U.S. immigrants have faced a changing landscape with regard to immigration enforcement over the last two decades. Following the passage of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, and the creation of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency after the attacks of September 11, 2001, detention and deportation activity increased substantially. As a result, immigrants today are experiencing heightened fear of profiling and deportation. Little research exists on how these activities affect the health and well-being of U.S. immigrant communities. This study sought to address this gap by using community-based participatory research to investigate the impact of enhanced immigration enforcement on immigrant health in Everett, Massachusetts, USA, a city with a large and diverse immigrant population. Community partners and researchers conducted 6 focus groups with 52 immigrant participants (documented and undocumented) in five languages in May 2009. The major themes across the groups included: 1) Fear of deportation, 2) Fear of collaboration between local law enforcement and ICE and perception of arbitrariness on the part of the former and 3) Concerns about not being able to furnish documentation required to apply for insurance and for health care. Documented and undocumented immigrants reported high levels of stress due to deportation fear, which affected their emotional well-being and their access to health services. Recommendations from the focus groups included improving relationships between immigrants and local police, educating immigrants on their rights and responsibilities as residents, and holding sessions to improve civic engagement. Immigration enforcement activities and the resulting deportation fear are contextual factors that undermine trust in community institutions and social capital, with implications for health and effective integration processes. These factors should be considered by any community seeking to improve the integration process.
Introduction Increasing Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) activities such as raids, detention and deportation may be affecting the health and well-being of immigrants. This study sought to understand the impact of ICE activities on immigrant health from the perspective of health care providers. Methods An online survey of primary care and emergency medicine providers was conducted to determine whether ICE activity was negatively affecting immigrant patients. Results Of 327 providers surveyed, 163 responded (50%) and 156 (48%) met criteria for inclusion. Seventy-five (48%) of them observed negative effects of ICE enforcement on the health or health access of immigrant patients. Forty-three providers gave examples of the impact on emotional health, ability to comply with health care recommendations and access. Conclusions Health care providers are witnessing the negative effects of ICE activities on their immigrant patients’ psychological and physical health. This should be considered an important determinant of immigrant health.
The American Psychological Association (APA) has historically had close ties with the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD). Recent revelations describe problematic outcomes of those ties, as some in the APA colluded with the DOD to allow psychologists to participate, with expectation of impunity, in harsh interrogations that amounted to torture of Guantanamo detainees, during the Bush era. We now know that leaders in the APA purposely misled psychologists about the establishment of policies on psychologists' roles in interrogations. Still, the authors wondered why, when the resulting policies reflected a clear contradiction of the fundamental duty to do no harm, few psychologists, in or out of the military, protested the policies articulated in 2005 by the committee on Psychological Ethics and National Security (PENS). Previous research suggested that U.S. graduate students in clinical psychology receive little or no training in the duties of psychologists in military settings or in the ethical guidance offered by international treaties. Thus psychologists might not have been well prepared to critique the PENS policies or to refuse to participate in interrogations. To further explore this issue, the authors surveyed Directors of Clinical Training of doctoral programs in clinical psychology, asking Editor's Note. Continue the conversation by submitting your comments and questions about this article/book review to PeacePsychology.org/ peaceconflict. (The Editor of PeacePsychology.org reserves the right to exclude material that fails to contribute to constructive discussion.) This article was published Online First August 8, 2016. ALICE LOCICERO holds a PhD. She is a 2016 -2017 Visiting Scholar at the Wright Institute in Berkeley, California. She also served as a core faculty member at the Center for Multicultural Training in Psychology from 2012-2015. Her recent research has focused on sociocultural factors affecting youth recruitment to groups using terrorism, and on how doctoral students are prepared for ethical dilemmas in an era where widespread fear challenges decision-making.ROBERT P. MARLIN holds PhD and MD. He is a staff physician in the
The American Psychological Association (APA) has long maintained a close, even symbiotic, relationship with the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Veterans Administration (VA). Herein we highlight these close ties and describe psychologists' participation in interrogations by U.S. military and intelligence entities. We then review the APA's statements about the permissibility of psychologist participation in the interrogation and torture of suspected terrorists. These issues are significant in and of themselves and because the VA and DOD have been described as "growth careers" for psychologists of the future (1). Additionally, the Health Care Personnel Delivery System allows the drafting of civilian clinical psychologists into military service even in the absence of a general draft. In light of psychologists' extensive involvement in the interrogation process of suspected terrorists, and the possibility that psychologists without prior military experience may be drafted, we wondered how much psychologists have been taught about their ethical duties should they find themselves in military settings. The results of our pilot study of U.S. psychology graduate students, which assessed their knowledge of military ethics, raise concerns that psychologists receive inadequate formal training in these matters. This may leave psychologists vulnerable to misinformation about proper ethical conduct in their future work.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.