The International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation

Multiculturalism and Mental Illness: 

Views of Mental Health Professionals on Mentally Ill Economic Migrants in Greece

Dr. Despina Sikelianou
Clinical Psychologist, Scientific Associate

Victoria Koutli
Post-graduate student of Social Work

Konstantina Alexandridou
 Post-graduate student of  Social Work

Department of Social Work, School of Health and Care Sciences, Technological and Educational Institute of Patras, Greece

Citation:
Sikelianou D, Koutli V, & Alexandridou K. (2010). Multiculturalism And Mental Illness: Views Of Mental Health Professionals
on Mentally Ill Economic Migrants In Greece.  International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation. Vol 15(1) 71-93

---

Introduction:

Multiculturalism is an established doctrine embracing multiple cultures. Interculturalism, the outcome of multiculturalism, aims at the peaceful co-existence of multiple cultural groups and minorities or ethnic groups within a society with simultaneous recognition of the rights of one group by the other group and especially the minority by the majority. The dynamics of multiculturalism forces our societies to evolve, proceeding from the majority society stage to that of the society of cultures and cultural groups (Vernikos and Daskalopoulou 2000).

The phenomenon of migration has always been a very significant parameter in the history of the Greek population, while developments in recent years have led to the country changing from one of migrant outflow to one of migrant influx. This transformation emerges gently in the second half of the 1970s, continues during the 1980s and intensifies in the last decade of the 20^th Century (Bagavos 2003). Special emphasis is placed on the migration flows during the 1990s due to their size, the variations observed in the characteristics of migrants and the fact that the evolution of migration was for the first time associated with the effort of establishing a migration policy based on the fact that Greece is now a recipient country for migrants (Bagavos 2003).

According to Robolis (2007), the 1990s was undoubtedly characterized by the expansion of the role of migration in the demographic changes that took place, in terms of the population size and age structure. More specifically, the influx of migrants and their stay in Greece contributed decisively to the growth of the total population size which, between 1991 and 2001, showed a rise of 704,000.

Greece, being a recipient country for a large number of migrants, has now become a European multicultural country since migrants account for more than 7% of the total population and more than 8% of its workforce.

Migrants, who number from 900,000 to 1,200,000, tend to reverse the composition of local societies, since in certain regions they constitute as much as 25% of the inhabitants (Riga 2007). The great majority of migrants are uninsured, do not receive any social security benefits or unemployment and sickness benefits, are low paid and employed in unhealthy jobs, while most of them are lodged in unacceptable conditions. They are tyrannized by the difficulties they face with regard to family reunification, while the education they receive is insufficient since their mother tongue and culture are absent (Riga 2007).

Social inclusion of migrant populations is subject to the diptych: i) the legalization of their residence in our country, ii) their integration into the official labour market (Kassimati 2003).

With regard to the migration issue in Greece, mainly during the last few years the following major issues have emerged: i) the legality of migrant residence and employment, ii) the benefit or not of their presence for the economy, iii) public safety and the crime rate and iv) the protection of human and social rights of migrants (Tsitselikis 2007).

The migrants, arriving in the recipient country, face the following: i) difficulties and restrictions in exercising their rights (e.g. family reunification), ii) the undue and uncontrollable administrative deportation procedure, iii) the scornful treatment of by the police, and by the public administration in general, iv) the acquisition of Greek nationality, which is granted through particularly restrictive conditions on the basis of ‘law of blood’, v) poor protection of employment rights and vi) the absence of dialogue and participation of aliens in decision making that concerns them (Psimenos 2004).

The susceptibility (or resistance) of the migrant towards psychiatric disorders may be related to the following factors: i) his ethnic origin, which concerns the frequency of psychiatric disorders in the ethnic group from which he comes, ii) the socio-demographic characteristics of the migrant (e.g. sex, age, social class), iii) the difference between the natural environment and culture in the place of origin and those in the place of migration, iv) the attitude of the native population towards migrants and vice-versa, v) the difference between the social status of a migrant in their place of origin and that in the place of destination and vi) the expectations of a migrant (Kontaxakis et al. 1994).

Madianos (2000) distinguished two psychological stages following arrival: i) The first stage, which lasts for about 2 months and is characterized by a subjective sense of ‘all being well’, with increased psycho-mobility, as a primitive manner of eliminating the stress and anxiety resulting from the migration and ii) The second stage, during which the migrant gradually perceives their social status and worries about communication difficulty with the natives and the differences in customs and values. The greater the difficulties, the greater the tendency of the migrant to flee the present through recollections of the past (nostalgia). During the second period, mental reactions become apparent and reach their peak approximately 6 months after the migrant’s arrival. The main symptoms during this period are as follows: i) suspiciousness and paranoid trends, ii) anxiety and depression, and iii) physical complaints, such as feeling of weakness, joint and muscle pains, insomnia, anorexia, nausea, dread, peptic ulcer disease, ulcerative colitis, asthma, and a tendency to conversion disorder.

The significant factors that affect the mental state of individuals who belong to ethnic-racial minorities during the acculturation process are as follows: i) the duration of the acculturation process. The rapid acculturation of a social group, in combination with the violent dissociation from the familiar social and cultural environment, results in social disorganization and is a cause of stress, which often leads to the manifestation of a mental disorder, ii) the existence or not of strong bonds with people of the same cultural origin, iii) the existence of a cohesive family system that constitutes an additional psychoprotective factor, iv) the stereotypes and prejudices towards minorities. Stereotype thinking leads to stereotype racist behavior, thus resulting in marginalization, which in turn affects mental health, v) the non-supportive social policy, which does not protect special social groups, such as the minority-ethnic groups, who are financially underprivileged and vulnerable to morbidity, and which excludes them from having access to mental health services and vi) the classification of minority groups as belonging to lower socio-economic classes, a fact that causes the manifestation of mental disorders through the known relationship between the lowest social class and high psychiatric morbidity (Madianos 2005).

According to Patiniotis (1989), the marginalization of migrants leads to conflicts over social rules and social roles, insecurity over social status, and disorientation as well as isolation, consequences that contribute to the manifestation of psychosomatic diseases. Being uprooted from the society and culture of the homeland causes serious intrapsychic conflicts as a result of the confusion caused by their new social role and psycho-social disorientation and the overt or covert disparagement of migrants.

 

Research Design 

Methodology

 The aim of this study was to investigate all the views, feelings and behavior of mental health professionals towards mentally-ill economic migrants, whenever the latter seek help and support in resolving their problems.

The research hypotheses upon which this study was based are: i) there is a phenomenon of multiculturalism in our country, as the number of migrants has quintupled over the last fifteen (15) years and migrants constitute seven per cent (7%) of the total population residing in Greece (Riga 2007), ii) the Greek state is unable to adopt a social policy that will extenuate the phenomenon of social exclusion and social stigmatization of economic migrants, a fact that makes it more likely for them not to receive the treatment they need or to be offered services of lower quality, and not according to their needs (Megalooikonomou 2007), iii) there is prejudice towards mentally-ill economic migrants, which results from the lack of cultural sensitization and updating in mental health professionals themselves (Madianos 2000) and iv) the mental health services do not implement actions, and consequently mentally ill economic migrants are not informed of how and why they could approach such a service (Bilanakis 2006).

Sample
The study sample consisted of one hundred and sixty (160) mental health professionals, who worked in mental health services and health structures where psychiatric observation services were also provided. The selection of the sample was made on the basis of systematic sampling. In particular, sixteen (16) structures were selected from the two (2) Prefectures (Achaia, Lesvos), and it was from here that the number of sample subjects was gathered. Specifically, in the Prefecture of Achaia, seven (7) structures were selected: the Social Sector of the Municipality of Patras (twelve (12) people), the Hellenic Red Cross (ten (10) people), the Mental Health Centre (thirteen (13) people), the Mental Hygiene Centre (ten (10) people), the Psychiatric Department of the Regional General University Hospital of Patras, in Rio (fifteen (15) people), and two boarding houses for chronic psychiatric patients (ten (10) and twelve (12) people, respectively). In the Municipality of Lesvos, nine (9) structures were selected: four (4) Health Centres (thirty one (31) people), the Psychiatric Department of the Hospital of Mytilene (eighteen (18) people), the Mental Hygiene Centre (thirteen (13) people), the Mobile Mental Health Unit (four (4) people), the Social Welfare Institute (eight (8) people) and one Rehabilitation Hostel for patients with chronic mental illness (five (5) people).

With regard to the sample characteristics, 120 (74.5%) were women and 40 (25.5%) were men. Their ages ranged from eighteen (18) to fifty-six (56) years old and over. 90 (56.3%) people were residents of urban centres, while 42 (26.3%) and 28 (17.5) people resided in rural and semi-urban areas respectively. 87 people (54%) were public sector employees, 34 people (21.1%) were employees with a fixed-term employment contract, 30 people (18.6%) were employees with an indefinite duration employment contract, 7 people (4.3%) were under a works contract and the remaining 3 people (1.9%) were hourly-paid employees. The specializations of the mental health professionals were as follows: five (5) psychiatrists, twenty two (22) psychologists, forty (4) social workers, ten (10) occupational therapists, forty three (43) Nurses, graduates of Technological Educational Institutes, thirty one (31) Nurses with two years of studies in Secondary Education and ten (10) health visitors. The majority of the employees (54) had work experience of 10 years and over, while approximately half of them (25) had work experience of 20 years and over. Of the remainder, 42 employees had worked from 1 to 3 years, 25 employees had worked from 3 to 6 years and 19 employees had worked from 6 to 10 years. Finally, only 12 employees had specialized (postgraduate studies), 2 of whom had obtained a PhD and 10 of whom had obtained a Master’s degree. Their specialization studies were not in the discipline of multiculturalism and interculturalism.   

Research method
 The survey method was used for the implementation of this study. According to the survey method, this study was divided into three (3) phases: the preliminary phase, the main phase (carrying out of research) and the statistical analysis of results phase. Specifically, the specification of the general aim of the research, the formulating of research questions and research hypotheses, the selection of the research method and identification of the population and the subjects to constitute the sample were implemented during the first (preliminary) research phase. During the second (main) phase, telephone communication with and visits to the organizations and mental health services were implemented in order to inform the officers in charge of the aims of this research, and asking them if they would agree to participate in the research process as sample subjects. The visits lasted for two (2) months (March and April 2008) and were accompanied by a formal letter also informing them in writing of the objective of the research process. Subsequently, meetings were held with those mental health professionals who agreed to participate in the research process as sample subjects, in order to inform them of the general aim of the research, the duration of the research and how the research process would be carried out. Finally, there followed the formulating of the questions in the questionnaire as a research tool, the distribution of questionnaires to the sample subjects and the collection, within a week, of completed questionnaires. During the third phase of this study, the codification and statistical analysis of research results on the basis of the Statistical Package for Social Sciences were implemented, and conclusions were drawn.

Presentation of Statistical Research Results

According to the results of this study it was ascertained that mental health professionals consider Greece to be a multicultural country, as 88% of professionals gave a positive answer and 12% gave a negative answer (Fig. 1).

 

(Figure 1)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Moreover, the majority of mental health professionals (86.8%) believe that migration is an aggravating factor in the development of mental disorders, while 12.7% do not agree with this (Fig.2). 

 
(Figure 2 )

 

 
70% of mental health professionals believe that economic migrants constitute a significant part of the clinical population of mental health structures, while 30% responded negatively (Fig.3).

 

(Figure 3)

 

 According to the responses, the migrants who approach mental health services are mainly Albanians (41.8%), followed by Afghans (15.3%), Kurds and Romanians (7.7% each), Russians (5.6%), Pakistanis (4.6%), Bulgarians (4.1%) and Georgians, Iraqis, Turks and Indians (from 0.5% to 1%) (Fig. 4).

 

(Figure 4)                                                                                                                                  

The majority of migrants (31.5%) who approach mental health services range from 31 to 40 years old (middle adulthood), 22.5% from 19 to 30 years old (young adulthood) and 19.5% from 12 to 18 years old. Migrants in the age range from 41 to 60 years old (7.6%), from 60 years old and over (2%), from 7 to 11 years old (9.6%) and from 2 to 7 years old (7.2%) are much less likely to approach mental health services (Fig. 5).

 

(Figure 5)

The reasons why migrants approach a mental health service are mainly for the treatment of a psychiatric disorder (40%), to be granted some kind of benefit (19%), to seek employment (8%), to solve general health problems (6%), to be granted a health certificate (2%) and much less likely for the purposes of solving problems regarding their children (1%), being granted a residence permit (1%), receiving psychological support and counseling (1%) or finding and securing accommodation and food (1%) (Fig. 6).

 

(Figure 6)

According to the responses of the mental health professionals, the disorders for which economic migrants approach Mental Health Services are as follows: Anxiety Disorders (22.1%), Mood Disorders (17.6%), Personality Disorders (14.1%), Substance use (12.5%), Sleep Disorders (12.2%), Schizophrenia and Psychotic Disorders (11.2%), Sexual Disorders (4.3%), Somatoform Disorders (3.2%), Senility (1.6%), Delinquent Behaviour (0.3%) and all the above (0.5%) (Fig. 7). 

 

(Figure 7)
 

84.7% of mental health professionals maintain that they themselves treat migrants equally (as they would treat Greeks) whenever they approach mental health services to seek help, while 12.5% of them give priority to Greeks and only 2.5% of them give priority to migrants (Fig. 8).

 

(Figure 8)

Moreover, when mental health professionals are called on to help a mentally ill migrant who does not possess the necessary legal documents, 92% of them maintain that they offer their help regardless of the existing legal problem, and 8% maintain that in such cases they refer them to Police Authorities (Fig. 9). 

 

(Figure 9)
 

 The predominant feelings of mental health professionals during their dealings with mentally ill migrants are embarrassment, as cooperation and communication become dysfunctional (60.1%), sadness, because migrants are not satisfied with the services (20.9%), guilt (11%) and indifference (4.9%) (Fig. 10).

(Figure 10) 

 To the question regarding the participation of mental health professionals in migrants’ attempts to claim their rights, 59.4% of professionals responded that they would not actively participate, even though they are sensitized towards the problems of migrants, 23.1% responded that they would actively participate and 17.5% responded that they would not participate (Fig. 11).

(Figure 11) 

 

83.9% of mental health professionals believe that intercultural teaching is essential in undergraduate studies. 38.8% of them maintain that there should be actions and activities at undergraduate level to inform and sensitize potential future mental health professionals so that they might develop a more positive attitude towards migrants.

31.3% maintain that there should be undergraduate courses to facilitate learning about the different cultures and civilizations of other ethnic groups, and 4.4% believe that there should be courses in more foreign languages. Finally, 23.8% maintain that all the above should apply in the undergraduate studies of mental health professionals (Fig. 12).

 
(Figure 12)

With regard to the acceptance of economic migrants by the community in which the mental health professionals worked, 38% answered positively, while 62% responded that economic migrants are not accepted by the community.

In accordance with the views of mental health professionals, the reasons for non-acceptance of economic migrants are: the inability of the Greek state to offer services that could ensure a better quality of life for migrants (41.9%), the xenophobia that prevails in Greek society (14%), the inefficiency and indifference of social services (10.1%), insufficient diffusion of information about the problems of economic migrants (7%), and the inadequate development of integrated intervention programmes to deal with the Social Exclusion of economic migrants (0.8%); finally, 25.6% responded that all the afore-mentioned reasons are significant reasons. (Fig. 13).

According to the views of mental health professionals, economic migrants encounter social racism because of the following reasons: the inadequate social policy of the Greek state with regard to the smooth integration of migrants into Greek society (61.1%), the negative stereotype and fear of the ‘stranger’ and that which is ‘different’ (22.2%), economic migrants cause serious problems while enjoying the hospitality of our country (5.6%), the cultures of migrants are inferior to that of the Greeks (1.5%) and 7.6%  of responses included all the above (Fig. 14). At the same time, mental health professionals believe that it is the Greeks (63%) and not the migrants themselves (37%) who are responsible for the social stigmatization of economic migrants.

 ( Figure 13)

(Figure 14)

 
With regard to the provision of qualitative services for care and treatment of migrant mental illness by mental health services, only 16% of them responded positively, while 84% of professionals answered that no services are provided in order to meet the needs of mentally ill migrants (Fig. 15).

(Figure  15)

 
Of those professionals who do not believe that mental health services are satisfactory and qualitative, 41% maintain that the main reason why mental health services cannot meet the needs of mentally ill migrants is because they are not organized to provide support to migrants.

24.2% of professionals believe that the services have no such intention, namely also to meet the needs of migrants suffering from a mental disease, while 15.5% of them maintain that the staff in these services does not have enough time available to inform migrants through information programmes so that they can approach mental health services. 11.2% of them believe that the community is not ready in general to comprehend the significance of the existence and development of mental health services, while 0.6% of them refer to reasons such as the non-satisfactory number of personnel who staff the services, the large size of the clinical population and the unequal allocation of financial resources, respectively. Finally, 6.2% of professionals believe that all the above-mentioned constitute reasons why qualitative mental health services are not offered to mentally ill migrants (Fig.16).

(Figure 16)

 

The ways in which qualitative mental health services to migrants could be facilitated are: the employment of staff specialized in community mental health and the existence of wider and qualitative networking of mental health services, through substantial action (21.2% each), the employment of translators (15.2%), the employment of mental health professionals from the same countries of origin as the migrants (9.2%), the spatial expansion of the existing workplace of professionals (λείπει ποσοστό), while 26.3% of respondents included all the above. Finally, 0.5% of respondents included measures such as: informing professionals of the legal issues related to migrants, the development of more social services, the legalization of migrants, the increase in financial resources by the State and the flexible working timetable of mental health professionals, respectively (Fig. 17).

 

(Figure 17)

To the question regarding the effectiveness of the Greek social policy in terms of the elimination of discrimination and the social integration of migrants in our country, 57.1% of mental health professionals responded that they believe that Greek social policy is insufficient, 32.9% maintain that Greek social policy does not include an organized plan for the migrants, while only 9.9% of them believe that Greek social policy is satisfactory with regard to the social integration of migrants in our country (Fig. 18).

 

(Figure 18)

 
Finally, with regard to the support that migrants should ideally [προτείνουμε να μπει η λέξη ideally] have in Greece, 32.6% of mental health professionals maintain that there should be special centres for the rehabilitation of mentally ill migrants, staffed by specialized personnel,  31.7% maintain that there should be cooperation between the Greek mental health services and the corresponding mental health organizations from the countries of origin of the migrants, through the delegation of specialized staff to cooperate with Greek mental health professionals, 18.1% believe that temporary hostels should be established, aiming at the return of migrants to their countries, 9.7% believe that Greece should follow the EU social policy for migrants, while 1.3% believe that migrants should be deported. It is worthwhile noting here that, in response to the same question, just 0.4% of mental health professionals believe that migrants should have the same legal rights and equal opportunities as Greek citizens, and 6.2% believe that all the above could apply in order for migrants to be supported by the Greek state (Fig. 19).

 

(Figure 19)

 

Discussion

According to the results of this research, migration is a significant triggering factor in the manifestation of a mental disease. As Kontaxakis et al. (1994) maintain, the susceptibility of a migrant towards psychiatric disorders may be related to the following factors: i) their ethnic origin, which concerns the frequency of psychiatric disorders in the ethnic group from which they come, ii) the possibility of ‘selecting’ individuals susceptible (or not) to psychiatric disorders within the group of migrants, iii) the socio-demographic characteristics of the migrant (e.g. sex, age, social class), iv) the difference between the natural environment and culture in the place of origin and those in the place of migration, v) the attitude of the native population towards migrants and vice-versa, vi) the difference between the social status of a migrant in their place of origin and that in the place of destination and vii) the expectations of the migrant.

Madianos (2000) points out that the ethnic origin variable is closely associated with the phenomenon of migration. From other research studies implemented among groups of migrants, different figures regarding the prevalence of mental disorders among these groups have been ascertained, and their social status (less or more disadvantageous) certainly plays a significant role in the development of mental morbidity. The migrant’s traditional culture and the degree to which they are assimilated [μήπως εννοείτε αφομοίωση;] by the foreign culture also play a role in the development of mental mechanisms leading to the manifestation of a mental disorder (acculturative stress). At the same time, as Madianos (2000) reports, the initial period following the arrival of a migrant has been judged crucial to the development of psychopathological conditions, since at this time they face a flood of cultural influences.

The arrival of the migrant is characterized as a period of personality crisis, and stress may cause a weakening of the migrant’s Ego. According to Madianos (2000), the main symptoms during this period are suspiciousness and paranoid trends, anxiety and depression, physical complaints such as feeling of weakness, insomnia, anorexia, nausea, dread, and a tendency to conversion disorder. Siampos (2003) also adds to this list the intense feelings of separation and being distanced from their place of birth, parents, relatives and friends. If migrants have a family, this is crippling and migrants are loaded with two unbearable financial burdens because they have two households (one in the country of origin and one in the recipient country), increased travelling expenses, long-distance calls, visits back home, etc. If migrants bring their family or various relatives with them, they ‘do not feel as if they were an uprooted tree, but rather a tree replanted in a flowerpot’, as the sociologist Tsaousis characteristically remarks in his analysis of migration. Thus, emotional deprivation coexists with financial difficulties and the migrant’s inner world is irreparably damaged.  

The overwhelming majority of migrants who usually approach mental health services are of Albanian and Afghan descent, while the most frequent disorders they develop are mainly Anxiety Disorders, Mood Disorders and Personality Disorders. Kasimati (2003) reports that the overwhelming majority of migrants in Greece are economic migrants, while Albanians constitute the largest group of migrants within the Greek territory.

According to this study, mental health professionals feel uncomfortable and embarrassed whenever they are called on to help and support the mentally ill migrant due to their inability to communicate in the same language. Megalooikonomou et al. (2007) point out that one of the most frequent problems to arise when migrants contact a mental health service is extreme difficulty in communicating and/or complete communication failure, because neither the user nor the service officer speak each other’s language and translators are not usually available.

According to this study, mental health professionals believe that intercultural teaching is essential in their undergraduate education, especially in terms of their being informed and sensitized in order to develop more positive attitudes towards economic migrants, but also in terms of their learning the culture and civilization of these nations.  Megalooikonomou et al. (2007) maintain that if mental health professionals show an interest in becoming familiar with the culture of the ‘foreigner’ and his/her personal [μήπως εννοείτε προσωπική γιατί δεν έχει νόημα το προσωρινή] experience, it is possible that they may comprehend many things which otherwise would seem inexplicable and irrational.

The confidence of mental health professionals in the belief that ensuring a better quality of life for mentally ill migrants and meeting their needs would both be accomplished through the provision of support at special alternative structures of psychiatric care addressed only to migrants, would appear to indicate a prejudice. This prejudice seems to be characterized by two (2) prejudicial aspects: i) the first concerns the individuality of economic migrants that characterizes them as ‘foreigners’ and ‘inferiors’ in relation to the ethnic majority and Greek cultural identity (Riga, 2007) and ii) the second concerns the ‘distorted image’ associated with a patient with mental illness, who is believed to be violent and dangerous, unpredictable, lazy and incapable of working or making decisions about his life (Lykouras and Soldatos, 2006).

According to Anthopoulos (2000), xenophobia is mainly provoked by the Mass Media through the use of negative national stereotypes against migrants, thus creating a climate of moral panic in which racial trends and racist behaviour or practices are developed or strengthened.

With regard to the feelings of mental health professionals whenever they are called to help a mentally ill economic migrant at their service, it was ascertained that they feel uncomfortable as their cooperation with the migrants is dysfunctional and problematic.

According to this study, mental health professionals maintain that they would offer their help to migrants exactly as they would do with their fellow citizens, in accordance with their principles and professional ethics. However, they would not actively participate in migrants’ attempts to secure their rights. As Zaimakis (2002) reports, the commitment of professionals to the values of racial, ethnic and cultural diversity demonstrates evidence of their ethical and professional conduct. Within the framework of a society which is inhabited and characterized by the coexistence of population groups with discrete collective identities, what is being sought is the formation of a multicultural environment, a structure that enhances interaction between different populations, mutual recognition, mutual acceptance and social incorporation of various cultural realities.  

According to the views of mental health professionals with regard to the sufficiency of mental health services offered in Greece, it was ascertained that the insufficiency of mental health services is due to the lack of an integrated social policy programme with regard to the integration of economic migrants in our country.

Megalooikonomou et al. (2007) point out that, although migrants and refugees constitute 10% of the population in the territory of Greece, the provision of health services and specifically mental health services in order to meet their needs has been totally ignored. According to Kasimati (2003), it is widely accepted that current migration policy has failed since it lacks social justification.

Bagavos and Papadopoulou (2006) maintain that the process of legalization of migrants in Greece has turned out to be inefficient and the biggest hindrance to social incorporation and integration of migrants.   

According to Tsitselikis (2007), under pressure from the concerned bodies, Law 3386/2005 was passed, according to which the third phase for legalization of migrants was set. At the same time, the Greek Nationality Code was cleaned up, especially on a technical level, without, however, spectacular improvements in its content, and migration policy in Greece has remained devoid of a fixed target and orientation.   

With regard to the migration issue in Greece, mainly during the last few years the following major issues have emerged: i) the legality of migrants’ residence and employment and the benefit or not of their presence for the economy, ii) public safety and the crime rate and iii) the protection of human and social rights of migrants (Tsitselikis 2007).

 

Conclusions
 According to the results of this study, certain conclusions were drawn; these are, however, indicative as they represent the views of only a part of the whole of mental health professionals who work in Mental Health Services in our country.

Mental health professionals maintain that migration is an aggravating factor in the development of mental illness, as a large number of economic migrants approach Mental Health Services to deal with and solve their psychological or psychiatric problems, even though actions and programmes to inform migrants of the objectives of the Greek Mental Health Services are neither organized nor implemented. A possible explanation that may justify this contradictory situation is the implementation and organization of actions to inform migrants by mainly voluntary medical and social organizations in Greece which aim to fill the wide gap in primary psychiatric care and nursing in Greece, and specifically in terms of prevention. 

The reasons why economic migrants approach a mental health service are mainly for the treatment of a mental illness and to be granted some kind of benefit, but only of course when economic migrants have managed to obtain the documents for their legalization. 

The disorders from which migrants suffer and consequently cause them to approach the relevant services are mainly Anxiety Disorders, Mood Disorders, Personality Disorders, Substance Use Disorders and Sleep Disorders.

The predominant feeling of mental health professionals in their communication with the migrants is one of embarrassment. The main reason for this is their inability to communicate with the migrants and therefore communication becomes dysfunctional as the necessary means and ways are not available to facilitate the provision of their therapeutic work.

Mental health professionals maintain that Mental Health Services do not offer quality services to migrants for the following reasons:

i)        The initial aim of the establishment of these Services was to meet the psychiatric needs of beneficiaries of Greek descent. The sheltering and continued arrival of economic migrants in our country found the Greek State unprepared and with no organized plan for meeting the psychiatric needs of migrants.

ii)      The inability of Greek society to comprehend the significance of the existence of Community Mental Health Services, since it continues to ‘stigmatize’ the mentally ill and even more so the mentally ill economic migrant.

iii)     The difficulty that professionals encounter in finding and dedicating more time within the framework of their work timetable to implement actions that could be beneficial for migrants in terms of informing them of issues related to the prevention and treatment of mental illness. 

 
Despite all the afore-mentioned impediments, mental health professionals maintain that they endeavour to offer their services to migrants without discrimination, even when migrants do not possess legal documentation for residence and shelter in Greece. It is worth mentioning that they would not actively participate in whatsoever action or activity necessary to claim the legal rights of migrants.  

With regard to this allegation, a probable prejudice towards the ‘stranger’ and that which is ‘different’ is revealed, arising from the wider value system of mental health professionals which has its roots in the very community in which these professionals live and work. Besides, mental health professionals constitute part of the community and hold the views and values of the community for which they are called to offer their services.  

According to mental health professionals, migrants are not accepted by the Greek society mainly for three (3) reasons which are divided into three (3) levels: i) the Greek State, ii) the Mental Health and Social Care Services and iii) the community. Consequently, on the one hand, we have the inability of the Greek State to develop or expand actions or services aiming at the social integration of migrants into Greek society, the inability or indifference of Mental Health Services to develop actions related to the social integration of migrants and the negative stereotype within the community towards the ‘stranger’ and that which is ‘different’.  

The suggestions made by the mental health professionals with regard to the provision of qualitative mental health services to migrants, which could also contribute to their social integration, are:

i)                    the existence of more professionals engaged in the provision of social care to citizens, and also offering supplementary services to those of the Mental Health Services, such as the direct issuing of legal documentation for residence in our country, the granting of benefits, the direct finding of accommodation, etc.

ii)                   the cooperation between the Greek Mental Health Services and the mental health professionals from the corresponding countries of origin of the migrants, also helping with translation during communication with the migrants

iii)                 the wider networking and mutual supplementation of Mental Health Services

iv)                 the development of special rehabilitation centres, the services of which are to address only migrants

v)                  the cooperation with the Mental Health Services of the corresponding countries of origin of the migrants

vi)                 the development of more shelters for migrants and their return to their homelands.

Suggestions

Ø       The granting of equal civil, employment and democratic rights to both natives and migrants.
 
Ø       The financial boosting or expansion of mental health services with the aim of improving the services provided and which will coincide with the needs and rights of mentally ill patients and migrants, and acceptance of the appropriate number of patients
 
Ø       The coexistence of mentally ill migrants and natives in common structures (boarding houses) to eliminate social stigma, aiming at commitment to treatment and improvement of health standards.
 
Ø       Action by mental health services and organizations to attract mentally ill migrants, through either information leaflets or special seminars or even provision of a helpline.
 
Ø       The enhancement of programmes for prevention, information and sensitization of the phenomenon of migration and mental health-illness by both the professionals themselves and the community.
 
Ø       The introduction of courses on Intercultural Education and Interculturalism at all levels of education, but especially at Tertiary level, emphasizing respect for personality, free will, acceptance of individuality, the fight for each human’s rights and the elimination of prejudice and inequality.
 
Ø       Lifelong learning for mental health professionals in the sector of interculturalism.
 
Ø       The co-organization of educational seminars for mental health professionals from different countries, aiming at broadening their knowledge and putting it into practice.
 
Ø       The development of mental health professionals’ abilities to work with mentally ill patients of different cultural, ethnic, linguistic and religious origin, through the application of Counseling, mainly in Tertiary Education.
 
Ø       The provision of counseling support in regions accessible to migrants by specialized staff and translators, in the form of either an organized counseling centre or streetwork.  This form of service presupposes a carefully selected team of social workers with well-rounded knowledge and great flexibility. Specifically, this involves searching for employment, organization of self-help groups, counseling on health issues, facilitation of communication with welfare authorities and the Social Security Institute, etc. Social workers will offer material, therapeutic and cultural support.
 
Ø       The role of social workers, which should be more active in terms of informing, sensitizing and mobilizing the community with regard to multiculturalism.
 
Ø       Greece following the migration policies adopted by the Scandinavian countries (Sweden, Norway and Finland) and Canada, and granting political asylum to all, bearing in mind the fact that there are those for whom migration to another country is a one-way street, sometimes a matter of survival and other times a quest for a better quality of life.

 

Anthopoulos, Ch. Protection against Racism and Freedom of Information, Papazisis Publishers, Athens 2000, (pp 36 - 42, 50 - 53).

Vernikos, N, Daskalopoulou, S. Multiculturalism – The dimensions of cultural identity, Kritiki Publishing , Athens 2000, (pp. 65 - 67).

Zaimakis, G. Community Work and Local Societies, Ellinika Grammata Publications, Athens 2002, (pp 143 - 151).

Kasimati, K. Social Exclusion: The Greek Experience, Centre for Social Morphology and Social Policy, Gutenberg Press, Athens 1998, (pp 99 - 102).

Kasimati, K. Immigration Policies and Integration Strategies, Centre for Social Morphology and Social Policy, Gutenberg Press, Athens 2003, (pp 107 - 114, 128 - 140).

Kasimati, K, Psimenos, I. Poverty and social exclusion, Exantas Publications S.A., Athens 2004, (p. 439).

Kontaxakis, V, Havaki-Kontaxaki, M, and Christodoulou, G. Issues on Preventive Psychiatry and Mental Health, BETA Medical Publications, Athens 2005, (pp. 79 - 87, 553 - 554, 573 - 575).

Lykouras, L, Soldatos, K. Writing on Psychiatry, BETA Medical Publications, Volume I, Athens 2006 (pp. 189 - 195).

Madianos, M. Society and Mental Health, Kastaniotis Publications, Vol. 2, 1^st Issue, entitled Community Psychiatry and Community Mental Hygiene, Athens 1989, (pp. 41 - 42, 123 - 124).

Madianos, M. Community Psychiatry and Community Mental Hygiene, Kastaniotis Publications, Athens 2005 (pp. 153 - 154).

Megalooikonomou, Th., Leridou, A and Monachou, M. Society and Mental Health: Migrants and Migration, Scientific Journal on health and social exclusion issues, 2^nd Issue, January 2007, Hellenic Open University, pp. 59 – 60.

Megalooikonomou, Th. Society and Mental Health: Mental Health policies: Exclusion, New Institutionalism and the Demand for Emancipation, Scientific Journal on health and social exclusion issues, 4^th Issue, July 2007, Hellenic Open University, p. 25.

Bagavos, C, Papadopoulou, D. Migration and inclusion of migrants into Greek Society, Gutenberg Press, Athens 2006, (pp. 132 - 134, 345, 356).

Bilanakis, N. Non-Governmental Organizations and Mental Health Services, Archipelago Publications, Athens 2006 (pp. 130 - 136, 115 - 120).

Patiniotis, N. Dependence and Migration: The Greek Case, National Centre of Social Research, 1989, (pp. 243 - 245).

Riga, A. Women Economic Migrants in Greece, Interculturalism and Education, Gutenberg Press, Athens 2007, (pp. 149 - 154).

Robolis, S. Migration to and from Greece, Epikentro Publishers S.A., Thessaloniki 2007.

Siampos, G. Population and Development in Greece, Greek Society for Demographic Studies, Athens 2003, Hellenic Demographic Conference, 19 – 20 November 1998 with data updated to 2000, (pp. 353 - 355)

Tsitselikis, K. Society and Mental Health: Migrants and Migration. Aspects of an irresolute migration policy, Scientific Journal on health and social exclusion issues, 4^th Issue, July 2007, Hellenic Open University, (pp. 36 - 38)

Psimenos, I. Immigration from the Balkans: Social Exclusion, Papazisis Publishers, Athens 2004, (pp. 157 - 163, 231).