Chapter Eight: Migration as a Family Process

Abstract. The purpose of this chapter is to re-conceptualize acculturation as a family process. Latin Americans who have settled in North America will be utilized as a case sample, as their common thread is the history of colonization and oppression. Hence, its applications will be relevant to diverse groups from colonized spaces. To do so, three theoretical frameworks are examined: family systems, social psychology, and economic sociology. This reconceptualization contributes to the existing literature in four ways: (1) it takes into account how immigrant experiences are shaped by the global economy, (2) it brings into focus the family context of migration, (3) it conceptualizes the immigrant family as a dynamic system moving across time and across borders and, (4) it offers the opportunity for research initiatives that are resource focused and take into account the complexities of the phenomenon of family immigration processes.

Key concepts: Historical trauma, transnational families, acculturation, social psychology, economic sociology and family systems theory

Introduction

Immigration in the global world has mostly focused on the individual and the macro levels (Root et al., 2014). Theorizations at the family level remain limited. This gap presents an opportunity to reimagine acculturation as a family process, specifically for those coming from previously colonized territories in the Global South to the Global North. Factors influencing acculturation from three bodies of literature will be assembled to create a new proposed approach, family systems, social psychology and economic sociology. Each of these theoretical frameworks offers complementary and unique concepts to arrive at such a reconceptualization. A systems perspective provides thinking on how families navigate cultural transitions and mediating factors; social psychology, to illustrate how individual experiences impact the family and finally, economic sociology details how labour market structuring and integration shapes acculturation is experienced. Using these concepts will produce a more complex understanding of how migrant families, specifically those perceived as the Stranger/Other, go through the changes involved in moving from their home country and settling in a new place. Finally, emerging from these concepts and gaps, an integrative definition of “family acculturation” is presented.

Latin American migrants who have settled in North America will be utilized as a case example. While a very diverse region, not only racially (i.e., Blacks, Indigenous, Asians, Arab and White European) but also linguistically (i.e., Spanish, Indigenous dialects, English, French, Creole and Portuguese) (Sanabria, 2015), its common thread is the history of colonization and coloniality. Hence, the applications draw in not only the three frameworks but also the colonial grid and coloniality to be relevant with diverse groups from colonized spaces in helping encounters.

Understanding Acculturation

Theories of acculturation have their footprints in anthropology and sociology, with growing influence from social psychology (Ngo, 2008). Berry (1992) has argued that psychological changes in the individual involve significant behavioural and internal transformations. Individuals may experience five types of changes during the acculturation process: physical, biological, cultural, social, and psychological. The type and degree of these changes will depend largely on the degree of differences between the individual and the respective context. Furthermore, Berry and Kim (1988) proposed that there are several modes of acculturation. These are: (a) assimilation, (b) integration, (c) separation (or segregation) and (d) marginalization. Outcomes range from: relinquishing their original cultural identity and becoming as similar as possible to members of the settlement country (assimilation), to being isolated from both their host society and their cultural of origin (marginalization). Weinreich (2009) added enculturation, wherein people merge their two identities by keeping parts their heritage and culture, while incorporating others from the settlement country. Berry (2006) argued that these changes may result in acculturative stress, identity transformations, shifts in personality and attitudinal changes.

Ngo (2008) has suggested that these theories unify experiences and create a taken-for-granted “truth” about migration. Understanding the construction of the migrant family as the Stranger requires an analysis of the contextual landscape. Migrant families cannot be separated from their historical, political and social realities, and neither can Canada. Using a frame of coloniality, the proposed model of family acculturation speaks to the ways that structural marginalization, including barriers to citizenship and economic integration, influences the migration journey. Further, it considers the ways that racism, discrimination, marginalization and prejudice have been significant components of the cultural history and social experience of Latin Americans (Viruell-Fuentes, Miranda and Abdulrahim, 2012). Hernández-Wolfe (2013) added that in the case of Latin Americans, the history of colonialism has shaped entitlements and privilege, or lack thereof.

The maintenance of ‘difference’ underscores policies and perceptions of immigration, contributing to the production of the ethno-racial hierarchy in Canada. It is within the broader context of reception and how immigration intersects with racism and prejudice, which significantly impacts family functioning and parent and child development during resettlement (Pereira, Chapman & Stein, 2006). Those arriving from colonized territories, faces pronounced challenges in their integration processes due to racial differences, which mark them as the Stranger: the colonial immigrant. This is a result of how, as Carranza (2016) asserts, our day-to-day interactions take place wherein the categorization of people, inherited from colonialism, is still used to navigate human relationships and identities and influences senses of belonging. In the dominant space, this informs perceptions about where particular individuals ought to belong. This is the foundation of the colonial grid, which roots ‘difference’ in people’s psyche. These differences are expressed through various transmuted responses (verbal and nonverbal), including tone of voice and subordinate and/or passive body language, postures and reactions toward the racialized ‘other’ (Hernández-Wolfe, 2013). These reactions often manifest into day-to-day experiences of micro-aggressions (Hernández, Carranza & Almeida, 2010).

Family Systems Theory

Family systems theorists have concluded that acculturation is a life-long journey, with effects spanning several generations. Conflicts that may arise from acculturation are understood as normative and a part of transitions throughout the life cycle. The concepts presented below draw attention to how adaptation and response occur during acculturation and the ways that the family system responds. The seminal work of McGoldrick and Carter (1999) sets the foundation for understanding family functioning through negotiating relationships and adaptation. They situate families as systems moving through time and, as such, face challenges across the life span, which forces a re-organization of relationships, triggering changes in the system. The authors argued that families:

encompass the entire emotional system of at least three, and frequently now four or even five, generations held together by blood, legal, and/or historical ties. Relationships with parents, siblings, and other family members go through transitions as they move along the life cycle. (p.1)

For Latin Americans, in particular, who share a strong sense of familismo, where the needs of the family are more important than the individual (Bacallao & Smokowski, 2007), it is important to note this system often involves members in the settlement country, abroad and includes deceased family members (Carranza, 2007a). When family members cross borders and resettle, family transitions become more complex and are layered on top of the life cycle changes (Falicov, 2014).

Families in Cultural Transition

Transitions involve many losses: home, extended family, relationships, and cultural environment that can have intergenerational effects on the family (McGoldrick & Carter, 1999).  Boss (2010) posits that migration creates a sense of “ambiguous loss”; that is, to remain psychologically connected to family members left behind while being strongly affected by their absence, which may never be resolved. Ambiguous loss disrupts through the uncertainty of these losses. Ambiguity confuses family dynamics through physical separation, reunions, and uncertainty, forcing people to question their roles and re-organize the unit to ensure its functioning for what is to come.

Separation and reunions during the migratory process require constant shifting in the family functioning (Bacallao & Smokowski, 2007). Long-term separations prompt substantial changes, and it can then be argued that unresolved conflicts can potentially impact family functioning across generations. New patterns of interaction emerge because of changes in family composition. Landau-Stanton (1990) adds that during acculturation, families experience stress with changes in attitudes and behaviours, in [inter] dependency patterns and roles shifting. McGoldrick and Walsh (1991) have suggested that all family members are connected, thus, they react to one another’s distress. Sometimes, their reactions may be compounded so that what upsets one ends up upsetting all.

Parent-child tension. Various studies have shown that due to faster acculturation in adolescents, there is often a gap with their parents (e.g., Lau et al., 2005). However, studies have not found that this gap results in conflicts (Smokowski & Bacallao, 2011; Lau et al., 2005). Changes in family dynamics also occur when children are asked to interpret for their parents, possibly resulting in role reversal (Bacallao & Smokowski, 2007). Dependency on their children may place parents in a less authoritarian position, disrupting traditional family dynamics (Falicov, 2007; Morrison & James, 2009). Adherence to familismo prompted the adolescents in Bacallao and Smokowski’s (2007) research to become bicultural and bilingual to help family members navigate the host society. This demonstrates that, in some instances, acculturation gaps between parents and adolescents can be beneficial in helping the family meet its needs (Bacallao & Smokowski, 2007; Smokowski et al., 2008). However, youth may feel caught between two worlds (Falicov, 2005; Smokowski & Bacallao, 2011). It has been argued that this conflict between cultural loyalties may contribute to a negative self-image for youth and can inhibit their chances for growth and achievement (Smokowski & Bacallao, 2011). Therefore, living between worlds, compounded with parent-child tension arising from value transmission and negotiating the family life stages in a new country, may negatively impact youth’s mental health (Carranza, 2015; Tummala-Narra & Claudius, 2013).

Trauma and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). PTSD is understood as chronic and disabling, marked by a spectrum of treatment-resistant long-term symptoms. These behaviours interfere with the relationships of the symptom bearer (McFarlane, 2009). Figley and Kiser (2013) also suggested that a trauma experienced by one member may be experienced by the entire family system. Consequently, traumatized families are struggling to cope with an extraordinary stress that is disruptive to their lives. Viewing the situation as a family issue rather than a problem of one or two members may assist symptom bearers (Figley & Kiser, 2013). Klarić and their colleagues (2013) added that research findings indicate:

That living in a family with a PTSD member can have a deep impact on other members of the family, the family dynamics, and the family system in its entirety. Traumatised families cope with the manifestation of the family member’s posttraumatic symptoms within the family dynamic, with Secondary Traumatic Stress, burnout, or compassion fatigue as a consequence. In addition, the PTSD of a family member has the potential to be transferred to subsequent generations (p. 33).

PTSD occurs at the intersection of race and gender on the colonial grid. Latin American women have been socialized to handle “the social-emotional tasks of bereavement, from the expression of grief to the care-taking of the terminally ill, as well as the surviving family members” (Walsh & McGoldrick, 1988, p. 328). Hernández-Wolfe (2013) adds that colonialism is so embedded in people’s value systems that it often informs responses to trauma. This influences family composition and navigation of traumas amidst the separation of people’s experiences from their history and context.

Responses to racism as a unit is under theorized, one example in family systems theory, Carranza (2007a) found that racism is dealt with at the family level in Salvadorian families. As an example, mothers teach their daughters how to position themselves to deal with prejudice and discrimination in Canada through fostering ethnic pride, which was found to be a significant protective factor. However, responses at the family level to racism and other oppressive forces have not yet been thoroughly researched. Nor does this literature thoroughly explore the social economic context of migration and how it shapes the family experience. Falicov (1998) argues that “for immigrants encounters with discrimination fluctuate with historical trends toward inclusion or exclusion. These, in turn, generate either ethnic affirmation or ethnic shame, a wish to assimilate to the dominant culture or a desire to isolate from it” (p. 96). To this extent, it is very important to consider these external factors when studying the acculturation shifts in North American countries. The focus on the system changes does not sufficiently encompass the experience of individuals within the family unit. The next part of the chapter draws from social psychology to expand conceptualizations of the immigration process. This perspective has some overlap, which speaks to the shortcomings of family systems and adds new concepts.

Relevant Concepts and Research in Social Psychology

Gold and Douvan (1997) defined social psychology as “the study of the reciprocal influence of persons and their environment” (42). The levels of analysis are usually the person, social organization, interpersonal relations, and culture (Gold & Douvan, 1997). With respect to immigration, the focus has been on the individual’s acculturation process—specifically the emotional and cognitive aspects of the change involved, with minimal consideration for the family. Acculturation is generally understood as the change process that occurs when people are consistently in contact with culturally dissimilar people, groups, and social influences (Schwartz et al., 2013).

Acculturative Stress

Refers to stressors experienced during settlement that have been found to negatively impact physical, psychological and emotional health and wellbeing (Berry, 2006). Both family systems and social psychology suggest that acculturative stress takes place over the lifespan as opposed to a one-time occurrence. Some of the signs of acculturative stress include anxiety, depression, feelings of marginality and alienation, heightened psychosomatic symptoms, and identity confusion (Berry, 2006). Scholars have identified several factors mediating the experience of acculturative stress (Berry, 1991). These include (a) mode of acculturation (b) phases of acculturation which may involve contact, conflict, crisis, and adaptation (c) nature of the receiving society which may be multicultural or demand assimilation d) characteristics of the acculturating group such as gender, and (e) characteristics of the acculturating individual such as coping skills, and contact with the larger society. Schwartz and colleagues (2010) add that real or perceived similarities between the country of origin and settlement country lower acculturative stress.

Individual Acculturation and the Family

Parent-child relationships. A substantial amount of psychology research has been dedicated to exploring the interplay between the younger generation’s role as language and cultural brokers, their psychological well-being and family functioning. This interplay invariably impacts the parent-child relationship, which in turn affects the family’s acculturation processes (Tardif-Williams & Fisher, 2009). For example, acculturation differences between parents and their children have been linked to low cohesion, increased conflict (Farver et al., 2002), and less supportive parenting (Weaver & Kim, 2008). Family dynamics can change when children are asked to interpret for parents. Acting as a broker can challenge the power relationship between the parent/child in the public sphere, while in the home, they are expected to occupy the role of the child (Villanueva &Buriel, 2010). Villanueva and Buriel (2010) found that the continual role-shifting between the public and private spheres may contribute to children’s stress.

Several studies have found a link between brokering and higher levels of individual and familial stress (Trickett & Jones, 2007; Martínez, McLure & Eddy, 2009), poor functioning (Martínez et al., 2009), and psychological health (Hua & Costigan, 2012). However, recent studies have also explored the role that the overall family context and familial processes play in mediating these relationships. For instance, in Hua and Costigan’s (2012) study, adolescents with a strong sense of familial obligation and who perceived their parents to be highly psychologically controlling experienced poor mental well-being. Trickett and Jones (2007) found that cultural brokering was linked to higher conflict in the family. Conversely, Orellana and their colleagues (2003) noted that children play a protective role by assisting their parents to navigate institutions and access various resources. Further, many of these studies also show that children view brokering as just another one of their household activities (Villanueva & Buriel, 2010) and are not necessarily related to decreased family cohesion or overall family satisfaction (Trickett & Jones, 2007). Weisskirch (2017) found that children viewed language brokering positively, which was linked to increased levels of attachment to the home culture and positively affected their ethnic identity. This may suggest that immigrant youth understand the necessity of their role for overall family survival.

Factors Influencing Acculturation

Loss and Trauma. Loss plays a significant role in acculturation and is experienced differently by migrant families, for example, after WWII, then those forcibly displaced (Choummanivong et al., 2014). The loss of family and friends, combined with fearing for their loved one’s safety, was strongly correlated with increased psychological distress, poor concentration, inability to secure employment and lower levels of language acquisition (Li et al., 2016). Significant losses, combined with a lack of social and family support, have been linked to maladaptive integration and coping strategies (Capielo et al., 2015). Fears for family members left behind, lack of trust in new relationships, and social isolation can lead to unhealthy relationships, struggles in parenting, and employment-related difficulties (Choummanivong et al., 2014).  These traumatic experiences can result in a series of personal difficulties in which unprocessed grief and trauma can impact present and future relationships, which are significant for the person’s survival in the new country. Leslie (1993), in a study of Central American families living in the United States, experience significant levels of stress due to the political upheaval most Central Americans have endured. Trauma and political violence experienced prior to flight shaped the refugees’ perceptions of their new home and affected the settlement process (Leslie, 1993).

Grief.  Often, discussions of migration and grief deal with these concepts at the individual level and from a problem-focused standpoint. These discussions are shaped by who belongs and who is allowed to grieve. The majority, however, fails to identify that grief may be a normal reaction and a way of validating the losses. The idea of “you are safe now” does not mitigate the loss experienced during migration (Carranza, 2008). To this extent, grief may be a necessary aspect of the transformation that individuals and families may go through in their acculturation process. Shapiro (1994) stated, “a family’s first priority in managing the crisis of grief is re-establishing the stable equilibrium necessary to support ongoing family development” (12). Establishing these new stable structures requires individual, family system, community, and socio-cultural resources.

Mediating grief during acculturation for those coming from the Global South is compounded by the experience of historical and collective trauma, which is owed to colonialism and its remnants. This type of trauma is prevalent among Indigenous Peoples across the Americas (Braveheart et al., 2011).  Braveheart (2003) defines historical trauma as cumulative emotional and psychological injuries carried across generations. These losses, compounded by collective trauma due to civil wars, can impact the ability to come together as a community, for example, to resist discrimination and demystify stereotypes (Carranza, 2007b).

Systemic Factors

Berry (2011) added to theories of acculturation in social psychology to include structural factors. Acculturation expectations and the assertion of power by the dominant group to influence the resettlement process have added a new layer to understanding. This new understanding highlights the ways in which ideology and policies frame the relationship between immigrants/formed migrants and Canada or their country of resettlement. He also connects the social, historical, and economic forces of colonization and domination to the phenomena of migration. Berry (2011) speaks to how “settler” societies receive racialized immigrants, particularly those from the Global South, and how values are re-negotiated by both those coming and the country of settlement. Positive acculturation is associated with bi-culturalism or competency in the values and traditions of the host and country of origin. This, however, is dependent on the host society’s degree to which their policies are aligned with multiculturalism and acceptance of diversity. Often, acceptance is correlated with the level of similarities between countries. Bekteshi and colleagues (2017) found that integration, often defined by learning the language and customs, is mediated by citizenship status, experiences in the country of origin, reasons for migration, gender and perception of acceptance.

Racism and acculturation. Bekteshi and colleagues (2017) studied how contextual factors, such as pre-migration status, departure experience, and difficulties during and after arrival, impact acculturative stress. Participants who faced racism, language barriers, and an unwelcoming environment experienced higher levels of stress and anxiety. Racialized immigrants’ stress was found to be significantly higher level than that of White English-speaking immigrants/forced migrants. Additional research suggests that stress and discrimination increase when a chosen acculturation strategy conflicts with the preferences of the receiving society, e.g. marginalization vs. assimilation (Jasinskaja-Lahti et al., 2003). A substantial amount of research in psychology suggests that stress and discrimination lead to poor psychological health outcomes (Jasinskaja-Lahti et al., 2006).

Carter (2007) stressed the importance of understanding the specific psychological and emotional injury caused by the various forms of racism and discrimination. The degree of exclusions from the receiving country, perceptions of the stranger and experiences of racism have a significant impact on the acculturation process and the mental health of immigrants/forced migrants. Additional research shows that support networks help to mediate the negative psychological consequences of discrimination: increased contact with ethnic support networks in both countries decreased the number of reported psychological symptoms. Social psychology brings important understandings of acculturation as an individual process, as mediated by reception (Carter, 2007).

The literature on family relationships previously reviewed (Espín, 1999; Martínez, McClure & Eddy, 2009) focuses on different dyads (i.e., husband-wife) versus the family unit and is mainly problem-focused. It speaks to issues as isolated events rooted in a point in time and ignores the processes of acculturation over the life course. In this respect, it risks stereotyping immigrant/forced migrant families as problematic. Also, they do not arrive in their new home as tabula rasa. They bring with them their knowledge, strategies, resources, and resiliency. In fact, it can be argued that it is their resistance to oppression that highlights their agency and capacity to withstand adversity. The literature reviewed in the preceding section also does not consider the way in which the historical, economic and political context affects individuals and families re-settling. It also does not speak to the process of economic integration and the implications for the family. For example, in the literature and in my clinical practice, it’s evident sending monthly remittances is a practice of love and support. This can add stress to the family relationships, challenging their economic survival. Economic sociology will be used to address these broader contextual issues.

Relevant Concepts and Research in Economic Sociology

The role of immigration in the labour market system is often understood through a class lens to examine the power relationships of the economy (Simmons, 2010). Furthermore, economic sociologists share with social psychologists an interest in language acquisition, cultural integration, and identity transformation as they relate to economic incorporation and class acquisition (Castles, 2010). Many economic sociologists are concerned with the interplay between the labour market structures that create “push” and “pull” factors, and society. From this perspective, migration is a fundamental part of labour and production in the globalized economy (Simmons, 2010). Seminal literature speaks to “incorporation,” which is understood through the means of production and consumption versus acculturation (Portes, 2010). Patterns of migration are understood as a direct response to the growing economic inequalities advancing the Global North and as a way for people to overcome market failures or poverty in the Global South (Sana & Massey, 2005). In this analysis, migration becomes the only way for families to meet their basic needs and achieve upward social mobility (Schmalzbauer, 2009).

Current economic sociology moves beyond a political economy and class analysis by adding two interrelated sets of questions. First, the role of social linkages in the migration and incorporation process (Sana & Massey, 2005). For example, what roles do family members who do not initially migrate play in encouraging the “pioneering” movement of a family member? Are friends abroad asked or expected to help when they arrive? The second set of questions concern “resistance”. For example, to what extent is migration a way to mitigate threats to well-being and security (Sana & Massey, 2005)? The above set of questions come together in the family sphere. Economic sociology has been active in exploring hypotheses on the way in which families use migration as survival and mobility mechanisms. I will now review the components most relevant to the topic of this paper.

Preceding Factors

Social class. Economic success is an essential determinant in the level of stress and social adaptation for immigrants and pre-migration factors play a key role in integration. For example, Federal Skilled Workers will likely integrate into the labour market differently than labourers or Refugees (Simmons, 2010). Classifications or reasons for migration are always determined by race and country of origin – whether a person is coming from the Global South or North. Itzigsohn and Giorguli-Saucedo (2005) argued that economic integration and labour market participation are mediated by race and embedded in the “pull” factors of the receiving society. For example, doctors from other English-speaking and predominantly white nations are recruited and welcomed. Conversely, people from Central America are viewed as best suited to landscaping and farming. Whereas professionals are sought out, the supply of Central American and Caribbean people “in need” is higher than the demand, and as a result, are met with a negative reception and remain undocumented. These examples of belonging shape and are shaped by the Colonial Grid.

Portes and Rumbaut (1990) argued that social class mediates incorporation and integration. In Canada, Bauder (2003) and Reitz (2005) identify social capital as an outcome of class and the primary commodity for exchange in the labour market. Bauder (2003) found that racialized immigrants were locked out of gaining social capital and restricted from high-skill and pay segments of the labour market. Segmentation reduces prospects for economic stability and, in turn, increases stress and negative mental and physical health outcomes.

Remittances. Many immigrants bring money home or send remittances (Menjívar, DaVanzo, Greenwell &Valdéz, 1998) to contribute to the individual and/or family life, as well as their community in general. Portes and Purhmann (2015) argued that “transnational communities”, are involved in a permanent economic, political and cultural bridging between the receiving and country of origin. Transnationalism has granted immigrants/forced migrants and their families new opportunities for material and social positioning. Members of transnational families are now able to fabricate the basis of their class reproduction and mobility in two different locations (Dreby & Adkins, 2010). These practices also reproduce class structures, as they highlight inequalities between families who receive remittances and those who do not (Schmalzbauer, 2009). Within families, those who have migrated have greater direct access to resources (e.g., increased technology), whereas non-migrants benefits are dependent on remittances (Dreby & Adkins, 2010). Thus, within the family, power must be negotiated and dynamics adjusted (Schmalzbauer, 2009). For example, in Schmalzbauer’s (2008) research, Honduran adolescents in transnational families self-identified as middle-class, largely unaware of their parent’s lived realities in the Global North. The remittances that permitted middle-class activities (e.g., attending private school), informed their belief in meritocracy, and shaped their expectations for the future. Yet, this lifestyle is dependent on them remaining in Honduras and continuing to receive remittances.

The Family’s Sphere

Youth and Social Mobility. A contemporary debate in sociology centres on how first, 1.5- and second-generation immigrants fare – will they experience upward or downward mobility? According to Segmented Assimilation Theory (Portes & Zhou, 1993), differences in how groups fare over time can be attributed to structural and sociocultural factors both in the country of origin and the receiving society. Where some communities have been able to protect against downward mobility (i.e. Cubans in the United States), others appear to lack the resources (e.g., the presence of ethnic civil and social institutions) necessary to facilitate upward mobility (López &Stanton-Salazar, 2001). Those without legal status arguably face the most difficult context of reception as their in-between status prevents their legal incorporation into society (Gonzáles, 2011; Menjívar & Salcído, 2002). Thus, even youth with access to pathways of upwardly mobility or who are academically successful are still prevented from successful economic incorporation (Gonzáles, 2011).

Liminality. Menjívar (2006) speaks to ambiguous or “in-between” citizenship as it shapes the migration process. Citizenship status, or lack thereof, has been understood as one of the most significant elements of integration. From how new immigrants interact with others in the settlement and country of origin to health and health-seeking behaviours, citizenship status creates barriers and defines access. Further, those with legal status and those without are regarded as two different social classes with varying access to social capital and upward mobility. As men often are the primary applicants for citizenship and sponsor their spouses, it generates a specific form of social vulnerability, including domestic violence and gendering pathways to citizenship (Menjívar & Salcido, 2002). Menjívar and Salcido (2002) found that as a result, women more often had “grey” legal status and were therefore more vulnerable. Women with precarious legal status are often unable to access assistance for experiences of abuse or to obtain citizenship.

Race and Class: Systemic Exclusion. Inequalities along race and class lines are the core of incorporation and form the basis of discrimination (Smith & Mannon, 2010). These cleavages of exclusion, as established during colonization, are the foundation of how social inequities are created and maintained. In the case of racialized women, structural oppression in the labour market intersects with racism, class and gender. Often, they feel forced to put up with discrimination because of fear of losing their job. In their study with immigrant/forced migrant women in Canada, Smith and Mannon (2010) discovered that most participants did not perceive “gender as a playing a major role in their lives” (p. 1000) and, alternatively, identified with other inequalities such as race and class. Women must learn to cope with labour exploitation, racial innuendoes, and sexism as a part of incorporation (Smith & Mannon, 2010). Participants in the study identified their ethnic communities as a source of solidarity and protection from experiences of discrimination both in the workplace and in their day-to-day lives. Portes (2010) argued that the greater the experiences of discrimination, the greater the distance between immigrants and members of the receiving society. Hence, discrimination can increase transnational participation.

The literature reviewed suggests that immigrants/forced migrants navigate challenging contexts of reception through connections and communities. The maintenance and development of linkages may be interpreted as their expression of solidarity across nations and a form of resistance. Moreover, these can be acts of family survival in a globalized economy. The economic sociology literature highlights that while race and ethnicity may be a source of external discrimination, in parallel, they can also be a source of unlimited collective strength. Family systems theory, social psychology, and economic sociology provide key concepts and different perspectives, informing the conceptualization of “family acculturation” for Latin Americans. I now draw from the most relevant concepts to propose an integrated model.

An Integrated Model of “Family Acculturation”

Reconceptualizing “acculturation” opens space to embody the uniqueness of the processes that occur at the familial level, to frame them within a historical, socio-political, and economic context. Coming from colonized spaces, families bring forth the poignant day-to-day reality of being the Stranger/Other, that is, the colonial immigrant/forced migrant (Carranza, 2017). The colonial immigrant/forced migrant experiences their worth, lack thereof, or sense of belonging in accordance to the ‘colonial matrix’; that is, where people’s imposed identity categories are ‘located’ (Carranza, 2016). In contemporary times, these are expressed on the individual level through micro-aggressions (Hernández, Carranza & Almeida, 2010), how people engage based on the colonial remnants engrained in the psyche of inferiority or superiority (Carranza, 2016) and structures such as the labour market. The historical, collective memory of and current external oppressions are navigated at the family level (Carranza, 2008, 2016).

Family systems theorists’ focus is on the changes that occur in the family in both the country of origin and the receiving (Falicov, 2014). For example, trauma is explored but not in the context of political or social violence, as many families have experienced in the Global South. Social psychologists focus on the changes of the individual and challenges faced in the settlement country. Like systems theorists, economic sociologists include both countries in their analysis. Although economic sociologists do not give attention to family sentiments, they discuss the transnational strategies used to remain connected for economic survival in a global economy. These concepts are imperative to a reconceptualization of “family acculturation,” which addresses the changes a family goes through during and after migration- but falls short of placing them on the colonial grid.

One significant difference between the three perspectives is the unit of analysis. Family systems’ is the family across the life span, social psychology’s literature analyzes the individual in relation to society and for economic sociologists the unit of analysis is the macro level. Their hypothesis addresses historical, political and class issues of power and domination and the strategies of resistance and resilience developed by immigrant/forced migrant groups. Social psychologists provide us with micro-level analysis, for example, the power differential between husbands and wives. At the same time, economic sociologists address gender at the macro level, that is, the role of women in the global economy. For families who have migrated from colonized spaces, theories must incorporate all units of analysis to be inclusive of the nuances and disparities of such a complex process.

Family systems theorists, social psychologists and economic sociologists speak to patterns of adaptation and resistance. They, at the margins, overlap regarding their discussions in the family sphere. Given that only a few family systems theorists have studied immigrant and refugee families as a whole, I will draw strongly on social psychology and economic sociology literature to further this analysis. I propose the following conceptualization. Family acculturation is reimagined as:

The processes by which transnational families, coming from colonized spaces, “negotiate” hierarchies of knowledge, and new processes and dynamics set out by their cultural transition such as new roles and identities with family members in the settlement country, and abroad. These processes are significantly influenced by the family’s: (i) perceived location, of themselves and others, in the imaginary colonial grid, (ii) hierarchy and members’ age and gender (iii) the inner dynamics of the ‘ethnic’ group and community, and (iv) the political/social/colonial processes between the specific racialized group and the society at large.

This reorganizing is achieved in an effort to minimize individual and familial risks and promote economic, emotional and spiritual growth across the lifespan. “Family acculturation” is continual and multi-dimensional. It is shaped by nuances and contradictions because of its links to the local, regional, national and global levels combined with economic, political and historical trends- that serve to demarcate the colonial immigrant from those born or those who appear to belong in the Global North. Families may engage in intercultural dialogues and “negotiations” within the settlement country and abroad. These may encompass the family’s experience of solidarity, resistance, cohesiveness, and scripts from past and present experiences, i.e., colonial grid, war, social class, resilience, and intergenerational legacies. The meaning of these may change according to the geo- localities, which may or may not give space for the family member’s sense of agency. “Family acculturation” is a process that entails the family’s perception of success that, in turn, may be guided by a re-assessment of what is valued in their lives. New family discourses, identities and roles will emerge not only for economic survival but also for the emotional well-being of all family members. These often correlated with the length of time in the settlement country, citizenship and economic integration. The roles may include members of the nuclear family and extended family, locally and abroad. The outcomes of successful acculturation will align with each family’s values and belief system. The colonial grid may impede (i.e., dark skin) or enhance (i.e., white-passing) family acculturation. This model offers possibilities for different outcomes.

Conceptual Implications

Latin American families who migrate place a strong importance on maintaining connections across time and space. Migration has meant that new family discourses, identities and roles will emerge not only for economic survival but also for the emotional and spiritual well-being of family members across countries. The roles may include members of the nuclear family, the extended family settling in the same or another country, and those still living in the country of origin. Frequent communications and easy access to travel may allow for old roles and relationships to continue or be re-claimed. Family meetings may take place in several living rooms, as technology allows virtual and instant connections between countries. In other circumstances, frequent travel to the country of origin may not be necessary for family acculturation to occur. As families acculturate, they may learn new ways of being and relating. Family visits to the country of origin and vice versa may expose family members to new information and behavioural patterns. Therefore, understanding families must include a transnational approach, as they remain active participants in each other’s lives. Migration requires an adjustment of how these roles are taken up, and as such, social work and the helping professions must reflect these configurations in teaching and research.

CASE STUDY

Steven

Steven and his family arrived in Canada three years ago. He separated from his wife of 20 years six months after their arrival. They have one son. Prior to coming to Canada, they enjoyed the privileges of a middle-class family, i.e., their son attended private school, had access to a private club, a beach house, etc. However, the idea of living in the North was appealing. The idea of having a ‘better life’ made them apply for a Canadian visa. Once their application was granted, they sold their company and other belongings, bringing their life savings with them.

When their son was born, they, as a couple, made the decision that his wife would stop working outside the home and stay home and care for their son. He stated that he grew up in poverty, and building his company from the ground up took him away from his family a lot. This meant that he became the sole breadwinner. He stated that his wife administered the family income. When their son attended school full-time, she was busy taking him to extracurricular activities. So, they decided that she should continue to focus on the care of their son and their household.

Once in Canada, they were confronted with challenges that they did not expect. Their son was fluent in English and French – as this was part of his educational formation in their country of origin. Their son was translating for them. This made him uncomfortable, as he felt that he was losing respect and his status in the family was threatened. Steven was not able to find meaningful employment. Moreover, having a ‘boss’ was a new experience for him. He was the ‘boss’ and had more than 200 employees under him, including managers and supervisors. He could only attain employment in the cleaning industry. He found himself having three part-time jobs in order to cover rent and household expenses. His wife and son refused to live in an apartment. They decided to invest their life savings in a house and vehicles – as neither of them was used to using public transportation.

However, due to the monthly mortgage payments, vehicle expenses, and household expenses, their life savings were soon disappearing. Due to the financial strain, his wife had to secure employment in the cleaning industry as well. He felt that his wife and son resented him. They accused him of “not being able to provide for them.” He reported feeling ashamed about the fact that he was working in the cleaning industry and that he no longer was able to provide the living standard his family was accustomed to.

Question: Using the model of family acculturation, how can we think through Steven and his family? What stands out?

Conclusion

The clinical implications derived from this discussion are twofold. The first is centring on the experience of migration in the family’s history. This approach necessitates that helpers must, in conjunction with the family, navigate the complexities of their acculturation through the lens of how racism, uncertainty, trauma and loss have reshaped their family. This serves as an emancipatory function in honouring experiences and not ascribing to knowable “truths” of acculturation. This also offers new possibilities to acknowledge bi-directional acculturation, where the dominant space is shifted through contact with immigrants/formed migrants. The second implication is concerned with systemic changes that bring into focus an underlying understanding that practitioners’ and clients’ therapeutic relations are a microcosm of contextual oppression. The helper’s position on the colonial grid must be attended to in the sense that it is not neutral and is the basis for their lens. The colonial grid includes the identity of the helper, in particular their relation to the families: biases, prejudice, and own assimilationist ideology pushing the colonial other to once again assimilate to white settler society, thus divorcing themselves from their history.