Understanding the mental health consequences of state, legal, diaspora, and charity support for sanctuary seekers

Abstract

Post-migration factors such as unemployment and discrimination are associated with negative mental health outcomes in people seeking sanctuary. State, legal, diaspora, and charity support can help, but can inadvertently victimise, medicalise, and stereotype sanctuary seekers. We use a critical public health lens and postcolonial theory to explore this support, drawing on 38 interviews with Iranian and Afghan sanctuary seekers, charity workers and diaspora members in the United Kingdom. We identify four themes: 1) ‘worthlessness in the eyes of the state’; 2) ‘the legal push for medicalisation’; 3) ‘a muted diaspora welcome’ and 4) ‘controlled charity spaces’. We argue that the meagreness of government support reinforces the public image of sanctuary seekers as parasitic and that institutional medicalisation of legal support undermines clients’ trust in lawyers. Diaspora networks, for many, provided a muted welcome at best, and at worst, exploitation. Charities struggled to provide spaces to form alternative social networks, but when they did, sanctuary seekers were often able to create cross-national communities of support. We urge governments to ensure the right to work, and charities to offer more opportunities for skill-building through paid or voluntary roles. We call also on lawyers to adopt cultural humility practices, and charities to facilitate the creation of sanctuary seeking communities.