"A Stone In The Ocean": A Mixed Methods Investigation Into The Experiences Of Families Trying To Reunite In Canada

Every year many families are formed, or find themselves separated, across borders. To address the problem of family separation, the family class stream of immigration to Canada, which accounts for 20-30% of new immigrants annually, allows citizens or permanent residents to sponsor certain family members for permanent residency. Yet there has been very little research on experiences of this policy. Family reunification immigration, located at the intersection of the personal and the political, has been marginalized by masculinized policy disciplines that focus on macro-trends in immigration and render the family invisible, and by feminized disciplines that focus on the family and individual in immigration while rendering policy invisible. This dissertation fills that gap in the literature, using a critical policy studies approach informed by aspects of Critical Theory, intersectionality and Foucauldian interpretations of power. I explore the lived experiences of families as they apply to reunite through the family class stream, and of families who would like to apply to reunite but cannot. I used mixed methods—qualitative interviews and quantitative surveys—to collect data from 169 families, and 100 key informants who support applicant families, including lawyers, consultants, settlement workers and constituency office caseworkers. This approach and research design allowed me to expose and develop a deep knowledge of families’ experiences that have until now been marginalized. Findings show that, though the decision on an immigration application is important, a sole focus on that decision both excludes applicants’ vastly different experiences during the process and renders invisible those who cannot even apply. Diversity in experiences was closely related to interactions between different aspects of social location, and policy design and implementation. Applicants exercised many forms of initiative and agency, but were ultimately constrained by policy structures. The new Government has recently made promising changes, but we must ensure these changes are effective and continue to advocate for further improvements that would mitigate applicants’ negative experiences. Finally, more research needs to be done, most importantly on family reunification through immigration streams that were excluded from this study.

"A Stone In The Ocean": A Mixed Methods Investigation Into The Experiences Of Families Trying To Reunite In Canada

Every year many families are formed, or find themselves separated, across borders. To address the problem of family separation, the family class stream of immigration to Canada, which accounts for 20-30% of new immigrants annually, allows citizens or permanent residents to sponsor certain family members for permanent residency. Yet there has been very little research on experiences of this policy. Family reunification immigration, located at the intersection of the personal and the political, has been marginalized by masculinized policy disciplines that focus on macro-trends in immigration and render the family invisible, and by feminized disciplines that focus on the family and individual in immigration while rendering policy invisible. This dissertation fills that gap in the literature, using a critical policy studies approach informed by aspects of Critical Theory, intersectionality and Foucauldian interpretations of power. I explore the lived experiences of families as they apply to reunite through the family class stream, and of families who would like to apply to reunite but cannot. I used mixed methods—qualitative interviews and quantitative surveys—to collect data from 169 families, and 100 key informants who support applicant families, including lawyers, consultants, settlement workers and constituency office caseworkers. This approach and research design allowed me to expose and develop a deep knowledge of families’ experiences that have until now been marginalized. Findings show that, though the decision on an immigration application is important, a sole focus on that decision both excludes applicants’ vastly different experiences during the process and renders invisible those who cannot even apply. Diversity in experiences was closely related to interactions between different aspects of social location, and policy design and implementation. Applicants exercised many forms of initiative and agency, but were ultimately constrained by policy structures. The new Government has recently made promising changes, but we must ensure these changes are effective and continue to advocate for further improvements that would mitigate applicants’ negative experiences. Finally, more research needs to be done, most importantly on family reunification through immigration streams that were excluded from this study.

Family Reunification? A Critical NAnalysis Of Citizenship And Immigration Canada’s 2013 Reforms To The Family Class

In 2011, the beginning of significant reform to Canada’s Family Class for immigration took place with the freezing of applications for parent and grandparent sponsorship. In May 2013, a package of reforms was proposed to the Family Class to bolster substantial change to implement more stringent conditions for sponsorship of parents, grandparents, and dependent children under the Family Class. In response, a coalition of civic stakeholders in Ontario mobilized to lobby Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) to oppose the implementation of these changes through the “My Canada Includes All Families” campaign. I analyze the package of reforms and explore the implications these reforms have upon the value of the family unit in Canada. This paper aims to support the “My Canada Includes All Families” campaign by presenting practical research to illustrate the social capital benefits that parents, grandparents, and family reunification has for the Canadian social fabric.

Women as sponsors : gendering Canadian family class immigration policy

Canada's family class immigration policy has been studied as a gendered policy that has differential and harmful effects on women sponsored by their male spouses for immigration to Canada (Côté et al., 2001; National Association for Women and the Law, 1999; Thobani, 2000). As women are commonly seen as migrating for marriage and men for work (Sweetman, 1998), there has been little research done on the experiences of women who sponsor male spouses for immigration to Canada. This study explores the experiences of sponsoring women, mainly how their economic and family situations are affected by immigration policy and process. Using multiple forms of data, particularly judicial cases and interviews with sponsoring women, the study extracts themes related to immigration policy, immigration process, neo-liberalism, and the Sponsorship Agreement. It concludes that immigration policy and process create barriers to the family reunification of sponsoring women and their partners, increase the economic marginalization of women, and re-victimize women who have been abused by sponsored partners by holding them responsible for the Sponsorship Agreement.

Women as sponsors : gendering Canadian family class immigration policy

Canada's family class immigration policy has been studied as a gendered policy that has differential and harmful effects on women sponsored by their male spouses for immigration to Canada (Côté et al., 2001; National Association for Women and the Law, 1999; Thobani, 2000). As women are commonly seen as migrating for marriage and men for work (Sweetman, 1998), there has been little research done on the experiences of women who sponsor male spouses for immigration to Canada. This study explores the experiences of sponsoring women, mainly how their economic and family situations are affected by immigration policy and process. Using multiple forms of data, particularly judicial cases and interviews with sponsoring women, the study extracts themes related to immigration policy, immigration process, neo-liberalism, and the Sponsorship Agreement. It concludes that immigration policy and process create barriers to the family reunification of sponsoring women and their partners, increase the economic marginalization of women, and re-victimize women who have been abused by sponsored partners by holding them responsible for the Sponsorship Agreement.

Family Reunification? A Critical NAnalysis Of Citizenship And Immigration Canada’s 2013 Reforms To The Family Class

In 2011, the beginning of significant reform to Canada’s Family Class for immigration took place with the freezing of applications for parent and grandparent sponsorship. In May 2013, a package of reforms was proposed to the Family Class to bolster substantial change to implement more stringent conditions for sponsorship of parents, grandparents, and dependent children under the Family Class. In response, a coalition of civic stakeholders in Ontario mobilized to lobby Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) to oppose the implementation of these changes through the “My Canada Includes All Families” campaign. I analyze the package of reforms and explore the implications these reforms have upon the value of the family unit in Canada. This paper aims to support the “My Canada Includes All Families” campaign by presenting practical research to illustrate the social capital benefits that parents, grandparents, and family reunification has for the Canadian social fabric.

The Parent and Grandparent Sponsorship Program Reforms- The Consequence of a Neoliberal Shift

Since the formal enshrinement of Canada’s immigration objectives in the Immigration Act of 1976, Citizenship and Immigration Canada has been tasked with the responsibility of balancing the demands of the labour market and reuniting immigrant families. Policy changes in the 1990s suggest that neoliberal ideology, which promotes market economy principles, has become increasingly influential in the shaping of Canadian social policies and practices, and has had significant implications for immigration policy and admission trends (Arat-Koc, 1999). The prominence of neoliberal logic in immigration policy has resulted in the framing of immigrant value in terms of economic contributions. As a result, Family Class admissions have been the target of criticism, particularly sponsored parents and grandparents, who are absolved of meeting the point system criteria and are therefore perceived as having little ability to contribute to the economy (McLaren & Black, 2005). This paper explores the extent to which recent reforms to the parent and grandparent sponsorship program are a reflection of, and maintain, the prevailing neoliberal discourse that subordinates Family Class immigrants, especially parents and grandparents, conceiving of them as burdens to the state as opposed to contributing Economic Class entrants. This economic framework provides an incomplete picture of the contributions that sponsored parents and grandparents make to Canada. Furthermore, the insufficiency of empirical data supporting the claim that parents and grandparents are a potential burden on the state suggests that the recent reforms are an explicit expression of fear rather than fact (VanderPlaat, Ramos & Yoshida, 2011). This paper concludes with future research suggestions that lend themselves to redefining “contribution” to incorporate social, cultural, and indirect economic contributions, to provide a more nuanced conception of the value of sponsored parents and grandparents.

The Parent and Grandparent Sponsorship Program Reforms- The Consequence of a Neoliberal Shift

Since the formal enshrinement of Canada’s immigration objectives in the Immigration Act of 1976, Citizenship and Immigration Canada has been tasked with the responsibility of balancing the demands of the labour market and reuniting immigrant families. Policy changes in the 1990s suggest that neoliberal ideology, which promotes market economy principles, has become increasingly influential in the shaping of Canadian social policies and practices, and has had significant implications for immigration policy and admission trends (Arat-Koc, 1999). The prominence of neoliberal logic in immigration policy has resulted in the framing of immigrant value in terms of economic contributions. As a result, Family Class admissions have been the target of criticism, particularly sponsored parents and grandparents, who are absolved of meeting the point system criteria and are therefore perceived as having little ability to contribute to the economy (McLaren & Black, 2005). This paper explores the extent to which recent reforms to the parent and grandparent sponsorship program are a reflection of, and maintain, the prevailing neoliberal discourse that subordinates Family Class immigrants, especially parents and grandparents, conceiving of them as burdens to the state as opposed to contributing Economic Class entrants. This economic framework provides an incomplete picture of the contributions that sponsored parents and grandparents make to Canada. Furthermore, the insufficiency of empirical data supporting the claim that parents and grandparents are a potential burden on the state suggests that the recent reforms are an explicit expression of fear rather than fact (VanderPlaat, Ramos & Yoshida, 2011). This paper concludes with future research suggestions that lend themselves to redefining “contribution” to incorporate social, cultural, and indirect economic contributions, to provide a more nuanced conception of the value of sponsored parents and grandparents.

Family reunification? : a critical analysis of Citizenship and Immigration Canada's 2013 reforms to the Family Class

In 2011, significant reforms to Canada’s Family Class for immigration began with the freezing of applications for parent and grandparent sponsorship. In May 2013, a package of reforms to the Family Class was proposed, which would impose more stringent conditions for the sponsorship of parents, grandparents, and dependent children under the Family Class. In response, a coalition of civic stakeholders in Ontario mobilized through the “My Canada Includes All Families” campaign to lobby Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) to stop the implementation of these changes. This paper analyzes the package of reforms and explores the impacts that past and proposed reforms might have upon the value of the family unit in Canada. This paper aims to support the “My Canada Includes All Families” campaign by presenting practical research to illustrate the benefits that parents, grandparents, and family reunification have for the Canadian social fabric in terms of social capital. Key words: policy reform, family reunification, social capital, economic rationale, racialization

Family reunification? : a critical analysis of Citizenship and Immigration Canada's 2013 reforms to the Family Class

In 2011, significant reforms to Canada’s Family Class for immigration began with the freezing of applications for parent and grandparent sponsorship. In May 2013, a package of reforms to the Family Class was proposed, which would impose more stringent conditions for the sponsorship of parents, grandparents, and dependent children under the Family Class. In response, a coalition of civic stakeholders in Ontario mobilized through the “My Canada Includes All Families” campaign to lobby Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) to stop the implementation of these changes. This paper analyzes the package of reforms and explores the impacts that past and proposed reforms might have upon the value of the family unit in Canada. This paper aims to support the “My Canada Includes All Families” campaign by presenting practical research to illustrate the benefits that parents, grandparents, and family reunification have for the Canadian social fabric in terms of social capital. Key words: policy reform, family reunification, social capital, economic rationale, racialization