Abstract
Through a social construction theoretical framework, it is explored how the Immigration and Refugee Board utilizes a diagnosis of PTSD as a measure of credibility during the refugee determination process, and how this is deemed problematic due to the barriers that exist for the refugee population in the mental health system. This research project was framed around two primary research question: (1)how does a mental health diagnosis of PTSD impact the refugee determination process in Canada? And, (2) is a diagnosis of PTSD for a refugee claimant accurate and appropriate? Semi-structured elite interviews were conducted with health care professionals who interact with the refugee population in Toronto. The findings indicate that there is an identifiable paradox between PTSD being utilized as a measure of credibility and PTSD being a social construction that is rendered inappropriate for individuals who originate in a non-Western culture. This research project demonstrates the existence of the paradox by analyzing the multi-faceted barriers that refugee claimants face in proving that their stories are credible, and the barriers in the accessibility and delivery of mental health care in Canada.
Highlights
1.1 Research Background At the end of 2013, the United Nation’s High Commissioner for Refugees (UNCHR) annual Global Trends report showed that over fifty-‐one million people were forcibly displaced – which is six million more than the reported amount at the end of 2012 (UNHCR, 2013).“We are seeing here the immense costs of not ending wars, of failing to resolve or prevent conflict, [...] political solutions are vitally needed
It is claimed that the Immigration and Refugee Board is “inadvertently using the language and ideology of post-‐traumatic stress disorder as a measuring stick to determine the credibility of asylum seekers” (Gojer & Ellis, 2014, p.2)
The findings of this research project provide evidence that there is a paradox between the utilization of post-‐traumatic stress disorder as a measurement of credibility in the refugee determination system and the appropriateness of a diagnosis of post-‐traumatic stress disorder among the refugee population
Summary
1.1 Research Background At the end of 2013, the United Nation’s High Commissioner for Refugees (UNCHR) annual Global Trends report showed that over fifty-‐one million people were forcibly displaced – which is six million more than the reported amount at the end of 2012 (UNHCR, 2013). A country once praised for its bleeding heart is currently facing scrutiny: “All Canadians must understand that our humanitarian tradition and our openness towards refugees are historic artifacts” (Dauvergne, 2013, para.11) It is argued, “it is easy to dismiss the current debate about changes to Canada’s refugee process as the same-‐old stand-‐off between the soft liberal left and a strong reformist government. As an extension of this, it is noted that the changes to the refugee determination process has resulted in increased demands on refugees to prove credibility, or rather, to prove that they are a ‘good’ refugee (Gojer & Ellis, 2014) In this way it becomes the refugee claimant’s responsibility to prove that their story is one that makes them worthy of protection. The refugee determination process is multi-‐faceted, it is reported “lawyers and asylum seekers are drawing on post-‐traumatic stress disorder as a vehicle toward credibility and access to Canada” (Gojer & Ellis, 2014, p.6). This research project provides a unique perspective from the service provider on barriers for refugees in accessing mental health services
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
