Immigrant Health and Changes to the Public-Charge Rule: Family Physicians' Response.

As the US federal government pursues immigration reform, changes to the federal public-charge rule have triggered confusion and concerns among patients who are immigrants. Although federal judges temporarily blocked implementation, a decision by the Supreme Court in January 2020 allowed the proposed changes to take effect. These policy changes have resulted in many legal immigrants and their family members becoming more reluctant to apply for health insurance, food, housing, and other benefits for which they are qualified. This article summarizes the changes and exclusions. Family physicians can effectively respond to patient and immigrant community concerns about these changes by providing outreach education, access to primary health care, and referrals to legal and social services.

Health Without Care? Vulnerability, Medical Brain Drain, and Health Worker Responsibilities in Underserved Contexts.

There is a consensus that the effects of medical brain drain, especially in the Sub-Saharan African countries, ought to be perceived as more than a simple misfortune. Temporary restrictions on the emigration of health workers from the region is one of the already existing policy measures to tackle the issue-while such a restrictive measure brings about the need for quite a justificatory work. A recent normative contribution to the debate by Gillian Brock provides a fruitful starting point. In the first step of her defence of emigration restrictions, Brock provides three reasons why skilled workers themselves would hold responsibilities to assist with respect to vital needs of their compatriots. These are fair reciprocity, duty to support vital institutions, and attending to the unintended harmful consequences of one's actions. While the first two are explained and also largely discussed in the literature, the third requires an explication on how and on which basis skilled workers would have a responsibility as such. In this article, I offer a vulnerability approach with its dependency aspect that may account for why the health workers in underserved contexts would have a responsibility to attend to the unintended side effects of their actions that may lead to a vital risk of harm for the population. I discuss HIV/AIDS care in Zimbabwe as a case in point in order to show that local health workers may have responsibilities to assist the population who are vulnerable to their mobility.

Relevant evidence, reasonable policy and the right to emigrate.

In this article I respond to commentaries by Javier Hidalgo and Phillip Cole. Javier Hidalgo believes that we would be justified in restricting the liberties of health personnel if we had compelling evidence that this would bring about beneficial consequences. He is sceptical that this evidence exists or would ever be forthcoming. Hidalgo therefore supports my position, at least in theory, that where there is good evidence concerning relevant beneficial consequences for remedying important losses associated with high skill migration, we may permissibly restrict health personnel's freedom to migrate through introduction of carefully crafted compulsory service and taxation programmes. So one important issue is whether such evidence is or could ever become available in a form useful to members of government. By contrast, Phillip Cole expresses significant reservations about the policies I argue are permissible under certain conditions. He believes that health workers should never be required to comply with the sorts of taxation and compulsory services programmes I recommend. I show that the programmes for which I argue are not as onerous as Cole imagines and therefore that they can be justified. I also show that relevant evidence exists to address Hidalgo's concerns.

Trump's immigration ban puts a damper on Match Day.

There's little information on how hospitals, doctors and patients make delivery decisions, which could help drop related healthcare costs and our nation's high C-section rate.

REGULATION OF AUSTRALIAN MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS AND NATIONAL SECURITY: LESSONS FROM THREE CASE STUDIES.

In recent times, Australia's national security concerns have had controversial impacts on regulation of Australian medical practitioners in areas related to immigration detention. This column explores three recent case studies relevant to this issue. The first involves the enactment of the Australian Border Force Act 2015 (Cth), which has a significant impact on the regulation of medical professionals who work with people in immigration detention. The second involves the decision of the High Court of Australia in Plaintiff M68/2015 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] HCA 1 that an amendment to Australian federal legislation justified sending children back to immigration detention centres in Papua New Guinea and Nauru. This legislation was previously heavily criticised by the Australian Human Rights Commissioner. The third concerns the deregistration of Tareq Kamleh, an Australian doctor of German-Palestinian heritage who came to public attention on ANZAC Day 2015 with his appearance online in a propaganda video for the Islamic State terrorist organisation al-Dawla al-Islamyia fil Iraq wa'al Sham, also known as Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) or Daesh. Australia's professional regulatory system should presumptively respect professional virtues, such as loyalty to the relief of individual patient suffering, when dealing with doctors (whether in Australia or ISIS-occupied Syria) working under regimes whose principles appear inconsistent with those of ethics and human rights.

Hunt's good intentions fall foul of the immigration dog whistle.

Attempts to discuss the expansion of medical training crashed into skepticism of how this could happen post-Brexit.

Immigration policy and internationally educated nurses in the United States: A brief history.

Since the 1980s, U.S. policy makers have used immigration policy to influence the supply of nurses by allowing or restricting the entry of internationally educated nurses (IENs) into the U.S. workforce. The methods pursued have shifted over time from temporary visa categories in the 1980s and 1990s to permanent immigrant visas in the 2000s. The impact of policy measures adopted during nursing shortages has often been blunted by political and economic events, but the number and representation of IENs in the U.S. nursing workforce has increased substantially since the 1980s. Even as the United States seeks to increase domestic production of nurses, it remains a desirable destination for IENs and a target market for nurse-producing source countries. Hiring organizations and nurse leaders play a critical role in ensuring that the hiring and integration of IENs into U.S. health care organizations is constructive for nurses, source countries, and the U.S. health care system.

Interventions to reduce emigration of health care professionals from low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: The emigration of skilled professionals from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to high-income countries (HICs) is a general phenomenon but poses particular challenges in health care, where it contributes to human resource shortages in the health systems of poorer countries. However, little is known about the effects of strategies to help regulate this movement. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of policy interventions to regulate emigration of health professionals from LMICs. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group Specialised Register (searched 15 March 2011), the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (searched 2 March 2011), MEDLINE (searched 5 March 2011), EMBASE (searched 2 March 2011), CINAHL (searched 5 March 2011), LILACS (searched 7 March 2011), WHOLIS (searched 20 March 2011), SocINDEX (searched 11 March 2011), EconLit (searched 8 March 2011), Science and Social Science Citation Index (searched 8 March 2011), NLM Gateway (searched 31 March 2011) and ERIC (searched March 3 2011). We reviewed reference lists of included studies and selected reviews on the topic, contacted authors of included studies and experts on the field, and reviewed relevant websites. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCT), non-randomised controlled trials (NRCT), controlled before-and-after studies (CBA) and interrupted time series (ITS) studies assessing any intervention in the source, the recipient or both countries that could have an impact on the number of professionals that emigrate from a LMIC. Health professionals, such as physicians, dentists, nurses or midwives, should be nationals of a LMIC whose graduate training was in a LMIC. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One review author extracted data onto a standard form and a second review author checked data. Two review authors assessed risk of bias. MAIN RESULTS: Only one study was included. This time series study assessed the migration of Philippine nurses to the United States of America (USA) from 1954 to 1990. We re-analysed it as an interrupted time series study. The intervention was a modification of migratory law in the US, called the 'Act of October 1965', which decreased the restrictions on Eastern hemisphere immigrants to the USA. The analysis showed a significant immediate increase of 807.6 (95% confidence interval (CI) 480.9 to 1134.3) in the number of nurses migrating to the USA annually after the intervention. This represents a relative increase of 5000% over the underlying pre-intervention trend. There were no significant differences in the slopes of the underlying trends for the number of nurses migrating between the pre- and postintervention periods. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is an important gap in knowledge about the effectiveness of policy interventions in either HICs or LMICs that could regulate positively the movement of health professionals from LMICs. The only evidence found was from an intervention in a HIC that increased the movement of health professionals from a LMIC.New initiatives to improve records on the migration of health professionals from LMICs should be implemented, as a prerequisite to conducting more rigorous research in the field. This research should focus on whether the range of interventions outlined in the literature could be effective in retaining health professionals in LMICs. Such interventions include financial rewards, career development and continuing education, improving hospital infrastructure, resource availability, better hospital management and improved recognition of health professionals.