Deservingness, Differential Treatment, and Dehumanization of Refugees, Asylees, and Asylum-Seekers

Overview: This presentation highlights a troubling aspect U.S. refugee and asylum policy – the differential treatment of refugees, asylees, and asylum-seekers. We highlight the need for refugee policy reform, offering insights from practice with asylum-seekers waiting for claims to be adjudicated, recently evacuated Afghans, and interprofessional approaches to working with asylum-seekers.Proposal text: Background/Rationale
Human rights violations currently have displaced over 82 million people from their homes (UNHCR, 2021). Since the Refugee Act passed in 1980, more than three million people have gained refuge in the United States from persecution on religious, political, or social grounds. But, their reception and access to resources varies widely based on their status as refugees, asylum seekers, or asylees.

Under the Refugee Act, refugees receive work authorization, access to public benefits, and can establish permanent residence after one year. The Act also allows asylum-seekers to claim asylum due to actual or a well-founded fear of persecution “on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion” (UNHCR-USA, n.d.). An asylee is someone granted asylum after adjudication of their case in asylum proceedings. Since 2000, asylees can access most assistance accorded to refugees, but the burden of securing these benefits falls to asylees themselves (Levey & Zoghlin, 2021). Asylum-seekers occupy the most marginal status, largely relying on charity to secure economic and social rights until work authorization is granted and their cases are resolved (Carney & Krause, 2020). This can take years to occur due to a backlog of more than 400,000 asylum-seeker cases.

Unequal treatment of refugees, asylees, and asylum-seekers has profound consequences for their well-being. Social workers are well-positioned to challenge an implicit distinction between refugees as “deserving” and asylees and asylum-seekers as “undeserving.” We highlight three cases to illustrate the need for refugee policy reform.

The first case examines the social, emotional, and economic costs of an underfunded asylum system, focusing on the experiences of asylum seekers who have waited years for decisions on their claims. We underscore the detrimental, dehumanizing impacts of “last-in, first-out” processing priorities that undermine rehabilitation from torture.

The second case illustrates the challenge of addressing the rights of some 75,000 Afghan evacuees admitted to the United States in 2021 with humanitarian parole, rather than refugee or Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) status. We emphasize how failing to classify Afghans as refugees or SIVs has created an extraordinary strain on the asylum system.

The third case considers how social workers can fulfill the social and economic rights of asylum-seekers by meeting their needs for healthcare, education, housing, and social services. We focus on one legal services organization that has developed an integrated model of social work and legal services for asylum-seekers and those in immigration detention. This case demonstrates how social workers can collaborate with lawyers to address gaps in the U.S. asylum system, and reinforces that rights-based social work is essential for promoting the human rights of refugees, asylees, and asylum-seekers.

Implications
Social workers can confront unjust practices based on their work with refugees and asylum-seekers (Zayas, 2015). To do so we must ground immigration policies in human rights principles and grant refugees, asylees, and asylum-seekers equitable access to programs and benefits; address asylum claims backlogs; and expand social work education and practice with refugees, asylees, and asylum-seekers to advocate for their rights.