Undocumented and Unwell: Legal Status and Health among Mexican Migrants

"Mi Familia Quiere Que Regrese": Retired Latiné Immigrants' Families' Expectations to Return to Their Country of Origin

We conducted a quantitative, interdisciplinary study that investigated how financial concerns and varying family connections influence the retirement choices of Latiné immigrants in terms of returning to their country of origin. We hypothesized that being worried about one's finances for retirement, and having strong transnational ties, would lead to familial expectations to return to one's country of origin. Through data collected from a survey through Qualtrics, we found that higher levels of financial worry significantly affected greater familial expectations to return to their country of origin. The transnational ties that influenced the families' expectations to return to their country of origin was having children, friends, and family not residing in the U.S. Following our findings, we discuss potential future directions and implications relating to transnational ties, remittances, and older Latiné immigrants.

Is use of a smuggler to cross the US-Mexico border associated with mental health problems among undocumented immigrants from Mexico?

Although numerous studies have found that Latine immigrants to the United States (US) have better health outcomes on average than persons born in the US, studies of persons living in Mexico have found that undocumented immigrants have worse health, especially those that were deported, compared to Mexican citizens that never migrated or migrated with authorization. However, the health outcomes of Mexican migrants using a smuggler to cross the US-Mexico border is a gap in the literature. We hypothesized that undocumented immigrant adults who used a smuggler to cross the US-Mexico border would be more likely to report mental health problems upon return to Mexico compared with undocumented immigrant adults that did not use a smuggler. We analyzed nationally representative, cross-sectional survey data of 1,563 undocumented immigrants currently living in Mexico. Most undocumented immigrants in the sample (87%) used a smuggler. Use of a smuggler by undocumented immigrant adults was associated with a 4.7% higher prevalence of emotional or psychiatric problems compared to undocumented immigrant adults that did not use a smuggler. We conclude that modality of ingress into the US is a risk factor for poorer mental health among undocumented immigrant adults.

Unauthorized Mexican-Born Immigrants, Occupational Injuries, and the use of Medical Services in the United States

This article examines how unauthorized immigrant status is associated with the risk of suffering a work-related accident or illness and with the use of medical services after experiencing an injury among Mexican immigrants in the United States. Using individual-level data on 81,004 Mexican immigrants who previously worked in the United States and were interviewed when they returned to Mexico in the Survey of Migration in the Northern Border of Mexico from 2010 to 2018, we estimate a series of probit models and nonlinear decompositions to analyze legal status differences in the incidence of occupational injuries among immigrant workers. The results show that among Mexican immigrants in the United States unauthorized status was associated with a greater probability of experiencing an occupational injury. The higher injury rate among unauthorized immigrants was partly driven by the fact that they worked more hours per day, more days per week, and were employed in riskier occupations than authorized immigrants. If unauthorized immigrants were older and had higher levels of English-language ability, the injury gap would have been even larger. Unauthorized status was also associated with a lower likelihood of using medical services after suffering an occupational injury because unauthorized workers had less access to medical care. The findings show that the right to legal work has important implications for the health of immigrants by setting a higher risk level for injury on the job and limiting access to health care following such an injury.

Apprehension and educational outcomes among Hispanic students in the United States: The impact of Secure Communities

Prior research suggests that disruptive events, such as shocks induced by family instability, neighborhood violence, or relocation, tend to be detrimental for children’s educational outcomes, but findings are heterogeneous depending on the type of event. Limited evidence is available on how shocks resulting from immigration enforcement impact educational outcomes among targeted minority groups. This study contributes to the literature by assessing how a policy implementation in the US–Secure Communities–is related to the school district level achievement of Hispanic students. The Secure Communities program is a national level immigration enforcement policy that was rolled out on a county-by-county basis. The program has increased the risk of deportation and led to rising apprehension and insecurity among undocumented migrants and the wider Hispanic community. Using detailed information on the implementation of Secure Communities, data from the Stanford Education Data Archive, and the Current Population Survey, this study estimates dynamic difference in differences exploiting regional variation in the timing of the policy change to assess its impact on educational outcomes. Results show that the activation of Secure Communities is negatively associated with Hispanic students’ subsequent English language arts achievement, while white and black students’ achievement does not change. Findings further suggest that Hispanic students living in the South, rural areas, and areas with high proportions of likely undocumented migrants are disproportionately impacted by the program’s activation. Whereas, Hispanic students in sanctuary jurisdictions, which reduce the likelihood of deportation, are not impacted. These findings indicate that immigration enforcement can have negative consequences for educational and social inequalities in the United States.

Health selection on self-rated health and the healthy migrant effect: Baseline and 1-year results from the health of Philippine Emigrants Study

Studies of migration and health focus on a "healthy migrant effect" whereby migrants are healthier than individuals not migrating. Health selection remains the popular explanation of this phenomenon. However, studies are mixed on whether selection occurs and typically examine migrants post-departure. This study used a novel pre-migration dataset to identify which health and social domains differ between migrants and their non-migrant counterparts and their contribution to explaining variance in self-rated health by migrant status at pre-migration and 1-year later. Data were used from the baseline and 1-year follow-up of the Health of Philippine Emigrants Study (HoPES). We used multivariable ordinary least squares regression to examine differences in self-rated health between migrants to the U.S. and a comparable group of non-migrants at baseline (premigration) and one year later, accounting for seven domains: physical health, mental health, health behavior, demographics, socioeconomic factors and healthcare utilization, psychosocial factors, and social desirability. A migrant advantage was present for self-rated health at baseline and 1-year. Accounting for all domains, migrants reported better self-rated health compared to non-migrants both at baseline (β = 0.32; 95% CI = 0.22, 0.43) and at 1-year (β = 0.28; 95% CI = 0.10, 0.46). Migrant status, health behavior, and mental health accounted for most of the variance in self-rated health both at baseline and 1-year follow-up. This analysis provides evidence of migrant health selection and nuanced understanding to what is being captured by self-rated health in studies of migrant health that should be considered in future research.

The political determinants of the health of undocumented immigrants: a comparative analysis of mortality patterns in Switzerland

BACKGROUND

The health of undocumented immigrants is an important concern in most societies. However, there is no conclusive evidence that inclusive health care policies lead to better outcomes for this group of the population. The aim of this study is to analyse whether there is an association between inclusive health care policies and the mortality patterns of undocumented immigrants, or the distribution of different causes of death among those who have died.

METHODS

We analyse individual data concerning the deceased in Switzerland between 2011 and 2017. We proceed in two steps. First, we estimate and compare the patterns of mortality of Swiss citizens, documented immigrants, and undocumented immigrants. Second, we test whether there is an association between cantonal authorities' policies and differing mortality patterns. We use logistic regressions and multinomial regressions to estimate the relationship between legal status and mortality patterns both in Switzerland and across different cantons.

RESULTS

We find a difference in the patterns of mortality between undocumented immigrants and the other groups of the population. Specifically, death from circulatory system diseases is twice as frequent among undocumented immigrants compared to documented immigrants and Swiss citizens. However, this difference is smaller in the Swiss cantons that have more inclusive health care policies towards undocumented immigrants.

CONCLUSIONS

We interpret these results as an indication that policies that expand access to health services lead to better outcomes for undocumented immigrants. This finding has implications for research on civic stratification and public health. Further analysis is needed to evaluate the effects of extending public health care for undocumented immigrants in different contexts.

Possibilities for Sociological Research to Reduce Inequalities: Observations from the Immigration Scholarship

This commentary brings immigration research to the conversation on sociology's possibilities to respond to inequality. It argues that legal status today has become an important dimension of inequality given its enduring impact across most areas of life and effects that extend laterally to all members of a family and across generations. The piece highlights the possibilities for sociologists to contribute to policy discussions but also the limitations of research in policy spaces given the antiscience resistance in the sociopolitical context today.

Recasting the Immigrant Health Paradox Through Intersections of Legal Status and Race

Immigrant health research has often noted an "immigrant health paradox", the observation that immigrants are "healthier" compared to their native-born peers of similar demographic and socioeconomic profile. This paradox disappears as immigrants stay longer in the host country. Multiple arguments, including migrant selectivity and cultural and behavioral factors have been proposed as reasons for the apparent paradox. Recently, the field has focused on immigrant legal status, especially its racialization. We review the literature on the immigrant health paradox, legal status, and racialized legal status to examine how this debate has taken a more structural approach. We find that immigrant health research has taken a needed intersectional approach, a productive development that examines how different markers of disadvantage work concurrently to shape immigrants' health. This approach, which factors in immigration enforcement practices, aligns with explanations for poor health outcomes among other racialized groups, and promises a fruitful avenue for future research.

Too precarious to walk: an integrated "three delays" framework for modeling barriers to maternal health care and birth registration among stateless persons and irregular migrants in Malaysia

This study extends Thaddeus and Maine's (1994) "three delays" framework to model the interrelated barriers to maternal health care and birth registration. We focus on stateless persons and irregular migrants, populations that are especially at risk of being "left behind" in United Nations member states' efforts to "provide legal identity to all" as part of the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda. Drawing on qualitative fieldwork conducted in Sabah, Malaysia, we model delays in accessing maternal health care and birth registration as an integrated, cyclical process. We identify the political and legal barriers that stateless or migrant families confront while deciding to make institutional contact (Phase I), identifying and reaching health or registering institutions (Phase II), and receiving adequate and appropriate treatment (Phase III). We find that exclusion from one system raises the risk of exclusion from the other, resulting in a range of negative consequences, including increased health risks, governments' impaired ability to monitor population health, and the perpetuation of intergenerational cycles of legal exclusion.

Aging and undocumented: The sociology of aging meets immigration status

Being undocumented is strongly correlated with low wages, employment in high risk occupations, and poor healthcare access. We know surprisingly little about the social lives of older undocumented adults despite the vast literature about youth and young undocumented migrants. Literature about the immigrant health paradox casts doubts on the argument that unequal social conditions translate to poorer self-reported health and mortality, but few of these studies consider immigration status as the dynamic variable that it is. Reviewing research about older migrants and minorities, I point to the emergence of undocumented older persons as a demographic group that merits attention from researchers and policymakers. This nexus offers important lessons for understanding stratification and inequality. This review offers new research directions that take into account multilevel consequences of growing old undocumented. Rather than arguing that older-aged undocumented migrants are aging into exclusion, I argue that we need careful empirical research to examine how the continuity of exclusion via policies can magnify inequalities on the basis of immigration status and racialization in older age.

(Il)legality and psychosocial well-being: Central Asian migrant women in Russia

Legal status has shown far-reaching consequences for international migrants' incorporation trajectories and outcomes in Western contexts. In dialogue with the extant research, we examine the implications of legal status for subjective well-being of Central Asian migrant women in the Russian Federation. Using survey data collected through respondent-driven sampling in two large cities, we compare migrants with regularized and irregular legal statuses on several interrelated yet distinct dimensions of subjective well-being. We find that, regardless of other factors, regularized status has a strong positive association with migrants' perception of their rights and freedoms but not with their feeling of being respected in society. Regularized status is positively associated with self-efficacy and negatively with depression. Yet, no net legal status difference is found in migrants' views on their relations with other migrants or on treatment of migrants by native-borns. The findings are situated within the cross-national scholarship on the ramifications of racialized immigrant (il)legality and its implications for membership and belonging.

Disentangling contributions of demographic, family, and socioeconomic factors on associations of immigration status and health in the United States

BACKGROUND

In the United States, immigration policy is entwined with health policy, and immigrants' legal statuses determine their access to care. Yet, policy debates rarely take into account the health needs of immigrants and potential health consequences of linking legal status to healthcare. Confounding from social and demographic differences and lack of individual-level data with sensitive immigration variables present challenges in this area of research.

METHODS

This article used the restricted California Health Interview Survey (CHIS) to assess differences in self-rated health, obesity, and severe psychological distress. Between US-born citizens, naturalised citizens, lawful permanent residents (LPR), undocumented immigrants, and temporary visa holders living in California.

RESULTS

Results show that while immigrant groups appear to have poorer health on the surface, these differences were explained predominantly by older age among naturalised citizens and by lower-income and education among LPRs and undocumented immigrants. Favourable family characteristics acted as protective factors for immigrants' health, especially among disadvantaged immigrants.

CONCLUSION

Immigration policy that limits access to healthcare and family support may further widen the health disadvantage among immigrants with less legal protection.

Legal Histories as Determinants of Incorporation: Previous Undocumented Experience and Naturalization Propensities Among Immigrants in the United States

This article examines how different histories of illegality may influence immigrants’ orientations toward acquiring citizenship in the United States. Findings from the New Immigrant Survey show that having crossed the border without authorization—compared to having no history of illegality—is associated with a higher propensity to naturalize, indicated by an expressed intention to naturalize upon eligibility and, notably, an early undertaking of the naturalization process. In contrast, there is weaker evidence that immigrants who overstayed their visas or worked without authorization differ with regards to naturalization from immigrants with no history of illegality. Results suggest that immigrants who have experienced the greatest degrees of legal insecurity in the past may be among those most likely to seek out full political membership. Thus, this article bears optimistic implications for the integration potential of previously undocumented immigrants, and highlights the importance of making available legal pathways “out of the shadows” and into the political communities of receiving states.

Evolution of the Mexico-U.S. Migration System: Insights from the Mexican Migration Project

Since 1987 the Mexican Migration Project has collected and disseminated representative survey data on documented and undocumented migration to the United States. The MMP currently includes surveys of 161 communities, which together contain data on 27,113 households and 169,945 individuals, 26,446 of whom have U.S. migratory experience. These data are here used to trace the evolution of the Mexico-U.S. migration system from the late 19th to the early 21st century, revealing how shifts in U.S. immigration and border policies have been critical to the formation of different eras of migration characterized by distinctive patterns of migration, settlement, and return in different legal statuses. The present era is characterized by the repression of the large population of undocumented migrants and their U.S. citizen children by an ongoing regime of mass detention and deportation and the simultaneous recruitment of Mexican workers for exploitation on short term temporary visas. The future of Mexican migration to the United States will be revealed by subsequent waves of data collection by the Mexican Migration Project.

The Ethnosurvey Revisited: New Migrations, New Methodologies?

This article provides a detailed review of the ethnosurvey, a research methodology that has been widely applied to the study of migration for almost four decades. We focus on the application of ethnosurvey methods in Mexico and Poland, drawing on studies done in the former country since the early 1980s and in the latter since the early 1990s (including several post-2004 examples). The second case is particularly relevant for our analysis as it refers to a number of novel migration forms that have been identified in Central and Eastern Europe in the post-1989 transition period. Drawing these studies, we consider the advantages and disadvantages of the ethnosurvey as a research tool for studying international migration. Its advantages include its multilevel design, its blend of qualitative and quantitative methods, its reliance on retrospective life histories, and its multisite data collection strategy. These features yield a rich database that has enabled researchers to capture circular, irregular, short-term, and sequential movements. Its disadvantages primarily stem from its hybrid sampling strategy, which necessarily places limits on estimation and generalizability, and the technical challenges of parallel sampling in communities of both origin and destination. Here we argue that the ethnosurvey was never proposed and should not be taken as a universal methodology applicable in all circumstances. Rather it represents a specialized tool that when correctly applied under the right conditions can be extremely useful in revealing the social and economic mechanisms that underlie human mobility, thus yielding a fuller understanding of international migration's complex causes and diverse consequences in both sending and receiving societies.