[Translated to English, original blog text in Finnish, www.soskieli.fi]
Susanna Lehtovaara, JADE Activity Centre for Older Migrants
Camilla Nordberg, SOSKIEL research project, Åbo Akademi University
Hanna Kara, SOSKIELI research project, Åbo Akademi University, University of Helsinki
Paula Merikoski, SOSKIELI research project, Åbo Akademi University, University of Helsinki
“This society should understand that there are more and more people in Finland, migrants and also Finns, who need help to survive in this service system and in the midst of all this digitalisation. Somehow, the pace is fast now. [–] And not everyone can keep up. That’s why, for example, social work exists. The task of a social worker, when it comes to people who need special support, is to ensure that they receive the services they need.” SOSKIELI workshop participant, 02/2023.
As practitioners in social services, third sector representatives and researchers, we have seen how language-related vulnerability can lead to unsustainable situations in welfare services. People who do not speak the mainstream institutional languages (Finnish or Swedish) can find themselves in situations where their rights are compromised, and their basic needs ignored. These inequalities are reinforced by the tendency in neoliberal societies to hold individuals responsible for becoming aware of and claiming their rights (Kamali & Jönsson 2018).
In Finland, the Administrative Procedure Act (434/2003) and the Language Act (423/2003) do not guarantee interpreting as a subjective right for service users in cases initiated by the service user, and interpreting may not be ordered even in cases where it is clearly necessary. Service users who speak other languages do not always know how to complain about the lack of service they have received or in situations where they disagree with the decisions taken. Language barriers contribute to experiences of voicelessness and powerlessness.
In the SOSKIELI research project we have employed the concepts of “bureaucratic violence” and “slow violence” (Nordberg & Merikoski, forthcoming). They describe a range of everyday and routine institutional practices, reinforced by neoliberal austerity policies, which are not considered violent per se, but which have violent consequences in the lives of individuals (Cooper & Whyte 2017). Bureaucratic violence is concretised through routine administrative practices, documentation, passivity, and rejection (Eldridge & Reinke 2018; Norberg 2021). Exclusion and inaction occur, for example, when the person accessing services is not adequately explained the steps to be taken in relation to their situation.
Previous research and our observations in practice show that multilingual service users often do not make complaints or requests for redress in situations where they feel they have been discriminated against or have been denied the services to which they are entitled. They often turn to their own networks or to third sector organisations for help and valuable peer support. However, this can also lead to frustration with public services and mistrust of public authorities. Many people use silence as a coping strategy: if you don’t talk about your problems or ask for help, you won’t be misunderstood or ignored.
In the current situation, we find it important to:
- Expand multilingual service provision skills in all public services, not only in specific services targeted to migrants.
- Establish a clear policy for public authorities on the use of professional interpreters to help ensure that other-language service users are properly heard.
- Strengthen the enforcement of the duty of public authorities to inform and provide advice to other-language service users (the duty of the primary authority with decision-making power in the matter to provide the necessary advice).
- Clarify legislation and guidance on the duty of public authorities to provide advice and information on the right of service users to file a complaint concerning a decision or to report discrimination.
- Extend the obligation of public authorities to provide interpretation also in cases initiated by the service user, such as cases where there is a reasonable suspicion that the service user is a victim of a crime against life or health.
- Extend the obligation of the authorities to provide interpretation to cases in which service users wish to avail themselves of the legal remedies available to them under law.
- Provide social work and employment services also outside office hours to facilitate access to services.
- Strengthen the cooperation between voluntary and public sectors and set up low-threshold services for adults, the elderly and undocumented migrants.
- Understand diversity as an asset and an asset in everyone – not just as a characteristic of certain groups, such as migrants.
- Increase training in anti-racism, respectful encounter, and inclusion for all those working in public authorities and public services.
References
Cooper, V. and Whyte, D. (2017) ‘Introduction: The violence of austerity’, in: Cooper, V. and Whyte, D. (eds.), The Violence of Austerity, London: Pluto Press.
Eldridge, E. R. and Reinke, A., J. (2018) ‘Ethnographic Engagement with Bureaucratic Violence: Introduction’, Conflict and Society, 4, 1, 94-98.
Kamali, M and Jönsson, J. (2018) (Eds.), Neoliberalism, Nordic Welfare States and Social Work: Current and Future Challenges. Routledge. Routledge Advances in Social Work.
Norberg, I. (2021) ‘Austerity as Bureaucratic Violence: Understanding the Impact of (Neoliberal) Austerity on Disabled People in Sweden’, Sociology, 56,4, 655–672.
Nordberg, C. and Merikoski, P. (forthcoming) (Non)resistance in the face of linguistic vulnerability and bureaucratic violence in welfare institutional encounters.