Int. Migration & Integration https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-018-0545-5

Immigration Policies and Immigrant Women’s Vulnerability to Intimate Partner Violence in Canada Vathsala Jayasuriya-Illesinghe 1

# Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Abstract This article explores Canadian immigration policies’ influence on immigrant and newcomer women’s vulnerability to intimate partner violence in Canada. Neoliberal policies’ influence on immigration policies and restructuring of the welfare state, the creation of structural conditions that increase immigrant and newcomer women’s vulnerability to intimate partner violence while restricting their access to services that can help them seek recourse from such abuse, are discussed. The underlying question raised and discussed in this article is whether cultural identity and distinctiveness could be used to rationalize exclusionary policies that are contrary to the ideals of multiculturalism in Canada. Keywords Immigrant women . Intimate partner violence . Immigration policy . Canada

Background Intimate partner violence (IPV) is the experience or a threat of physical, sexual, emotional/psychological abuse, or violence by a current or previous marital, dating, or cohabiting intimate partner (Saltzman et al. 1999). IPV is a serious problem in Canada accounting for one quarter of all violent crime reported to the police (Sinha 2015) and many more unreported incidents. Women are the most common victims of IPV in Canada (ibid), as is the case in other settings globally. There are multiple and multi-level factors playing a role in determining a woman’s risk of experiencing abuse in intimate relationships; however, immigration policies create conditions that make this an even more complex problem for immigrant and newcomer women in Canada (Alaggia et al. 2009). With immigrant women claiming a large and growing share of the

* Vathsala Jayasuriya-Illesinghe [email protected]

1

Yeates School of Graduate Studies, Ryerson University, 350 Victoria St, Toronto, ON M5B 2K3, Canada

Jayasuriya-Illesinghe V.

female population in Canada, a trend that is projected to continue over the next 30 years (Hudon 2015), their vulnerability to IPV is of concern. There is evidence to show that immigrant women’s experiences of IPV can begin in the post-migration context, remain the same, or change from their pre-migration experiences (Mason et al. 2008). Although immigrant and newcomer women’s increased vulnerability to IPV and its links to their migration trajectory have been documented (Alaggia et al. 2009), the ways in which immigration policies create economic, social, and political conditions that increase their vulnerability to IPV have not been examined. The focus of this paper is the changes and shifts in immigration policies and the ideals of citizenship during the last two decades in Canada, which, under the influence of neoliberalism, have been responsible in direct and indirect ways, to increase immigrant and newcomer women’s vulnerability to IPV. The first half of the paper will focus on how neoliberalism has contributed to shifts in immigration policy and the welfare state, making immigrant and newcomer women more vulnerable to IPV. The second half will critique the cultural essentialism that is applied to the analysis of immigrant women’s experiences of IPV that renders the underlying structural determinants of IPV less visible than the cultural ones. An intersectional approach is used to guide this discussion. This approach recognizes the complexity surrounding multiple axes of social identity (such as gender, race, class, ethnicity, and culture), helps explore multiple and multi-level relationships and interactions between them, and identifies the institutional and structural elements that maintain inequalities between various groups of women and men (Crenshaw 2005; Hankivsky and Varcoe 2007; Sokoloff and Dupont 2005). This article is focused on IPV; however, works in the areas of violence against women, family violence, and domestic violence, which are relevant for this discussion, are included. Also, although IPV can take place between same-sex partners and can be perpetrated by women against men, this article will focus on male violence against women in heterosexual relationships, specifically among immigrant women in Canada. This is predicated on the widely prevalent consensus that women are more likely to be victims of family violence and homicide from a male intimate partner than men (Canadian Women’s Foundation 2014). In keeping with the intersectionality framework, this analysis considers immigrant communities’ multiple axes of social identity and the multiple and multi-level factors and their interactions in the analysis of determinants of IPV. Neoliberal Influence on Immigration Policies and Women’s Vulnerability to IPV Under a neoliberal agenda, Government's aim is to create and maintain institutional frameworks and practices that support Bindividual entrepreneurial freedoms and skills^ (Harvey 2005, 2). In Canada, under the neoliberal influence, immigration policies are beleived to have shifted during the last two decades, becoming more oriented to meet a particular labor market demand. By adopting immigration policies that allowed the state to select highly-educated, skilled, and wealthy immigrants, those who are seen as being self-sufficient and able to demonstrate the desired individual entrepreneurial freedoms and skills, the Government aimed to maximize human and economic gain from immigration, while reducing the costs associated with settlement of newcomers (Arat-Koc 1999, 2012; Bauder 2008; Root et al. 2014).

Immigration Policies and Immigrant Women’s Vulnerability to...

When Canada introduced a points-based system for selection of skilled migrants in 1967, it was purported as eliminating racism and sexism from the immigration policy and making the selection processes more fair and objective (Arat-Koc 1999; Root et al. 2014). Under the points-based system, those deemed most suitable for immigration were those who can potentially contribute to the Canadian economy immediately upon arrival in Canada because they would have the desired qualities—many years of formal education and work experience, certain specified, preferred occupational skills, and English or French language competency. Successive Canadian governments have adopted this scheme to maximize the gains from the economic class of immigrants while minimizing the burden from the other two classes—family class and refugee/ humanitarian grounds (Bhuyan et al. 2014; Root et al. 2014). By introducing various changes to the immigration policy, the state controlled and imposed restrictions on family class migrants, including the sponsored-spouses by stipulating the conditions under which they can come to Canada, whether and how long they can stay in the country, and what benefits and rights they can claim. The use of a points-based system, which ascribes commodity values to people based on their potential contribution to the economy, allows for the exclusion and differential treatment of those who are deemed less valuable to the labor market, thereby failing to eliminate the very biases that it sought eliminate from the immigration system (Arat-Koc 1999; Dobrowolsky 2010). Most immigrants to Canada are admitted under the economic class, accounting for 60% of immigrants, followed by the family class (30%) and refugee/humanitarian grounds (10%) (Statistics Canada 2017). Women are less likely to arrive as economic class primary applicants, accounting for only 20% of economic migrants to Canada; majority (80%) of them have arrived as sponsored-spouses (through the family class) or as dependents of skilled migrants (Chui 2011; Hudon 2015). Women, particularly from the Global South, are more likely to get excluded from the economic class because they have had less access to the types of education or formal work that are preferred in a points-based system (Dobrowolsky 2010; Gabriel 2006). With the largest proportion of immigrants and immigrant women coming to Canada now being born in an Asian country (Statistics Canada 2017), many of which are traditionally patriarchal societies, such women may not have had access to education and work that is given value in a points-based system. Immigration policies can help reinforce gendered norms and male hegemony creating and/or reinforcing patriarchy in ways that are disadvantages and harmful to women post-migration in Canada. The 10-year sponsorship agreement with the sponsor, lack of recourse to public funds, and a 2-year cohabiting requirement (introduced in 2012 and later repealed in 2017) are some of the restrictions directly imposed on sponsored women (Canadian Council for Refugees 2015). Being a sponsored female spouse, whose immigration status is tied to her male sponsor's status, is linked to immigrant women’s risk of IPV by virtue of this dependency (Alaggia et al. 2009; Folson 2004). When the Canadian government introduced the 2-year conditional permanent residency in 2012, a rule which only applied to sponsored-spouses, such women’s residency in Canada was conditional on remaining in a conjugal relationship and living with their sponsor (Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) 2013). Many service providers and community workers highlighted that this policy gave disproportionate power to the men, allowed abusive male sponsors to exert control over women, and increased sponsored women's vulnerability to IPV (Bhuyan et al. 2014; Canadian Network of Women’s Shelters and Transition Houses 2013). Studies show

Jayasuriya-Illesinghe V.

that the IPV experienced by immigrant women, particularly from several traditionally patriarchal societies such as China, Portugal, India, and Sri Lanka, only began after their arrival in Canada (Barata et al. 2005; Guruge et al. 2010a, b; Guruge 2014; Hyman et al. 2006, 2008; MacLeod and Shin 1990; Tyyskä and Dinshaw 2009). But for some of the immigrant women, their post-migration experiences of IPV were part of an ongoing state of abuse that began pre-migration and became worse in Canada (Barata et al. 2005; Guruge et al. 2010a, b; Hyman et al. 2006, 2008; MacLeod and Shin 1990; Tyyskä and Dinshaw 2009). The neoliberal rationale favoring highly-skilled labor allows for differential treatment of women not only at the point of selection for migration (Gabriel 2006), but also post-migration (Arat-Koc 1999, 2012; Bhuyan et al. 2014; George and Rashidi 2011). The sexism, racism, and classism reproduced by immigration policies help keep certain groups of women living in poverty, unemployed and dependent on their own men, and/or under-employed and subservient to other men and women that they work for. Moreover, sponsored women are ineligible for social welfare, healthcare, and other services and supports such as governmentsponsored language training programs or any public assistance for 10 years. Such women could risk becoming part of an Bunskilled, cheap, and exploitable labour force^ (Folson 2004, 31) because they are only able to access temporary, unskilled, and precarious work. According to the 2016 Canadian Census, newcomer immigrants, particularly women and 'visible minorities' are more likely to remain unemployed and living in poverty (Hudon 2015; OCASI 2017). They are unable to find work or take a long time to do so, and take up jobs that are not commensurate with their education and work experience. They earn less when compared to immigrant men as well as Canadian-born women of equal education level (Hudon 2015). A substantial proportion of immigrant women experience deskilling and more so than the immigrant men as their scope of work is limited to services and manufacturing, keeping them entrapped in low-income situations, long-term. Poverty and downward social migration are linked to various negative health and social outcomes including, stress, alcohol and substance abuse, and alone and in combination with other risk factors, to IPV (Barata et al. 2005; Guruge et al. 2010a, b; Hyman et al. 2006, 2008; MacLeod and Shin 1990; Tyyskä and Dinshaw 2009). By conferring a temporary legal status, social exclusion, and economic precariousness on some groups, immigration policies not only reinforce the gender-inequitable conditions faced by many immigrant women premigration, but also make them even more dependent and vulnerable to exploitation and abuse post-migration in Canada (Bhuyan 2012; Bhuyan et al. 2013; 2014). Neoliberalism, Restructuring of the Welfare State, and Women’s Access to Services and Supports For most women experiencing IPV, seeking recourse and leaving abusive relationships are difficult under the best of conditions. Many immigrant women already experience discrimination because of their skin color, race, ethnicity, and culture as newcomers to Canada (Du Mont and Forte 2012). In addition to the gender, race, and class-based barriers to accessing health and social services, immigrant women are further constrained because

Immigration Policies and Immigrant Women’s Vulnerability to...

their rights and entitlements are tied to their immigration status and the sponsors’ status in Canada (Bernhard et al. 2009; Hyman et al. 2009). Fears of loss of status and deportation and loss of custody of the children are some of the barriers to care seeking reported by immigrant women who experience IPV (Guruge 2014; Hyman et al. 2009). In addition to availability and accessibility of health, social, and welfare services, a sense of stability and income security that enables one to live independently and support themselves are important, yet often challenging conditions that prevent immigrant and newcomer women from seeking IPV-related services in Canada (Alaggia et al. 2009; Bhuyan 2012; Bhuyan et al. 2014; George and Rashidi 2011; Guruge and Humphreys 2009; Hyman et al. 2009). Under the neoliberal influence, when market forces become a main determinant of public and private spending, the financial supports available for social services and welfare can decline sharply (Abu-Laban and Gabriel 2002; Bhuyan 2012). In Canada, after the 1990s, as a result of the erosion of the welfare state, there has been a diminution of funding for agencies that provide services and supports to women including those for women experiencing domestic violence (Canadian Network of Women’s Shelters and Transition Houses 2013). Many of the agencies and service providers, particularly those serving newcomers and immigrants, have faced funding cuts (Bhuyan 2012; Bhuyan et al. 2014; Canadian Network of Women’s Shelters and Transition Houses 2013), experienced a devolution and delegation of responsibility from the federal government to the provincial level (Arat-Koç 2012), leading to what Brodie and Bakker (2008) call Bthe politics of delegitimization, dismantling, and disappearance^ of the welfare state (9). The loss of public services and supports often impact those most likely to benefit from them, those who are vulnerable, welfare-dependent, and reliant on publiclyfunded programs (Bhuyan et al. 2014; Canadian Network of Women’s Shelters and Transition Houses 2013; Dobrowolsky 2010). As immigrant and newcomer women often avoid contact with the police and legal services for fear of jeopardizing their sponsorship or citizenship status, their only access to formal services could be through health, settlement services, and other newcomer services such as employment and language training programs (Bernhard et al. 2009; Hyman et al. 2009). However, when there is a trend for the state to limit its responsibility towards services and supports provided to the most precarious immigrants, including sponsored-spouses, thier pathways to leaving abusive relationshipsability could be severly constrained. Reconciling BCultural^ and BStructural^ Factors Related to Immigrant Women’s Vulnerability to IPV Despite the evidence that IPV can begin post-migration, and an understanding that both cultural and structural factors can be important determinants of immigrant women’s experiences of it, there is a tendency to attribute violence experienced by immigrant women mainly to cultural factors than the structural ones (Bhuyan 2012; Das Gupta 2011; Dobrowolsky 2010; Kasturirangan et al. 2004). From an intersectional standpoint, IPV against women by male partners is not only gender-based, i.e., women are more likely to be victimized by men because they are women, but also determined by other factors such as poverty, precariousness, and the downward social migration (as experienced by immigrant and newcomer women) which can compound this risk, making them more vulnerable than they would have been because of their female gender or when they were in their home counties (Guruge et al. 2010a, b; Tyyskä and

Jayasuriya-Illesinghe V.

Dinshaw 2009). Immigration policies, which make women disproportionately dependent on men, limit their access to work, supports, and services because they are women of certain ethno-racial backgrounds or from the lower socio-economic strata, create structural conditions that increase newcomer, immigrant, and visible minority women’s vulnerability to IPV post-migration (Dua 2000; Gabriel 2006). Yet, public and academic discourses around violence against immigrant women in Canada help reinforce the importance of cultural factors than the structural ones. On one hand, popular media highlight and depict violence against immigrant women, including IPV and domestic violence, as culture-driven (Caplan 2017; Cohen 2012; Olwan 2013; Crowe 2006). Although the term Bhonor killings^ is used to denote a specific premeditated crime against women and applies to certain ethno-cultural contexts (Department of Justice 2016), applying this more broadly to denote violence experienced by all ethno-racial women can detract from the fact that violence against women occurs in all communities, and that the violence experienced by women in some at-risk communities are not all "honor-based" (Hildebrandt 2009). Majority of visible minority women who experience violence within the domestic context are abused by intimate male partners. However, when they are Muslims, Hindus, or Sikhs, or of South Asian or Middle Eastern heritage, there is a tendency to frame such incidents as Bhonor-based,^ or as culturally- and religiously-motivated (Das Gupta 2011; Hildebrandt 2009). Immigrant women face the paradox of being Bvisible,^ yet Binvisible^ at the same time and in the context of thier experiences of IPV, risk being blamed and portrayed as those who uphold traditional cultural valules (Dobrowolsky 2010). The academic discourses, particularly those relying on statistical data, also contribute to the Binvisibility^ of immigrant women in Canada, undermining their experiences of IPV. On one hand, there is a clear lack of data specific to immigrant women’s experiences of violence (Alaggia et al. 2009). On the other hand, the national surveys which can gather data to show the magnitude of the problem, identify those who are most at risk, and separate the structural determinants from the culturally-framed discourses, fail to include and adequately represent non-Canadian-born women in Canada. For example, most of the non-Canadian-born women included in the General Social Survey (GSS) were born in Western countries because they would have English and/or French language skills that facilitate their inclusion in the survey. As a result, some immigrant women, for example, from Asian countries of origin are severly underrepresented in the GSS sample. Therefore, data from surveys such as the GSS, which are used to report on IPV, state that immigrant women are less vulnerable to IPV than Canadian-born women (Ahmad et al. 2005; Cohen and Ansara 2002; Du Mont and Forte 2012; Sinha 2013). This is clearly contrary to findings from in-depth, qualitative studies which reveal immigrant women's experiences of IPV and the perspectives of community leaders and service providers who talk about the conditions that increase such women’s vulnerability to IPV post-migration (Chambion 1989; Chokshi et al. 2009; Chui 2011; Fong 2000; George and Rashidi 2011; Guruge et al. 2010a, b; Tyyskä and Dinshaw 2009). By capturing the experiences of only some women many of whom not representative of immigrant women in Canada, national surveys (Alaggia et al. 2009; Tyyskä and Saran 2013) tend to make their social issues, including experiences of IPV less visible in public and political spaces. Drawing attention to immigrant women’s issues, including IPV could help address some of the deep social issues that affect them. However, there has been

Immigration Policies and Immigrant Women’s Vulnerability to...

a resistance to track immigrant communities’ social issues in Canada so as to prevent them from being stereotyped (Alaggia et al. 2009). But, this tendency maybe actually having the opposite effect. If information is not gathered from all groups of immigrants, their experiences would become less visible than that of those who are included and help support a different and often culturally essentialist discourse about their issues of concern. Looking Back and Moving Ahead Canadian multiculturalism, introduced as a framework for ensuring socially inclusive policies and programs, was touted as a route to a more tolerant and inclusive society. As a political theory, multiculturalism should challenge neoliberal ideals that serve to diminish ideals of equality and diversity (Mann 2012; Kymlicka 1995; Bloemraad et al. 2008). Instead, under the influence of neoliberalism, Canadian governments have used immigration policies for economic gain, thereby undermining the very same multicultural agenda that it seeks to uphold. This paper provides a specific example of this trend, focusing on the Canadian immigration policies and its shifts under a neoliberal agenda to discuss the ways in which structural conditions that increase immigrant and newcomer women’s vulnerability to IPV are created while reducing the services and supports available to such women. In the popular media and national surveys, immigrant women’s experiences and risk of IPV are framed in ways that allow it to be predominantly attributed to cultural determinants. Framing IPV experienced by immigrant and newcomer women as a form of violence experienced differently by racialized communities redirect attention away from the fact that systemic inequalities contribute to the prevalence of IPV, and that there are gaps in services and supports made available to such women. As a result, the responsibility for addressing immigrant and newcomer women’s vulnerability to IPV can be placed on the women and thier communities, those who are alluded to as bearing the burden of their culture, without having to recognize that government policies have created conditions that systematically increase certain population groups vulnerability to abuse. Recognizing the precariousness, exclusion, and marginalization of immigrant women that arise from the neoliberal influence on immigration policies is the overarching policy implication to be highlighted and reiterated here. Addressing the methodological challenges of involving diverse groups in national surveys and ensuring that people who don't speak English or French are able to fully participate in them is one of the first steps in better understading social issues that are faced by all population groups in Canada. Until we have access to such data, unbiased information, and strong evidence to garner public and political support for government policy changes, the responsibility of providing urgent services and supports to immigrant and newcomer women who experience IPV would have to be borne by agencies who have taken on the burden of supporting their own cultural communities. However, full social inclusion of immigrant women and their gender-equitable participation in society would require a recognition and elimination of the

Jayasuriya-Illesinghe V.

biases that are embedded in and reproduced by the immigration policies in Canada.

References Abu-Laban, Y., & Gabriel, C. (2002) Selling diversity: immigration, multiculturalism, employment equity, and globalization. Peterborough, Ontario: Broadview Press. Ahmad, F., Ali, M. & Stewart, D.E. (2005). Spousal-abuse among Canadian immigrant women. Journal of Immigrant Health, 7(4). Alaggia, R., Regehr, C., & Rishchynski, G. (2009). Intimate partner violence and immigration laws in Canada: how far have we come? International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 32(6), 335–341. Arat-Koc, S. (1999). Neo-liberalism, state restructuring and immigration: changes in Canadian policies in the 1990s. Journal of Canadian Studies, 24(2), 31. Arat-Koc, S. (2012). Invisibilized, individualized and culturalized: paradoxical invisibility and hyper-visibility of gender in policy making and policy discourse in neoliberal Canada. Canadian Woman Studies, 29(3), 6–17. Barata, P. C., McNally, M. J., Sales, I. M., & Stewart, D. E. (2005). Portuguese immigrant women’s perspectives on wife abuse: a cross-generational comparison. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 20(9), 1132–1150. Bauder, H. (2008) The economic case for immigration: neoliberal and regulatory paradigms in Canada’s Press. Studies in Political Economy, 131–152. Bernhard, J. K., Goldring, L., Young, J., Berinstein, C., & Wilson, B. (2009). Living with precarious legal status in Canada: implications for the well-being of children and families. Refuge, 24(2), 101–114. Bhuyan, R. (2012). Negotiating citizenship on the frontlines: how the devolution of Canadian immigration policy shapes service delivery to women fleeing abuse. Law & Policy, 34(2), 211–236. Bhuyan, R., Osborne, B., & Cruz, J.F.J. (2013). Unprotected and unrecognized: the ontological insecurity of migrants who are denied protection from domestic violence in their home countries as refugee claimants in Canada. CERIS Working Paper No. 96. Toronto: CERIS: The Ontario Metropolis Centre. Bhuyan, R., Osborne, B., Zahraei, S., & Tarshis, S. (2014). Unprotected, unrecognized Canadian immigration policy and violence against women, 2008–2013. Toronto: University of Toronto. Bloemraad, I., Korteweg, A., & Yurdakul, G. (2008). Citizenship and immigration: multiculturalism, assimilation, and challenges to the nation-state. Annual Rev. Sociol, 34, 153–179. Brodie, J., & Bakker, I. (2008). Where are the women?: gender equity, budgets and Canadian public policy. Ottawa: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. Canadian Council for Refugees. (2015). Conditional permanent residence: failure in policy and practice. CCRweb.ca. Canadian Network of Women’s Shelters and Transition Houses. (2013). The case for a national action plan on violence against women. endvaw.ca. Canadian Women’s Foundation. (2014). Fact sheet moving women out of violence. https://www. canadianwomen.org/the-facts/gender-based-violence/ Caplan, G. (2017). Honour killings in Canada: even worse than we believe. The Globe and Mail. March 27, 2017. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/second-reading/honour-killings-in-canada-evenworse-than-we-believe/article1314263/ Chambion, A. (1989). Refugee families’ experiences: three family themes—family disruption, violent trauma, and acculturation. Journal of Strategic and Systemic Therapies, 8, 3–13. Chokshi, R., Desai, S., & Adamali, A. (2009). Overview of domestic violence in the South Asian community in Canada: prevalence, issues and recommendations. In J. Fong (Ed.), Out of the shadows: woman abuse in ethnic, immigrant and aboriginal communities. Toronto: Women’s Press. Chui, T. (2011). Immigrant women. In Women in Canada: a gender-based statistical report. Statistics: Canada. Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC). (2013). Facts and figures 2009: immigration overview. Ottawa: CIC. Cohen, T. (2012). Honour killings’ on the rise in Canada: expert. Canada.com. http://www.canada. com/life/honour+killings+rise+canada+expert/3165638/story.html

Immigration Policies and Immigrant Women’s Vulnerability to... Cohen, M. & Ansara, D. (2002). Violence against women. In D.E. Stewart, A. Cheung, L.E. Ferris, I. Hyman, M. Cohen & I.J. Williams (Editors), Ontario Women's Health Status Report. Toronto: Ontario Women's Health Council. Crenshaw, K. W. (2005). Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. In R. K. Bergen, J. L. Edleson, & C. M. Renzetti (Eds.), Violence against women. Classic papers. Boston: Pearson Education. Crowe, Janey (2006, Nov 1) Multiculturalism always has been a flawed concept. Vancouver Sun. Das Gupta, T. (2011). Canadian multiculturalism and social inclusion. Equity matters. http://www.idees-ideas. ca/blog/canadian-multiculturalism-and-social-inclusion Department of Justice. (2016). Preliminary examination of so-called Bhonour killings^ in Canada. http://www. justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/cj-jp/fv-vf/hk-ch/p1.html Dobrowolsky, A. (2010). Immigrant women, equality and diversity in Canada. Equity Matters. http://www. ideas-idees.ca/blog/immigrant-women-equality-and-diversity-canada Du Mont, J., & Forte, T. (2012). An exploratory study on the consequences and contextual factors of intimate partner violence among immigrant and Canadian-born women. BMJ Open, 2, e001728. https://doi. org/10.1136/bmjopen-2012. Dua, E. (2000). The Hindu women’s question: Canadian nation building and the social construction of gender for South Asian-Canadian women’. In A. Calliste & G. J. Sefa Dei (Eds.), Anti-racist feminism: critical race and gender studies (pp. 55–72). Halifax: Fernwood. Folson, R. B. (2004). Representation of the immigrant in rose. In B. Folson (Ed.), Calculated kindness: global restructuring, immigration and settlement in Canada. Halifax: Fernwood. Fong, J. (2000). Silent no more: how women experienced wife abuse in the local Chinese community. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, York University, Toronto. Gabriel, C. (2006). A question of skills: gender, migration policy and the global political economy in Kees van der Pijl, Libby Assassi and Duncan Wigen (Eds.) Global regulation: managing crises after the imperial turn. Palgrave Macmillan. George, P., & Rashidi, M. (2011). Domestic violence in South Asian communities in the GTA: critical perspectives of community activists and service providers. CAOS: The Journal of Critical AntiOppressive Social Inquiry, 1, 67–81. Guruge, S. (2014). Perceptions about and responses to intimate partner violence in the Sinhalese Immigrant Community in Toronto. Arts Social Sci J, S, S1-006. https://doi.org/10.4172/2151-6200.S1-006. Guruge, S., & Humphreys, J. (2009). Barriers that affect abused immigrant women’s access to and use of formal social supports. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research, 41(3), 64–84. Guruge, S., Khanlou, N., & Gastaldo, D. (2010a). The production of intimate male partner violence in the migration process: intersections of gender, race, and class. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 66(1), 103–113. Guruge, S., Refaie-Shirpak, K., Hyman, I., Zanchetta, M., Gastaldo, D., & Sidani, S. (2010b). A metasynthesis of post-migration changes in marital relationships in Canada. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 101(4), 327–331. Hankivsky, O., & Varcoe, C. (2007). From global to local and over the rainbow: violence against women. In M. Morrow, O. Hankivsky, & C. Varcoe (Eds.), Women’s health in Canada: critical perspectives on theory and policy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Harvey, D. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford Univeristy Press. Hildebrandt, A. (2009). Honour killings: domestic abuse by another name? CBC News Canada. Jul 24, 2009. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/honour-killings-domestic-abuse-by-another-name-1.792907 Hudon, T. (2015). Immigrant women. In Women in Canada: a gender-based statistical report. Statistics Canada. Catalogue no. 89–503-X. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-503-x/2015001/article/14217-eng.pdf Hyman, I., Mason, R., Guruge, S., Berman, H., Kanagaratnam, P., & Manuel, L. (2006). Perceptions of factors contributing to intimate partner violence among Sri Lankan Tamil immigrant women in Canada. Health Care for Women International, 32(9), 779–794. Hyman, I., Guruge, S., & Mason, R. (2008). The impact of post-migration changes on marital relationships: a study of Ethiopian couples. Journal of Comp. Family Studies, 39, 149–164. Hyman, I., Forte, T., Du Mont, J., Romans, S., & Cohen, M. M. (2009). Help-seeking behavior for intimate partner violence among racial minority women in Canada. Women’s Health Issues, 19(2), 101–108. Kasturirangan, A., Krishnan, S. and Riger, S. (2004) The impact of culture and minority status on women’s experience of domestic violence. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 5, 318-332. Kymlicka, W. (1995). Multicultural citizenship: A liberal theory of minority rights. Oxford: Clarendon Press. MacLeod, L., &Shin M.. (1990). Isolated, afraid and forgotten: the service delivery needs and realities of immigrant and refugee women who are battered. Health Canada: National Clearinghouse on Family Violence Health and Welfare Canada.

Jayasuriya-Illesinghe V. Mann, J. (2012). The introduction of multiculturalism in Canada and Australia, 1960s–1970s. Nations and Nationalism, 18(3), 483–503. Mason, R., Hyman, I., Berman, H., Guruge, S., & Kanagaratnam, P. (2008). BViolence is an international language^: Tamil Women’s perceptions of intimate partner violence. Violence Against Women, 14, 1397. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801208325096. OCASI. (2017). Growing gap: immigrants, racialized residents in the 2016 Census. http://www.ocasi. org/growing-gap-immigrants-racialized-residents-2016-census . Olwan, D. M. (2013). Gendered violence, cultural otherness, and honour crimes in Canadian National Logics. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 38(4), 533–555. Root, J., Gates-Gasse, E., Shields, J. & Bauder, H. (2014) Discounting immigrant families: neoliberalism and the framing of Canadian immigration policy change. RCIS Working Paper no. 2014/7 Ryerson Centre for Immigration & Settlement. Saltzman, L. E., Fanslaw, J. L., McMahon, P. M., & Shelley, G. A. (1999). Intimate partner violence surveillance: Uniform definitions and recommended data elements. Atlanta: National Centre for Injury Prevention and Control. Sinha, M. (2013). Measuring violence against women: statistical trends. Component of Statistics Canada catalogue no. 85-002-X Juristat. Sinha, M. (2015). Intimate partner violence. Statistics Canada. https://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002x/2013001/article/11805/11805-3-eng.htm#n3 Sokoloff, N., & Dupont, I. (2005). Domestic violence at the intersections of class, race, and gender: challenges and contributions to understanding violence against marginalized women in diverse communities. Violence Against Women, 11(1), 38–64. Statistics Canada (2017). Immigration and ethnocultural diversity: key results from the 2016 Census. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/171025/dq171025b-eng.htm Tyyskä, V. & Dinshaw, F. (2009). Families and violence in Punjabi and Tamil communities in Toronto. CERIS working paper no. 96. Toronto: CERIS: The Ontario Metropolis Centre. Tyyskä, V, & Saran, S. (2013). Family violence. McCraw-Hill. Canadian Collection. Toronto: McCraw-Hill.