Boundaries beyond borders: The impact of institutional discourse on the identities of asylum seekers

Abstract

Previous research has shown how certain language has been used to legitimise political actions against asylum seekers, but a greater examination of how this language might impact the identities of asylum seekers themselves by imposing particular subject-positions, is needed. This paper begins from the premise that social identity change is important in the psycho-social wellbeing of asylum seekers and that discourse within UK asylum guidance enables and obstructs this process. Foucauldian Discourse Analysis was used to explore how certain identity categories were constructed, and asylum seekers were positioned, within 59 official documents. The documents selected were those which directly addressed asylum seekers, providing guidance about UK asylum policy and practice. These included formal UK government guidance documents and documents provided by Non-Government Organisations (NGOs). A discourse of ‘security’ inhabited the UK government guidance, which constructed a moral imperative to protect the UK from outside harm and thus positioned those forced to migrate as morally dubious. Further, the discourse served to infrahumanise asylum seekers, homogenising them as ‘other’ which in turn was used to justify more punitive asylum practices. By contrast, a discourse of ‘compassion’ inhabited the NGO texts, which served to recognise, emotionally connect and respond to the needs of those seeking asylum. It constructed active, multiple identities among those seeking asylum, allowing space for old and new identities to come to the fore and positioning a potential ‘them’ as ‘us’. Within this material, UK asylum guidance acts as a powerful psychological tool in which the two discourses construct seemingly incompatible identities. These identities either open up or close down opportunities for change, thus enabling both a ‘social cure’ and a ‘curse’ in the experience of, and changes within, post-migration life.