Doctor of Philosophy / Department of Sociology, Anthropology, and Social Work / Robert K. Schaeffer / In a 2005 op-ed piece, Wall St. Journal columnist Peggy Noonan queried, "What does it mean that your first act on entering a country is breaking its laws?" Unauthorized noncitizen populations have increased rapidly, from 3 million in 1990 to over 11 million in 2009. In the first decade of the twenty-first century, the Minuteman Project and the Tea Party generated renewed interest in restrictionist social movements (RSMs). Sociological social movement theories focused primarily on oppressed populations rather than privileged groups, leaving significant gaps in our understanding of right-wing movements. This dissertation‘s main question is: how did contemporary restrictionists frame their anti-immigrant principles, practices, and policies in the post-9/11 period? In turn, what comprise the social and political consequences of such strategies? This study argues that the "new" restrictionists successfully framed issues relating to unauthorized noncitizens concerning the cultural, economic, and security risks they posed to the United States. Fifty members from a diverse set of voluntary organizations were interviewed, including the Minuteman Project, the Daughters of the American Revolution (DAR), and the American GI Forum (AGIF). Grounded theory methodology was used to create initial codes, which were then connected with themes derived from the literature. This study finds that grassroots, right-wing RSMs brought attention to contentious noncitizen issues that spurred debate and action within both Democratic and Republicans parties, public discourse, and social policy from after 9/11 to 2012. The success of the 2005 Minuteman Project border patrol demonstrated that the federal government lacked the political will to control the U.S.–Mexico border. This dissertation adds to the social movement literature demonstrating that both classical and solidarity theories of social movements help explain how restrictionists framed unauthorized noncitizen issues. Ultimately, this study finds RSMs represent a right-wing mobilization (rather than conservative) because of their singling out of Mexican unauthorized noncitizens, extra-institutional action on the border, the use of inflammatory rhetoric, and anti-Catholic sentiment, which contributed in pushing the Republican Party further to the right.

Doctor of Philosophy / Department of Family Studies and Human Services / Joyce Baptist / The purpose of this study is to expand our understanding of alcohol dependency and its recovery in Northeast Brazil by exploring the lived experience of this disorder and its recovery process among couples whose husbands are seeking treatment for alcohol dependency. Culturally specific values such as patriarchy and gender roles were explored to gain insight into the recovery process. Findings from in-depth interviews conducted with couples and mental health professionals indicated that wives had a major role in the recovery process but were not included in the treatment process. Wives are expected to wait and temporarily “wear the pants” while husbands attend to their personal problems in treatment. Wives were viewed as a major support to husbands in treatment as well as the “stone in the middle of the road” that obstructed progress. The cultural values and gender norms appear to play a major role in how alcohol dependency is managed within the couple system and by mental health professionals. The use of metaphors to externalize problems and religious scripts helped couples cope. Clinical implications for systemic treatment and research implications are discussed.