Exam Preparation PDF

Preview

Summary

Preparation notes for final exam...

Description

Exam Prep Social Construction of Social Problems  Exam question is on framework around social constructionism. Illustrate the usefulness of the framework regarding Benefit Fraud/Tax Evasion dichotomy. Period since 1997. Essay Plan  Introduction  Social Constructivist framework o Clarke (2001) originally highlighted this perspective as an alternative to the realist approach, which views social problems as observable facts. o how some issues come to be defined as social problems and hence are deemed to be legitimate foci for interventions via the policy making process o why some issues come to be described as problems requiring state intervention whereas other issues are defined as private troubles o why issues that were once described as private troubles undergo a change in status and are newly defined as social problems. Note: when an issue is defined as a social problem it usually implies a role for “some form of collective response rather than an individual resolution” (Page, 2001: 17) o which issues become the focus of public concern and which do not, and crucially, why o who has the power and influence to define an issue as a problem and , more specifically, as a particular type of problem o For the social constructionist it is only by understanding the processes of social construction at work that we can begin to deconstruct certain issues and identify the range of possible understandings and hence policy options open to us.  Benefit Fraud o Has been constructed as a serious and widespread problem in modern times o Focus is on how this creates problems for both the government, and the ‘normal’ British citizen who is in employment and pays their taxes  Not so much focus on deserving individuals in the benefits system o Dominant discourse is of a ruthless and significant minority defrauding the population as a whole, putting British life under threat o Growing concern about the impact an emerging culture of fraud with have on the collective morality of the nation. o Idea that the underclass of fraudsters will contaminate the hard-working poor o Focus on benefit fraud since 70s and 80s has been more marked than in the post-war period. o Media Focus  Media reporting about fraud and sensationalised stories have played a significant part in legitimating the money spent on combating fraud  A ‘moral panic’. For example: in 1994 72% of respondents in the British Social Attitudes survey believed that ‘large numbers of people these days falsely claim benefits’  in 2000 40% of respondents believed that ‘most people on the dole were fiddling in one way or another’ (Sainsbury, 2003) o However, looking at it from a social constructivist perspective, we need to examine political agendas and the economic context.  Policy Focus o Sainsbury (2003) notes governments can use deterrence, detection, and prevention to combat benefit fraud

Government introduced targets to DHS staff for detecting benefit fraud.  Problematic – Explain? o Trial by media exposed fraudsters in the press and highlighted consequences o 1997 Social Security Administration (Fraud) Act introduced information sharing powers between different departments, and increased powers to recover money and penalise offeders o 1999 New Labour Strategy ‘Safeguarding Social Security’  More targets, the development of an anti-fraud culture among DHS staff and the public o 2001 Social Security Fraud Act  New powers to access details of bank accounts where fraud is suspected  Tougher penalties for employers seen to be colluding with claimants o Clearly, these policies reflect the dominant constructions of benefit fraudsters outlined earlier – as feckless, criminal, undeserving scroungers. Tax Evasion o Dean (2001) notes that tax evasion is the costliest form of fraud in relation to public expenditure and the public purse and yet we hear so much less about that o However, problem is more than 10 times as big with estimated £100 billion lost revenue in 1997-98. o Culprits treated less harshly. Cook (1997) reported that more than £6bn. in unpaid taxes was recovered in 1994-95 yet only 357 people were prosecuted for a total loss of £650m Benefit Fraud o Suggestion that economic necessity is one of the principle reasons given for fraudulent benefit activity – in particular: benefits are deemed to be too low to live on leading Dean and Melrose (1996) to highlight a discourse of ‘deprivation and hardship’ as important  claims that to declare one off or occasional earnings leads to a potential financial crisis for the household as benefits are reassessed  claims that to declare occasional earnings results in more being clawed back in benefits than has been earned from working. o Moreover, this same research demonstrates that those who commit benefit fraud are not professional criminals living outside of the moral framework of society – most experience much anxiety about their behaviour and fear the consequences but feel they have little in the way of real choices Conclusion o questions can be asked about the assumptions being made and the processes by which certain people, behaviours and issues come to be defined as problematic. o we can identify strengths and weaknesses of accepted policies and interventions o we can identify alternative responses that may reflect more accurately the underlying causes of a problem and that certainly challenge political claims that “There is No Alternative”. o







Asylum Seekers Essay Plan 





Introduction o In this essay I will discuss the reconstruction of Asylum Seekers from being those in need and deserving of aid to the current discourse of bogus claimants and the concept of an ‘economic migrant’. I will explain policy responses to this reconstruction from government, touch on the issue of British social citizenship and recent political events in the United Kingdom, as well as engage in a short exploration of the global context. Old construction o 1951 UN Convention on Asylum Seekers defined a refugee as someone who had a well-founded fear of persecution in their home state. o Asylum seekers in Britain were still subject to the same limited social rights and instances of discrimination and racism as all ethnic minorities at the time. However, they were seen to be more deserving of humanitarian intervention on the grounds of their perceived suffering.  This was amplified when their home state’s government or regime was seen to be discredited or out of keeping with British values. Reconstruction o As we move into the 1980s and 90s there is a systematic reconstruction of asylum seekers. o Those formerly viewed to be refugee victims in need of support are increasingly referred to as bogus asylum seekers. As the ‘undeserving other’ motivated by economic gain only. o Cook: talks about imagery and language of asylum seekers shifting to link increasing numbers of asylum seekers to wider social problems in Britain. o Creation of a suspect culture. Citizens encouraged to snoop and report those who they suspect of being bogus. Increased policing of visible minorities. o A moral consensus begins to form against asylum seekers, pushed forward by the media and political groups. Bloch and Schuster o Cohen notes the complicity of the local state, with local authorities co-operating with central government controlling measures.  All this culminates in a climate of fear for asylum seekers living in Britain. Feeling that society doesn’t want them, and is actively set against them. Racialised discourse doesn’t just affect asylum seekers, but also all ethnic minorities in Britain. o Castles and Miller note that number of asylum seekers in the world grew in period between 70s and 90s.  Not just numbers but meaning attached to them.  The context is a perceived welfare crisis in the country and the problem of too much welfare expenditure  Once again can link to benefits claimants?  Poor economic performance of the UK in general  Assumption that British welfare acts as a magnet for economic migrants who gain access to Britain unlawfully by claiming asylum status  This can serve as a criticism of the view that asylum seekers are simply economic migrants. Why would people looking for an economic boost and motivated solely by economic gain move to a



country with poor performance which diverting resources from social to economic policy?  Instead is the discourse simply racial? o Joppke “the colour couched control mentality” of immigration policy  Need more on this.  Shifting ideology on welfare. Terms of dependency and passivity. o Growing numbers of incomers were presented as a threat to Britain, and were presented to the public as a threat to the welfare settlement and the ‘ordinary’ British citizen  This idea of ordinary gives rise to a discussion about British social citizenship  Social Citizenship commentary?? o This construction of asylum seekers as a ‘threat’ to our economy, welfare state and way of life is in stark contrast to UN constructions of refugees as desperate and in need of humanitarian assistance and support  However, evidence to suggest asylum seekers aren’t drawn to a country by the welfare system  Bloch and Schuster (2002) note  Where welfare has been curtailed in Northern Europe, numbers of asylum seekers have not declined. Applications have even increased in poorer countries  There is a historical link in cultural ties (shared language), imperialcolonial relations, and family and social network ties.  Increasingly asylum seekers don’t exercise choice – they travel with carriers who choose their destination. Policy Response o From the 1990s onwards there was a 2-pronged approach in Britain. 1 – Limiting Entry. 2 – Limiting Rights (particularly welfare) on entry. o Asylum and Immigration Appeals Act 1993 removed welfare entitlement from those not declaring their asylum status upon entry. o Asylum and Immigration Act 1996 removed the right of Asylum Seekers to work  Cook (1998) notes other components of act  Fast tracking of appeal to close the door quicker  White list of safe countries. All applications from here automatically considered bogus and denied o Who is on list?  Indefinite detention  All of this continues the rhetoric that asylum seekers are an underclass of criminals and cheats, scammers and chancers. Comparisons to Racial Discourse at the time “nigger for a neighbour vote labour” and once again also benefit cheats. o Immigration Support Regulations 2000 prevents those under immigration control from being absent from their accommodation for more than 7 consecutive days and nights, or more than 14 days and nights in any 6-month period without permission of National Asylum Support Service (NASS)  Treating migrants like prisoners on parole o Section 9 of the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Act 2004  Gave the Home Office powers to terminate all welfare support for those who fail to seek asylum, who are deemed not to be taking reasonable steps to leave

Notion of starving asylum seekers out of the country through impoverishment and destitution.  Additional risk that their children could be taken into care as they cannot support them.  Government claimed that aim was to remove perverse incentives and encourage families to leave.  Impact on innocent children? o Immigration, Asylum & Nationality Act 2006  Brought in new restrictions on right to appeal asylum decisions  If an employer hires someone subject to immigration or asylum control, then they face imprisonment. o A dual system around a socially constructed deserving-undeserving distinction  Who is deserving?  Who gets to decide who is deserving? EU Referendum o Idea of an Economic Migrant came to the fore once again o Media portrayals of “refugees with smartphones” – if they have an Apple phone, they’re not real asylum seekers, etc. o No willingness to recognise where Britain had contributed to crisis (bombings in Syria, failing to tackle ISIS, etc.) 



Do’s and Don’ts of Exam Writing  Properly Structured o Introduce topic and explain how you will answer it o Group areas together in paragraphs o Conclusion – Summarise key points, but also link back to the question and show how you’ve answered it o Answers need to be explicit o Must reference key thinkers and literature  Learn authors and dates – engage with the literature  Content o Must set the scene. Show economic, ideological, cultural, political contexts that policy responses exist in. o Precise and explicit detail of policy o Explain instead of describe. Why is it like it is?S...