Immigration detention and the production of race in the UK

2021 ◽  
pp. 236-247
Author(s):  
Mary Bosworth
Keyword(s):  
Immigration Detention ◽  
The Uk

scholarly journals Mental health morbidity among people subject to immigration detention in the UK: a feasibility study

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 628-637 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Sen ◽  
J. Arugnanaseelan ◽  
E. Connell ◽  
C. Katona ◽  
A. A. Khan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Personality Disorder ◽  
Mental Disorder ◽  
Developmental Disorders ◽  
Psychiatric Morbidity ◽  
Screening Tools ◽  
Psychiatric Research ◽  
Foreign National ◽  
Immigration Detention ◽  
The Uk

Aims.The UK has one of the largest systems of immigration detention in Europe.. Those detained include asylum-seekers and foreign national prisoners, groups with a higher prevalence of mental health vulnerabilities compared with the general population. In light of little published research on the mental health status of detainees in immigration removal centres (IRCs), the primary aim of this study was to explore whether it was feasible to conduct psychiatric research in such a setting. A secondary aim was to compare the mental health of those seeking asylum with the rest of the detainees.Methods.Cross-sectional study with simple random sampling followed by opportunistic sampling. Exclusion criteria included inadequate knowledge of English and European Union nationality. Six validated tools were used to screen for mental health disorders including developmental disorders like Personality Disorder, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and Intellectual Disability, as well as for needs assessment. These were the MINI v6, SAPAS, AQ-10, ASRS, LDSQ and CANFOR. Demographic data were obtained using a participant demographic sheet. Researchers were trained in the use of the screening battery and inter-rater reliability assessed by joint ratings.Results.A total of 101 subjects were interviewed. Overall response rate was 39%. The most prevalent screened mental disorder was depression (52.5%), followed by personality disorder (34.7%) and post-traumatic stress disorder (20.8%). 21.8% were at moderate to high suicidal risk. 14.9 and 13.9% screened positive for ASD and ADHD, respectively. The greatest unmet needs were in the areas of intimate relationships (76.2%), psychological distress (72.3%) and sexual expression (71.3%). Overall presence of mental disorder was comparable with levels found in prisons. The numbers in each group were too small to carry out any further analysis.Conclusion.It is feasible to undertake a psychiatric morbidity survey in an IRC. Limitations of the study include potential selection bias, use of screening tools, use of single-site study, high refusal rates, the lack of interpreters and lack of women and children in study sample. Future studies should involve the in-reach team to recruit participants and should be run by a steering group consisting of clinicians from the IRC as well as academics.

Structural Injustice and the Human Rights of Workers

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Virginia Mantouvalou
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Working Conditions ◽  
Private Life ◽  
Alternative Solution ◽  
Main Approach ◽  
Immigration Detention ◽  
Structural Injustice ◽  
Legal Structures ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right

Abstract An increasing number of jobs are precarious, making workers vulnerable to various forms of ill-treatment and exploitation. The UK Government’s main approach has been to criminalise the actions of unscrupulous employers who seek to exploit these. This approach, however, has been ineffective, partly because it ignores the broader socio-economic structures that place workers in conditions of vulnerability. This article develops an alternative solution, seeking to identify structures that force and trap workers in conditions of exploitation. It focuses specifically on what I call ‘state-mediated structural injustice', where legislative schemes that promote otherwise legitimate aims create vulnerabilities that force and trap workers in conditions of exploitation. I use examples such as restrictive visa regimes, prison work and work in immigration detention, welfare conditionality programmes, and zero-hour contracts to illustrate the unjust structures. I finally assess whether these legal structures are compatible with human rights, such as the right to private life, the prohibition of slavery, servitude, forced and compulsory labour, and the right to fair and just working conditions.

scholarly journals What are we afraid of? Exploring risk and immigration detention

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Lindley
Keyword(s):  
Risk Evaluation ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Early Adopter ◽  
Immigration Detention ◽  
Policy Practice ◽  
Multiple Issues ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Government Statistics ◽  
Migration Regimes

Abstract Risk assessment is a prominent feature of managed migration regimes. How risk is conceptualised and operationalised, however, is highly contested terrain. The extent to which immigration detention represents an appropriate response to specific risks posed by people with contingent or no legal status is particularly hotly debated. In the UK, an early adopter and until recently an eager developer of detention , the policy is that immigration officers carry out individualised risk assessments on each person detained, considering removal prospects, risk of flight, and offending as well as the risk of harm to the individual. Drawing on published reports, government statistics, and interviews with close observers, this article explores the premises, policy, practice, and outcomes of these processes. The analysis flags multiple issues, suggesting that risk evaluation in relation to immigration detention is far from a well-oiled and reliable machine, causes unnecessary human harm, operates in a way that generates unforeseen risks for wider society, and points to other logics shaping detention.

scholarly journals Immigration Detention, Punishment and the Transformation of Justice

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Bosworth
Keyword(s):  
Due Process ◽  
Immigration Detention ◽  
Process Fairness ◽  
Two Systems ◽  
Criminal Penalties ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Porous Boundaries

In this article, I examine the changing nature of punishment under conditions of mass mobility. Drawing on research conducted in immigration removal centres in the UK, I will show how porous boundaries between administrative penalties and criminal penalties have made the two systems co-constitutive and, in so doing, have drawn into question the liberal foundations of punishment. As foreigners face additional, administrative burdens and are subject to processes of differentiation and exclusion simply by virtue of their citizenship, I suggest, basic values of due process, fairness and equality of treatment and outcome, are drawn into question. As a consequence, justice itself is transformed.

Immigration detention in the UK damages health and frustrates healthcare

BMJ ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. k2104
Author(s):  
Kristine Harris ◽  
Hilary Pickles
Keyword(s):  
Immigration Detention ◽  
The Uk

The psychosocial experience of UK immigration detention

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 76-89 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jake Hollis
Keyword(s):  
Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
Cultural Backgrounds ◽  
Immigration Detention ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Healthcare Needs ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Depth Interviews

Purpose Existing quantitative research demonstrates negatively impacted mental health outcomes for people detained in immigration removal centres (IRCs) in the UK. However, there is limited qualitative research on the phenomenology of life inside UK IRCs. The purpose of this paper is to explore the psychosocial stressors experienced by people in detention, the psychological impacts of being detained and the ways in which people express resilience and cope in detention. Design/methodology/approach In-depth interviews were conducted with nine people who had previously been held in UK IRCs. Interview transcripts were analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis. Findings Participants experienced incredulity and cognitive dissonance at being detained, and found themselves deprived of communication and healthcare needs. These stressors led participants to feel powerless, doubt themselves and their worldviews, and ruminate about their uncertain futures. However, participants also demonstrated resilience, and used proactive behaviours, spirituality and personal relationships to cope in detention. Antonovsky’s (1979) theory on wellbeing – sense of coherence – was found to have particular explanatory value for these findings. Research limitations/implications The sample of participants used in this study was skewed towards male, Iranian asylum seekers, and the findings therefore may have less applicability to the experiences of females, ex-prisoners and people from different geographical and cultural backgrounds. Originality/value This study offers a range of new insights into how detention in the UK impacts on people’s lives. The findings may be useful to policy makers who legislate on and regulate the UK immigration detention system, as well as custodial staff and health and social care practitioners working in IRCs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document