Reviewer ’s report  
 
Title: A qualitative study of Filipina immigrants' stress, distress and coping: the impact of their  
multiple, transnational roles as women  
 
Version: 0 Date: 15 Apr 2016  
 
Reviewer: Michaela Hynie  
 
Reviewer's report:  
 
I read this manuscript with interest and found it both informative and important. Particularly in 
light of the authors' post -colonial feminist lens, however, I think that more attention needs to be 
paid to the intersectionality of gender and migration pathways. Tempor ary migration and 
marriage are the two migratory pathways described in this paper and I would like to see  more 
attention paid to how these very different migration experiences are shaped by political and 
gendered lenses.   
 
 
The different forms of migratio n matter, at a number of levels. I would encourage the authors to 
consider these pathways separately so they can more clearly expose the role of immigration 
policy, both locally and internationally, on these women's experiences. Many temporary 
migration ar rangements are facilitated by international agreements where the worker is seen only 
as a resource, where protection is rarely provided by either the sending or receiving country, and 
where, by virtue of being temporary, workers are rendered vulnerable to exploitation. They are 
also, by definition, excluded from becoming part of the receiving society and may have no desire 
or intention to be included since they perceive their stay as temporary. If their goal is to become 
permanent, this raises another set o f issues.  
 
 
The assumption of sacrifice of the individual, and their family, to serve financial needs is a harsh 
reality in temporary migration that requires more attention; migration laws that separate parents 
from their children, or where economic suppor t is not available to allow them to bring their 
children, is part of a larger systemic problem. This paper surfaces some of the complex tensions 
around the gendered experience of temporary migration, including what it means for the 
construction of women's roles. Of particular interest is the conflict and inherent contradictions in 
taking on caregiving roles that are both valued socially and devalued financially, and that are 
celebrated (the importance and centrality of caring for others) but subservient to financial need 
(i.e., leaving children in the care of others in order to care for strangers so that one can send 
remittances). I feel more could be done here if these contradictions were analysed separately by 
migration pathway before identifying shared th emes across these experiences.  
 
 
The situation for women who migrated through marriage is quite different. The article is written 
as if marriage to a Norwegian is a migration strategy for Filipino women, rather than a 
relationship initiated for emotional re asons. This is a common assumption in immigration policy 
and leads to the suspicion and dependence that women (and men) experience when they 
immigrate for marriage, which in turn leads to its own unique forms of vulnerability. I think the 
authors need to u npack their own assumptions around marriage for this sample and explain them 
more clearly. The risks and resources for immigrant spouses are quite different to those for 
immigrant workers, in part because they are making an effort to permanently join Norwe gian 
culture and so belonging plays a different role than it does for those who are intending to remain 
temporarily. As a result, the psychological effects are quite different and, again, exploring these 
separately before identifying the common themes woul d have strengthened this paper.  
 
 
Thus, while I found the description of the shared experiences of these women compelling and 
interesting, I think that more attention needs to be paid to these different migration pathways in 
both the literature reviewed, a nd the analysis of the data. A clearer statement about local 
immigration laws regarding rights, legal status, and access to services under these different 
migration strategies would help situate the risks and resources for these women and shed light on 
some of structural and political forces at work for these women.  
 
 
Among other, minor comments, I suggest the following: More attention to the importance of 
language as a barrier to accessing services should be noted. Language is an important barrier in 
accessing services and connecting to the larger community for many mi grants, although it seems 
that for this sample the majority were comfortable in Norwegian.  
 
 
The authors assume that mental health professionals can provide better mental health care than 
informal networks, despite referencing research indicating that profe ssional mental health care 
providers are often not preferred because they do not provide relevant or culturally appropriate 
care. There is a substantial body of literature on social support that both highlights cultural 
differences in how support differs c ulturally, and the importance of providing support from the 
appropriate people and in the appropriate ways. In light of that, I would not assume that 
experiencing distress necessarily suggests that professional care should be sought. Rather, it 
suggests th at the adequacy of the networks women are drawing their care from should be 
assessed, and a reflection on what other resources are available, appropriate and desired.  
 
 
A final minor point is with regards to the methods, which are generally well described b ut more 
discussion about sample selection, particularly why 14 was an appropriate number of women to 
interview, should be included.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Are the methods appropriate and well described?  
If not, please specify what is required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Does the work include the necessary controls?  
If not, please specify which controls are required in your comments to the authors.  
 
Unable to assess  
 
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the data shown?  
If not, please explain in your comments to the authors.  
 
Yes 
 
Are you able to assess any statistics in the manuscript or would you recommend an  
additional statistical review?  
If an additional statistical review is recommended, please speci fy what aspects require further 
assessment in your comments to the editors.  
 
Not relevant to this manuscript  
 
Quality of written English  
Please indicate the quality of language in the manuscript:  
 
Acceptable  
 
Declaration of competing interests  
Please complete a declaration of competing interests, considering the following questions:  
 
1. Have you in the past five years received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary f rom an  
organisation that may in any way gain or lose financially from the publication of this  
manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
2. Do you hold any stocks or shares in an organisation that may in any way gain or lose  
financially from the publication of this manuscript, either now or in the future?  
 
3. Do you hold or are you currently applying for any patents relating to the content of the  
manuscript?  
 
4. Have you received reimbursements, fees, funding, or salary from an organization that 
holds  or has ap plied for patents relating to the content of the manuscript?  
 
5. Do you have any other financial competing interests?  
 
6. Do you have any non -financial competing interests in relation to this paper?  
If you can answer no to all of the above, write 'I declare that I have no competing interests' 
below.  If your reply is yes to any, please give details below.  
 
I declare that I have no competing interests  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal. I understand that my name will be included  
on my report t o the authors and, if the manuscript is accepted for publication, my named report  
including any attachments I upload will be posted on the website along with the authors'  
responses. I agree for my report to be made available under a n Open Access Creative Commons  
CC-BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ). I understand that any comments  
which I do not wish to be included in my named report can be included as  confidential comments  
to the editors, which will not be published.  
 
I agree to the open peer review policy of the journal