Hi, all. With immigration reform in the news these days, I think it is important to look at words we use to describe immigrants , especially those who are in the United States without proper authorization: That is, how we talk about immigrants who are here without the documents needed to work or stay in the United States.
On the their Facebook page, on Friday, April 12, 2013 at 10:44am, at
https://www.facebook.com/MigrationPolicyInstitute#!/notes/migration-policy-institute/whats-your-view-ap-stylebook-drops-illegal-immigrant/10151546418014430,
the Migration Policy Institute wrote [in part] the following about terms used to describe immigrants and immigration:
"What's your view? AP Stylebook drops "illegal immigrant" by Migration Policy Institute (Notes) on Friday, April 12, 2013 at 10:44am
Earlier this month, the Associated Press announced that its influential AP Stylebook, widely used by other news organizations as well as beyond the media, was dropping the term “illegal immigrant” and any other use of the term “illegal” when describing a person. The Stylebook definition of “illegal immigration” now reads:
Illegal immigration: Entering or residing in a country in violation of civil or criminal law. Except in direct quotes essential to the story, use illegal only to refer to an action, not a person: illegal immigration, but not illegal immigrant. Acceptable variations include living in or entering a country illegally or without legal permission. …
This week, USA Today, the nation’s second-largest newspaper, announced it would only use “illegal immigrant” when in a direct quote, and instead would use “undocumented immigrant, “undocumented worker,” or “unauthorized immigrant.” And The New York Times also is reviewing its policy, according to its public editor, though she said she doubted the Times’ change would be as sweeping as the one undertaken by AP…..
The AP’s move comes at a time when momentum for overhauling the U.S. immigration system has increased significantly. Controversy over the use of terms such as “illegal immigrants,” “illegals,” and “illegal aliens” is not new, however. … MPI has long referred to the phenomenon as “illegal immigration” or “irregular migration,” based on the geographic focus of the research. While “illegal immigration” is the term most commonly used in North America, “irregular migration” is typically used in Europe and other parts of the world. As for the people who are living in a country without legal status? MPI refers to them as “unauthorized immigrants” or “unauthorized workers.” As they typically have documents from their country of origin, calling them “undocumented” would not seem to be wholly accurate. What’s your view?"
Just yesterday I noticed the Washington Post using “illegal immigration” and “illegal immigrant "in a front page article
I think words matter. They color how we view something or somebody and how we respond to what others say.
What do you think? Do you like the “irregular/regular” categorization of Europe “Documented/undocumented?” “Authorized/unauthorized?" Something else entirely?
I would like to hear from community members here as to your preference and, if you are so inclined, why that is your preference. Thanks. Miriam
Comments
Miriam - this is a very interesting topic. I wish we did not have a need for lables. That being said, I believe in people first language. I would prefer to hear "a person without a visa" or "a person with a xxx passport." I would also be curious to know what language immigrant communities or their advocates would perfer.
Thank you. Susan W
Hello,
I'm currently working for an ESOL program and I am an advocate for immigrant communities. I am an immigrant myself and come from a mixed status family; meaning we have family members who are both, born and naturalized U.S. citizens, Legal Permanent Residents, hold Visas, and unauthorized immigrants. I feel very strongly agaisnt the use of 'Illegal' to refer to any individual. We are part of a society that feels we need to have borders and label things, so on tha note if I have to choose a label, I prefer the term 'irregular immigration', because it's not following the regulations procedures put in place by the systems. Immigration is administrative law, not criminal. Therefore, a person who enters the U.S. irregularly is not breaking any criminal laws and is not a criminal based on this sole act. An unauthorized person has entered the country unbeknown to the systems and regulations in place or has overstayed their authorization period.
In response to the previous comment, "a person without a visa" or "a person with a xxx passport" can be very limiting and doesn't necessarily apply to all unathorized immigrants. Some foreign individuals dont' need a visa to enter the United States and can become 'unauthorized' immigrants, and unauthorized immigrants can and often do hold passports, and even dual citizenship recognized by other countries. Our immigration systems and laws are very complex and often diffucult to understand and navigate.
Going even further on this topic, is the use of the term 'American'. Many non-English speaking countries refer to U.S. nationals as 'United Statian' and refer to 'American' to anyone from the western hemisphere. Student are also taught in school that America is one continent and not three: North, Central, and South as is taught in schools across the United States. There is a lot of published research with the use of the term United Statian rather than 'American'.
I like this example used in the urban dictionary:
As the example above points out, if there was a country in Africa called "United States of Africa" then anyone from Africa would be an African not just people from that country.
Thanks for this topic,
Elsabel
Thanks Susan and Elsabel for your comments. I agree that people are not "illegal." I, too, prefer "irregular." It seems to take the censure out of it.
I also agree that it is a misnomer to say that only those in the United States are "Americans." I think part of the problem, however, stems from the fact that we don't have one word to describe ourselves - other than the rather folkloric "Yankee" or "Yank." And even that is not acceptable to all in the US, as southerners don't consider themselves Yankees, (and netiher do most midwesterners or north or southwesterners for that matter, either), and indeed, it can be seen as slang at best and pejorative at worst.
Those in Canada are Canadians, in Mexico they are Mexicans, in Guatemala they are Guatemalans, in Argentina they are Artentinians, and so on. I seem to remember from a Spanish class I took that some folks, as Elsabel says, in Central and South America call us "Estadounidense" or something similar to that. It seems clumsy, at least in English to say we are "United Statesians," but what are we, then, if not that?
When speaking with someone not from the US, or when outside the US myself, I always avoid the issue by just saying: "I'm from the US." or "I'm from the USA." I think I try to avoid using the word here in the US as much as possible, as well.
Thoughts, anyone, on how to navigate this situation? I very much believe that words matter and when we say we are "Americans," we can be seen as are being, actually, quite arrogant, considering we are only one country among many in North, Central, and South America.
Miriam
"