Parenting Strain among Mexican-origin Mothers: Differences by Parental Legal Status and Neighborhood

To know and be known: Mexican borderland mothers’ epistemic experiences

Few studies have examined how Mexican-origin mothers experience epistemic harm irrespective of its impact on childrearing. Clinicians and researchers can benefit from understanding how public narratives of (un)belonging influence the development of Mexican-origin mothers’ knowledge construction and identity as knowers. We used Chicana decolonial feminisms to examine the epistemic experiences of seven Mexican-origin mothers in the US–Mexico borderlands during a period of heightened racist, nativist, and anti-family violence. Participants between the ages of 22 and 51 years completed in-depth semi structured testimonio interviews in Spanish, English, and Spanglish, an admixture of both English and Spanish common among bilingual Americans of Mexican descent. Epistemic experiences were intertwined with crossing, bridging, and the liminality associated with navigating diverse citizenship discourses as gendered, racialized knowers. Three themes were identified including brown-on-brown conflict, discrimination denial, and co-family as sources of new knowledge. Participants experienced epistemic harm from expected and unexpected sources, including within-family invalidations that were especially disorienting. Epistemic growth arose from relational, integrated co-construction of new knowledge, but epistemic harm also appeared to cultivate internalized nativist fears in some participants.

Mothers' Intimate Partner Violence Victimization and Depression: Associations with Children's Behavioral Functioning

Despite robust bodies of literature documenting that both mothers' intimate partner violence (IPV) victimization and mothers' mental health are consequential for children's behavioral functioning, the conjunction of these two risk factors is less understood. Findings are mixed as to whether mental health mediates the effect of IPV on behavioral functioning. Such mixed findings may result from literature primarily examining samples selected from clinical, shelter, or intervention settings. Furthermore, few studies have expanded the literature to assess moderation, rather than mediation, effects. While mediation analysis tests whether behavioral problems result from mothers' IPV because IPV increases depression, moderation analysis instead tests whether mother's IPV victimization has a different impact for their children based on whether or not the mother is also experiencing depression. The current study uses a representative survey of neighborhoods and households in Los Angeles County, the Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey (n = 1,913), to examine the combined effects of mothers' IPV victimization and depression on children's internalizing and externalizing behavior problems. The findings suggest that mothers' IPV victimization and depression have direct, positive effects on both internalizing and externalizing behavior problems. Additionally, there is a moderation effect such that children of mothers who suffer from both IPV victimization and depression have higher levels of internalizing behavior problems. These results emphasize the importance of addressing the mental health of IPV victims, not only for the benefit of the direct victim, but also for the benefit of her children.

"Me Cuesta Mucho": Latina immigrant mothers navigating remote learning and caregiving during COVID-19

Before the pandemic, immigrant mothers from Latin America in the United States typically shouldered the weight of caregiving for children, maintained jobs, and managed transnational care responsibilities. But as COVID-19 erupted across the globe, the combination of gendered roles and a collapsing economy ruptured the already fragile arrangement of childcare and paid labor for Latina immigrant mothers. In this article, I examine how school closures intersected with Latina women's identities and social positions as immigrant mothers who suddenly confronted job loss, illness, and increased familial responsibilities. I show how Latina immigrant women renegotiated relationships to schooling, becoming teachers overnight in an unfamiliar system. Mothers shifted educational aspirations for their children to prioritize safety, as they managed increased stress and conflict while schools remained remote. I demonstrate how the breakdowns in care infrastructure forced mothers to rethink the elusive balance between paid labor and childcare, especially for those who were undocumented. Throughout, I explore how immigrant women's intersecting identities left them vulnerable to structural racism and exclusionary immigration policies. Despite the multiple layers of struggle, women continued to support their children's education and socio-emotional well-being, even in the face of multiple levels of gendered, racialized inequalities.

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.

Vulnerable and Resilient: Legal Status, Sources of Support, Maternal Knowledge, and the Family Routines of Mexican and Central American-origin Mothers in Los Angeles

How do unauthorized immigrant parents promote family functioning to navigate challenging conditions and contexts in the United States? This article offers the first quantitative analyses contrasting the family organization and maternal knowledge of Mexican and Central-American immigrant mothers by legal status. Using Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey data with a sample of mothers of school-aged children, the analyses investigate whether mothers’ documentation status, origin country/region, and access to social and instrumental support are associated with the frequency of family dinners, the consistency of family routines, and the knowledge of their child’s associations and friendships. Relative to their US-born and documented Mexican immigrant counterparts, undocumented Mexican immigrant mothers have as many or more frequent family dinners, more predictable family routines, and the same level of knowledge about whom their child is with when not at home. Whom mothers can rely on for emergency childcare and financial support also is linked with both family organization and levels of maternal knowledge about their child. More quantitative research is needed about how undocumented immigrant parents actively employ different family functioning strategies to promote strengths and resiliency in their lives in the midst of challenging contexts driven by lack of legal status.

Spanning Borders, Cultures, and Generations: A Decade of Research on Immigrant Families

The authors review research conducted during the past decade on immigrant families, focusing primarily on the United States and the sending countries with close connections to the United States. They note several major advances. First, researchers have focused extensively on immigrant families that are physically separated but socially and economically linked across origin and destination communities and explored what these family arrangements mean for family structure and functions. Second, family scholars have explored how contexts of reception shape families and family relationships. Of special note is research that documented the experiences and risks associated with undocumented legal status for parents and children. Third, family researchers have explored how the acculturation and enculturation process operates as families settle in the destination setting and raise the next generation. Looking forward, they identify several possible directions for future research to better understand how immigrant families have responded to a changing world in which nations and economies are increasingly interconnected and diverse, populations are aging, and family roles are in flux and where these changes are often met with fear and resistance in immigrant-receiving destinations.

Parenthood and Well-Being: A Decade in Review

Understanding social aspects of parental well-being is vital, because parents' welfare has implications not only for parents themselves but also for child development, fertility, and the overall health of a society. This article provides a critical review of scholarship on parenthood and well-being in advanced economies published from 2010 to 2019. It focuses on the role of social, economic, cultural, and institutional contexts of parenting in influencing adult well-being. We identify major themes, achievements, and challenges and organize the review around the demands-rewards perspective and two theoretical frameworks: the stress process model and life course perspectives. The analysis shows that rising economic insecurities and inequalities and a diffusion of intensive parenting ideology were major social contexts of parenting in the 2010s. Scholarship linking parenting contexts and parental well-being illuminated how stressors related to providing and caring for children could unjustly burden some parents, especially mothers, those with fewer socioeconomic resources, and those with marginalized statuses. In that vein, researchers continued to emphasize how stressors diverged by parents' socioeconomic status, gender, and partnership status, with new attention to strains experienced by racial/ethnic minority, immigrant, and LGBTQ parents. Scholars' comparisons of parents' positions in various countries expanded, enhancing knowledge regarding specific policy supports that allow parents to thrive. Articulating future research within a stress process model framework, we showed vibrant theoretical pathways, including conceptualizing potential parental social supports at multiple levels, attending to the intersection of multiple social locations of parents, and renewing attention to local contextual factors and parenting life stages.

Deported Men's and Father's Perspective: The Impacts of Family Separation on Children and Families in the U.S

Background: Family separation due to the deportation of a migrant is pervasive, yet less is known about its potential impacts on the social, economic and mental well-being of families remaining in the United States. Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods study. In 2013, 303 Mexican male nationals completed an interviewer-administered questionnaire at a free clinic in Tijuana, Mexico. For this analysis, participants were: (1) ≥18 years; (2) seeking services; (3) Spanish or English speakers and (4) reported a U.S. deportation. Participants answered migration history items and open-ended questions regarding the impact of their deportation on U.S.-based family members. We present descriptive statistics and illustrative quotes for themes identified in the qualitative text data. Using a grounded-theory approach, we considered all data to develop a conceptual framework that others may use to study the consequences of family separation due to deportation. Results: Nearly two-thirds of participants reported living in the U.S. for 11+ years, a similar proportion reported 2+ deportations, and 31% reported being banned from re-entering the U.S. for 11+ years. More than one-half of participants were separated from their nuclear families (spouse/partner and/or children). Deportees who were separated from any family members reported that their families lost income for basic needs (rent/utilities: 50%, food: 44%, clothing: 39%, daycare: 16%, health insurance: 15%); school participation was also negatively impacted (31%). Qualitative data revealed that children ≤18 years remaining in the U.S. experienced mental health symptoms post-parental deportation (i.e., persistent crying, depression, sadness, anger, resentment). Deported fathers consistently expressed frustration at being unable to provide love, care, support, mentorship for their children. Based on our mixed-methods approach, we propose a framework to systematically study the consequences of family separation due to the deportation of fathers. Conclusion: Findings are consistent with the extant research. Binational interventions to support families that experience forced-separation are needed to mitigate short and long-term adverse mental health outcomes, especially among youth in the U.S., and other unfavorable family and household-level outcomes. Funding to understand the implications of maternal deportation and for longitudinal qualitative and quantitative research on migrant-focused interventions and related outcomes is needed.