Examining the disjunctures between policy and care in Canada’s Parent and Grandparent Supervisa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine disjunctures between the ways in which Canada’s Parent and Grandparent Supervisa is framed within policy documents and press releases, and how it is actually experienced by older adults and their adult children from the Global South who engage in intergenerational care exchanges once they reunify. Design/methodology/approach – A case study involving qualitative interviews with a married couple (adult children), and official texts from Citizenship and Immigration Canada were analyzed, and subsequently categorized according to themes. Findings – The findings of this paper first demonstrate how policies such as the Parent and Grandparent Supervisa and the revamped Family Sponsorship program are ostensibly made to alleviate the significant backlog of family reunification applications, but in reality streamline and categorize older adults from the Global South as visitors who are given minimal state entitlements. Second, the Parent and Grandparent Supervisa reinforces forms of structured dependency by placing the responsibility and burden of care onto sponsors who must provide financial, social, and health care to their older parents. Finally, official statements on the Parent and Grandparent Supervisa and restructured Family Sponsorship program ignore the complex intergenerational exchanges that take place to ensure the survival of the family unit. Research limitations/implications – Given the nature of the case study’s design, the study’s findings speak to the experiences of Analyn and Edwin; adult children who sponsored an older parent under the Parent and Grandparent Supervisa. Given the recency of the program, the issues highlighted provide a much-needed starting point in examining the Supervisa’s impact on families from the Global South. Moreover, future studies could critically assess how the highly gendered nature of care is experienced under Canada’s temporary reunification programs. Practical implications – The study highlights the everyday challenges of sponsoring a parent under the Parent and Grandparent Supervisa. These issues are particularly important for policy makers and practitioners to assess and understand how such policies transform dynamics of care for families from the Global South. The unbalanced power dynamics raises questions on how to best support overburdened adult children, and vulnerable older parents who have no access to state resources. Originality/value – The findings of this paper further the understanding of how families from the Global South provide and receive care under the Parent and Grandparent Supervisa. These experiences, however, are neglected within official state policies which frame older newcomers as visitors who are managed, and denied entitlements to state resources. Revealing disjunctures between policy and lived experiences can assist service providers, professionals, and policy makers to recognize how programs like the Parent and Grandparent Supervisa overburden the family unit, and exacerbate conditions of poverty and marginalization.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".