Not Simply “Asian Americans”: Periodical Literature Review on Asians and Pacific Islanders
Not Simply “Asian Americans”: Periodical Literature Review on Asians and Pacific Islanders
复制标题
不仅仅是“亚裔美国人”：关于亚裔和太平洋岛民的定期文献综述
DOI：
10.1093/sw/39.3.298
复制
发表时间：
1994
期刊：
影响因子：
2.9
通讯作者：
N. Mokuau
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Rowena Fong;N. Mokuau
美国每四个人中就有一个是有色人种（美国人口普查局，1991年）。1990年的人口普查显示，在2.487亿常住人口中，白人占75.6%；12.1%是黑人；9.0%是西班牙裔；2.9%是亚洲和太平洋岛民；0.4%是美洲原住民、爱斯基摩人和阿留申人。这些数字反映了1980-90年代种族和民族多样性的增加，其中黑人人口增长了13.2%；美洲原住民、爱斯基摩人和阿留申人减少38%；拉美裔人口减少53%，亚洲和太平洋岛屿人口减少108%。亚洲人和太平洋岛民的增长包括日本人、中国人、菲律宾人、韩国人、越南人、老挝人、柬埔寨人（现在的柬埔寨人）、亚洲印第安人、夏威夷原住民、萨摩亚人、汤加人、斐济人和查莫罗人（关岛人）等不同的美国群体。尽管亚裔和太平洋岛民是增长最快的有色人种，但他们一直受到神话和误解的困扰。其一，他们是“模范少数族裔”，不需要任何政府或社会服务。一些人声称，亚洲人和太平洋岛民不再有资格作为弱势群体或代表性不足的群体，并随后将他们排除在平权行动法的保护之外（古尔德，1988）。例如，由300个组织组成的美国公共卫生服务局的所有机构参与制定了一项国家计划，其中有637个目标，旨在改善国民健康；然而，由于缺乏关于亚洲人和太平洋岛民的数据，只有8项目标针对他们所关心的问题（亚裔美国人健康论坛，1990年）。亚洲和太平洋岛屿人民的真正问题被忽视了。例如，夏威夷土著居民经历了严重的健康问题，包括患癌症、心脏病和糖尿病的比例高得惊人，但直到最近才在联邦倡议中被确认为需要服务的人口（Mokuau， 1990年b）。对亚洲和太平洋岛民的需要缺乏反应可能是由于缺乏承诺和兴趣，但更可能是由于对构成这一不断增长的人口的不同群体缺乏准确的描述性和分析性资料和知识。人口统计学家预测，到世纪之交，美国总人口的三分之一以上将是非白人少数群体的成员（Harris, 1988-89）。其中很大一部分人口将包括亚洲人和太平洋岛民（Gould, 1988）。因此，社会工作者必须了解有色人种及其关注的问题。如果对少数群体，特别是亚洲和太平洋岛民所关心的问题的反应与信息和知识的可得性有关，那么促进这种知识的发展就很重要。必须鼓励学者研究和讨论一系列问题，如制度性种族主义、移民的历史路径、文化适应调整等。审查现有的信息以评估其内容，确定知识库中的优势和差距，并为未来的研究指明方向也很重要。本文通过对社会工作期刊文献的回顾和未来研究领域的确定，评估了亚太岛民社会工作知识的现状。方法选取1980 ~ 1991年在《社会工作》、《社会个案工作》（后来的《社会中的家庭》）、《社会服务评论》和《社会工作教育》四种主要社会工作期刊上发表的有关亚裔和太平洋岛民直接实践内容的文章为研究对象。这四本期刊是公认的主要社会工作出版物，具有通才的视角；它们在3000到超过14万的读者之间流通（Mendelsohn, 1992），它们也被收录在社会工作期刊文献的其他评论中（Corcoran & Kirk, 1990; Jayaratne, 1979; Lum, 1986; Thyer & Bentley 1986）。…
One of every four persons in the United States is a person of color (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1991). In the total resident population of 248.7 million, the 1990 census revealed that 75.6 percent are white; 12.1 percent are black; 9.0 percent are Hispanic; 2.9 percent are Asian and Pacific Islander; and 0.4 percent are Native American, Eskimo, and Aleut. These numbers reflect an increase in racial and ethnic diversity in the 1980-90 decade, with the black population increasing by 13.2 percent; the Native American, Eskimo, or Aleut population by 38 percent; the Hispanic population by 53 percent, and the Asian and Pacific Island population by 108 percent. This increase for Asians and Pacific Islanders includes such diverse American groups as Japanese, Chinese, Filipinos, Koreans, Vietnamese, Laotians, Cambodians (now Kampucheans), Asian Indians, native Hawaiians, Samoans, Tongans, Fijians, and Chamorros (Guamanians). Although they are the fastest-growing people of color, Asians and Pacific Islanders have been plagued by myths and misconceptions. One is that they are a "model minority," without any need of government or social services. Some have claimed that Asians and Pacific Islanders no longer qualify as a disadvantaged or underrepresented group and have subsequently excluded them from the protections of affirmative action laws (Gould, 1988). For example, all agencies of the U.S. Public Health Service, a 300-organization consortium, participated in developing a national plan with 637 objectives to improve the health of the nation; yet, because of lack of data on Asians and Pacific Islanders, only eight objectives targeted their concerns (Asian American Health Forum, 1990). Real problems of Asian and Pacific Island peoples have been ignored. Native Hawaiians, for example, have experienced severe health difficulties, including startlingly disproportionate rates of cancer, diseases of the heart, and diabetes mellitus, but have only recently been recognized in federal initiatives as a population in need of services (Mokuau, 1990b). The lack of responsiveness to the needs of Asians and Pacific Islanders may derive from a lack of commitment and interest, but more probably it originates in the insufficient amount of accurate descriptive and analytical information and knowledge about the diverse groups that make up this growing population. Demographers forecast that by the turn of the century more than one-third of the entire population of the United States will be members of nonwhite minority groups (Harris, 1988-89). A significant portion of that population will include Asians and Pacific Islanders (Gould, 1988). Thus, it is imperative that social workers stay informed about people of color and their concerns. If responsiveness to the concerns of minority groups, and of Asian and Pacific Islanders in particular, is related to the availability of information and knowledge, then it is important to promote the development of that knowledge. Scholars must be encouraged to examine and discuss a range of issues such as institutional racism, historical paths of immigration, acculturation adjustment, and so on. It also is important to examine the information currently available to assess its content, to identify strengths and gaps in the knowledge base, and to chart directions for future research. This article assesses the status of social work knowledge on Asians and Pacific Islanders by reviewing the social work periodical literature and identifying areas for future research. Methodology The authors investigated articles that had total direct practice content on Asians and Pacific Islanders from 1980 to 1991 in four major social work journals: (1) Social Work, (2) Social Casework (later Families in Society), (3) Social Service Review, and (4) Journal of Social Work Education. These four journals are recognized as major social work publications with a generalist perspective; they circulate among 3,000 to over 140,000 readers (Mendelsohn, 1992), and they have been included in other reviews of social work periodical literature (Corcoran & Kirk, 1990; Jayaratne, 1979; Lum, 1986; Thyer & Bentley 1986). …