DeepDyve
ER -