Women, Gender, and Politics

N19 - Intersectionality in and of Public Policy

Date: Jun 4 | Time: 01:30pm to 03:00pm | Location:

Discussant/Commentateur/Commentatrice : Tammy Findlay (Mount Saint Vincent University)

Reproductive Precarity: Immigration Status as Structural Violence for Pregnant Migrants in Canada: Lindsay Larios (Concordia University)
Abstract: The term obstetric violence has gained traction, beginning in Latin America, as a means to conceptualize dehumanizing treatment and abuse experienced by people under obstetric care (Pérez D’Gregorio, 2010). Critical feminist scholars and reproductive justice advocates have highlighted the ways in which these experiences are shaped by race, class, ability, and other vectors of power and oppression which have heightened the vulnerability of certain groups of marginalized pregnant people (for example, Chadwick, 2018; Luibhéid, 2013; Ross & Solinger, 2017). The objective of this paper is to unpack the politics of reproductive rights for precarious status migrants in Canada and understand how this politics is experienced firsthand. To do so, this paper draws on narrative interviews with women during which they share their lived experiences with pregnancy and birth while living in Montreal with precarious immigration status – that is, temporary or non-authorized residency status (Goldring & Landolt, 2013). This research argues that the institutionalization of precarious immigration status is a form of structural violence grounded in a politics of exclusion that reinforces colonial white hetero-patriarchy, acting acts as a barrier to reproductive justice by de facto legislating some bodies as more worthy of care than others (Bhuyan, Valmadrid, Panlaqui, Pendon, & Juan, 2018; Montesanti & Thurston, 2015; Sadler et al., 2016). Further, these narratives demonstrate that obstetric violence is a process that is embedded within these broader systems of structural violence, such that the experience of obstetric violence begins for many before they even begin their first medical examination.

A Decolonial Feminist Methodology of Girl Agency under the 'Girling' of Global Development: Lindsay Robinson (Carleton University)
Abstract: Global governance efforts increasingly target the 'girl-child' as the silver-bullet solution for global poverty. As the global development industry asserts, once girls are invested in, given the right educational opportunities, and removed from local cultural barriers, they will uplift themselves, their communities, and even their entire countries out of poverty. Although feminist research has importantly critiqued 'the girling of development' for its neoliberal and instrumental logic, research is now only beginning to centre girls' embodied experiences of these development programmes. Using an interdisciplinary theoretical toolkit of decolonial feminism and girlhood studies, this paper puts forth a critical methodology for conceptualizing a non-androcentric and non-Eurocentric framework for childhood agency broadly, and girls in the global South in particular. Decolonial theory pushes back against the hierarchical privileging of Western technical knowledge at the expense of situated knowledge and experience, while girlhood studies highlight critical notions of girls' agential capacities, interrogating the assumption that agency is reserved for adulthood. This methodology is developed for qualitative interviewing - to take place in Guatemala's Malala Education Centres - in which I suggest girls are meaningful actors before the efforts of Western intervention; girls always already shape their own lives, and the lives of others, while possessing situated knowledge of their local/global context. By listening to these voices, I tease out the tensions between necessary gendered lenses in development, and the limitations when these lenses focus on individual 'girl-children' as instrumental investments, ultimately contributing to a more inclusive, transformative politics by and for girls.

Gender Bias in Provincial Health Policy Regulation and the Disparity of Disciplinary Standards between Men and Women: David Said (University of Guelph)
Abstract: The healthcare field is among a number of professions where issues of sexism, gender-based violence and discrimination has yet to be completely resolved. Many of these issues have been linked to traditional gendered roles that prescribe the appropriate positions that men and women should occupy as medical practitioners. Despite the increasing number of women entering the medical field as physicians and surgeons over the last two decades in Canada, women continue to face a sexist culture in the regulation of the medical health care profession. Regulatory bodies responsible for managing the practice of medicine in Ontario such as the College of Physicians and Surgeons and the College of Nurses are legislatively mandated to establish internal committees that investigate matters related to public complaints and carry out disciplinary actions in cases where professional misconduct has occurred. This paper examines the outcomes of disciplinary hearings since 2005 and compares the imposed penalties decided by the committee, on men and women within and between both colleges. The analysis reveals evidence of systemic bias and discrimination towards women in disciplinary hearings in the regulation of the health care profession. It further demonstrates that gendered-based violence can take on different forms when policy fields are examined from different institutional perspectives. Examining the regulatory practices of professions, such as those within the medical field, sheds light onto the procedural issues that perpetuate violence against women within politicized workplaces, institutions and administrative bodies that are responsible for delivering public policies.

Intersectionality and Policy Design: Analysing the Construction of Gender and Sexually Diverse Communities in Educational Policy Documents: Leanne letourneau (Concordia University)
Abstract: Saskatchewan’s Ministry of Education has developed a policy statement called Student Alliances for Gender and Sexual Diversity in Saskatchewan Schools, which states that the ministry supports safe school practices for all students, including the development of a student alliance for gender and sexual diversity. Additionally, a supplementary resource guide was created to assist staff in Saskatchewan school divisions to create safe and inclusive school environments. While the document discusses issues of privilege and oppression and includes a section on Two-Spirit communities, there is little mention of other intersecting identities, which is important considering gender and sexually diverse communities are not homogeneous. Gender and/or sexual diversity are often considered the intersecting identities, which fails to acknowledge that the needs of gender and sexually diverse communities may differ depending on intersecting identities. Therefore, in this paper, I will apply Hankivsky et al.’s (2012) intersectional-based policy framework (IBPA) to Saskatchewan’s Ministry of Education’s resource guide Deepening the Discussion: Gender and Sexual Diversity in order to question whether intersectionality is considered beyond gender and sexual diversity in education policy. Theoretically, asking this question is significant for policy design because how target groups are socially constructed determines policy solutions. Therefore, if gender and sexually diverse communities are constructed without considering the differences within these groups and how this diversity affects their experiences, then solutions for creating safe and inclusive schools will not meet the needs of all students.