Restoring An Inclusionary Safety Net For Children In Immigrant Families: A Review Of Three Social Policies

Immigration policy climate and contraceptive use among Mexican-origin women in the United States: Support for the "spill-over" hypothesis

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to examine the association between state-level Immigration Policy Climate (IPC) and the use of most or moderately effective contraceptive methods among US-born White, US-born Mexican-origin, and foreign-born Mexican-origin women.

STUDY DESIGN

We linked nationally representative survey data from three waves of the National Survey of Family Growth (2013-2019) with a novel and dynamic state-level measure of IPC. We compared the use of a most or moderately effective contraceptive method at the time of the survey among the three ethnicity and nativity groups alone and as an interaction with state IPC index score above or below the national mean in the year of the survey. We used multivariable logistic regression to adjust for individual- and state-level characteristics and test for heterogeneity of the effect of IPC.

RESULTS

Weighted study sample included 31,528,602 respondents: 26,029,129 (82.5%; unweighted n = 5441) non-Latina White, 2,958,960 (9.4%; unweighted n = 971) US-born Mexican-origin, and 2,540,513 (8.1%; unweighted n = 719) foreign-born Mexican-origin. After adjusting for confounders, living in a state with a more inclusive immigration policy environment was associated with higher use of moderately or most effective contraception among Mexican-origin respondents, both US- (59.8% vs 52.2% less inclusive) and foreign-born (62.1% vs 55.9% less inclusive), but not US-born White (65.2% vs 67.8% less inclusive) respondents.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results support the "spillover" hypothesis; more exclusionary immigration policies were associated with lower utilization of effective contraceptive methods among both US-born Mexican-origin and Mexican immigrant women.

IMPLICATIONS

Mexican-origin women in states with more inclusive immigration policies are more likely to use effective contraception than those in states with exclusionary policies; this suggests that immigration policy climate may "spill over" into US-born Mexican-origin populations.

Racial/Ethnic and Immigrant Disparities in the Relationship Between Insurance and Cost-Related Unmet Health Needs in Adolescence

OBJECTIVE

Addressing cost-related unmet health needs is critical to ensuring positive health outcomes in adolescence. Promoting insurance coverage is a common strategy for reducing cost-related unmet health needs, but public insurance programs and private insurance differ in the number and types of no-cost services provided, and groups with higher average poverty rates such as immigrants and racial and ethnic minorities may be more negatively impacted by healthcare costs. This study examined the relationship between insurance type and adolescents' cost-related unmet health needs overall and by race and ethnicity and whether parents are immigrants.

METHODS

We used nationally representative cross-sectional data from the 2018-2021 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Household Component. We conducted multivariable logistic regression analysis adjusting for other explanatory variables. We analyzed data for the full sample, by race and ethnicity, and by parents' immigrant designation (US-born, mixed immigrant type, and foreign-born).

RESULTS

The sample included 11,493 adolescents aged 10-17 (weighted n = 32,320,725). In the overall analysis, adolescents with public insurance were less likely to have cost-related unmet health needs than those with private insurance. In the sub-sample analyses, this finding only was significant for adolescents with US-born parents and Non-Hispanic Black adolescents.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings indicate that for some but not all groups of adolescents, public insurance is more beneficial than private insurance in terms of reducing cost-related unmet health needs. Additional research is needed to understand the reasons for these group-level differences and to develop strategies to ensure all adolescents have access to affordable health care.

Enhancing immigrant families' mental health through the promotion of structural and community-based support

Immigrant communities in the United States are diverse and have many assets. Yet, they often experience stressors that can undermine the mental health of residents. To fully promote mental health and well-being among immigrant communities, it is important to emphasize population-level policies and practices that may serve to mitigate stress and prevent mental health disorders. In this paper, we describe the stressors and stress experienced by immigrant families, using Sunset Park, Brooklyn as an example. We discuss ways to build structures and policies in support of equitable environments that promote mental health at the population level and enable families and their children to thrive.

Immigrants to the United States contribute to society: Here are 3 ways to support their transition

The number of migrants entering the United States in 2023 shattered records. Despite prevailing narratives, immigrants, on average, contribute substantially to US society. Rather than slamming the door in the faces of newcomers, federal, state, and local policymakers should provide services to these individuals to ensure they have the maximum opportunity to thrive, both for their own benefit and for the greater social good. Public health and social science research provides ample rigorous evidence on the benefits of different types of investments in these vulnerable individuals upon their arrival in our country. In this Commentary, I review 3 examples of potential evidence-based investments: social inclusion, meeting basic needs, and supportive neighborhoods.

Left Behind: Medicaid Immigrant Exclusions and Access to Maternal Health Care Across the Reproductive-Perinatal Continuum

Noncitizen immigrants are often excluded from accessing critical safety-net programs, such as Medicaid. Access to health care plays a central role in current policy debates on maternal health. Yet, immigrant exclusions are rarely considered in maternal health policy research. Through open-ended interviews with 31 policymakers, researchers, and program administrators, we examined state variations in approaches to providing care for pregnant, post, and intrapartum immigrant women. We found four themes: (a) a patchwork safety-net exists that provides some access to immigrants ineligible for Medicaid; (b) patchwork coverage leads to patchwork care, which can contribute to maternal health inequities; (c) immigrant Medicaid policy is assembled along a hierarchy of deservingness based on documentation status; (d) Trump-era public charge rules and political climate may have a substantial chilling effect on benefit uptake regardless of eligibility. We discuss implications for efforts to expand Medicaid postpartum and address the maternal health crisis.

Race And Racial Perceptions Shape Burden Tolerance For Medicaid And The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program

Safety-net programs do not reach all eligible Americans, partly because of administrative burden, or experiencing bureaucratic obstacles in obtaining and maintaining program benefits. This burden often disproportionately affects historically marginalized groups, adding concerns about equity. We used a national survey to examine public thinking about the acceptability of administrative burdens imposed by states when implementing Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and the role of race in these considerations. We found that support for state actions associated with six types of burden was unchanged when respondents were informed about disparate effects by race. Neither racial identity nor prejudice toward other racial groups was associated with support for policies imposing higher burdens. However, non-Hispanic White respondents with higher levels of racial resentment were more supportive of policies that would create burden, whereas respondents who believed that burdens had disparate effects on historically disadvantaged groups favored less burdensome alternatives. Also associated with lower support for more burdensome policies were responses indicative of respondents' empathy, concerns about ability to manage burdens, Democratic party identification, and program experience.

Integration and coordination across public benefit programs: Insights from state and local government leaders in the United States

•Integration across public benefit programs could streamline access to services.•Modernized technology and shared missions among agencies promote integration.•Limited financial resources and insufficient guidance hinder integration.•State agencies view integration as a way to create human-centered experiences.•Additional resources from federal agencies could help establish greater integration.

Parental Immigration Status, Medicaid Expansion, And Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Participation

Anti-immigrant public policies and rhetoric during 2017-19 may have eroded enrollment in safety-net programs, such as the enrollment of children of immigrants in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). At the same time, states' expansion of Medicaid through the Affordable Care Act may have mitigated erosion through coordinated enrollment across safety-net programs, including SNAP and Medicaid. We examined changes in SNAP participation rates by parental immigration status among low-income households in 2015-16 versus 2017-19 for differences by child race and ethnicity or state Medicaid expansion status. Relative to those among citizen children with US-born parents, SNAP participation rates among citizen children from mixed-status families and noncitizen children significantly decreased between 2015-16 and 2017-19, with the magnitude of disparity widening over time. Declines in SNAP participation were sharper for Hispanic and Latino children from mixed-status families, Hispanic and Latino noncitizen children, and noncitizen children residing in nonexpansion states. Findings are consistent with some policy makers' concerns of erosion in SNAP participation. Mechanisms that could be employed to help reverse these trends include policies, outreach strategies, and enrollment processes.

Adolescent Reproductive Health Outcomes Among Mexican-Origin Women on Both Sides of the U.S.-Mexico Border

PURPOSE

Much reproductive health research on the Latina population overlooks heterogeneity by national origin, nativity, and age and also ignores how U.S.-based populations differ from those in "sending" nations. The purpose of this study is to describe a history of adolescent birth, age at first sex, and contraceptive use at first sex in the Mexican-origin population in both the United States and Mexico.

METHODS

We developed a binational dataset merging two comparable nationally representative cross-sectional surveys in the United States and Mexico and used covariate balancing propensity scores to balance the age structure of our four samples: U.S.-born Latinas of Mexican origin, foreign-born Latinas of Mexican origin, U.S.-born non-Latina Whites, and Mexican women residing in Mexico. We used a negative binomial regression and calculated the predicted probability of experiencing at least one adolescent birth for each ethnicity/nativity group, stratified by 5-year age group. We also described age and contraceptive use at first sex.

RESULTS

Foreign-born Latinas of Mexican origin and Mexicans in Mexico had similar adjusted probabilities of reporting an adolescent birth (30.1% and 29.9%, respectively), which were higher than those of Mexican-Americans (26.2%) and U.S.-born non-Latina Whites (11.6%). History of an adolescent birth is declining across all four groups among younger ages. Differences do not appear to be driven by the timing of first sex but by contraceptive use, which is increasing among younger age groups.

DISCUSSION

Access to and use of effective contraception rather than timing of initiation of sexual activity is a key determinant of U.S. Latina and Mexican adolescent births.

Working around safety net exclusions during the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative study of rural Latinx immigrants

Rural Latinx immigrants experienced disproportionately negative health and economic impacts during the COVID-19 pandemic. They contended with the pandemic at the intersection of legal status exclusions from the safety net and long-standing barriers to health care in rural regions. Yet, little is known about how rural Latinx immigrants navigated such exclusions. In this qualitative study, we examined how legal status stratification in rural contexts influenced Latinx immigrant families' access to the safety net. We conducted interviews with first- and second-generation Latinx immigrants (n = 39) and service providers (n = 20) in four rural California communities between July 2020 and April 2021. We examined personal and organizational strategies used to obtain economic, health, and other forms of support. We found that Latinx families navigated a limited safety net with significant exclusions. In response, they enacted short-term strategies and practices - workarounds - that met immediate, short-term needs. Workarounds, however, were enacted through individual efforts, allowing little recourse beyond immediate personal agency. Some took the form of strategic practices within the safety net, such as leveraging resources that did not require legal status verification; in other cases, they took the form of families opting to avoid the safety net altogether.

Insurance and Health Care Outcomes in Regions Where Undocumented Children Are Medicaid-Eligible

OBJECTIVES

Expansion of insurance eligibility is associated with positive health outcomes. We compared uninsurance and health care utilization for (1) all children, and (2) children in immigrant families (CIF) and non-CIF who resided inside and outside of the seven US states/territories offering public health insurance to children regardless of documentation status ("extended-eligibility states/territories").

METHODS

Using the cross-sectional, nationally representative National Survey of Children's Health-2019, we used survey-weighted, multivariable Poisson regression to assess the association of residence in nonextended- versus extended-eligibility states/territories with uninsurance and with health care utilization measures for (1) all children, and (2) CIF versus non-CIF, adjusting for demographic covariates.

RESULTS

Of the 29 433 respondents, the 4035 (weighted 27.2%) children in extended- versus nonextended-eligibility states/territories were more likely to be CIF (27.4% vs 20.5%, P < .001), 12 to 17 years old (37.2% vs 33.2%, P = .048), non-White (60.1% vs 45.9%, P < .001), and have a non-English primary language (20.6% vs 11.1%, P < .001).The relative risk of uninsurance for children in nonextended- versus extended-eligibility states/territories was 2.0 (95% confidence interval 1.4-3.0), after adjusting for covariates. Fewer children in extended- versus nonextended-eligibility states/territories were uninsured (adjusted prevalence 3.7% vs 7.5%, P < .001), had forgone medical (2.2% vs 3.1%, P = .07) or dental care (17.1% vs 20.5%, P = .02), and had no preventive visit (14.3% vs 17.0%, P = .04). More CIF than non-CIF were uninsured, regardless of residence in nonextended- versus extended-eligibility states/territories: CIF 11.2% vs 5.7%, P < .001; non-CIF 6.1% vs 3.1% P < .001.

CONCLUSIONS

Residence in nonextended-eligibility states/territories, compared with in extended-eligibility states/territories, was associated with higher uninsurance and less preventive health care utilization.

A New Agenda for Optimizing Investments in Community Mental Health and Reducing Disparities

The Biden-Harris Administration's FY22 budget includes $1.6 billion for the Community Mental Health Services Block Grant program, more than double the FY21 allocation, given the rising mental health crises observed across the nation. This is timely since there have been two interrelated paradigm shifts: one giving attention to the role of the environmental context as central in mental health outcomes, the other moving upstream to earlier mental health interventions at the community level rather than only at the individual level. An opportunity to reimagine and redesign the agenda of mental health research and service delivery with marginalized communities opens the door to more community-based care interventions. This involves establishing multisector partnerships to address the social and psychological needs that can be addressed at the community level rather than the clinical level. This will require a shift in training, delivery systems, and reimbursement models. The authors describe the scientific evidence justifying these programs and elaborate on opportunities to target investments in community mental health that can reduce disparities and improve well-being for all. They select levers where there is some evidence that such approaches matter substantially, are modifiable, and advance the science and public policy practice. They conclude with specific recommendations and the logistical steps needed to support this transformational shift.

Including Children in Immigrant Families in Policy Approaches to Reduce Child Poverty

Although they are an increasing share of the US child population (26% in 2020) and have much higher poverty rates than children in nonimmigrant families (20.9% vs 9.9%), children in immigrant families have much more restricted access to the social safety net, which can lead to increased economic hardship and health and developmental risks. More than 90% of children in immigrant families are US citizens, but they are excluded from the safety net due to restrictions that affect their parents and other family members. Exclusions that affect children in immigrant families include restricted categorical eligibility based on immigrant status, stricter income eligibility, reduced benefit levels, high administrative burden, and interactions with immigration policy such as public charge. These exclusions limit the ability of both existing and enhanced social programs to reduce child poverty among this population. Results derived from the Transfer Income Model simulations for the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine's 2019 report A Roadmap to Reducing Child Poverty show that the poverty-reducing effects of potential enhancements to three main antipoverty programs result in unequal poverty reduction effects by family citizenship/immigration status with disproportionate negative effects on Hispanic children, 54% of whom live in immigrant families. Policy principles to improve equitable access and poverty-reduction effects of social programs for children in immigrant families include basing eligibility and benefit levels on the developmental, health and nutrition needs of the child instead of the immigration status of other family members, reducing administrative burden, and eliminating the link between immigration policy and access to the safety net.