Everyday Violence: Immigration Enforcement, COVID-19, and Depression among Undocumented Young Adults in California.

Background: The immigration enforcement system has significant effects on the health of immigrants, their families, and society. Exposure to the immigration enforcement system is linked to adverse mental health outcomes, which may have been exacerbated by sustained immigration enforcement activities during the COVID-19 pandemic. Objectives: This study was conducted to investigate the association between exposure to immigration enforcement and the mental health of undocumented young adults in California during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Data are from the COVID-19 BRAVE (Building Community Raising All Immigrant Voices for Health Equity) Study, a community-engaged cross-sectional survey of the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on undocumented immigrants in California. A total of 366 undocumented immigrants between 18 and 39 years of age completed the online survey, which was conducted between September 2020 and February 2021. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit to examine the association between immigration enforcement exposure and depression. Results: Almost all participants (91.4%) disclosed exposure to the immigration enforcement system, with most reporting an average of 3.52 (SD=2.06) experiences. Multivariate analyses revealed that an increase in the immigration enforcement exposure score was significantly associated with higher odds of depression (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.10, 1.40), and women were 92% more likely to report depression than were men (aOR=1.92; 95% CI: 1.12, 3.31). Those who reported deportation fears were significantly more likely to be depressed (aOR=1.24; 95% CI: 1.10, 1.40). Conclusions: Researchers should consider the mental health implications of a punitive immigration enforcement system, and policymakers should examine the impacts of immigration policies on local communities.

Introduction to the special issue on the consequences of immigration policies on children, youth, and families who experience migration-related trauma.

We are excited to introduce this special issue on the consequences of immigration policies on children, youth, and families who experience migration-related trauma. International migration has increased over the last 5 decades. Recent estimates suggest that 281 million people live in a country other than the one in which they were born (McAuliffe & Triandafyllidou, 2021). These migratory patterns are complex and present both challenges and opportunities for trauma psychologists and professionals from diverse disciplines who approach their work with immigrants from a trauma-informed perspective. In this 21st century, a variety of stressors and crises continue to propel the movement of children, youth, and families across the globe. Trauma often pervades the experiences that cause people to leave their homes. They may need to escape oppressive political systems; criminal gangs, war, or disasters; or simply to survive. Migration itself can lead to exposure to additional traumatic events, such as physical and sexual violence, kidnapping, and trafficking. Finally, upon arrival in a host country, individuals may experience further stressors as they struggle to navigate immigration systems with discriminatory processes and inadequate resources. In this special issue, 14 articles illustrate various ways by which migration-related traumatic experiences can inform assessment and treatment, public health policy, and human rights advocacy. Focusing primarily on children and families, unaccompanied youth, and adult migrants from Latin America and other regions, the authors explore premigration, migration itself, and postmigration issues that arise when individuals migrate to survive. The articles highlight how the resiliency and strength of individuals and families can be called upon to empower them in their journey toward healing and the critical need for cross-disciplinary treatment and advocacy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Mexican-origin women's individual and collective strategies to access and share health-promoting resources in the context of exclusionary immigration and immigrant policies.

BACKGROUND: A growing literature has documented the social, economic, and health impacts of exclusionary immigration and immigrant policies in the early 21st century for Latiné communities in the US, pointing to immigration and immigrant policies as forms of structural racism that affect individual, family, and community health and well-being. Furthermore, the past decade has seen an increase in bi-partisan exclusionary immigration and immigrant policies. Immigration enforcement has been a major topic during the 2024 Presidential election cycle, portending an augmentation of exclusionary policies towards immigrants. Within this context, scholars have called for research that highlights the ways in which Latiné communities navigate exclusionary immigration and immigrant policies, and implications for health. This study examines ways in which Mexican-origin women in a midwestern northern border community navigate restrictive immigration and immigrant policies to access health-promoting resources and care for their well-being. METHODS: We conducted a grounded theory analysis drawing on interviews with 48 Mexican-origin women in Detroit, Michigan, who identified as being in the first, 1.5, or second immigrant generation. Interviews were conducted in English or Spanish, depending on participants' preferences, and were conducted at community-based organizations or other locations convenient to participants in 2013-2014. RESULTS: Women reported encountering an interconnected web of institutional processes that used racializing markers to infer legal status and eligibility to access health-promoting resources. Our findings highlight women's use of both individual and collective action to navigate exclusionary policies and processes, working to: (1) maintain access to health-promoting resources; (2) limit labeling and stigmatization; and (3) mitigate adverse impacts of immigrant policing on health and well-being. The strategies women engaged were shaped by both the immigration processes and structures they confronted, and the resources to which they had access to within their social network. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest a complex interplay of immigration-related policies and processes, social networks, and health-relevant resources. They highlight the importance of inclusive policies to promote health for immigrant communities. These findings illuminate women's agency in the context of structural violence facing immigrant women and are particularly salient in the face of anti-immigrant rhetoric and exclusionary immigration and immigrant policies.

The Intergenerational Effects From Structural Racism Cost Our Society Greatly.

Structural racism is historically rooted, and has been a foundation for United States immigration policy. This injustice has intergenerational effects that cost society greatly - with impacts on social cohesion, individual and collective health, and well-being, and ultimately our ability to function as a civil society. Limited pathways to citizenship and major restrictions to resources that promote integration have adverse consequences for immigrants and, their families. Research shows that children experience toxic stress that negatively impacts their long-term health and development from heightened immigration enforcement, regardless of any personal impact. In embracing the next generation of children, we will not succeed unless we support sound integration policies that promote the health and well-being of immigrant families across this nation. We must recognize how intricately our fates and our health are tied to each other; we all depend on immigrants being well. We must advance new a social contract, one that counters the 'othering' of immigrants" and recognizes that we must invest in the health and well-being of all families.

"They Don't Care If We Live or Die": A Qualitative Analysis Examining the US Immigration System's Treatment of Undocumented Communities during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Historically, the US immigration system (ie, institutions, agencies, and laws) has served the goals and principles of white supremacy through its treatment of globally displaced people and this appears to have continued through the COVID pandemic. Yet, the implications for immigrant health are not routinely addressed in mainstream public health discourse, and especially so in regard to public health disasters. This study conducted a series of focus groups with participants from social justice organizations working with immigrants, migrants, undocumented persons, refugees, persons seeking asylum, and persons detained in immigration jails to collect stories on how the immigration system undermined efforts to control the spread of COVID-19 and exacerbated health inequity within immigrant jails and across related community contexts during the pandemic. Focus groups were conducted to explore issues related to immigrants and immigration detention during the COVID-19 pandemic. There was a total of N=14 participants across the 4 focus groups with a dedicated focus group on perspectives of Black immigrants/from Black immigrant organizations only. Each focus group consisted of 3 to 4 participants. Five key themes emerged: 1) dehumanization of immigrants and migrants and devaluation of their lives; 2) inhumane conditions of confinement that propagate risk of disease; 3) denial of resources for COVID-19 prevention and mitigation; 4) expansion of intersecting oppressive systems; and 5) community-based resistance and mobilization against immigration policies and enforcement. Our findings highlight the harms from policing, criminalization, and exclusion that racialized communities face as a result of the (in)actions within the immigration system during a public health disaster including the COVID context.

Gender, culture, and migration: A qualitative study of the socioeconomic challenges facing Afghan women refugees in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.

The research explores Afghan refugee women's challenges in accessing education, employment, and legal rights in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. It seeks to inform policy changes to improve their socioeconomic circumstances and mitigate these hardships. The study employs qualitative methodologies, utilizing interviews, observation, and document analysis to capture rich, in-depth narratives from three Afghan refugee women. Each narrative provides unique insights into the women's struggles with education, employment, and securing legal rights. The research highlights challenges from forced migration, gender inequality, cultural norms, and socioeconomic marginalization, causing a holistic crisis for Afghan refugee women in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. These issues hinder access to education, employment, financial vulnerabilities, and legal uncertainties. The study suggests a comprehensive, multi-pronged approach to policy changes, including education reform for refugee girls, gender-responsive recruitment practices, and legal reforms to secure refugees' rights. It emphasizes gender-responsive support services and involves Afghan refugee women in policy development processes, leveraging their experiences for more effective and inclusive policies.

La recherche explore les difficultés rencontrées par les femmes réfugiées afghanes pour accéder à l'éducation, à l'emploi et aux droits légaux à Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, au Pakistan. Il cherche à éclairer les changements politiques pour améliorer leur situation socio-économique et atténuer ces difficultés. L'étude utilise des méthodologies qualitatives, utilisant des entretiens, des observations et des analyses de documents pour recueillir des récits riches et approfondis de trois femmes réfugiées afghanes. Chaque récit fournit un aperçu unique des luttes des femmes en matière d'éducation, d'emploi et d'obtention de leurs droits légaux. La recherche met en évidence les défis liés à la migration forcée, à l'inégalité entre les sexes, aux normes culturelles et à la marginalisation socio-économique, provoquant une crise holistique pour les femmes réfugiées afghanes à Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, au Pakistan. Ces problèmes entravent l'accès à l'éducation, à l'emploi, souffrent de vulnérabilités financières et d'incertitudes juridiques. L'étude suggère une approche globale et multidimensionnelle des changements politiques, y compris une réforme de l'éducation pour les filles réfugiées, des pratiques de recrutement sensibles au genre et des réformes juridiques pour garantir les droits des réfugiés. Il met l'accent sur les services de soutien sensibles au genre et implique les femmes réfugiées afghanes dans les processus d'élaboration des politiques, en tirant parti de leurs expériences pour des politiques plus efficaces et inclusives.

The nexus of immigration regulation and health governance: a scoping review of the extent to which right to access healthcare by migrants, refugees and asylum seekers was upheld in the United Kingdom during COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: Complementing the well-established evidence base on health inequalities experienced by migrants, refugees and asylum seekers in the UK; we examined the extent to which their right to equal non-discriminatory access to health services (promotive, preventive, curative) was upheld during the COVID-19 pandemic. STUDY DESIGN: Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review framework. METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted on Medline, PubMed, and CINAHL using detailed MESH terms, for literature published between 01 January 2020 and 01 January 2024. The process was supported by a ten-page Google search and hand searching of reference lists. 42 records meeting the inclusion criteria were charted, coded inductively and analysed thematically in an integrated team-based approach. RESULTS: Dissonance between immigration regulation and health governance is illustrated in four themes: Health systems leveraged to (re)enforce the hostile environment; Dissonance between health rights on paper and in practice; Structural failures to overcome communication and digital exclusion; and COVID-19 vaccine (in)equity exacerbated fear, mistrust and exclusion. Migrants, refugees and asylum seekers encountered substantial individual, structural and policy-level barriers to accessing healthcare in the UK during COVID-19. Insecure immigration status, institutional mistrust, data-sharing and charging fears, communication challenges and digital exclusion impacted heavily on their ability to access healthcare in an equitable non-discriminatory manner. CONCLUSIONS: An inclusive and innovative health equity and rights-based responses reaching all migrants, refugees and asylum seekers are warranted if the National Health Service is to live up to its promise of 'leaving no one behind' in post-pandemic and future responses.

Mental Health Implications of Family Separation Associated with Migration Policies in the United States: A Systematic Review.

The practice of family separation as a mechanism of oppression has a deep-rooted history in the U.S., manifesting in diverse contexts, including punitive migration policies. This systematic review aimed to provide a rigorous and updated synthesis of the research on family separation as a result of migration policies and its impacts on immigrants' mental health while making a distinction between forced family separation, family separation by constrained choices, and living with the fear of family separation. We systematically searched four bibliographic databases using keywords related to family separation, migration, transnational families, and mental health for peer-reviewed studies published in English on or before January 1st, 2022. Results of the review indicate that family separation or fear of it may result in depression, anxiety, behavioral and emotional issues, sleep disturbances, and stress or distress in affected children. Similarly, impacted parents or caregivers might experience stress or distress, depression, anxiety, and sleep disturbances. Findings call for migration policy changes prioritizing family unity and comprehensive mental health interventions to respond to the pervasive consequences of family separation or fear thereof among immigrants in the U.S.

The Forensic Assessment for Immigration Relief (FAIR) clinic: A faculty-led, pediatric clinic model.

Since 2019, the number of children apprehended by the United States Custom and Border Patrol at the southern border continues to increase. Many of these children are fleeing violence and extreme poverty and qualify for several forms of humanitarian relief. Trained pediatric health professionals have an essential role to play in documenting evidence to support their petitions. The goal of a forensic medical and psychological evaluation is to establish the facts related to the reported incident(s), provide forensic evidence to support these claims, and provide an expert opinion on the degree to which a finding correlates with the client's reports through a written affidavit. Research studies have demonstrated a significant increase in asylum grant rate for cases that include an evaluation. As demand for forensic evaluations has grown, multiple clinic models have emerged, including volunteer networks, student-led clinics, and faculty-led clinics. The Forensic Assessment for Immigration Relief (FAIR) Clinic offers a sustainable infrastructure while emphasizing the training of pediatric healthcare professionals on the conduct of trauma-informed, culturally attuned, and developmentally appropriate forensic evaluations. This paper outlines the year-long process of developing and launching a clinic specializing in pediatric forensic medical and psychological evaluations as a blueprint for replication.

How immigration detention harms children: A conceptual framework to inform policy and practice.

OBJECTIVE: This paper identifies the multiple adversities and trauma experienced by children who are detained after seeking asylum. A conceptual framework identifies the specific impact of immigration detention on the psychosocial development and mental health of refugee children that can inform policy and prevent additional migration-related trauma. METHOD: The paper draws on international evidence about the impact of childhood adversity, challenges faced by all displaced children, and the additional negative consequences of immigration detention. It integrates socioecological, temporal, and relational approaches to identify the pathways through which detention of forcibly displaced children causes preventable harm. The public health and human rights implications are identified. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK: The framework draws on Bronfenbrenner's socioecological model and has the child, their development, and experience at the center. Refugee children are exposed to cumulative adversity during displacement, flight, and resettlement. Immigration detention is associated with multiple additional adversities and human rights violations. International and national contexts and the detention environment impact on family functioning and directly on the child's well-being. CONCLUSIONS: Immigration detention is a preventable and profoundly negative reception experience for already vulnerable children. It is unavoidably associated with multiple additional adverse exposures with significant health and public health consequences. The proposed framework demonstrates adversity in each socioecological sphere of the detained child's life and across time. The framework can inform migration, child protection, and public health policy. Advocacy and political action to end this practice are urgently required to prevent further harm. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

The use of suboptimal antiretroviral therapy when applying for migration to Australia: a case series.

Background Australia imposes restrictions for people living with HIV (PLHIV) applying for permanent residency (PR), including spending less than AUD51,000 on medical costs over 10years. Some PLHIV opted for suboptimal and cheaper antiretroviral therapy (ART) regimens to increase their chances of receiving PR. We collated a case series to examine PLHIV on suboptimal ART because of visa issues. Methods We identified all patients applying for a PR in Australia who obtained nevirapine, efavirenz or zidovudine between July 2022 and July 2023 from the Melbourne Sexual Health Centre. Pathology results and records detailing psychological issues relating to the patients' wishes to remain on suboptimal ART were extracted from clinical records by two researchers. Results We identified six patients with a mean age of 39years migrating from Asian and European countries. Three patients used efavirenz, and three used nevirapine. All desired to remain on cheaper, suboptimal ART to stay below visa cost thresholds, which they considered to aid favourably with their application. Four displayed stress and anxiety arising from visa rejections, appeal deadlines and the lengthy visa application process. Conclusions Despite access to more effective and safer ART, we identified patients who chose to remain on cheaper ART to improve chances of obtaining an Australian visa, potentially putting their health at risk. We found significant evidence of stress and anxiety among patients. There is a need to review and revise current migration policies and laws in Australia that discriminate against PLHIV and jeopardise public health.

Transplantation in the Context of Migration and Refugees: A Summary of the DICG and TTS Ethics Committee Workshop, Buenos Aires, Argentina, September 2022.

Global conflicts and humanitarian crises have resulted in an unprecedented number of refugees and migrants. This challenges the limited resources of health care systems and jeopardizes the availability of transplant care for these deserving migrants and refugees. This was the basis for a workshop held during the Congress of the Transplantation Society (Buenos Aires, 2022). We elaborate on the proceedings of the workshop entitled "Transplantation in the Context of Migration and Refugees," organized by the Ethics Committee of The Transplantation Society and Declaration of Istanbul Custodian Group. Transplant providers from around the world shared strategies of how each region has responded to providing access to care for refugees and migrants in need of transplant services. The potential exploitation of this vulnerable group leading to illicit organ removal was addressed for each region. The Transplantation Society, Declaration of Istanbul Custodian Group, and global transplant community should continue to focus on the status of refugees and migrants and collaborate on strategies to provide access to transplant care for this deserving population. Global cooperation will be essential to provide vigilant oversight to prevent exploitation of this vulnerable population.

The Impacts of Inclusionary State Immigrant Policies on Psychosocial Outcomes Among Latinx Adolescents.

OBJECTIVE: State-level policies that exclude immigrants, primarily undocumented, from public services and benefits have been found to have negative psychosocial impacts on Latinx adults, regardless of nativity. The effects of inclusionary policies-that is, extending public benefits to all immigrants-remain underexamined, as well as the impacts on adolescents. METHOD: We used data from the Youth Risk Behavior Survey from 2009 to 2019 to examine the association between 7 state-level inclusionary policies and bullying victimization, low mood, and suicidality among Latinx adolescents via 2-way fixed-effects log-binomial regression models. RESULTS: Banning the use of eVerify in employment was associated with decreased bullying victimization (prevalence ratio [PR] = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.53-0.74), low mood (PR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.78-0.98), and suicidality (PR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.62-0.86). Extending public health insurance coverage was associated with decreased bullying victimization (PR = 0.57, 95% CI: 0.49-0.67), and mandating Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services (CLAS) training for health care workers was associated with decreased low mood (PR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.69-0.91). Extending in-state tuition to undocumented students was associated with increased bullying victimization (PR = 1.16, 95% CI: 1.04-1.30), and extending financial aid was associated with increased bullying victimization (PR = 1.54, 95% CI: 1.08-2.19), low mood (PR = 1.23, 95% CI: 1.08-1.40), and suicidality (PR = 1.38, 95% CI: 1.01-1.89). CONCLUSION: The relationships between inclusionary state-level policies and Latinx adolescent psychosocial outcomes were mixed. Although most inclusionary policies were associated with improved psychosocial outcomes, Latinx adolescents residing in states with inclusionary policies related to higher education had worse psychosocial outcomes. Results suggest the importance of elucidating the unintended consequences of well-intentioned policies and the importance of continued efforts to reduce anti-immigrant sentiment.