Abstract Children in the United States (N = 488, 4–11 years, 239 females, 248 males, one other, 53% White; data collected 2021–2022) participated in three studies investigating their expectations about immigrants. Participants recognized that immigration impacts characters' national identity and behaviors. Although previous research reported that children may essentialize nationality, participants instead reasoned flexibly about immigrant characters. Children expected immigrant characters to share behaviors and preferences with people from both their heritage and host countries, suggesting they may think immigrants hold dual national identities. Even the youngest children tested (ages 4–6) reasoned flexibly about behaviors based on immigration status. Thus, children appear to view national identity as constructed through social and cultural experiences, rather than something innate.
more »
« less
Growing up Without Status: The Integration of Children in Mixed‐Status Families
Abstract Over the past three decades, a central new challenge confronting millions of children of immigrants has emerged: growing up in a mixed‐status family in which at least one member lacks legal authorization to live and work in the United States. A body of recent research argues that unauthorized immigrant status is thefundamentaldeterminant of integration for unauthorized immigrants, with intergenerational consequences for their U.S.‐born children. We discuss the immigration and other policies that create the particular social context within which unauthorized immigration status becomes so detrimental for integration. Specifically, we focus on federal and state policies that undermine the very factors thought to protect children and support the integration of new generations of Americans: families and social networks, economic resources and opportunities, and health. We conclude with recommendations for future research.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1822787
- PAR ID:
- 10461281
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley-Blackwell
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Sociology Compass
- Volume:
- 13
- Issue:
- 6
- ISSN:
- 1751-9020
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract Restrictive US immigration laws and law enforcement undermine immigrant health by generating fear and stress, disrupting families and communities, and eroding social and economic wellbeing. The inequality and stress created by immigration law and law enforcement may also generate disparities in health among immigrants with different legal statuses. However, existing research does not find consistent evidence of immigrant legal status disparities in health, possibly because it does not disaggregate immigrants by generation, defined by age at migration. Immigration and life course theory suggest that the health consequences of non-citizen status may be greater among 1.5-generation immigrants, who grew up in the same society that denies them formal membership, than among the 1st generation, who immigrated as adolescents or adults. In this study, we examine whether there are legal status disparities in health within and between the 1st generation and the 1.5 generation of 23,288 Latinx immigrant adults interviewed in the 2005–2017 waves of the California Health Interview Survey. We find evidence of legal status disparities in heart disease within the 1st generation and for high blood pressure and diabetes within the 1.5 generation. Non-citizens have higher rates of poor self-rated health and distress within both generations. Socioeconomic disadvantage and limited access to care largely account for the worse health of legally disadvantaged 1st- and 1.5-generation Latinx adults in California.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Undocumented immigration status is a structural barrier to socioeconomic mobility. The regularization of legal status may therefore promote the socioeconomic mobility of formerly undocumented immigrants. The 2012 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program provided protection against deportation and access to work authorization for eligible undocumented immigrants who came to the United States as children. While studies using cross-sectional data find that DACA led to improved socioeconomic status, no studies have examined the socioeconomic status of DACA recipients over time and few have disaggregated among groups of DACA recipients. Drawing from one of the only longitudinal studies of DACA recipients, we use growth curve models to estimate individuals’ wage trajectories from the year prior to DACA receipt up to 77 months post-DACA receipt among Latino/a DACA participants in California. In this sample, DACA is associated with improved earnings trajectories for recipients, compared with nonrecipients. Among DACA recipients, there is variation in earnings growth by stage of the life course, as measured by age and educational attainment. Notably, DACA tenure appears to be particularly beneficial for individuals who attain DACA at earlier ages and who earn college degrees. This study contributes to our understanding of the role of immigration laws and policies in structuring immigrant integration and socioeconomic mobility in the United States.more » « less
-
Miller, Jody. (Ed.)Until recently, national-level data on criminal victimization in the United States did not include information on immigrant or citizenship status of respondents. This data-infrastructure limitation has hindered scientific understanding of whether immigrants are more or less likely than native-born Americans to be criminally victimized and how victimization may vary among immigrants of different statuses. We address these issues in the present study by using new data from the 2017–2018 National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) to explore the association between citizenship status and victimization risk in a nationally representative sample of households and persons aged 12 years and older. The research is guided by a theoretical framing that integrates insights from studies of citizenship with the literature on immigration and crime, as well as with theories of victimization. We find that a person’s foreign-born status (but not their acquired U.S. citizenship) confers protection against victimization. We also find that the protective benefit associated with being foreign born does not extend to those with ambiguous citizenship status, who in our data exhibit attributes similar to the known characteristics of undocumented immigrants. We conclude by discussing the implications of our findings and the potential ways to extend the research.more » « less
-
The COVID pandemic drew attention to longstanding disparities in health care by race and immigration status, prompting states like Oregon, Illinois, and California to provide health insurance to undocumented immigrants with their own funds. This talk examines efforts within Colorado to expand Medicaid to undocumented immigrants and to make Emergency Medicaid more accessible. It explores the challenges that Trumpian policies have posed to these efforts as well as practices of bureaucratic disentitlement in a new receiving area, and concludes with potential counter-strategies.more » « less