The position of human rights in social work practice. The case for asylum seekers
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
For the last three decades, Western host countries have been implementing restrictive immigration measures towards asylum seekers aiming to keep them out, to contain them in their country of origin or to toughen their living conditions in the host country. These measures have deeply affected the civil and political rights of asylum seekers as well as their social and economic well-being. Using an exploratory approach, this study explored how principally social workers deal with situations of social and economic human rights violations experienced by asylum seekers in Canada. It also explored how some key informants such as doctors, lawyers and community organizers consider social workers' practice with asylum seekers. Specifically, the study examined the institutional exclusion faced by asylum seekers and how this is managed by social workers within their practice, while exploring what motivated social workers to protect the human rights of asylum seekers under their care. Findings revealed that many factors shaped social workers' conceptions of human rights and their decisions to engage in human rights-based practice. These factors were academic training, social workers' personal stance towards human rights and social workers' approach to structural disadvantage carried out in public institutions towards asylum seekers. Findings concluded that social workers differed in their approach to situations of human rights violations. Some developed interventions centered around human rights that followed from empowerment, such as consciousness-raising, critical thinking and actions of mobilization. Others engaged in social work actions strictly structured by institutional policies where human rights are not necessarily considered. Findings also focused on praxis to understand how social workers developed their knowledge and improved their practice. Findings showed that with regard to human rights-based practice, praxis characteristics are shaped by institutional constraints. Implications included reformulation of social policies to ensure the inclusion of asylum seekers in social welfare spheres and to guarantee access to rights and entitlements. Implications for practice comprised the difference between needs-based practice and human rights-based practice, an opportunity to bridge the micro and macro aspects of social work practice, involvement of social workers and accountability of professionals involved in situations of human rights violations. Implications for social work curricula involved the inclusion of material on human rights, and a human rights approach to practice.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,012 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,043 | 0,135 |
| Communication savante | 0,016 | 0,009 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,017 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,010 | 0,010 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».