Alone in a strange land: Unaccompanied minors and issues of protection.

Montgomery, Catherine ; Rousseau, Cecile ; Shermarke, Marian 等

ABSTRACT/RESUME

Unaccompanied minors are young refugees under the age of eighteen who have been separated from their parents and who arrive in Canada unaccompanied by a legal guardian. In Quebec, between 200 and 300 unaccompanied minors arrive every year. While several studies have documented obstacles to integration for adult refugees, relatively little is known about the life situations of unaccompanied minors. The following paper looks more closely at this group: the history of unaccompanied minors in general, their profile and migratory trajectories, and some of the special intervention issues relating to them. The analysis is based on individual and group interviews with eighteen social practitioners working with unaccompanied minors in Montreal. The study reveals the interface between factors of protection and of risk for this population, particularly in relation to placement and school networks, and concludes that these youth should not only be considered as victims of a world gone wrong, but also as actors in their o wn histories.

Les mineurs non accompagnes sont des jeunes refugies de moins de 18 ans. Ils sont separes de leurs parents et arrivent au Canada non accompagnes d'un tuteur legal. Entre 200 et 300 mineurs non accompagnes arrivent au Quebec chaque annee. Bien que les difficultes reliecs a la migration des refugies ont souvent etudiees en lien avec Ia population adulte, Ia realite des mineurs non accompagnes demeure relativement peu connue. Le present article presente un portrait de ce groupe: I'historique du phenomene des mineurs non accompagnes leurs profils et trajectoires migratoires et certains enjeux d'intervention qui leur sont specifiques. L'analyse repose sur des entrevues individuelles et de groupe, avec dix huit intervenants sociaux qui oeuvrent aupres des mineurs non accompagnes a Montreal. L'etude revele I'interface entre des facteurs de protection et de risque, notamment en ce qui concerne les resequx de placement et de I'ecole, et conclut que cesjeunes ne devraient pas etre consideres seulement comme des victime s, mais aussi comme des acteurs dans leurs propres histoires.

Tarek is a young man originally from Ethiopia. Wanting to protect him from threats directed against the family, his parents sent him to the United States where he stayed with friends of the family who had recently immigrated to New York. During this period, he had a tourist visa and was authorised to stay in the country for a limited time only. During his stay, he learned that his father and older brother had been imprisoned and that his mother had been reported missing. Knowing that he could not return to Ethiopia, Tarek remained in the United States until his tourist visa expired. Finding himself in a status of illegality, and not wanting to create trouble for the family which had taken him in (who were themselves living in a situation of poverty), he boarded a bus one day and arrived at the Canadian border where he claimed political asylum. Tarek was fifteen at the time of his arrival in Montreal.

Tarek is an unaccompanied minor; that is, a young refugee under the age of eighteen who has been separated from his parents and who arrived in Canada unaccompanied by a legal guardian (UNHRC, 1994). Of the close to eighteen million refugees in the world today between two and five percent are estimated to be unaccompanied minors, a figure which represents between 360,000 and 900,000 youth (OMS, 1997; UNHCR, 1994). In Quebec alone, between 200 and 300 unaccompanied minors pass through the offices of the Services d'aide aux refugids et aux immigrants de Montreal Metropolitain (SARIMM) every year. SARIMM is a specialized program for refugees which is mandated for the protection of unaccompanied minors and which is part of the CLSC Cote-des-Neiges, a health and social services institution in Montreal (CLSC Cote-des-Neiges, 1999, 2000). Like refugees in general, these youth are without a homeland, 'propulsed' into the world by war, violence and political instability (Adelman, 1991).

The objective of governmental policies and programs in matters relating to integration and immigration is to offer the possibility of full participation in Canadian society for new immigrants and refugees. There is, however, often a distance between this ideal of full participation and the day-to-day experiences of these populations. Several studies on adult refugees have documented the obstacles to integration which tend to turn 'full participation' into 'partial participation' (Adelman, 1991; Heipel, 1991; Bertot and Jacob, 1991; McAll, 1996; Renaud and Gingras, 1998; Beiser, 1999; Roy and Montgomery, in press). The reality of unaccompanied minors, however, remains relatively little known. The following paper looks more closely at this group: the history of unaccompanied minors in general. their profile and migratory trajectories, and some of the special intervention issues relating to them. The discussion is drawn from a larger study on unaccompanied minors in Quebec which examines their process of establ ishment, both in terms of obstacles and survival strategies and in terms of intervention practices on their behalf. (1)

SOME THEORETICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS

In international law, unaccompanied minors are protected by the Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, both of which have been ratified by Canada. These

conventions are not merely juridical instruments, but rather reflect an ethical position based on humanitarian ideals and the protection of basic human rights. They are rooted in the history of minority rights and the acknowledgement of crimes against humanity. From this point of view, the double status of these youth as refugees and as minors dictates the necessity, even the responsibility, to intervene on their behalf in a logic of protection. While these international instruments provide a valuable framework for guiding action on a global level, social intervention practices in countries of asylum are necessarily coloured by the specific context of establishment of unaccompanied minors.

This context can be analyzed in terms of processes of exclusion and inclusion faced by refugee and immigrant populations (Weber, 1978; Juteau, 1999; McAll, 1996). In the first case, they are often excluded from key sectors of mainstream society, pushed toward the margins of society and distanced from the rights of full participation proclaimed in discourses on citizenship. At the same time, however, exclusion can be counterbalanced by processes of inclusion which open avenues to other forms of participation. There is thus a dialectic established between the obstacles faced by these populations and the strategies put into place to surmount them. In intervention terms, this dialectic refers to the delicate balance between factors of risk and factors of protection. In what way are these factors manifest in the process of establishment of unaccompanied minors in Quebec? What are their implications for intervention practices and policies on behalf of these youth? These questions form the background for the presen t paper.

In terms of methodology, the discussion is based on a series of individual interviews and one group interview with eighteen social practitioners working with unaccompanied minors in Montreal, including fifteen social workers and three program administrators. The respondents are from four types of services and organisations, including SARIMM, YMCA, (2) Youth Centres (Centres jeunesse), and the Ministry of Relations with Citizens and Immigration (Ministere des relations avec les Citoyens et de l'Immigration). (3) A second series of interviews is presently underway with unaccompanied minors and some selected examples have also been taken from these narratives for purposes of illustration. Overall, however, the analysis draws on the discourse of practitioners. As front-line actors, they have in-depth knowledge of the issues facing unaccompanied minors and of the conditions which could facilitate their full participation in Quebec society. They also offer a privileged voice for reflecting on the possibilities and limits of their own intervention practices (Sevigny, 1993). The semi-directive interviews were conducted around the following themes: history of intervention with unaccompanied minors, profiles and trajectories of these youth, and conditions and limits of social practice with this population.

UNACCOMPANIED MINORS: HISTORY OF A PHENOMENON

The phenomenon of unaccompanied minors is not a new one. Since there have been wars, there have most certainly been children living in exile, separated from their parents and other close relations. The immigration of unaccompanied youth to Canada, while little documented, can be traced to the mid-nineteenth century. Between 1868 and 1925, for instance, Canada became home to close to 80,000 unaccompanied British youth. This group was not comprised of refugees per se. Indeed, the term 'refugee' itself had not yet been introduced into the international rights vocabulary. The forced emigration of these youth was seen less as a humanitarian project than as a means of relieving the burden of the poorhouses in Great Britain (Parr, 1980). These youth, however, were unaccompanied minors in the broader sense of the term; that is, youth separated from their parents and alone in a strange land.

It is more specifically during the World War II period, with the mass migrations of refugee populations, that the term unaccompanied minors came into use. Ressler et al. estimate that most European countries were home to between 50,000 and 200,000 unaccompanied children during this period, while the civil wars in Spain, Korea, and Nigeria accounted for another 100,000 of these youth (Ressler et al., 1988). In Canada, special programs were put into place in the early 1940s to prepare for the arrival of young refugees. A first program made provisions for the protection of close to 6,000 'British Guest Children' (Adelman, 1984). While some were accompanied by their mothers or other family members, close to 1,500 were unaccompanied. The National Advisory Committee for Children from Overseas, working in collaboration with the federal and provincial governments and with the Children's Aid Societies, was established to ensure their placement and care. Unlike unaccompanied minors today, however, exile for the 'Briti sh Guest Children' was meant to be temporary and most returned home after the war. A second program for young refugees was set up in 1943, its objective being to evacuate 1,000 Jewish youth from unoccupied territories in France (Adelman, 1984; Forbes and Weiss, 1985). The program was short-lived, however, and came to an end with the German occupation of these territories. Slightly more than a decade later, in 1956, the Russian invasion of Hungary brought a new wave of unaccompanied minors to Canada who were placed in the care of the Children's Aid Societies (Adelman, 1984). While their numbers are not available for Canada, the United States accepted close to 6,000 unaccompanied Hungarian minors during this period (Forbes and Weiss, 1985).

In more recent memory, it is most certainly the arrival of the Vietnamese, Laotian, and Cambodian 'boat children', between 1978 and 1983, which is best known (Beiser, 1999). Close to 900 unaccompanied minors arrived in Canada during this period (Adelman, 1984). While this group is smaller in number than those which arrived in earlier decades, extensive media coverage during this period drew an overwhelming response from the general public. Designated care organisations were inundated with calls from families wanting to open up their homes, there was a significant mobilization of public and community resources, and policy makers debated immigration and placement measures.

Since this period, however, there has been relatively little attention given to unaccompanied minors despite the fact that their numbers have increased steadily since the 1980s. Also, unlike earlier decades, these youth do not arrive in waves from any one single region but rather from a great diversity of countries. In Quebec alone, the unaccompanied minor clientele of SARIMM came from thirty-five countries in 1999. As would be expected, their countries of origin reflect the current 'hot spots' of the world. In 1999, the majority were from the African and Indian continents (48.2% and 35.3% respectively) and a remaining 16.4 percent from South America and Europe. The countries most represented within these continents are the following: Congo (20%), Rwanda (8.2%), India (13.5%), and Sri Lanka (12.4%). Other important countries of origin include Afghanistan, ex-Soviet Union, China, and several South American countries such as Peru, Guatemala, and Colombia. More than two-thirds of these youth (70%) are boys or y oung men and just under a third are girls or young women (30%). The majority (64%) are over sixteen years of age, followed by 22% between the ages of thirteen and fifteen, and 14% under the age of twelve. (4)

TRAJECTORIES AND PROFILES OF UNACCOMPANIED MINORS

Unaccompanied minors constitute a heterogeneous population not only in terms of the diversity of their origins and languages but also, and especially, in terms of their personal histories and trajectories. They do not migrate for the same reasons nor do they share the same conditions upon their arrival or the same needs in terms of protection. The situations which provoke the separation of youth from their families are numerous. In some cases, they are situations which Ressler et al. refer to as 'involuntary'; that is, children who have been lost in the confusion of refugee camps or whose parents have been imprisoned or recruited by the military. In other situations, separation may result from more 'voluntary' situations such as the desire for parents to protect their children by sending them abroad (Ressler et al., 1988). In all of these cases, however, the term 'voluntary' must be used cautiously. Even if the decisions themselves are made consciously, there is nothing voluntary about the life conditions wh ich have lead to such situations.

Among those who have arrived in Quebec in recent years, three principal migratory profiles were identified in the interviews with social practitioners. The first, and largest, category corresponds to those for whom the departure from their homelands is provoked by events beyond their control: these are the obliged departures. For some, exile follows tragic situations involving the loss or the disappearance of family members or situations of extreme violence. This was the case, for instance, of a young man from Nigeria, aged seventeen, whose life was turned upside down the day that a friend of the family arrived at his school to tell him that he could not return to his home because his mother and brother had been killed. He was sent to hide in a small village for several weeks. Fearing for the safety of the youth, the friend arranged for his passage to Montreal. These events happened so rapidly that the youth did not have time to reflect on his situation. It was only after his arrival in Quebec that he realis ed the full impact of his loss.

For others in this same category, the departure may also be provoked by persecution or the fear of persecution because of involvement in political activities. In some instances, it is the youth who decides that he or she must leave, in others it is the family who makes this decision. This was the case of a young man from Pakistan who, along with other members of the family, was very active politically. At the time of his departure, he had already lost an older brother, killed by members of the political opposition, and his father had been imprisoned. His mother and other family members hastily made the decision to send the youth to Canada, saying we've already lost one, that's enough. We'll send you to the devil, but at least we're going to keep you alive." The youth had no say in the matter, but would much have preferred to stay in Pakistan and continue his political activities, despite the risks involved. As in this example, the will of the family often supersedes that of the minor. Departure plans may eve n be made without the youth's knowledge or consent, as one social worker suggests:

There are some youth who don't even know they will be leaving. Either their parents didn't know themselves when the ticket would be ready -- because there are often false papers and all and the youth is absolutely not aware -- or he is not told because it is not part of family authority or this type of family relations to ask for the opinion of youth. One day he is told 'Well, there you go. You'll be leaving at such and such a time.' So thc parents decide what is best for the others and they don't consult the youth. And, in these cases, the youth arrives here and he knows nothing of his itinerary.

The second profile corresponds to youth described by the practitioners as 'adventurers'. These youth also come from countries in turmoil, but the decision to leave the homeland is made by themselves. Generally older in age, many are in search of autonomy and independence. While their departures are primarily provoked by the situations in their homelands, they also wish to establish themselves as young adults, to escape family constraints, or to flee countries in which opportunities are limited because of war, political unrest, or economic instability. This was the case, for instance, of a young woman who, at the age of seventeen, joined a dance troop which had planned a tour in Quebec. Shortly after her arrival she left the troop and claimed political asylum. Tired of the political situation in her country and wanting to break away from her family, she took what means were necessary to get away. Commenting on the motives of the young woman, her social worker said "In her case, there is the attraction of newn ess. ... She was really a girl who wasn't so worried about her refugee status, but who wanted to choose a country, the best country for her [in terms of opportunities]."

A final profile corresponds to youth who have been caught up in trafficking networks. Once again, these youth are from countries in the throes of war or political unrest; contexts in which they are easy victims for such networks. While this profile is exceptional in relation to the unaccompanied minor population in general, it nonetheless represents a certain reality which is both difficult to measure and to control. For the most part, these youth are destined to end up in the United States, possibly for black market or criminal activity, and only pass through Quebec. Sometimes, however, the chain is broken and the youth are intercepted at the border and taken into protection in Quebec. Speaking of the case of two Indian youth, a social worker comments on the fact that they tend to 'disappear' after a couple of months, presumably having been smuggled into the States: "What is clear in cases like this is that we [youth protection services] are like a grain of sand in a well oiled gear that was supposed to wor k otherwise. These youth were supposed to cross the border where they would be given papers. They end up making their claims here and afterwards someone takes them to the United States by God knows what means." The practitioners express a certain powerlessness with respect to the real possibility of helping the youth in this profile: "There is not much we can do. When you go before the judge, you have to have proof and we often only have suspicions. The Direction of Youth Protection will only say 'We can't do anything about that'."

UNACCOMPANIED MINORS AND INTERVENTION ISSUES

These profiles demonstrate the exceptional circumstances surrounding the migration of unaccompanied minors to Western countries where they claim political asylum. In some ways, the needs of unaccompanied minors are similar to those of other young immigrants with whom they share several common barriers, such as language, school integration, lack of knowledge of resources, discrimination, prejudice and so on (Meintel, 1992; Roy, Rheaume and Hetu, 1998; Potvin, 2000; Chiasson-Lavoie and Roch, 2000). At the same time, however, the practitioners participating in the study emphasized some specific issues of protection and intervention with regard to this population: coping with loss, shock, and trauma, support networks and adequate placement resources, access to education, and the question of status. Most of these issues have a dual character, revealing at the same time both factors of protection and of risk for these youth. In this sense, they should be viewed as double-edged swords whose impact varies depending on the individual histories and trajectories of each youth and on the resources available to them.

Coping with Loss, Shock, and Trauma

One of the most immediate concerns in terms of protection is related to questions of loss, shock, or trauma, particularly in the period immediately following the arrival of the youth. This is often the case, for instance, for those who have been obliged to leave their countries without warning or preparation. A social worker describes the devastation displayed by a young brother and sister upon their arrival in Montreal, following a migration which they had not in the least suspected: "They arrived at the Y on the weekend. They were in a state of shock. They couldn't talk. They smiled, but their faces were closed, closed, dosed. They were like two baby birds who had fallen from the nest. That image often struck me ... just like birds fallen from a nest." These youth had been literally parachuted from their homes which, according to this practitioner, often "makes for a child who is more lost, more dependent."

Shock may also result from the sometimes brutal separation of youth from their families, particularly for those who have lost all contact or whose parents have disappeared or been killed. (5) In addition to the shock of precipitated departure and family separation, some of these youth have also suffered severe trauma either as victims or witnesses of torture. This was the case of a young Cambodian girl who, in her foster home in Quebec, would wake in the night screaming and running from her bed. The foster family later learned that the girl's father had been killed before her eyes and, in order to save herself and her younger brother and sister, the girl had had to pretend that she did not know the man who was being killed. She had kept on walking without calling out for help. Her dreams were representations of feelings of guilt and mourning.

While shock and trauma are important intervention issues, they do not have the same consequences for all unaccompanied minors. Many of these youth have developed survival strategies which enable them to cope surprisingly well, despite their loaded histories. These are strategies which sometimes leave a lasting impression on those who work with them, as the following comment suggests;

In general, what strikes me is the force of survival of these youth, their courage. Some may not even realize it. You know, sometimes when you're in great danger, you don't realize it. If you realized it, you would panic and you would break down. There are others who do realize it and who have a great force of adaptation to make it through. I admire them a lot. And I try to tell them that 'You know, I really admire you, I admire your courage.' We mustn't take things too tragically, but whether you want it or not, [their stories] leave a mark on you.

Anger, aggressiveness, and assertiveness may also represent strategies used by youth to cope with their situations. Fiorino (1993) illustrates well this type of strategy in his description of the tensions between several Somali unaccompanied minors and the social practitioners working with them in a Montreal group home. The youth were described by the practitioners as being "arrogant, aggressive, macho, and frankly impolite." Special measures had to be adopted in order to negotiate the place of the minors and practitioners, each expressing their frustrations with respect to the other. The measures were effective in diminishing the tension. A social worker in the present study, referring specifically to this case, explains that the aggressiveness was in fact a great force of this group: "the Somalis had a quality that the others didn't. They are not youth who will give in. [...] They know what they want. Generally, we don't like people who protest all the time. We don't like them. We prefer those who give in." He emphasizes, however, that this aggressiveness is in fact their greatest strength given the circumstances they have had to cope with.

Another important factor of protection lies in the symbolic role played by the family, even for those who have lost all contact. Rousseau et al. (1998a, 1998b), for Instance, examine the way in which unaccompanied Somali minors draw on myths of migration embedded in family and community stories in order to ensure continuity between their past and present. In the current study, this symbolic role is also illustrated in a case described by a social worker of three brothers and sisters who were placed in a Quebec foster family. Although they had lost direct contact with their parents, the youth continued to receive letters and gifts from their grandmother in the ex-Soviet Union. After a while, the gifts became increasingly larger: several hand woven oriental carpets in varying sizes. The carpets became a saga in themselves, because duty had to be paid on them and the foster family had to find room to store them. In the beginning, the foster family and social services accepted these inconveniences because the car pets were the only link that these youth had with their family. Tension increased, however, after the elder sister put mothballs in the carpets to protect them, creating a stench throughout the house. The foster family presented social services with an ultimatum: either the carpets or the youth were to leave the house. The carpets were removed. Several years later, when the social worker had a chance encounter with the elder sister on the street, the latter explained to her how difficult it had been to part with the carpets. The carpets had been like a life line to them, a representation of the family line.

Other youth may be protected by the fact that they carry with them a family project or dream. This is the case of a young African girl of nine whose parents had been killed by a car bomb. In her foster home, she was described as a very serious child who spent long hours studying, a behaviour which her social worker explains in terms of compensation for the loss of her parents: "She never played. She wanted to compensate in her studies, in the memory of her parents. She had to succeed in her studies no matter what the cost [...]. Now she is fourteen. She is in high school, she is bilingual. Really, at the beginning it was very difficult and we were very worried." Although her parents were deceased, she was protected by the hopes which they had vested in her. Her dream was to become an accountant and it was this project which gave her the strength to carry on.

Factors of protection can also become factors of risk. Some youth, for instance, may feel trapped by a family project or become frustrated when they are not able to meet the expectations which their families have placed on them. This dual role of the family as a factor of protection and of risk is corroborated by Rousseau et al. (1997), who examine the influence of psychosocial factors on the mental health of young refugees in the school system. In some cases, traumatic events experienced by parents prior to the birth of their children may play a compensatory role, leading to greater investment in order to ensure a secure future for their offspring. In other cases, however, an intergenerational transmission of trauma from parents to children can be observed, particularly in relation to histories of rape.

Support Networks and Adequate Placement Resources

In the absence of the immediate family, social services and the placement resources (6) often become the primary support network for unaccompanied minors. For youth who are completely alone and have no contacts whatsoever in Quebec, the initial phase of establishment is often more difficult than for those who arrive in an already established network (distant relatives or friends of the family). In recent years, there have been a growing number of young Africans in this first category, although youth from other origins may also arrive without an existing network to fall back on. In many of these cases, the sole source of support in the first months comes from the social worker assigned to their case. As one practitioner suggests, social services are often the first support network for these youth and, consequently, the investment in terms of intervention may be more important: "Of course we see a difference, because those who arrive alone are often missing a family frame of reference. Thus it is certain that we will invest more in these youth than in those who have an extended family network or neighbour [to help them]." The appreciation for the role of social services also finds its expression in the words of an unaccompanied minor from India who, when asked to identify the five most important people to him in Quebec, immediately said "my social worker. She is like my mother."

Although most unaccompanied minors arrive alone, it would seem that the majority are integrated in some form of established network relatively quickly. Some communities are particularly well organised for this purpose. In the Sikh community, for instance, youth are often given immediate shelter in a temple where they stay until someone in the community assumes responsibility for them and invites them into their home. Thus, placement within the same community of origin can be an important factor of protection for many unaccompanied minors, particularly in the initial phase of establishment. Compared to youth who arrive completely alone, those rapidly inserted in a network have more support and encouragement, as the following comment suggests: "Well, the advantage for the youth is that he is in a familiar environment very rapidly, whether in terms of food or even the type of dress. In any case, [...] I have the impression that they are told more about what is going on [in terms of immigration procedures]. They are more reassured. I think it is a form of passage which is more harmonious. They are better accompanied."

Once again, however, factors of protection can also become risk factors. Many youth are placed in families or with individuals whom they have never met. In such circumstances, it is not always easy to develop a relationship of confidence. Personality differences, divergences in habits or rules of conduct, and also situations of abuse within a placement situation may increase the vulnerability of the youth. This was the case, for instance, of a young man from India. After having been given temporary refuge in a temple in Montreal, he was placed in the care 01 an adult trom the same community of origin. Not only did the youth's 'guardian' (a term used in this community) demand an exaggerated sum for rent, but he also charged the youth fifty dollars every time accompaniment was necessary for immigration procedures, medical visits, and so on. After discussing his situation with another member of the temple, the youth was placed with another guardian who he now considers to be his closest friend in Quebec. Thus, the nature of interpersonal relations in the placement situation may impact greatly on the degree of support given to an unaccompanied minor.

The degree of support may also depend on the profile of the host family: the age of those responsible for the youth and their immigration or socio-economic status. Due to a lack of placement resources, some minors may be placed in situations which are less than ideal. This is the case, for instance, of two brothers and a sister aged seven, nine, and fifteen who arrived as unaccompanied minors from Africa. On their arrival, they were placed with an older brother, aged twenty, who had arrived in Quebec about a year earlier. In many ways, it was a logical placement decision made in the interest of keeping the family together. At the same time, however, the care of three younger siblings proved to be a heavy responsibility for the twenty year old. His lack of maturity, desire to spend time with friends his own age, and financial insecurity were factors which greatly increased the vulnerability of the younger siblings.

Also, many of the families in which these youth have been placed are recent immigrants or refugees themselves. Not only do many speak a language other than French or English at home, but they do not necessarily have full knowledge of the resources available to them or to the youth. While placement in the community of origin in the initial phase of establishment is generally considered to be a factor of protection, some social workers question the impact of such placements on long term integration, as the following comment suggests:

Most of the time, these people [host families] have arrived only recently or even during the same period as the youth. Thus, they have little knowledge of the language or the school system. They are themselves isolated and don't know how things work. They are not able to help the youth a lot, especially when it comes to contacts with the school [or] in terms of understanding French. The youth doesn't understand [...] and there is no one to give him a helping hand.

This theme, of course, opens up an important debate on the meaning of integration and the creation or maintenance of what have been referred to as 'ethnic enclaves' or 'ghettos'. For the practitioners in the study, however, there is another theme which is of more immediate concern. They emphasize that it is not only the unaccompanied minors who need the support of social services in these cases, but also the host family as a whole. At the same time, however, they express the frustration of not being able to intervene on both the individual and familial dimensions because their caseloads are too heavy: "It's evident that it would take a lot more resources and time, which is not the case at the moment. It's the same for the youth and for the family. If I compare for the family, I have to say that I feel a little bit guilty, because I have too many cases and when I have too many cases, I completely neglect the families." According to the respondents, real protection for these youth must take into account all of the dimensions of vulnerability, including those of the host families in which they are placed.

Access to Education

In addition to placement and other support networks, the educational system was identified by the practitioners as a crucial sector for the integration of unaccompanied minors. Whereas for adult refugee claimants it is the job market which provides the principal means of integration in society (Adelman, 1991; McAll, 1996; Renaud, 1999), for unaccompanied minors it is the school which, in principle, plays this role. Although the series of interviews with the minors is not yet complete, preliminary results seem to indicate that the school system does play an important symbolic role for them. One young man began attending school a month or so after his arrival in Quebec (the time needed for his papers to be put in order). During that month he said that he was depresssed, that he had headaches, and that he could not sleep. He found the days long and could not help thinking about his family, especially his father who had disappeared. When he finally began attending school, he could focus on other things. The isol ation which he had felt during his first month slowly disappeared as he began to get to know the other students in the welcome class. He knew, too, that his future project, to become a computer technician, could only be realized if he succeeded in school.

At the same time, however, unaccompanied minors face significant barriers in the educational sector. In part, these barriers are a result of their pre-migratory histories. Most of these youth come from war torn countries where their schooling has been interrupted or where the resources available may not have enabled the same rate of advancement as might have been the case here. Also, many do not have the language skills necessary to be integrated immediately into regular classes. The following comment from a social worker illustrates these difficulties:

If their principal language is not French, by definition they start in a welcome class in order to learn French. It might last a year, or two years in some cases. After this period, the youth is supposed to know enough to begin [regular classes]. But in addition to the language question, there is also the question of the style of course material, the way of teaching, and all of that. That means that in their country of origin, certain youth have maybe finished secondary four and here they are put into first year high school.

For these reasons, unaccompanied minors are often a heavy clientele for the school system, to the extent that some schools are very reluctant to accept them in their schools. Recently, this reluctance was manifested in a school's refusal to accept an unaccompanied minor because of his status as a refugee claimant. For the most part, however, the exclusion described by the social workers is more subtle. After the age of sixteen in Quebec, the schools have no legal responsibility to keep youth in the system. Several respondents suggest that the schools use this clause to their advantage by placing unaccompanied minors in what is referred to as 'avenues of avoidance' (voies d'evitement) until they reach the age of sixteen; that is, they limit interventions to a strict minimum until the youth can he farmed out to adult sector continuing education programs. While these programs at least give the youth an opportunity to continue their studies, they offer little in terms of support or counselling which could benefi t this population.

Other practitioners mention the absence of complementary resources in the schools resulting from budget restrictions. These restrictions affect all students and not only recent immigrant youth or unaccompanied minors. Nonetheless, the latter often need additional support which, in the present context, is threatened by the recent cutbacks in the educational sector, as the following comment suggests:

With the budget cuts, schools have increasingly eliminated most of the complementary resources. Before, they had liaison officers (agents de liaison), they had psychologists, they had orthopedogogues. Cutbacks in the schools, like in the social services, mean that many of these professionals, who were complementary to the schools, have disappeared. It's notjust for unaccompanied minors, but for immigrants in the whole, youth from all sorts of countries, and it is not evident to integrate them rapidly.

In addition to the lack of resources, many commented on the existence of stereotypes and prejudices in the schools which tend to reinforce a negative image of unaccompanied minors, thus becoming another obstacle to the attainment of a decent education. If, as suggested earlier, the school system is the principal means of integration for these youth, then there would appear to be some very serious gaps in the system. One of the priorities for action identified by the practitioners is a greater awareness in the schools of the life histories of these youth: "the school boards don't understand the needs of these youth. Sometime, we'll really have to set up a program to train schools on the[ir] needs." This same wish was expressed in other terms during an interview with an unaccompanied minor. He described the difficulties that he had had in class during the first few months, especially the fact that he would sometimes bury his face in his hands and start crying. The teacher would get angry, tell him to stop disr upting the class, and send him to the Principal's office. In the interview, he said, "and if she had known that my father was killed two months ago? If she knew that I didn't want to leave my country and that now I am all alone? Would she have understood?"

The Question of Status

The obstacles faced in the educational sector also draw attention to two aspects of status which create certain limitations on the rights of social participation of unaccompanied minors. First, these youth arrive in Quebec as refugee claimants; that is, they have not yet been officially accepted as refugees and still face the possibility of deportation. It is a status which might be better labelled as a 'status-in-waiting', because of the lengthy administrative delays in processing their claims. Second, these youth are minors, that is, under the age of eighteen. This 'age of majority' marks an important socio-juridical boundary in Western societies. While this may mean simply the right to vote, to sign legal documents, or even to enter bars for most Canadian youth, the status of being a 'minor' has more complex implications for unaccompanied minors. The accumulation of these two aspects of status, as refugee claimants and as minors, creates a certain number of barriers for unaccompanied minors.

We live in a society obsessed with administrative, bureaucratic, and juridical procedures. Signatures are a proof of legality and of our status as consenting, willed, and autonomous beings. Minors, however, are not free to sign any type of document, although parents or legal guardians can sign or co-sign official papers for youth under their responsibility. For unaccompanied minors in Quebec, there is no designated legal guardian or authority (Houde and Sabourin, 1997) and the question of signatures is sometimes a very tricky one. From report cards to consent forms for school outings or vaccination programs, no one has legal signing authority for these youth. There are ways of negotiating in this grey zone. Sometimes a family or a social worker will sign these papers, despite the fact that they do not have signing authority to do so. Generally speaking, there are no real or serious consequences to these practices. However, as one practitioner put it, signing papers without the authority to do so can be risky business: "If something goes wrong afterwards? We put our signature somewhere. Imagine that something happens to the child; that he has a major infection and dies [i.e. following a vaccination]. Who is responsible?"

The limitations of status may also have implications for access to sectors of public life. Access to housing, for instance, is a difficulty often cited by adult refugee claimants. In addition to discriminatory practices based on skin colour or accent, they also face refusals by landlords because of their immigration status (McAll, 1996; Renaud and Gingras, 1998). For unaccompanied minors, access to the rental market does not have the same urgency as for adult refugees since most placement situations are organised by social services. Minors who are sixteen or seventeen, however, are sometimes placed in more autonomous living situations, such as apartments. Thus, some have an early introduction to the rental market. According to the Civil Code of Quebec, youth over sixteen years of age can sign a lease. Despite this legal acknowledgement, however, immigration status and status as minors may become the basis of discrimination in the rental market, as the following comment illustrates: "It's true, [the immigratio n status] creates a credibility problem for the tenant. I am thinking of one of my youths. It took several weeks before he could obtain an apartment - because he was a minor, because he didn't have any revenue, because he was a new [immigrant]." One of the minors interviewed in the second part of the study also described an experience of apartment hunting with a friend. Although the friend was twenty-five, the roommates were both refused by a landlord who "does not rent to youth."

Difficulties of access also extend to other sectors of public life which the majority of us probably take for granted, such as banks. Banks want profits and unaccompanied minors do not constitute a very lucrative clientele. Although they do receive a given amount of money from a refugee fund to pay for their basic needs in terms of housing, clothing, and food, they do not have large savings accounts. Thus, unaccompanied minors may face obstacles opening bank accounts or cashing cheques.

The difficult access to banks is not only a question of money, it is also a question of their status, first as refugee claimants and second as minors, as the following comment suggests:

[Banking] is not only a problem for minors [although] for minors it is even more difficult. It is a problem for anyone who does not have a status. The banks have become more and more demanding in the sense that in the past few years they have developed the habit of always wanting to gain and never ........ More and more, they want nothing to do with clients that aren't profitable. Because our clients are not profitable... they [the banks] don't always want to cash cheques, even if the cheques are perfectly legitimate and come from the CLSC, because they say to themselves: Ah, maybe it is someone else'. They [the minors] may have three photos, with immigration papers, but the banks consider them to be suspect.

While the lack of immigration status is an important barrier in terms of access to certain types of resources, the practitioners unanimously agree that the attainment of status is an important factor of protection. Obtaining status eliminates many of the barriers described earlier relating to the issue of being a refugee claimant (signatures on important documents, access to services and education). More importantly still, a large part of the anxiety relating to the migratory process is relieved with the attainment of status. It is at this point that the youth begin to feel more secure and begin to plan for the future; it is at this point that many begin to dream again. One social worker gave the example of a youth for whom the process of establishment had been particularly difficult. It was only after having obtained his refugee status that things started falling into place and that he began to think about his life differently. In the words of the practitioner, "it was difficult for him, but once he obtaine d his refugee status he was at least more reassured. The last news I had was good. He continues to go to school. He was living alone in an apartment and I even think he started to get interested in politics again."

DISCUSSION

As refugees and as minors, unaccompanied minors represent a very specific population in terms of protection and intervention issues. Their process of establishment is necessarily a complex one, as is the case of all refugees and immigrants in general. In part, this process is dependent on factors specific to the minors themselves: family and educational backgrounds, pre-migratory and migratory histories, and experiences of loss, shock, or trauma. It would be a mistake, however, to consider these youth only as victims of a world gone awry. They are also actors in their own histories and, as suggested in earlier examples, display incredible survival strategies, whether in terms of assertiveness, or resourcefulness, or in terms of being carriers of a family project or dream.

At the same time, however, the process of establishment is also dependent on factors which, in some respects, are beyond their immediate control, such as the support offered by various organizations or their integration into social networks. Social services, placement networks and the educational system are, at least in theory, well-placed to play a front-line role in facilitating the establishment of these youth and in diminishing barriers of exclusion. This role is certainly acknowledged in the preliminary interviews with the unaccompanied minors themselves. Yet, it is clear in the minds of the practitioners that there are important limits to this role, particularly given diminished resources in a period of budgetary restrictions: lack of complementary resources in the schools (psychologists, liaison officers, orthopedagogues), limits in the help given to the host families of the youth, growing case-loads, and the need for awareness programs aimed at countering prejudicial attitudes toward these youth and refugees more generally. Diminished resources may even lead to feelings of guilt on the part of the practitioners who question their capacity to intervene in the best interests of the youth: "In terms of intervention, the fact that we are very rushed and that we don't have time, we ourselves become guilty of standardizing our practice, as is the case in the schools. There are things we could be doing, there is a lot to be improved in terms of helping families who host these youth, there is a lot of follow-up that can be done to improve their situations."

Aside from the question of resources, the analysis also reveals other types of obstacles in terms of access to education and to other public sectors of activity. Furthermore, this exclusion is reinforced by questions of legal status relating to immigration and to age. Thus we find both juridical and sociological aspects of rights intertwined; that is, the fact of not being a citizen in the legal sense of the term becomes, in itself, a constraint on social participation. Taken one-by-one, the obstacles discussed above have only isolated importance. Taken together, however, they have a cumulative effect. On the one hand, they construct a veil of 'difference' which reinforces the distance between these youth and other youth. On the other hand, repeated obstacles in this early stage may well become in themselves a barrier to long term integration, both in terms of self-esteem and in terms of adequate preparation for the job market or for continued studies. While these youth are protected to some extent by the st rategies of survival which they bring into play and the support services offered to them, the practitioners argue that they could go even further given more resources.

As a case study, the situation of unaccompanied minors can be placed in the broader perspective of intervention with what have been called 'target populations', 'vulnerable groups', or 'special needs groups' in various policy papers, particularly in the health, employment, and education sectors. These policy orientations were developed in the heyday of the welfare state, in the acknowledgement that certain segments of the population are more vulnerable than others and that special measures are needed in order to make their full participation in society possible. This was also a time of important investment in the social sector. With the severe cutbacks in the past decade, illustrated in this study of unaccompanied minors, we are witnessing a radical shift in priorities. The fear expressed by practitioners in the present study is that the rationalization of services will also lead to a standardization of social intervention practices and that the special needs of unaccompanied minors and other vulnerable popu lations will be forgotten along the way. As one practitioner suggests, it is a question of political will: "You understand the problem [...]. We have to put money into resources, [but] this requires a political will. However, in present day society, the refugee population is far from being a priority. We are far from the public mobilization that we had experienced during the Vietnam war, with the arrival of the Vietnamese [refugees]." In the words of another practitioner, we must not forget that "these are future citizens" and, as a society, we have to weigh the balance between short term savings and long term costs, both economic and social.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to express our gratitude to the practitioners of SARIMM, Youth Centres, and the Ministry of Relations with Citizens and Immigration whose rich insights and experiences have made this study possible. We would also like to thank the Conseil quebecois de la recherche sociale which provided the financial support necessary to undertake the project.

NOTES

(1.) The study, funded by the Conseil quebecois de la recherche sociale (CQRS), forms part of the postdoctoral program of the principal author. The project is undertaken in collaboration with the CLSC Cote-des-Neiges and the Montreal Children's Hospital.

(2.) SARIMM has a branch office in the YMCA where short term lodging is also provided for unaccompanied minors in the days following their arrival in Quebec.

(3.) The Centres jeunesse, which form part of the youth protection network in Quebec, are responsible for unaccompanied minors with regularized immigration statuses. As for the Ministere des relations avec les citoyens et de l'Immigration, it is the Ministry responsible for immigration procedures in Quebec.

(4.) This data, based on 1999 figures, is derived from internal statistics provided by SARIMM, CLSC Cote-des-Neiges.

(5.) In 1999, the majority of unaccompanied minors (49%) at SARIMM had no contact whatsoever with their families, compared with 40% who still had regular contact and 6% who had contact from time to time (5% no response) (data derived from the internal statistics of SARIMM, CLSC Cote-des-Neiges).

(6.) Generally speaking, in Quebec these resources are of four types. In the first category, group homes may be used, although these are generally temporary placement arrangements in the period immediately following the arrival of a youth. The second, and most commonly used long term placement resource, is the 'host' family (families d'entraide). Host families are comprised of individuals within the youth's extended family network (an uncle or aunt, an older brother or sister, a grandmother already living in Quebec) or within the same community of origin (persons known or unknown to the youth). When an appropriate host family cannot be found, or there are special needs in terms of supervision, regular foster families designated by the Youth Protection Services (Direction de la protection de la jeunesse) may also be used. Finally, older youth who have demonstrated sufficient maturity may be placed in supervised or semi-autonomous apartments.

REFERENCES

Adelman, Howard. Unaccompanied Children in Emergencies: The Canadian Experience. Toronto: York University Press, 1984.

Adelman, Howard (ed.). Refugee Policy. Canada and the United States. Toronto: York Lanes Press, 1991.

Baker, Nicholas, "Substitute Care for Unaccompanied Refugee Minors." Child Welfare LXI, no. 6 (1982): 353-362.

Beiser, Morton. Strangers at the Gate. The 'Boat Peoples' First Ten Years in Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999.

Bertot, Jocelyne, and Andre Jacob. Intervenir avec les immigrants et les refugies. Montreal: Meridien, 1991.

Chiasson-Lavoie, Michele, and Marie-Lynn Roch. "La pratique interculturelle aupres de jeunes en difficulte," In L'intervention interculturelle, Giscle Legault, ed., 221-252. Montreal: Gaetan Morin, 2000.

CLSC Cote-des-Neiges. Rapport annuel, 1999-2000. Montreal: CLSC Cote-des-Neiges, 2000.

Eisenbruch, Maurice. "The Mental Health of Refugee Children and their Cultural Development." International Migration Review XXII, no. 2 (1988): 282-300.

Fiorino, Giovanni. "L'adaptation institutionnelle: un defi interculturel enrichissant." Intervention 96 (1993): 58-66.

Forbes, Susan S., and Patricia Weiss Fagen. "Unaccompanied Refugee Children: The Evolution of U.S. Policies -- 1939 to 1984." Migration News 1 (1985): 3-36.

Juteau, Danielle. L'ethnicite et ses frontieres. Montreal: Les Presses de l'Universite de Montreal, 999.

Heipel, Robert. "Refugee Resettlement in a Canadian City: An Overview and Assessment." In Refugee Policy. Canada and the United States, Howard Adelman, ed., 344-355. Toronto: York Lanes Press, 1991.

Houde, Jeanne, and Frederique Sabourin. Mineurs non accompagnes. Internal document, Interministerial Working Group on Unaccompanied minors, MSSS-MRCI, 1997.

Jacob, Andre. Les refugies, tout un monde. Montreal: LAREHS, 1992.

Marx, Emanuel. "The Social World of Refugees: A Conceptual Framework." Journal of Refugee Studies 3, no. 3 (1990): 189-203.

McAll, Christopher. "Les murs de Ia cite: territoires d'exclusion et espaces de citoyennete." Lien social et Politiques 34 (1995): 81-92.

McAll, Christopher. Les requerants dustatutde refugie au Quebec. Montreal: Ministere des relations avec les citoyens et de l'immigration, 1996.

Meintel, Deirdre. "L'identite ethnique chez des jeunes Montrealais d'origine immigree." Sociologie et societes 24, no. 2 (1992): 73-89.

Organisation mondiale de la sante (OMS). La santementale des refugies. Geneva: Organisation mondiale de la sante, 1997.

Parr, Joy. Labouring Children. British Immigrant Apprentices to Canada, 1869-1924. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1980.

Potvin, Maryse. "Racisme et citoyennete chez lesjeunes Quebecois de la deuxieme generation haitienne." In L'individu et le citoyen dans la societe moderne, ed. Potvin, Maryse, Bernard Fournier, and Yves Couture, 185-225. Montreal: Presses de l'Universite de Montreal, 2000.

Renaud, Jean, and Lucie Gingras. Les trois premieres annees au Quebec des requerants du statut de refugie regularises. Montreal: Ministere des relations avec les citoyens et de l'Immigration, 1998.

Rousseau, Cecile, Aline Drapeau, and Ellen Corin. Influence desfacteurs psychosociaux sur la sante mentale des adolescents refugies. Report presented to the Conseil quebecois de la recherche sociale, 1997.

Rousseau, Cecile, Taher Mohamed Said, Marie Joseph Gagne, and Gilles Bibeau. "Between Myth and Madness: The Premigration Dream of Leaving Among Young Somali Refugees." Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry 22 (1998a): 385-411.

Rousseau, Cecile, Taher Mohamed Said, MarieJoseph Gagne, and Gilles Bibeau. "Resilience in unaccompanied minors from the North of Somalia." Psychoanalytic Review 85, no. 4 (1998b): 615-635.

Roy, Ghislaine, and Catherine Montgomery. (In press). "Practice with Immigrants in Quebec." In Cross Cultural Social Work Practice., ed. Alean Al-Krenawi and John Graham. Toronto: Oxford University Press.

Roy, Shirley, Jacques Rheaume, and Pierre Hetu. Jeunes en difficulte et contextepluriethnique: l'intervention en maisons d'hebergement communautaires. Montreal: les Cahiers de recherche du Collectifde Recherche sur l'Itinerance, 1998.

Sevigny, Robert. "L'approche clinique dans les sciences humaines." In L'analayse clinique dans les sciences humaines., ed. Eugene Enriquez, Gilles Houle, Jacques Rheaume, and Robert Sevigny, (13-28). Montreal: Editions Saint-Martin, 1993.

United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR). Refugee Children. Guidelines on Protection and Care. Geneva: UNHCR, 1994.

Weber, Max. Economy and Society. 1-2. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1978 (original, 1921).

Zulfacar, Diane. "Alternative Forms of Care forUnaccompanied Refugee Minors: A Comparison of US and Australian Experience." International Social Work 30, no. 1 (1987): 61-75.

Catherine Montgomery is a researcher at the CLSC Cote-des-Neiges, a health and social services centre in Montreal, and Adjunct Professor in Sociology at McGill University. She specializes in questions relating to immigration and health services.

Cecile Rousseau is a psychiatrist. She directs the Transcultural Psychiatry research team at the Montreal Children's Hospital and is an Associate Professor in the Department of Psychiatry at McGill University. Her recent research work examines the impact of war on children and their families.

Marian Shermarke is a social worker with the Service d'aide aux regugies et aux immigrants de Montreal metropolitain (SARIMM), a service of the CLSC Cote-des-Neiges. She has several years of intervention and teaching experience, particularly with refugees and refugee claimants.