Search

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., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd and Faculty of Forensic and Legal Medicine. All rights reserved.)

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.

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., (Copyright © 2023 American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

This paper studies the effects of Secure Communities (SC), a wide-ranging immigration enforcement program, on infant health outcomes in the United States. Using administrative birth certificate data together with event study and triple-differences designs, I find that SC increases the incidence of very low birth weight by 21% for infants of foreign-born Hispanic mothers, who were most likely to be affected by immigration enforcement. There is suggestive evidence that the results are consistent with (i) changes in maternal stress induced by deportation fear and (ii) inadequate prenatal nutrition. A back-of-the-envelope calculation suggests that this unintended social cost of immigration enforcement ranges from $872 million to $1.59 billion annually., (© 2023 The Authors. Health Economics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Increasingly, immigration policies are understood as structural determinants, rooted in racism, nativism, and ethnocentrism, which raise serious public health concerns for Latinx adolescents' mental health. Our objective was to examine how immigration policy enforcement affects mental health of Latinx youth raised in a county with an aggressive interior immigration enforcement program. From 2009 to 2021, Gwinnett County, GA, led the nation in deportations under the 287(g) program as a "universal enforcement model," where local law enforcement were deputized to detain undocumented immigrants, primarily through traffic violations. From June to July 2022, we followed a participatory action research approach with two groups of Latinx youth who grew up in Gwinnett County. In total, 10 youth took photos related to the research question, and engaged in facilitated dialogue using photovoice guide SHOWED/VENCER for four, 2-hour sessions that were audio-recorded and transcribed. Transcripts were analyzed following grounded theory principles to arrive at a conceptual model codeveloped and validated by youth. Youth described how 287(g) led to policing and deportation in their communities, fueling stereotypes, and discrimination that criminalized Latinx immigrants. Youth linked immigration enforcement policies like 287(g) to exclusionary systems that contributed to fear, marginalization, and loss in their communities, bringing experiences of sadness, grief, isolation, hopelessness, and low self-worth. From youth-driven research, we identified mental health implications of the 287(g) program among Latinx youth. The cascading harms of immigration enforcement policies highlight the need to address these policies and identify immediate strategies to promote Latinx youth mental health., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between county- and state-level immigrant criminalizing and integrating policies and Latino household participation in the largest safety net program against food insecurity in the U.S., the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Our outcome, county-level proportion of SNAP-participating Latino households, and county-level covariates were obtained from the American Community Survey 1-year county files (N = 675 counties) for 13 years (2007-2019). Our exposures were county-level presence of sanctuary policies and a state-level immigrant friendliness score, created based on 19 immigrant criminalizing and integrating state-level policies obtained from the Urban Institute's State Immigration Policies Resource. We classified every county in the sample as 1) sanctuary policy + immigrant friendly state, 2) sanctuary policy + immigrant unfriendly state, 3) no sanctuary policy + immigrant friendly state, and 4) no sanctuary policy + immigrant unfriendly state. Using multivariable generalized linear models that adjusted for poverty levels and other social composition characteristics of counties, we found that county-level SNAP participation among Latino households was 1.1 percentage-point higher in counties with sanctuary policies (B = 1.12, 95%CI = 0.26-1.98), compared to counties with no sanctuary policies, and 1.6 percentage-point higher in counties with sanctuary policies in immigrant friendly states (B = 1.59, 95%CI = 0.33-2.84), compared to counties with no sanctuary policy in immigrant unfriendly states. Local and state immigration policy, even when unrelated to SNAP eligibility, may influence SNAP participation among Latino households. Jurisdictions which lack sanctuary policies or have more criminalizing and less integrating policies should consider adopting targeted outreach strategies to increase SNAP enrollment among Latino households., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest None., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Legal exclusions and cultural factors reproduce barriers to health care by enforcing boundaries between citizens and immigrants, leading to a range of health risks and disparities for Latinx immigrant and Indigenous communities. This study utilized a mixed-methods examination of news media and ethnographic interviews guided by a decolonial-inspired framework to demonstrate the linkages between policy discourse and health behaviors. Both newspaper articles and interviews with affected stakeholders show how immigrants and their families experience more significant health risks because of policy changes and proposals. Regardless of the political regime, media discourses that promote fear and threat sustain the overall effects of immigration policy enforcement strategies on health. Immigration policy is health policy, and these laws should be evaluated in terms of their impact on public health, in addition to other factors. Furthermore, the news media is a contextual factor for health promotion strategies and a target for health advocates working with immigrant and Indigenous communities.

Legislative action on issues of immigration emerged prominently across and within US states throughout the 2000s. The emerging literature on this topic demonstrates the political motivations driving anti-immigrant laws that negatively impact the mobility of Hispanic/Latino and Foreign-born populations across US states. Considerable research identifies the political mechanisms driving restrictive state-level immigration policies. Despite the growth of this scholarly work, the impact of these laws within states requires further study. This paper broadens the approach to the study of restrictive state-level omnibus immigration laws (OILs) using a rich dataset to uncover the effects of these laws on compositional change for undocumented, foreign-born, and Hispanic/Latino populations from 2005 to 2017. Using a quasi-experimental design, I show that by passing omnibus immigration laws, states shape demographic patterns of Foreign-born populations. Specifically, I find that states that pass omnibus immigration laws experience a decrease in undocumented and Foreign-born populations relative to states that did not pass similar laws. Effects are estimated each year after the passage of OILs, providing additional insight into the temporal impact of omnibus immigration laws on the settlement patterns of these groups. I conclude by discussing the theoretical implications of the multiple interior immigration law and policies, specifically at the state level, and their salience in shaping population dynamics across the United States., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Immigration enforcement policies are associated with immigrants' barriers to health care. Current evidence suggests that enforcement creates a "chilling effect" in which immigrants avoid care due to fear of encountering enforcement. Yet, there has been little examination of the impact of immigrants' direct encounters with enforcement on health care access. We examined some of the first population-level data on Asian and Latinx immigrants' encounters with law and immigration enforcement and assessed associations with health care access., Methods: We analyzed the 2018 and 2019 Research on Immigrant Health and State Policy survey in which Asian and Latinx immigrants in California (n=1681) reported on 7 enforcement experiences (eg, racial profiling and deportation). We examined the associations between measures of individual and cumulative enforcement experiences and the usual sources of care and delay in care., Results: Latinx, compared with Asian respondents, reported the highest levels of enforcement experiences. Almost all individual enforcement experiences were associated with delaying care for both groups. Each additional cumulative experience was associated with a delay in care for both groups (OR=1.30, 95% CI 1.10-1.50). There were no associations with the usual source of care., Conclusion: Findings confirm that Latinx immigrants experience high levels of encounters with the enforcement system and highlight new data on Asian immigrants' enforcement encounters. Direct experiences with enforcement have a negative relationship with health care access. Findings have implications for health systems to address the needs of immigrants affected by enforcement and for changes to health and immigration policy to ensure immigrants' access to care., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Immigrant-related social policies and immigration enforcement contribute to a sociopolitical environment that affects immigrants' health. This exploratory study in six metro-Atlanta counties examined associations among immigrants' perceived vulnerability to harmful immigrant-related social policies and county-level 287(g) agreements (which facilitate cooperation between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities), county-level immigration enforcement levels (arrests, community arrests, detainers, and removals), and immigrants' mental health., Methods: Using data from a 2020 study among Latinx parents who were undocumented or members of mixed-status families (N = 140), we merged data on individuals' perceived policy vulnerability and depressive and anxiety symptoms with county 287(g) status and immigration enforcement levels., Results: Perceived policy vulnerability was not associated with county-level 287(g) status or immigration enforcement levels. Greater policy vulnerability and Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrests were associated with higher depressive and anxiety symptoms, but 287(g) status was associated with lower depressive and anxiety symptoms., Conclusion: Perceived policy vulnerability, 287(g) status, and immigration enforcement levels do not always align and can have different associations with mental health.

International migration puts people's sexual and reproductive health (SRH), particularly those of women and children, at increased risk. However, many international migrants are denied access to timely and adequate SRH information, goods, and services by governments and/or service providers. This article reviews relevant international human rights treaties to argue that the barriers faced by migrants in accessing SRH care constitute violations of international law. It is well established that migrants are guaranteed access to SRH care as a part of their right to health, as well as the rights enjoyed by vulnerable populations. Increasingly, hindrance of migrants' access to SRH care is also recognized as a threat to their rights to life and equality with non-migrants. The case of Toussaint v Canada illustrates how governments may be held accountable by human rights treaty monitoring bodies when they fail to respect and fulfill migrants' right to SRH care., (© 2022 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics.)

This study presents an empirical investigation of naturalization adjudication in the United States using new administrative data on naturalization applications decided by the US Citizenship and Immigration Services between October 2014 and March 2018. We find significant group disparities in naturalization approvals based on applicants' race/ethnicity, gender, and religion, controlling for individual applicant characteristics, adjudication years, and variation between field offices. Non-White applicants and Hispanic applicants are less likely to be approved than non-Hispanic White applicants, male applicants are less likely to be approved than female applicants, and applicants from Muslim-majority countries are less likely to be approved than applicants from other countries. In addition, race/ethnicity, gender, and religion interact to produce a certain group hierarchy in naturalization approvals. For example, the probability of approval for Black males is 5 percentage points smaller than that of White females. The probability of approval for Blacks from Muslim-majority countries is 9 percentage points smaller than that of Whites from other countries. The probability of approval for females from Muslim-majority countries is 6 percentage points smaller than that of females from other countries. This study contributes to our understanding of the nature of inequalities present in agency decision-making in the naturalization process., Competing Interests: The authors declare no competing interest.

Competing Interests: Competing interests: none declared.

This replication underlines the importance of outlier diagnostics since many researchers have long neglected influential observations in OLS regression analysis. In his article, entitled "Primary Resources, Secondary Labor," Shin finds that advanced democracies with increased natural resource wealth, particularly from oil and natural gas production, are more likely to restrict low-skill immigration policy. By performing outlier diagnostics, this replication shows that Shin's findings are a statistical artifact. When one outlying country, Norway, is removed from the sample data, I observe almost no significant and negative relationship between oil wealth and immigration policy. When two outlying countries are excluded, the effect of oil wealth completely disappears. Robust regression analysis, a widely used remedial method for outlier problems, confirms the results of my outlier diagnostics., Competing Interests: The author has declared that no competing interests exist.

The global population of unaccompanied minors-children and adolescents younger than 18 years who migrate without their legal guardians-is increasing. However, as data are not systematically collected in any region, if collected at all, little is known about this diverse group of young people. Compared with adult migrants, unaccompanied minors are at greater risk of harm to their health and integrity because they do not have the protection provided by a family, which can affect their short-term and long-term health. This Review summarises evidence regarding the international migration and health of unaccompanied minors. Unaccompanied minors are entitled to protection that should follow their best interests as a primary consideration; however, detention, sometimes under the guise of protection, is a widespread practice. If these minors are provided with appropriate forms of protection, including health and psychosocial care, they can thrive and have good long-term outcomes. Instead, hostile immigration practices persist, which are not in the best interests of the child., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests We declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Study Objectives: Heightened immigration enforcement may induce fear in undocumented patients when coming to the Emergency Department (ED) for care. Limited literature examining health system policies to reduce immigrant fear exists. In this multi-site qualitative study, we sought to assess provider and system-level policies on caring for undocumented patients in three California EDs., Methods: We recruited 41 ED providers and administrators from three California EDs (in San Francisco, Oakland, and Sylmar) with large immigrant populations. Participants were recruited using a trusted gatekeeper and snowball sampling. We conducted semi-structured interviews and analyzed the transcripts using constructivist grounded theory., Results: We interviewed 10 physicians, 11 nurses, 9 social workers, and 11 administrators, and identified 7 themes. Providers described existing policies and recent policy changes that facilitate access to care for undocumented patients. Providers reported that current training and communication around policies is limited, there are variations between who asks about and documents status, and there remains uncertainty around policy details, laws, and jurisdiction of staff. Providers also stated they are taking an active role in building safety and trust and see their role as supporting undocumented patients., Conclusions: This study introduces ED-level health system perspectives and recommendations for caring for undocumented patients. There is a need for active, multi-disciplinary ED policy training, clear policy details including the extent of providers' roles, protocols on the screening and documentation of status, and continual reassessment of our health systems to reduce fear and build safety and trust with our undocumented communities., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

The medical demand imposed by COVID-19 has distracted proper care of other illnesses. Herein, we report the impact on new diagnoses of HTLV-1, HTLV-2, and HIV-2 in Spain, where these infections are mostly driven by immigration flows from endemic regions. As expected, case reporting declined for all three retroviral infections with respect to prior years. Furthermore, late presentations were more common. The two major reasons for these observations were significant declines in the arrival of foreigners from endemic regions and a shift in medical resources to prioritize COVID-19.

Importance: The health effects of restrictive immigration and refugee policies targeting individuals from Muslim-majority countries are largely unknown., Objective: To analyze whether President Trump's 2017 executive order 13769, "Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States" (known as the "Muslim ban" executive order) was associated with changes in health care utilization by people born in targeted nations living in the US., Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included adult patients treated at Minneapolis-St. Paul HealthPartners primary care clinics or emergency departments (EDs) between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2017. Patients were categorized as (1) born in Muslim ban-targeted nations, (2) born in Muslim-majority nations not listed in the executive order, or (3) non-Latinx and born in the US. Data were analyzed from October 1, 2019, to May 12, 2021., Exposures: Executive order 13769, "Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States.", Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes included the number of (1) primary care clinic visits, (2) missed primary care appointments, (3) primary care stress-responsive diagnoses, (4) ED visits, and (5) ED stress-responsive diagnoses. Visit trends were evaluated before and after the Muslim ban issuance using linear regression, and differences between the study groups after the executive order issuance were evaluated using difference-in-difference analyses., Results: A total of 252 594 patients were included in the analysis: 5667 in group 1 (3367 women [59.4%]; 5233 Black individuals [92.3%]), 1254 in group 2 (627 women [50%]; 391 White individuals [31.2%]), and 245 673 in group 3 (133 882 women [54.5%]; 203 342 White individuals [82.8%]). Group 1 was predominantly born in Somalia (5231 of 5667 [92.3%]) and insured by Medicare or Medicaid (4428 [78.1%]). Before the Muslim ban, primary care visits and stress-responsive diagnoses were increasing for individuals from Muslim-majority nations (groups 1 and 2). In the year after the ban, there were approximately 101 additional missed primary care appointments among people from Muslim-majority countries not named in the ban (point estimate [SE], 6.73 [2.90]; P = .02) and approximately 232 additional ED visits by individuals from Muslim ban-targeted nations (point estimate [SE], 3.41 [1.53]; P = .03)., Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this cohort study suggest that after issuance of the Muslim ban executive order, missed primary care appointments and ED visits increased among people from Muslim-majority countries living in Minneapolis-St. Paul.

In recent years, significant policy changes focused on immigrants migrating through the southern United States border have been implemented. To determine if there was an association between time since immigration and increases in negative mental health symptomology, 249 Mexican-American immigrants ages 18-65 were field recruited to participate in a survey exploring their physical and mental health. Results indicate that inconsistent with the Hispanic Health Paradox, the psychological health of immigrants arriving since 2015 was significantly worse than that of more established immigrants. New arrivals had a .38 increased risk of experiencing clinically significant depression and a .47 increased risk of experiencing global psychological distress. Time since immigration was not significantly related to past 30-day alcohol use. Implications for future research and clinical practice with immigrants are explored, and suggestions on how better identify and assist Mexican-American immigrants with mental health concerns are offered.

As countries are lifting restrictions and resuming international travels, the rising risk of COVID-19 importation remains concerning, given that the SARS-CoV-2 virus could be transmitted unintentionally through the global transportation network. To explore and assess the effective strategies for curtailing the epidemic risk from international importation nationwide, we evaluated "the joint prevention and control" mechanism, which made up of 19 containment policies, on how it impacted the change of medical observation and detection time from border arrival to laboratory confirmation of COVID-19 in its burst in China. Based on 1,314 epidemiological-survey cases from February 29 to May 25, 2020, we found that the synchronized approach of implementing multi-dimensional interventional policies, such as a centralized quarantine and nucleic acid testing (NAT), flight service adjustment and border closure, effectively facilitate early identification of infected case. Specifically, the implementation of the international flight service reduction was found to be associated with a reduction of the mean intervals of diagnosis from arrival to lab-confirmation by 0.44 days maximally, and the border closure was associated with a reduction of the diagnosis interval of imported cases by 0.69 days, from arrival to laboratory confirmation. The study suggests that a timely and synchronized implementation of multi-dimensional policies is compelling in preventing domestic spreading from importation., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Those who work with immigrants in detention centers may be at increased risk of secondary trauma. This study used Photovoice to capture reflections on how the lives of volunteers are affected by their work on behalf of immigrant family detainees. Participants were recruited over a two-month period in 2018 from amongst the volunteers of a non-governmental organization that provides legal services to the detainees at one immigration detention center. Participants submitted photos and captions that explored their experiences with their work. Thirteen volunteers consented to participate and submitted 44 photos with captions to the project. Major themes included emotional challenges of the work, frustrations with the U.S. government, comparison of their experiences to those of their clients', and finding uplifting moments. Our findings regarding the significant emotional challenges of this work are of particular importance given the increasing coverage of immigration detention in the media and the increased interest in volunteer opportunities to support this population.

Introduction: Anti-immigrant rhetoric and increased enforcement of immigration laws have induced worry and safety concerns among undocumented Latino immigrants (UDLI) and legal Latino residents/citizens (LLRC), with some delaying the time to care. In this study, we conducted a qualitative analysis of statements made by emergency department (ED) patients - a majority of whom were UDLI and LLRC - participating in a study to better understand their experiences and fears with regard to anti-immigrant rhetoric, immigration enforcement, and ED utilization., Methods: We conducted a multi-site study, surveying patients in three California safety-net EDs serving large immigrant populations from June 2017-December 2018. Of 1684 patients approached, 1337 (79.4%) agreed to participate; when given the option to provide open-ended comments, 260 participants provided perspectives about their experiences during the years immediately following the 2016 United States presidential election. We analyzed these qualitative data using constructivist grounded theory., Results: We analyzed comments from 260 individuals. Among ED patients who provided qualitative data, 59% were women and their median age was 45 years (Interquartile range 33-57 years). Undocumented Latino immigrants comprised 49%, 31% were LLRC, and 20% were non-Latino legal residents. As their primary language, 68% spoke Spanish. We identified six themes: fear as a barrier to care (especially for UDLI); the negative impact of fear on health and wellness (physical and mental health, delays in care); factors influencing fear (eg, media coverage); and future solutions, including the need for increased communication about rights., Conclusion: Anti-immigrant rhetoric during the 2016 US presidential campaign contributed to fear and safety concerns among UDLI and LLRC accessing healthcare. This is one of the few studies that captured firsthand experiences of UDLI in the ED. Our findings revealed fear-based barriers to accessing emergency care, protective and contributing factors to fear, and the negative impact of fear. There is a need for increased culturally informed patient communication about rights and resources, strategic media campaigns, and improved access to healthcare for undocumented individuals.

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the extent to which public support for outbreak containment policies varies with respect to the severity of an infectious disease outbreak., Methods: A web-enabled survey was administered to 1017 residents of Singapore during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and was quota-sampled based on age, sex, and ethnicity. A fractional-factorial design was used to create hypothetical outbreak vignettes characterised by morbidity and fatality rates, and local and global spread of an infectious disease. Each respondent was asked to indicate which response policies (among five policies restricting local movement and four border control policies) they would support in five randomly assigned vignettes. Binomial logistic regressions were used to predict the probabilities of support as a function of outbreak attributes, personal characteristics, and perceived policy effectiveness., Results: Likelihood of support varied across government response policies but was generally higher for border control policies compared with internal policies. The fatality rate was the most important factor for internal policies, while the degree of global spread was the most important for border control policies. In general, individuals who were less healthy, had higher-income, and were older were more likely to support these policies. Perceived effectiveness of a policy was a consistent and positive predictor of public support., Conclusions: Our findings suggest that campaigns to promote public support should be designed specifically to each policy and tailored to different segments of the population. They should also be adapted based on the evolving conditions of the outbreak in order to receive continued public support.

The escalating cost of civil litigation is leaving many defendants and plaintiffs unable to meet legal expenses such as attorney fees, court charges and others. This significantly impacts their ability to sue or defend themselves effectively. Related to this phenomenon is the ethics discussion around access to justice and crowdfunding. This article explores the dimensions that explain the phenomenon of litigation crowdfunding. Using data from CrowdJustice, a popular Internet fundraising platform used to assist in turning legal cases into publicly funded social cases, we study litigation crowdfunding through the lenses of the number of pledges, goal achievement, target amount, length of description, country, case category, and others. Overall, we see a higher number of cases seeking funding in the categories of human rights, environment, and judicial review. Meanwhile, the platform offers access to funding for other less prominent categories, such as voting rights, personal injury, intellectual property, and data & privacy. At the same time, donors are willing to donate more to cases related to health, politics, and public services. Also noteworthy is that while donors are willing to donate to education, animal welfare, data & privacy, and inquest-related cases, they are not willing to donate large sums to these causes. In terms of lawyer/law firm status, donors are more willing to donate to cases assisted by experienced lawyers. Furthermore, we also note that the higher the number of successful cases an attorney presents, the greater the amount raised. We analyzed valence, arousal, and dominance in case description and found they have a positive relationship with funds raised. Also, when a case description is updated on a crowdsourcing site, it ends up being more successful in funding-at least in the categories of health, immigration, and judicial review. This is not the case, however, for categories such as public service, human rights, and environment. Our research addresses whether litigation crowdfunding, in particular, levels the playing field in terms of opening up financing opportunities for those individuals who cannot afford the costs of litigation. While it may support social justice, ethical concerns with regards to the kinds of campaigns must also be addressed. Most of the ethical concerns center around issues relating to both the fundraisers and donors. Our findings have ethical and social justice implications for crowdfunding platform design., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Competing Interests: Competing interests: The author completed the ICMJE Unified Competing Interest form (available upon request from the corresponding author) and declares no conflicts of interest.

In Latin America, violence is a major public health issue causing many families to flee to the United States to seek safety. Current US immigration policies fail to address why families are forced to depart their home country or the needs of families once arriving in the United States. This article identifies root causes of family displacement, examines the insufficient protections for children in families during US immigration processing, and provides practice and policy recommendations on how to transform the US immigration system so that it is more humane for children and families forcibly displaced by violence., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have nothing to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Although the citizenship clause of the fourteenth amendment guarantees citizenship to persons born in the United States, the 1996 Immigration Act does not allow illegal immigrant parents to avoid deportation unless such deportation would cause extreme and exceptional hardship to a U.S. citizen relative. This paper reviews the potential adverse effects of such deportation on a child. It presents 12 cases where child and adolescent forensic psychiatric evaluations of U.S. citizen children supported their immigrant parents' petitions for legal resident status. Parent-child attachment, as well as the child's educational status, language proficiencies, acculturation to U.S. culture, and psychiatric distress at the potential deportation, are the factors most helpful in elucidating a child's reaction to this threatened deportation. During the child and adolescent psychiatry evaluations, the parents were interviewed, school records were reviewed and, where appropriate, pediatric records were considered. All the children were examined alone and then as a family unit with their parents using standard DSM-IV-TR diagnostic criteria [1]. Firstly, considering their clinical diagnoses, a clinical prognosis was made for the possibility if the child were to be forced to go to their parents' country of origin with their deported illegal immigrant parent(s). Secondly, each case was examined and analyzed individually to determine the clinical prognosis of the U.S. citizen child if they were to stay in the United States while the illegal immigrant parent(s) was forced to leave. In all of the 12 cases, there was already pre-existing anxiety in the children secondary to the fear of a negative outcome for the parents in the immigration legal cases. In all of the 12 cases it was also determined that the prognosis for the child's adjustment to being without their parent but remaining in the US would have produced a significant exacerbation of the psychopathology already seen. Furthermore, in all of the 12 cases, were the children to be relocated to their parental culture, unfamiliar to the child's American culture, again, the prognosis was made that a significant exacerbation of psychopathology would occur. On the basis of the findings of the child and adolescent psychiatric evaluations and analyses presented to the court, all of the illegal immigrant parents were permitted to receive permanent resident status.

Immigration-both the experience of migrating and events after migration-can affect the mental health and well-being of immigrants and their communities. However, evidence suggests that immigrants in the United States do not access mental health services to the same extent as nonimmigrants. In particular, immigrant adolescents and young adults may have unique stressors related to their developmental stage, experiences in school and with peer groups, and shifting roles within family systems. This scoping review summarizes findings from published research studies and practitioner-focused gray literature about the mental health needs of immigrant communities in the United States. The review finds that specific mental health needs vary across factors like age, racial/ethnic group, immigration status, and place of residency. Findings also indicate that structural factors like immigration-related laws affect both access to mental health services and stressors in the overall environment for immigrants and their families. This review also explores models of community-level initiatives that utilize strengths-based approaches to promoting mental health and well-being among immigrant communities. Findings highlight the need for a better understanding of the mental health needs and current barriers to care among diverse immigrant populations, as immigration continues to play a major role in U.S. public policy and discourse. The COVID-19 pandemic taking place as this article goes to press in 2020 also raises questions regarding health equity and access for marginalized populations, including immigrants and their communities, and so these findings also indicate the need for further interdisciplinary research to assess intersections among the pandemic's many impacts, including those related to mental health and well-being.

Background: US immigration policy changes may affect health care use among Latinx children. We hypothesized that January 2017 restrictive immigration executive actions would lead to decreased health care use among Latinx children., Methods: We used controlled interrupted time series to estimate the effect of executive actions on outpatient cancellation or no-show rates from October 2016 to March 2017 ("immigration action period") among Latinx children in 4 health care systems in North Carolina. We included control groups of (1) non-Latinx children and (2) Latinx children from the same period in the previous year ("control period") to account for natural trends such as seasonality., Results: In the immigration action period, 114 627 children contributed 314 092 appointments. In the control period, 107 657 children contributed 295 993 appointments. Relative to the control period, there was an immediate 5.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.40%-10.9%) decrease in cancellation rates among all Latinx children, but no sustained change in trend of cancellations and no change in no-show rates after executive immigration actions. Among uninsured Latinx children, there was an immediate 12.7% (95% CI: 2.3%-23.1%) decrease in cancellations; however, cancellations then increased by 2.4% (95% CI: 0.89%-3.9%) per week after immigration actions, an absolute increase of 15.5 cancellations per 100 appointments made., Conclusions: There was a sustained increase in cancellations among uninsured Latinx children after immigration actions, suggesting decreased health care use among uninsured Latinx children. Continued monitoring of effects of immigration policy on child health is needed, along with measures to ensure that all children receive necessary health care., Competing Interests: POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST: The authors have indicated they have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 by the American Academy of Pediatrics.)

States have enacted a wave of statutes over the past several years preempting local government law and policies that potentially promote public health in various ways. Among these local preemption measures are statutes in at least 9 states that outlaw municipal policies providing some form of "sanctuary" to immigrants. Such policies, and their preemption, have importance both for direct access to health services and for broader social determinants of health.This article gauges the coverage and potential impact of these state preemption laws based on key informant interviews nationally and a close legal analysis of relevant laws and policy documents. It distinguishes between preemption laws focused on law enforcement cooperation and those that also encompass a wider array of "welcoming" policies and initiatives. It also distinguishes between more passive forms of preemption that prohibit barring cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, and those statutes that more affirmatively require active measures to assist federal enforcement.Drawing these distinctions can help municipalities determine which immigrant-supportive measures are still permitted, and how best to mitigate the adverse public health effects of these preemption laws.

This article provides a general overview of the practical management of legal issues in cross-border gestational surrogacy. Particular problems arising from the global pandemic as well as a number of proposed solutions are presented and analyzed. A section addressing the involvement of the fertility center in such arrangements is included. Additionally, the article discusses how parentage and citizenship are handled abroad, with a focus on the United Kingdom., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

U.S. immigration policies and enforcement can make immigrants fearful of accessing healthcare. Although current immigration policies restrict enforcement in "sensitive locations" including healthcare facilities, there are reports of enforcement actions in such settings.

Competing Interests: POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST: The authors have indicated they have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

As healthcare providers engage in the politics of reforming and humanizing our immigration and asylum "system" it is critical that they are able to refer their patients whose health is directly impacted by our immigration laws and policies to experts who can help them navigate the system and obtain the healthcare they need.

Immigration detention centers are densely populated facilities in which restrictive conditions limit detainees' abilities to engage in social distancing or hygiene practices designed to prevent the spread of COVID-19. With tens of thousands of adults and children in more than 200 immigration detention centers across the United States, immigration detention centers are likely to experience COVID-19 outbreaks and add substantially to the population of those infected.Despite compelling evidence indicating a heightened risk of infection among detainees, state and federal governments have done little to protect the health of detained im-migrants. An evidence-based public health framework must guide the COVID-19 response in immigration detention centers.We draw on the hierarchy of controls framework to demonstrate how immigration detention centers are failing to implement even the least effective control strategies. Drawing on this framework and recent legal and medical advocacy efforts, we argue that safely releasing detainees from immigration detention centers into their communities is the most effective way to prevent COVID-19 outbreaks in immigration detention settings. Failure to do so will result in infection and death among those detained and deepen existing health and social inequities.

Despite growing recognition of sexual orientation- and gender identity-based violence, scholars continue to identify barriers for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) individuals seeking asylum protection. Lesbian women asylum applicants, in particular, encounter a system that is unsure how to classify their cases and that generally questions the credibility of women's experiences. In this way, lesbian women applicants are among the most vulnerable populations of asylum claimants, particularly in the U.S. context. In this research note, I examine U.S. appellate level Circuit Court cases initiated by lesbian women asylum applicants. I expand existing literature to include an examination of how the violence faced by lesbian women is interpreted and ultimately erased as Circuit Courts grapple with legal interpretations of persecution. Specifically, I find three mechanisms of erasure: ruling that the violence experienced was unextreme, finding that the applicants' accounts of violence were unsubstantiated, or arguing that the violence experienced was unrelated to the applicants' sexual orientation. When placed in historical context, these patterns are troubling. Unlike previous decades that have witnessed overt homophobia, racism, and ethnocentrism in the immigration system, these cases indicate a more subtle form of exclusion-finding technicalities in case law and formal legal definitions as grounds for denial.

Background: Immigrants in the United States (US) today are facing a dynamic policy landscape. The Trump administration has threatened or curtailed access to basic services for 10.5 million undocumented immigrants currently in the US. We sought to examine the historical effects that punitive laws have had on health outcomes in US immigrant communities., Methods: In this systematic review, we searched the following databases from inception-May 2020 for original research articles with no language restrictions: Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Cochrane Library (Wiley), Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate), CINAHL (EBSCO), and Social Work Abstracts (Ovid). This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42019138817. Articles with cohort sizes >10 that directly evaluated the health-related effects of a punitive immigrant law or policy within the US were included., Findings: 6,357 studies were screened for eligibility. Of these, 32 studies were selected for inclusion and qualitatively synthesized based upon four themes that appeared throughout our analysis: (1) impact on healthcare utilization, (2) impact on women's and children's health, (3) impact on mental health services, and (4) impact on public health. The impact of each law, policy, mandate, and directive since 1990 is briefly discussed, as are the limitations and risk of bias of each study., Interpretation: Many punitive immigrant policies have decreased immigrant access to and utilization of basic healthcare services, while instilling fear, confusion, and anxiety in these communities. The federal government should preserve and expand access for undocumented individuals without threat of deportation to improve health outcomes for US citizens and noncitizens., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

People seeking asylum experience traumatic events and psychological difficulties in country-of-origin, in 'flight', and during re-settlement. Research with this population has focussed on using quantitative methods to examine psychopathology from exposure to traumatic events, and there is a paucity of qualitative research exploring subjective experiences of this population throughout their asylum journey. Few studies have examined ways asylum seekers might cope with such events. This study aimed to address this gap by employing Constructivist Grounded Theory to understand the ways people seeking asylum conceptualize and cope with their experiences across the asylum process. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with eleven people seeking asylum accessing a third sector mental health project and/or primary-care health service. Four main themes emerged from the data: 'Before Asylum ', ' Displacement ', ' Identity in the UK ' and ' Reflections on the Future'. The stress of the asylum system and adaptation to new environments are core aspects of the theory, along with an exploration of how people cope with these circumstances, via internal psychological strategies and external support sources. Prior experiences (including the development of ' inner strength ') impacted upon how participants conceptualized their everyday experiences, and this shaped their considerations for the future. Service implications are discussed.