Group Wiki Part 4- Identification of a Policy alternative As an astute social worker and professional policy advocate, once you have selected and identified a social problem, you begin the process of
Do you need academic writing help with your homework? Let us write your papers.
Order a Similar Paper
Order a Different Paper
Group Wiki Part 4- Identification of a Policy alternative
As an astute social worker and professional policy advocate, once you have selected and identified a social problem, you begin the process of creating and implementing a policy that addresses that social problem. One of the first things you do in the implementation process is an analysis of the social policy you identified. There is always the possibility that the policy created and implemented to address the social problem you identified is not viable for a variety of reasons. In this case, you must explore a policy alternative.
In Part 4 of your ongoing Wiki assignment, your group identifies a policy alternative to the social problem you identified.
Save your time - order a paper!
Get your paper written from scratch within the tight deadline. Our service is a reliable solution to all your troubles. Place an order on any task and we will take care of it. You won’t have to worry about the quality and deadlinesOrder Paper Now
By Day 7
Part 4 of your Wiki.
Address the following items within your group’s Wiki page for Part 4:
- What is the policy alternative?
- What, if any, change(s) in the policy alternative are necessary and where will they need to occur (local, state, national, and international)?
- Is this policy alternative congruent with social work values? Explain.
- What is the feasibility of the alternative policy (political, economic, and administrative)?
- Does the policy alternative meet the policy goals (e.g., social equality, redistribution of resources, social work values, and ethics)?
- What are the forces that are for/against the policy?
- What policy advocacy skills can be used to support the policy alternative?
Group Wiki Part 4- Identification of a Policy alternative As an astute social worker and professional policy advocate, once you have selected and identified a social problem, you begin the process of
Group Wiki Parts 1-3 (to help assist with assignment)* Describe a current social problem. How might this problem be incongruent with social work values/ethics? The current social problem is deportation and immigration of people. The deportation of people has led to the separation of children and their parents, (Jansson, 2018). There are five core social values and ethics which include service, social justice, integrity, dignity, and human relationship. The main goal of social workers is to help individuals talk, manage and resolve social problems. Social workers fight against unfairness and promote social justice. Moreover, they also offer resources and social support to the oppressed group. Social workers value the dignity and worth of each person and treat clients with respect regardless of the cultural and ethnicity difference. They are expected to work in a trustworthy manner. As a result of the current administration’s policies on immigration several changes have been enacted which has affected parents and children of people who attempt to migrate via the Mexican border, refugees and Muslims. How/when has this problem been identified historically, and what were the actions taken to address this concern Immigration to America began in the sixteenth century with Spanish. In the seventeenth century, French and English settlers came to America. Mass immigration occurred in 1880 and 1924 primarily from eastern and southern Europe; this led to a total of 25 million immigrants. From early 1990 about one million immigrants arrive annually. Policies were created and implemented in 1920 to restrict immigrants. To address these situation support groups have been formed, (Blackboard, 2013). In 2012 President Obama began a program that offered two years’ deportation deferrals and works permit to undocumented immigrants. In June 2018 due to political and public outrage, Trump signed an order that was meant to end the policy of separating infants and children from their parents. First, the Trump administration’s zero policy which requires criminal prosecution of those who enter the United States unlawfully has allowed undocumented migrants detained on civil infractions. The migrants and their children are separated as a result and have been placed in different immigration centers after being held in cage-like structures at immigration centers. Additionally, some children are placed into foster care services and are moved to other cities to be placed in shelters, As a result, the migrant children are separated from their parents. The treatment of children and their parents at the border goes against the creed and moral fabric of what Social workers believe. According to the National Association of Social Work. A “zero-tolerance” immigration policy that would prosecute families who attempt to cross the border and forcibly separate children from parents is malicious and unconscionable and the National Association of Social Workers (NASW) will press lawmakers to rescind this egregious action (NASW,2018) Another aspect of the immigration policy has been the cutting back of humanitarian aid programs. For example, the number of refugees who are allowed to enter the United States annually. On September 27, 2017, the Trump administration drastically lowered the annual refugee admission cap from 110,000 to 45,000, the lowest cap since 1980. In FY 2018, only 22,491 refugees were admitted into the U.S., reflecting how the Trump administration views the annual cap as a ceiling rather than as a target goal to meet and effectively reducing the admission of refugees to a mere trickle. The administration has lowered the annual cap even further in FY 2019, to 30,000 refugees. (No Muslim Ban Ever, 2019) How have the groups affected by this concern changed over time? The group affected by this are parents and children, especially. This social problem has led to the separation of infants from their parents. Research shows that by June 2018, 2300 immigrant children including infants were separated from their parents. Moreover, these policies can lead to traumatization, stress, damage attached relationship, and wider detrimental impact on the immigrant communities. The government needs to stop the practice of family separation and children detention for immigration control. (Plummer, et al., 2014). Finally, the Muslims ban, in which the Trump administration has stop entry to the U.S. from certain countries. This act is considered discrimination of a person because of their religion by the NASW. By permitting Trump’s Muslim Ban, the Court encourages an underlying xenophobic and nativist trend. All of which contradicts the nation’s ethos of religious freedom and inclusiveness. It is unquestionable that discriminating against countries based on nationality or religion will not make the United States stronger; it will make us decidedly weaker in the eyes of the rest of the world (NASW,2018). References Blackboard, Inc. (2013, May 28). How to create and edit wikis pages [Video File]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/vvy7LgC4MXA Harvard Law School Harvard Immigration and Refugee Clinical Program (n.d.) Retrieved from https://today.law.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Report-Impact-of-Trump-Executive-Orders-on-Asylum-Seekers.pdf Jansson, B. S. (2018). Becoming an effective policy advocate: From policy practice to social justice. (8th ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Cengage Learning Series. Jervis, T and Gomez A,( May 2, 2019) Trump administration has separated hundreds of children from their migrant families since 2018. USA Today, Retrieved from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/05/02/border-family-separations-trump-administration-border-patrol/3563990002 No Muslim Ban Ever (2019) Understanding Trump’s Muslim Bans, Retrieved from https://www.nilc.org/issues/immigration-enforcement/understanding-the-muslim-bans Popescu, M, and Libal K(2018) Social Work With Migrants and Refugees: Challenges, Best Practices, and Future Directions, Advances In Social Work retrieved from file:///C:/Users/22600-Article Text-34741-3-10-20190222 (1).pdf Plummer, S.-B., Makris, S., & Brocken S. M. (Eds.). (2014). Sessions: Case histories. Baltimore, MD: Laureate International Universities Publishing. [Vital Source e-reader]. The National Association of Social Work, (2018) NASW Code of Ethics, Retrieved from https://www.socialworkers.org/News/News-Releases/ID/1667/Supreme-Court-Ruling-in-Muslim-Travel-Ban-Case-is-a-Severe-Blow-to-Protections-against-Religious-Discrimination Strengths and Weaknesses of Zero Tolerance to Immigration Policy Policies normally change with time to better serve and meet the needs of the public. Changes in policy usually bear significant changes in people’s lives and ways of conducting activities. With the change of immigration policy from the previous one to the current one, zero tolerance to immigration, several changes have been in place and others are yet to be in place both positive as well as negative (Pierce, Bolter & Selee, 2018). It, therefore, follows that this policy has potential areas of strengths and weaknesses, which are worth highlighting and evaluating in terms of security alongside humanitarian grounds. To begin with, people migrate to foreign countries for diverse reasons of which running away from hostile political and oppressive environments is among them (Cole, 2019). On migration to another country, following laid down rules, regulations, and processes are necessary. Many times, immigrants fail to comply fully with these procedures, and this contributes to disproportionate numbers of undocumented immigrants. Immigrants particularly unauthorized ones strains today’s scarce social amenities. They also bring about unfair competition in line with employment opportunities and therefore remedying the trend and pattern would be a great relief for locals. This is what zero tolerance to immigration policy and deportation tends to handle and address and this is its strength. Not all immigrants harbor good intentions especially now that national and international security is an issue of great concern for all. The majority of undocumented immigrants are dangerous individuals with the intent to disrupt peace and harmony in the country. In other words, they are potential security threats to the nation especially concerning drug trafficking, money laundering, and terrorism and the trend needs prompt reversal (Pierce et al., 2018). Consequently, zero-tolerance immigration policy and deportation tend to enhance the safety and security of people and property. This is another major strength of the policy. One strength or advantage of the zero-tolerance policy is that proponents of the zero policy, states that the policy will act as a deterrent for those entering the country at the border. Proponents of the family separation at the US-Mexico border say the policy was intended as a deterrent to people making the long and dangerous journey to cross the US-Mexico border illegally. They also contend that the US government is trying to curb abuse of its asylum process and that people who knowingly violate US laws have to face the consequences (ProCon,2018). The zero-tolerance policy has caused a dip in the number of immigrants crossing into the United States at the border. The August numbers show a consistent decline in arrests since the spring and come as the Trump administration has pushed forward numerous controversial policies intended to help stem the flow of migrants arriving at the southern border. An influx of migrant families and children, predominantly from Central America, strained resources along the border as severe overcrowding took hold earlier this summer. (Sands, 2019). Another advantage which has been stated by the policymakers Is that the policy will help with people who are abusing the asylum laws. Attorney General Jeff Sessions stated that “As this [US Asylum] system becomes overloaded with fake claims, it cannot deal effectively with just claims… The surge in trials, hearings, appeals, bond proceedings has been overwhelming.”(ProCon, 2018). Aside from strength are the downsides of the policy in question, particularly based on humanitarian grounds. Apprehension and prosecution of illegal immigrants who have children cause separation and this bears psychosocial effects on victims. Precisely, the policy is egregious since it largely disregards the fundamental rights of people especially the defenseless and innocent minors via separation from parents (Cole, 2019). That is why shelving the policy is a general recommendation by child rights advocates, social workers, and human rights activists. In addition to that, zero tolerance to immigration and deportation policy tends to encourage and entrench discrimination in society and this proves a serious weakness. Diversity and inclusivity are important virtue that society should embrace in totality. Unfortunately, this policy encourages xenophobic and stereotypical tendencies and practices, which the law equally prohibits (Oskooii, Lajevardi & Collingwood, 2019). For instance, a total ban on immigrants of Muslim religious inclination from certain countries as proposed by President Donald Trump’s administration amounts to open religious discrimination. This is equally against the prevailing legislation and therefore, reversing the policy would be beneficial. The policy has brought some negatives which have affected families who are fleeing their country. Many medical persons have indicated that separating children from their parents will have a damaging psychosocial effect that will include psychological, emotional, and physical. According to, Dylan Gee, Assistant Professor of Psychology at Yale University, stated that “Forcible separation places these children at elevated risk for mental health disorders, including post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, depression, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and conduct problems.”(ProCon, 2018). The disadvantages or weaknesses that have occurred as a result of the zero-tolerance policy has brought some negatives which have affected families who are fleeing their country. Many medical persons have indicated that separating children from their parents will have a damaging psychosocial effect that will include psychological, emotional, and physical. According to, Dylan Gee, Assistant Professor of Psychology at Yale University, stated that “Forcible separation places these children at elevated risk for mental health disorders, including post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, depression, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and conduct problems.”(ProCon,2018). Additionally, Dr. Colleen Kraft, President of the American Academy of Pediatrics, called separating children from their parents “a form of child abuse,” adding, “This type of trauma can be long-lasting, and it’s difficult to recover from this. We know very young children go on to not develop their speech, not develop their language, not develop their gross and fine motor skills and wind up with developmental delays.”(ProCon, 2018). Also, The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College of Physicians, and the American Psychiatric Association all spoke out against the “zero-tolerance” policy (ProCon, 2018). Another disadvantage of the policy is that international organizations are not on board with it. The United Nations has asked the US to immediately stop the policy. “The US should immediately halt this practice,” she told reporters in Geneva. “The practice of separating families amounts to arbitrary and unlawful interference in family life and is a serious violation of the rights of the child” (Presse, 2018). Finally, the policy has been deemed to be immoral. The president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops criticized President Donald Trump’s administration over immigration policy on Wednesday, declaring that separating mothers and children at the US border is “immoral” (Foran, 2018). They believe that families are the foundation of society and they should never be separated. In conclusion, cutting off humanitarian aid programs is another important weakness of the policy. For instance, the action by President Trump’s administration to lower drastically, the annual refugee admission cap from the initial 110,000 to the present 45,000 is indeed worrying. In general, despite the policy being able to handle and reduce acts of lawlessness attributable to unauthorized border crossings, it is prudent and fair to rescind it. It proves unworkable and non-implementable since it gravely violates the fundamental rights of people particularly innocent and defenseless juveniles alongside asylum seekers, who lean towards Muslim religion. References Cole, C. E. (2019). Mothering, Migration, and Immobility in the Age of the Muslim Ban. Departures in Critical Qualitative Research, 8(2), 35-43. Floran, C, (2018) Catholic leader calls separating mothers and children at border ‘immoral’. CNN Politics. Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/13/politics/immigration-illegal-family-separation-catholic-bishops-asylum/index.html France-Presse, A. The Guardian (2018). UN says the US must stop separating migrant children from parents.: Retrieved from: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jun/05/un-says-us-must-stop-separating-migrant-children-from-parents Oskooii, K. A., Lajevardi, N., & Collingwood, L. (2019). Opinion Shift and Stability: The Information Environment and Long-Lasting Opposition to Trump’s Muslim Ban. Political Behavior, 1-37. Pierce, S., Bolter, J., & Selee, A. (2018). US immigration policy under Trump: Deep Changes and lasting impacts. Retrieved on October 16, 2019. Pros & Cons of Current Issues.Reliable. Nonpartisan.(Aug. 16, 2018) Empowering. Was the United States Justified in Its Policy of Family Separation at the US-Mexico Border? – Top 3 Pros and Cons. Retrieved from https://www.procon.org/headline.php?headlineID=005 Sands, G., (2019, September, 4) US Border Patrol Arrests Continue to drop in August with approximately 51,000 migrants arrested. CNN Politics. Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/04/politics/border-patrol-august-numbers-drop/index.html Immigration Policy and the Federal Government Immigration has been and still is a commonplace practice under various jurisdictions in various regions of the world for various reasons. Particularly, many immigrants preferred settling in America for divergent reasons and this made the number of the immigrant population especially undocumented ones raise to unprecedented proportions. This prompted the Donald Trump administration to amend previous immigration policy to the current harsher, zero tolerance to immigration policy (Pierce, Bolter & Selee, 2018). To be precise, immigration policy in the US falls squarely within the authority of the federal government since it is a sensitive issue, which directly touches on the entire nation’s sovereignty. Nevertheless, in its enforcement, local, state, and national governments work in collaboration to achieve success. Different Aspects of Zero Tolerance to Immigration Policy This new policy operates in the country under certain strict guidelines and legal provisions that generally affect the wellbeing and rights of immigrants. Particularly, unauthorized immigrants including infants and asylum seekers are the most affected. Adults would face apprehension, detention, and charged, while those with juveniles would face separation. When parent-child separation occurs, minors usually undergo transfer to the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS’s) for custody, where they are handled in accordance with laws concerning Unaccompanied Alien Children (Kandel, 2018). This is what causes public uproar concerning human rights violations. In other words, any unauthorized entry remains criminalized and is subject to due process, asylum-seeking status notwithstanding. Period the Current Policy Has Been In Force Since the change of tenancy at the White House from former President Obama to the present one, Trump on January 2017, some significant changes to immigration policy have happened. Specifically, the current policy regarding immigration and deportation took effect officially on May 7, 2018 (Kandel, 2018). Proponents argued it would help deter illegal border crossers from accessing the country for fear of punitive repercussions despite opposition from a section of the community. Proponents and Opponents of Zero Tolerance to Immigration Policy This new policy enjoys support and criticisms almost in equal measure from various sections of the community. For instance, the federal government supports the policy on the allegation that it would help reduce the rate of unauthorized border crossings and significantly reduce immigrant population and adverse consequences associated with the same. For example, it would help reduce criminals, enhance safety and security especially in the wake of enhanced terrorist activities. On the other hand, a section of community vehemently opposes the policy citing serious infringements on fundamental human rights (Pierce et al., 2018). For instance, social workers, religious groups, and human rights activists, among others oppose the policy including some state and local governments. They argue that separation of children from parents, cutting off humanitarian aid, and mistreatment of asylum seekers especially from Muslim religious backgrounds or nationalities amounts to discrimination and violation of human rights. Put in another version, the policy violates five core social values. Amendments Made to Zero Tolerance to Immigration Policy Generally, this new immigration policy aims at reducing immigrant populations and increasing the number of deportations (Kandel, 2018). Since the policy is still at its initial stages of implementation, it has not witnessed meaningful amendments to suit the demands of all stakeholders. Possibly, some amendments would be carried out in the near future bearing in mind that some sections of the community such as social workers and human rights advocates remain opposed to it with concrete reasons. References Kandel, W. A. (2018). The Trump Administration’s “Zero Tolerance” Immigration Enforcement Policy. Pierce, S., Bolter, J., & Selee, A. (2018). US immigration policy under Trump: Deep Changes and lasting impacts. Retrieved on January 11, 2019.