Considering Nancy Fraser's Notion of Social Justice for Social Work: Reflections on Misframing and the Lives of Refugees in South Africa

Abstract

This article explores the implications of cross-border migration for social work's normative commitment to social justice. Specifically, it interrogates Nancy Fraser's conceptualisation of social justice in guiding social work practice with refugees. The paper is grounded in an ethnographic study conducted from 2008 to 2009 in a South African church which had provided shelter to a group of refugees following their displacement by an outbreak of xenophobic violence. The study's findings reveal that various kinds of misframing created multiple forms of voicelessness amongst its foreign participants. These filtered out to justify, perpetuate and deepen other types of injustice, particularly misrecognition and maldistribution. There was some evidence of resistance, solidarity, recognition and small acts of redistribution. However, such positive practices proved difficult to sustain. The paper confirms the central importance of the notion of misframing for conceptualising and responding to social injustice in the absence of citizenship—as required of practitioners in the field of social work with refugees and indeed other groups rendered vulnerable within current economic, social, political and cultural constellations. In this regard, Fraser's contribution looks set to enrich social work's commitment to social justice both in normative and practical terms.

Keywords:

• Nancy Fraser
• Social Justice
• Misframing
• Social Work with Refugees
• Xenophobia
• South Africa

Notes

1 I believe that in the context of this paper, it is important to venture beyond dualisms according to which a refugee is understood in opposition to an asylum seeker, or another kind of migrant. Instead, my view is that taking refuge and seeking asylum are but one form of cross-border migration, which overlap and intersect with others (compare the definition of mixed migration put forward by the Danish Refugee Council 2008). Moreover, within their country of refuge or residence, cross-border migrants can be displaced further, for example as a result of xenophobic violence. Thus deviating from mainstream conceptualisations (compare, for example, UNHCR 2011), I speak of persons affected by misframing legislation, discourses and practices (Fraser 2008) as follows:

When referring to foreigners, foreign nationals, cross-border migrants or non-citizens (which I do interchangeably, depending on context), I am making a point of general relevance for all persons implied in the Danish Refugee Council's (2008) definition of mixed migration, including undocumented migrants, refugees, asylum seekers, and temporary work permit holders.

When speaking about refugees, I refer to both certified refugees and asylum seekers, for the latter are persons who claim to be refugees, which is what matters in the context of my arguments. However, asylum seekers do enjoy considerably fewer rights and experience considerably more status insecurities than recognised refugees, and at certain points of the argument, I use the term to make this distinction explicit.

Finally, when speaking of displacees or displaced refugees, I refer to the fact that all the foreign participants in my study had been internally displaced during South Africa's May 2008 xenophobic pogroms.