MSWPG 7214 ­ Advocating for Individuals, Families, Groups, & Communities - Assessment 3

Introduction

Social changes often drive decisions on policy making. Policies that govern an organization, state or nation evolve over time as a response to the changes that take place in socio­economic and political areas (Gourdine & Brown, 2016). Policy decisions are often influenced by a group of individuals or organizations that force the governing body to rethink on the existing policies that may not be suitable in the changed circumstances (Blasi & Jost, 2006). Advocacy can be understood as the deliberate act of influencing the people who make policies (Wheeler, 2000). The policy makers can be mass leaders, planners, politicians, or other people in authority. Policy advocacy is concerned with the rights of individuals within multi­cultural and multi­ethnic social settings in a region or a state in order to ensure equality among all the stakeholders (Hoefer, 2011). Social action on the other hand is a response to the unjust treatment or to the unequal privileges and rights of a group of people or individuals, in order to ensure fair and just treatment of all the strata of the society (Gourdine & Brown, 2016). Social action is normally a collective action of the people and organizations that are concerned with the well­being of all the stakeholders to strengthen the social fabric and values (Cajaiba­Santana, 2014). The following essay identifies and discusses two advocacy models and two social action models bases on real life cases. The report would then compare the two models both theoretically and as applied to the chosen cases.

Models of Advocacy

Power distribution in a society may not always be equal within a society and some sections of society can be vulnerable to exploitation or may be deprived of their rights to respectable living and functioning within the society (Blasi & Jost, 2006). Advocacy is an attempt by individuals and organizations to influence policy decisions of the governing bodies so that even vulnerable sections of the society get their due place in the mainstream society (Wheeler, 2000). Advocacy can also be understood as an effort to voice the concerns of the underprivileged class of the society in order to effect policies and laws that help the upliftment of the underprivileged sections of the society (Hoefer, 2011). Advocacy can also be considered as systematic persuasion of governing authorities through logic, reasoning, data and information to form policies to ensure social equality and justice (Blasi & Jost, 2006). There are various models. Some of them are peer advocacy, self advocacy, group advocacy, legal advocacy, citizen advocacy and independent advocacy (Hoefer, 2011). Group advocacy and Legal advocacy are discussed below.

Legal Advocacy Model

Legal advocacy refers to precise and emphasizing that it is the process of lading for other person or institution in court (Wheeler, 2000). Legal advocacy can be understood as the means of enforcing a policy decision by using the existing laws and legal course of action (Hoefer, 2011). In this form of advocacy experienced and eminent legal professionals can either work individually or form a group to provide a legal support to the people fighting for a cause (Mintrom & Vergari, 1996). Though policy decisions are not undertaken or framed in a court of law, a court can act as an intermediary upholding the petitioners’ request for the consideration of a change in the law or policy that is not suited in the current circumstances. Legal advocacy also aims to build support in the legal community so that the larger issue is taken up by a large group of legal practitioners (Wheeler, 2000). Legal advocacy can also help in developing a model legislation, which can be forwarded to the governing body of the state for the consideration of constitutional amendment.

One such legal advocacy was taken up during immigration violation when the government implemented laws about detention of citizens in Australia without any crime committed. Two Australian citizens were wrongly sent to immigration detention in 2017 (Koziol, 2017). The immigration department of Australia wrongly sent two Australian citizens to detention custody. They were detained since their visas were cancelled under section 501 of the Australian Migration Act 1958. Section 501 of the Migration Act entails the cancellation of the visa of the non­citizen for any crime committed in Australia and the consequential jail term for more than 12 months (Koziol, 2017). The government was able to enforce detentions since migration legislation does not come under the judicial supervision or judicial authorization. Since there is no overseeing by the judiciary in such cases, the government’s decision could not be contended by the victims affected by the decision. The detention of two Australian citizens was only one among the many such instances where the Department of Immigration has proactively acted to detain illegal immigrants often infringing on the rights of the rightful citizens of Australia.