Federal, State, and Local Immigrant-Related Policies and Child Health Outcomes: a Systematic Review

Risk of Adverse Perinatal Outcomes Among African-born Black Women in California, 2011-2020

BACKGROUND

African-born women have a lower risk of preterm birth and small for gestational age (SGA) birth compared with United States-born Black women, however variation by country of origin is overlooked. Additionally, the extent that nativity disparities in adverse perinatal outcomes to Black women are explained by individual-level factors remains unclear.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based study of nonanomalous singleton live births to United States- and African-born Black women in California from 2011 to 2020 (n = 194,320). We used age-adjusted Poisson regression models to estimate the risk of preterm birth and SGA and reported risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Decomposition using Monte Carlo integration of the g-formula computed the percentage of disparities in adverse outcomes between United States- and African-born women explained by individual-level factors.

RESULTS

Eritrean women (RR = 0.4; 95% CI = 0.3, 0.5) had the largest differences in risk of preterm birth and Cameroonian women (RR = 0.5; 95% CI = 0.3, 0.6) in SGA birth, compared with United States-born Black women. Ghanaian women had smaller differences in risk of preterm birth (RR = 0.8; 95% CI = 0.7, 1.0) and SGA (RR = 0.9; 95% CI = 0.8, 1.1) compared with United States-born women. Overall, we estimate that absolute differences in socio-demographic and clinical factors contributed to 32% of nativity-based disparities in the risk of preterm birth and 26% of disparities in SGA.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed heterogeneity in risk of adverse perinatal outcomes for African- compared with United States-born Black women, suggesting that nativity disparities in adverse perinatal outcomes were not fully explained by differences in individual-level factors.

Exploring the Links Between Immigration and Birth Outcomes Among Latine Birthing Persons in the USA

BACKGROUND

Birth outcomes are worse for birthing people and infants in the USA than other high-income economies and worse still for underprivileged communities. Historically, the Latine community has experienced positive birth outcomes, despite low socioeconomic status and other socio-political disadvantages, leading to what has been termed as the Hispanic birth paradox. However, this perinatal advantage and protective effect appears to have been shattered by unfavorable policies, structural conditions, societal attitudes, and traumatic events impacting Latine immigrants, leading to negative effects on the health and well-being of birthing Latines-regardless of citizenship status and increasing rates of preterm birth and low birth weight infants.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted a comprehensive literature review and identified two pathways through which birth outcomes among Latine birthing persons may be compromised regardless of citizenship status: (1) a biological pathway as toxic levels of fear and anxiety created by racialized stressors accumulate in the bodies of Latines and (2) a social pathway as Latines disconnect from formal and informal sources of support including family, friends, health care, public health programs, and social services during the course of the pregnancy.

CONCLUSION

Future research needs to examine the impact of immigration climate and policies on health and racial equity in birth outcomes among Latines regardless of citizenship status. Attaining health and racial equity necessitates increased awareness among health providers, public health practitioners, and policy makers of the impact of larger socio-political pressures on the health of Latine birthing persons.

Anxious Activists? Examining Immigration Policy Threat, Political Engagement, and Anxiety among College Students with Different Self/Parental Immigration Statuses

Restrictive immigration policies harm the mental health of undocumented immigrants and their U.S. citizen family members. As a sociopolitical stressor, threat to family due to immigration policy can heighten anxiety, yet it is unclear whether political engagement helps immigrant-origin students to cope. We used a cross-sectional survey of college students from immigrant families (N = 2,511) to investigate whether anxiety symptomatology was associated with perceived threat to family and if political engagement moderated this relationship. We stratified analyses by self/parental immigration statuses-undocumented students, U.S. citizens with undocumented parents, and U.S. citizens with lawfully present parents-to examine family members' legal vulnerability. Family threat was significantly associated with anxiety; higher levels of political engagement reduced the strength of this relationship. However, this moderation effect was significant only for U.S. citizens with lawfully present parents. These findings emphasize the importance of the family immigration context in shaping individuals' mental health outcomes.

Advocacy and Policy: A Focus on Migrant Youth

Mental health challenges experienced by migrant children are shaped by multiple factors within the health care system and society at large. It is essential for health care providers to recognize the profound impact of these influences on child well-being. By actively engaging in advocacy and policy initiatives, health care providers can address structural barriers, social inequalities, and stigma that perpetuate mental health disparities. Through their advocacy efforts, providers can contribute to creating an inclusive society that upholds children's rights and ensures equitable access to mental health support and services.

Recreational cannabis legalization and immigration enforcement: a state-level analysis of arrests and deportations in the United States, 2009-2020

BACKGROUND

Recreational cannabis laws (RCL) in the United States (US) can have important implications for people who are non-citizens, including those with and without formal documentation, and those who are refugees or seeking asylum. For these groups, committing a cannabis-related infraction, even a misdemeanor, can constitute grounds for status ineligibility, including arrest and deportation under federal immigration policy-regardless of state law. Despite interconnections between immigration and drug policy, the potential impacts of increasing state cannabis legalization on immigration enforcement are unexplored.

METHODS

In this repeated cross-sectional analysis, we tested the association between state-level RCL adoption and monthly, state-level prevalence of immigration arrests and deportations related to cannabis possession. Data were from the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse. Immigration arrest information was available from Oct-2014 to May-2018 and immigration deportation information were available from Jan-2009 to Jun-2020 for. To test associations with RCLs, we fit Poisson fixed effects models that controlled for pre-existing differences between states, secular trends, and potential sociodemographic, sociopolitical, and setting-related confounders. Sensitivity analyses explored potential violations to assumptions and sensitivity to modeling specifications.

RESULTS

Over the observation period, there were 7,739 immigration arrests and 48,015 deportations referencing cannabis possession. By 2020, 12 stated adopted recreational legalization and on average immigration enforcement was lower among RCL compared to non-RCL states. In primary adjusted models, we found no meaningful changes in arrest prevalence, either immediately following RCL adoption (Prevalence Ratio [PR]: 0.84; [95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 0.57, 1.11]), or 1-year after the law was effective (PR: 0.88 [CI: 0.56, 1.20]). For the deportation outcome, however, RCL adoption was associated with a moderate relative decrease in deportation prevalence in RCL versus non-RCL states (PR: 0.68 [CI: 0.56, 0.80]; PR 1-year lag: 0.68 [CI: 0.54, 0.82]). Additional analyses were mostly consistent by suggested some sensitivities to modeling specification.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that decreasing penalties for cannabis possession through state RCLs may reduce some aspects of immigration enforcement related to cannabis possession. Greater attention to the immigration-related consequences of current drug control policies is warranted, particularly as more states weigh the public health benefits and drawbacks of legalizing cannabis.

Policy solutions to eliminate racial and ethnic child health disparities in the USA

Societal systems act individually and in combination to create and perpetuate structural racism through both policies and practices at the local, state, and federal levels, which, in turn, generate racial and ethnic health disparities. Both current and historical policy approaches across multiple sectors-including housing, employment, health insurance, immigration, and criminal legal-have the potential to affect child health equity. Such policies must be considered with a focus on structural racism to understand which have the potential to eliminate or at least attenuate disparities. Policy efforts that do not directly address structural racism will not achieve equity and instead worsen gaps and existing disparities in access and quality-thereby continuing to perpetuate a two-tier system dictated by racism. In Paper 2 of this Series, we build on Paper 1's summary of existing disparities in health-care delivery and highlight policies within multiple sectors that can be modified and supported to improve health equity, and, in so doing, improve the health of racially and ethnically minoritised children.

Facing a dual threat: Pandemic stress and immigration policy vulnerability on mental health among Latinx immigrant parents

BACKGROUND

Exclusionary immigration policies rooted in structural racism threaten the wellbeing of Latinx families, increasing stress, anxiety, depression, and distress among immigrant parents. The COVID-19 pandemic has had devastating and disproportionate impacts on communities of color with unique impacts on Latinx immigrant parents in mixed-status families.

AIMS

From a syndemic theory lens, we explored the convergence of structural racism and the COVID-19 pandemic to explore if the stress of the COVID-19 pandemic may compound harmful immigration-related policies.

METHODS

Our community-based participatory research cross-sectional study administered 145 surveys among Latinx immigrant parents in mixed-status families in Georgia. We examined the relationship of pandemic stress and perceived statewide immigration policy vulnerability to depressive, anxiety, and PTSD symptoms. We conducted multiple linear regression analyses to test these relationships and their interaction.

RESULTS

We found that that greater perceived policy immigration vulnerability and reported pandemic stress were associated with higher symptoms of depression. Increased PTSD symptoms were also associated with immigration policy vulnerability, but not pandemic stress. Tests to assess if pandemic stress strengthened the relationship between policy vulnerability on depressive, anxiety, and PTSD symptoms revealed no statistically significant interactions.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that stress of the COVID-19 pandemic and longstanding anti-immigrant policies in Georgia were salient for and related to the mental health of these Latinx immigrant parents.

Qualitative Study of Barriers and Facilitators to Care Among Children in Immigrant Families

OBJECTIVES

Children in immigrant families comprise ∼25% of US children and live in families with high levels of poverty and food insecurity. Studies suggest a decline in public benefit enrollment among children in immigrant families. We aimed to explore perspectives on barriers and facilitators in accessing care among immigrant caregivers of hospitalized children.

METHODS

With a general qualitative descriptive design, we developed a semistructured interview guide using an iterative process informed by literature and content expertise. Using purposive sampling, we recruited immigrant caregivers of hospitalized children in March 2020 and conducted interviews in English or Spanish. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and translated to English. Three authors coded transcripts using Dedoose and identified themes via thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Analysis of 12 caregiver interviews revealed barriers and facilitators in accessing healthcare and public benefit use. Barriers included healthcare system barriers, immigration-related fear, and racism and discrimination. Within healthcare system barriers, subthemes included language barriers, cost, complexity of resource application, and lack of guidance on available benefits. Within immigration-related fear, subthemes included fear of familial separation, fear of deportation, fear that benefit use affects immigration status, and provider distrust. Healthcare system facilitators of resource use included recruiting diverse workforces, utilizing language interpretation, guidance on benefit enrollment, legal services, and mental health services. Participants also recommended hospital partnership with trusted information sources, including media stations and low-cost clinics.

CONCLUSIONS

Immigrant caregivers of hospitalized children identified barriers and facilitators in access to care. Further research is needed to assess the efficacy of caregiver-suggested interventions.

State-Level Anti-Immigrant Sentiment and Policies and Health Risks in US Latino Children

BACKGROUND

Although systemic inequities, broadly defined, are associated with health disparities in adults, there is a dearth of research linking contextual measures of exclusionary policies or prejudicial attitudes to health impairments in children, particularly among Latino populations. In this study, we examined a composite measure of systemic inequities in relation to the cooccurrence of multiple health problems in Latino children in the United States.

METHODS

Participants included 17 855 Latino children aged 3 to 17 years from the National Survey of Children's Health (2016-2020). We measured state-level systemic inequities using a factor score that combined an index of exclusionary state policies toward immigrants and aggregated survey data on prejudicial attitudes toward immigrants and Latino individuals. Caregivers reported on 3 categories of child health problems: common health difficulties in the past year, current chronic physical health conditions, and current mental health conditions. For each category, we constructed a variable reflecting 0, 1, or 2 or more conditions.

RESULTS

In models adjusted for sociodemographic covariates, interpersonal discrimination, and state-level income inequality, systemic inequities were associated with 1.13 times the odds of a chronic physical health condition (95% confidence interval: 1.02-1.25) and 1.24 times the odds of 2 or more mental health conditions (95% confidence interval: 1.06-1.45).

CONCLUSIONS

Latino children residing in states with higher levels of systemic inequity are more likely to experience mental health or chronic physical health conditions relative to those in states with lower levels of systemic inequity.

Assessing Quality of Life in First- and Second-Generation Immigrant Children and Adolescents; Highlights from the DIATROFI Food Aid and Healthy Nutrition Promotion Program

To compare first- and second-immigrant pediatric populations with a non-immigrant pediatric population in terms of quality-of-life metrics, a cross-sectional analysis using data from the DIATROFI Program was implemented. In total, n = 2277 students (mean age: 9(4) years) from public schools in Greece participating in the 2020-2021 school year were analyzed. The students' immigration status (first-generation/second-generation) was defined as per the standard definition. The students' health related-quality of life (HRQoL) was assessed using a parental-perceived quality of life questionnaire. The sample included 4.8% first-generation and 21.2% second-generation immigrant students. Compared with non-immigrants, the first-generation immigrant students were more likely to have poor HRQoL (odds ratio (OR) = 2.82; 95% confidence interval (95%CI) = 11.75, 4.53), physical (OR = 1.91; 95%CI = 1.18, 3.10), social (OR = 1.94; 95%CI = 1.16, 3.22) and school function (OR = 2.52; 95%CI = 1.54, 4.13). Similar results were observed for second-generation immigrant students regarding HRQoL (OR = 1.68; 95%CI = 1.28, 2.21), physical (OR = 1.60; 95%CI = 1.23, 2.10) and school function (OR = 2.09; 95%CI = 1.58, 2.77). Children with one parent having a country of origin different that the country of residence had elevated odds of having poor emotional health (OR = 1.19; 95%CI = 0.87, 1.64). The family's affluency level was interrelated with the connection of poor HRQoL and immigration status. The immigrant students have a poorer quality of life depending on their immigration generation and irrespective of their socioeconomic background.

Immigration Enforcement Climate in Georgia and the Mental Health of Latinx Immigrants

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.

Analysis of State Medicaid Expansion and Access to Timely Prenatal Care Among Women Who Were Immigrant vs US Born

IMPORTANCE

Disparities exist in access to timely prenatal care between immigrant women and US-born women. Exclusions from Medicaid eligibility based on immigration status may exacerbate disparities.

OBJECTIVE

To examine changes in timely prenatal care by nativity after Medicaid expansion.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A cross-sectional difference-in-differences (DID) and triple-difference analysis of 22 042 624 singleton births from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2019, in 31 states was conducted using US natality data. Data analysis was performed from February 1, 2021, to August 24, 2022.

EXPOSURES

Within 16 states that expanded Medicaid in 2014, the rate of timely prenatal care by nativity in years after expansion was compared with the rate in the years before expansion. Similar comparisons were conducted in 15 states that did not expand Medicaid and tested across expansion vs nonexpansion states.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Timely prenatal care was categorized as prenatal care initiated in the first trimester. Individual-level covariates included age, parity, race and ethnicity, and educational level. State-level time-varying covariates included unemployment, poverty, and Immigrant Climate Index.

RESULTS

A total of 5 390 814 women preexpansion and 6 544 992 women postexpansion were included. At baseline in expansion states, among immigrant women, 413 479 (27.3%) were Asian, 110 829 (7.3%) were Black, 752 176 (49.6%) were Hispanic, and 238 746 (15.8%) were White. Among US-born women, 96 807 (2.5%) were Asian, 470 128 (12.1%) were Black, 699 776 (18.1%) were Hispanic, and 2 608 873 (67.3%) were White. Prenatal care was timely in 75.9% of immigrant women vs 79.9% of those who were US born in expansion states at baseline. After Medicaid expansion, the immigrant vs US-born disparity in timely prenatal care was similar to the preexpansion level (DID, -0.91; 95% CI, -1.91 to 0.09). Stratifying by race and ethnicity showed an increase in the Asian vs White disparity after expansion, with 1.53 per 100 fewer immigrant women than those who were US born accessing timely prenatal care (95% CI, -2.31 to -0.75), and in the Hispanic vs White disparity (DID, -1.18 per 100; 95% CI, -2.07 to -0.30). These differences were more pronounced among women with a high school education or less (DID for Asian women, -2.98; 95% CI, -4.45 to -1.51; DID for Hispanic women, -1.47; 95% CI, -2.48 to -0.46). Compared with nonexpansion states, differences in DID estimates were found among Hispanic women with a high school education or less (triple-difference, -1.86 per 100 additional women in expansion states who would not receive timely prenatal care; 95% CI, -3.31 to -0.42).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this study suggest that exclusions from Medicaid eligibility based on immigration status may be associated with increased health care disparities among some immigrant groups. This finding has relevance to current policy debates regarding Medicaid coverage during and outside of pregnancy.

Self-rated health of both US citizens and noncitizens is associated with state-level immigrant criminalization policies

Evidence shows that state-level restrictive immigrant policies are associated with health disparities between noncitizens and citizens. Most research has focused on Latinos and there is limited knowledge of the relationship between restrictive policies and citizenship status among other groups, particularly Asian and Pacific Islanders (API). We examined whether state-level criminalization policy contexts (e.g., law enforcement collaboration with immigration authorities, E-Verify employment authorization) were associated with self-rated health (SRH) by citizenship, with a focus on Latinos and APIs. We expected that criminalization policies would be associated with worse health for noncitizens and citizens, but with a more negative influence for noncitizens; and that this pattern would be the same for Latinos and APIs. We merged a state-level immigrant criminalization policy database with a multi-racial/ethnic sample from 2014 to 2015 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS, n = 70,335). We tested the association between SRH and the number of state-level criminalization policies and generated predicted probabilities of noncitizens and citizens reporting excellent health in states with the most and fewest criminalization policies for the full sample, Latino, and API respondents. In states with the most criminalization policies, all noncitizens had a higher and all US-born citizens had a lower probability of excellent health. In states with the fewest criminalization policies there were no differences by citizenship status. Findings provide new evidence that state-level immigrant policies may harm the health of US-born citizens. As immigrant policymaking at the state level continues, understanding the relationship between state-level immigrant policies and health inequities across citizenship statuses will continue to be critical to improving population health.

•

State policies that criminalize immigrants may harm the health of both noncitizens and citizens of different races/ethnicities.

•

More state immigrant criminalization policies are associated with health inequities between US citizens and noncitizens.

•

Immigrant criminalization policies are associated with worse self-reported health for US born citizens.

Immigrant-Related Policies and the Health Outcomes of Latinx Adults in the United States: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

US federal and subfederal immigrant-related policy activity has increased in recent years. We hypothesize that these policies are structural determinants of health for Latinx communities, operating through access to resources, discriminatory enforcement, and stress.

METHODS

We searched seven databases for quantitative studies, published as of September 2021, examining the association between the presence of federal, state, or local immigrant-related policy(ies), over time or cross-sectionally, and mental or physical health outcomes among immigrant or US-born Latinx adults. We rated studies on methodologic quality.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included. Policies included federal and state policies. Health outcomes included mental health (seven studies), self-rated health (n = 6), and physical disability (n = 1). Among immigrant, noncitizen, or Spanish-preferring Latinx adults, exclusionary policies were associated with poor self-rated health, physical disability, and poor mental health. Inclusive policies were associated with better health, although null findings were more common than among studies of exclusionary policies. Only three studies separately examined policy effects on US-born or citizen Latinx adults and these findings were often null. All studies received a weak overall study quality rating; among quality domains, studies were strongest in confounding control and weakest in outcome information bias and reporting missing data approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

These results support the hypothesis that immigrant-related policies, especially exclusionary policies, are structural drivers of health for immigrant or noncitizen Latinx adults. However, evidence is scant among US-born or citizen Latinx adults. Studies of policies and physical health outcomes besides disability are lacking, as are results disaggregated by nativity and/or citizenship status.