House Poor in Los Angeles: Examining Patterns of Housing-Induced Poverty by Race, Nativity, and Legal Status

The health impacts of eviction: Evidence from the national longitudinal study of adolescent to adult health

Eviction represents an urgent social and economic issue in the United States, with nearly two million evictions occurring annually in the U.S. Still, the population health impacts of evictions, as well as the pathways linking eviction to health, are not well documented or understood, particularly among young adults. Using nationally-representative, longitudinal data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (1994-2008) (n = 9029), the present study uses a combination of analytic methods-including prospective lagged dependent variable regression models, inverse probabilities of treatment weighting, longitudinal first difference models, causal mediation techniques-to comprehensively assess whether and how evictions relate to depressive risk and self-rated health across early adulthood, paying particular attention to the stress-related pathways linking eviction and health. Results provide robust evidence of positive longitudinal associations between eviction and depressive risk, in particular. In the prospective regression models, young adults who experienced recent eviction had more depressive symptoms and worse self-rated health than those who were not evicted, net a host of background characteristics. Using treatment weighting techniques, results showed that young adults who experienced eviction had more depressive symptoms than those who were not evicted (5.921 vs. 4.998 depressive symptoms, p = 0.003). Perceived social stress mediated nearly 18 percent of the associations between eviction and the depressive symptoms (p < 0.001). In the first difference models, young people who experienced eviction between survey waves experienced greater increases in depressive symptoms over time compared to those who were not evicted, net of changes in other indicators of socioeconomic status and residential instability. Taken together, our results suggest that the recent surges in evictions in the U.S. serve as a potent threat to population health during the emerging adult period, with especially devastating consequences for low-income individuals and communities of color.

Depressive symptoms of house-poor persons: Korean panel data evidence

BACKGROUND

There are no studies researching the relationship between house-poor persons and mental health. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the relationship between house-poor status and depressive symptoms.

AIM

To examine the relationship between the house-poor and depressive symptoms according to household income.

METHODS

Data from the Korean Welfare Panel Study were used. House-poor were defined as people having possession with over 10% house-related interest in disposable income. About 7,565 participants over the age of 19 years were followed up from 2011 to 2013. The generalized estimating equations were used for analysis.

RESULTS

Individuals with more house-related debt showed increasingly higher depression scores (possession with under 5% related debt to disposable income β = 0.2024, p = .1544; under 10% β = 0.7030, p = .0008; over 10% β = 1.3207, p < .0001). Individuals possessing houses with over 10% ratio of house-related debts to disposable income had higher depression scores than individuals without house ownership (no possession β = 0.8927, p < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Individuals without houses and individuals owning houses with higher percentages of house-related interests showed higher levels of depressive symptoms. Therefore, this study affirmed that the importance of considering the most vulnerable groups in addressing the mental health of individual.

Hurdles or walls? Nativity, citizenship, legal status and Latino homeownership in Los Angeles

Homeownership is directly and indirectly linked with many positive child, adult, and community-level outcomes. Prior research offers strong evidence that nativity and immigrants' citizenship status shapes U.S. homeownership, but relatively little work has explored how immigrants' legal status is connected with homeownership. This study draws from locational attainment and classic assimilation theories to develop hypotheses about sources of intra-Latino heterogeneity in homeownership. Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey data are used to contrast four distinct groups of Latinos: U.S. born natives, naturalized citizens, authorized non-citizens, and unauthorized non-citizens. Logistic regression results indicate baseline and residual variation in Latino homeownership based on immigrant citizenship and legal status. Of these, unauthorized non-citizens are the least likely to own their home. The results provide support for all three theoretical models, particularly the place stratification perspective. The results also point to the need for more housing studies that jointly examine citizenship and legal status.

Homes of low-income minority families with asthmatic children have increased condition issues

The home is increasingly associated with asthma. It acts both as a reservoir of asthma triggers and as a refuge from seasonal outdoor allergen exposure. Racial/ethnic minority families with low incomes tend to reside in neighborhoods with low housing quality. These families also have higher rates of asthma. This study explores the hypothesis that black and Latino urban households with asthmatic children experienced more home mechanical, structural condition-related areas of concern than white households with asthmatic children. Participant families (n = 140) took part in the Kansas City Safe and Healthy Homes Program, had at least one asthmatic child, and met income qualifications of no more than 80% of local median income; many were below 50%. Families self-identified their race. Homes were assessed by environmental health professionals using a standard set of criteria and a specific set of on-site and laboratory sampling and analyses. Homes were given a score for areas of concern between 0 (best) and 53 (worst). The study population self-identified as black (46%), non-Latino white (26%), Latino (14.3%), and other (12.9%). Mean number of areas of concern were 18.7 in Latino homes, 17.8 in black homes, 13.3 in other homes, and 13.2 in white homes. Latino and black homes had significantly more areas of concern. White families were also more likely to be in the upper portion of the income. In this set of 140 low-income homes with an asthmatic child, households of minority individuals had more areas of condition concerns and generally lower income than other families.

Undocumented migration and the residential segregation of Mexicans in new destinations

This study uses data from the 2000 Census and 2005-2009 American Community Survey to examine the impact of undocumented Mexican migration to new destinations on residential segregation between Mexican immigrants and native-born whites and native-born blacks. We find that Mexican-white and Mexican-black segregation is higher in new Mexican gateways than in established areas and that, for Mexican-immigrant segregation from whites, this heightened level of residential segregation in new destinations can be explained by the high presence of unauthorized Mexican immigrants living there which tends to bolster segregation between the two groups. By contrast, Mexican-immigrant segregation from native-born blacks tends to be lower in areas with larger undocumented populations, a pattern that is especially true in new destinations. Neither of these opposing effects of legal status on Mexican-immigrant segregation can be explained by compositional differences in assimilation (English ability and earnings) between documented and undocumented immigrants nor by structural variation in metropolitan areas, suggesting a unique association between legal status and segregation.

Housing and neighborhood quality among undocumented Mexican and Central American immigrants

Extensive research has documented the challenges that undocumented immigrants face in navigating U.S. labor markets, but relatively little has explored the impact of legal status on residential outcomes despite their widespread repercussions for social well-being. Using data from the 1996-2008 panels of the Survey of Income and Program Participation to impute documentation status among Mexican and Central American immigrants, we examine group differences in residential outcomes, including homeownership, housing crowding, satisfaction with neighborhood and housing quality, problems with neighborhood crime/safety, governmental services, and environmental issues, and deficiencies with housing units. Results from our analysis indicate that undocumented householders are far less likely to be homeowners than documented migrants, and also live in more crowded homes, report greater structural deficiencies with their dwellings, and express greater concern about the quality of public services and environmental conditions in their neighborhoods. In comparison to native whites, undocumented migrants' residential circumstances are lacking, but their residential outcomes tend to be superior to those of native-born blacks. Overall, our results highlight the pervasive impact of legal status on stratifying Mexicans' and Central Americans' prospects for successful incorporation, but also underscore the rigidity of the black/nonblack divide structuring American residential contexts.

Who has housing affordability problems? Disparities in Housing Cost burden by Race, Nativity and Legal Status in Los Angeles

Housing costs are a substantial component of U.S. household expenditures. Those who allocate a large proportion of their income to housing often have to make difficult financial decisions with significant short-term and long-term implications for adults and children. This study employs cross-sectional data from the first wave of the Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (L.A.FANS) collected between 2000 and 2002 to examine the most common U.S. standard of housing affordability, the likelihood of spending thirty percent or more of income on shelter costs. Multivariate analyses of a low-income sample of U.S. born Latinos, Whites, African Americans, authorized Latino immigrants and unauthorized Latino immigrants focus on baseline and persistent differences in the likelihood of being cost burdened by race, nativity and legal status. Nearly half or more of each group of low-income respondents experience housing affordability problems. The results suggest that immigrants' legal status is the primary source of disparities among those examined, with the multivariate analyses revealing large and persistent disparities for unauthorized Latino immigrants relative to most other groups. Moreover, the higher odds of housing cost burden observed for unauthorized immigrants compared with their authorized immigrant counterparts remains substantial, accounting for traditional indicators of immigrant assimilation. These results are consistent with emerging scholarship regarding the role of legal status in shaping immigrant outcomes in the United States.