Invisible by law: Germany’s immigration policy and the exclusion of undocumented women in Leipzig

Immigration enforcement exposures and COVID-19 vaccine intentions among undocumented immigrants in California

Reviewed by: Decolonizing Ethnography: Undocumented Immigrants and New Directions in Social Science by Carolina Alonso Bejarano et al. Ruth Gomberg-Muñoz Carolina Alonso Bejarano, Lucía López Juárez, Mirian A. Mijangos García, and Daniel M. Goldstein, Decolonizing Ethnography: Undocumented Immigrants and New Directions in Social Science. Durham: Duke University Press, 2019. 208 pp. Decolonizing Ethnography is both an experiment and an invitation. It is an experiment in ethnographic research design, implementation, and writing that seeks to address and subvert long-standing power inequities in anthropological research relationships. It is also an invitation for readers to think with and critique the authors' "decolonizing" project, which is not presented as a balm for wider inequalities but points toward possibilities for more reciprocal research relationships and the rich understandings such relationships can yield. To carry out these tasks, the book merges decolonial feminist theory and activist anthropological approaches to explore and engage the work lives of undocumented people in New Jersey. Decolonizing Ethnography could stand on its own as a contribution to the growing scholarship on undocumented labor and worker activism. Throughout the book, the authors' ethnographic research illustrates how undocumented workers in pseudonymous Hometown, New Jersey find empowerment in community organizing to respond to a host of gendered vulnerabilities and experiences of violence. In particular, workers featured in the text, including two of the book's co-authors, recount experiences of workplace injury, labor rights violations, partner violence, and prolonged family separation, all of which take place in a broader context of US immigration politics that render undocumented workers especially vulnerable to abuse. Yet the text's focus on worker activism pushes beyondy [End Page 1613] narratives of vulnerability to show how undocumented workers access and disseminate information, build social capital, and develop self-empowerment through community organizing. As outlined in the book's Introduction, another purpose of Decolonizing Ethnography is to depart from the mainstream ethnographic canon and critique not only abusive and exploitative practices of employers and state agents but also the exploitative practices that lie at the heart of anthropological research itself. The first chapter presents an extended review of critical scholarship on academic coloniality and "decolonization." The authors effectively contrast the principles that have guided mainstream or "dominant" anthropology, such as valorization of research with marginalized "others," research for intellectual rather than social goals, and publishing in academic venues, with the principles that have guided activist, engaged, and applied approaches, such as research in service to community-determined goals, more democratized and collaborative research designs, and work that prioritizes social change in addition to, or in lieu of, theory building. Decolonizing Ethnography does not just critique colonialist academic practices, it seeks to do something different. The second chapter describes the trajectories of the book's authors: an unlikely quartet comprising a junior scholar from an elite Colombian family, an undocumented woman worker/activist from Guatemala, an undocumented woman worker/activist from Mexico, and a senior white male US anthropologist. As their paths converged around a shared concern with understanding and addressing challenges facing undocumented workers in New Jersey, the four designed a project that centers the contributions of non-academics in both method and theory. The project's methodology, the subject of Chapter 3, draws on applied and activist anthropological approaches that prioritize the objectives and contributions of community partners. The research, then, incorporated community members as producers of research and was designed to advance their goals. It did not start out this way. Originally conceived by Alonso Bejarano and Goldstein as a study of undocumented laborers, the project initially brought two undocumented women workers on board as research assistants. As the relationship among the four deepened, the non-academics became both producers of theory and co-authors of texts in their own right, not in service to academia per se but to advance the immigrant rights movement in their community. In particular, ethnographic [End Page 1614] methods helped them to identify myriad community concerns among undocumented workers in Hometown and also helped them forge relationships with workers and expand workers' rights education. Chapter 4 describes how insights gained from their field experiences informed the book's analytical crux, which foregrounds the theoretical argument...

In this descriptive study, 100 female undocumented immigrants aged > or =18 years were interviewed about their health condition. The objective was to gain insight into the health situation and specific health problems of undocumented women. Sixty-five per cent of these undocumented women rated their health as 'poor' (moderate or bad) and 91 per cent spontaneously mentioned having current health problems. When provided with a list of 26 common health problems, subjects reported on average 11.1 complaints. Gynaecological and psychological complaints were very prevalent, but seldom mentioned spontaneously. Also obstetric problems were numerous. Undocumented women may not present important symptoms to physicians when they encounter them. We conclude that physicians should actively ask about psychological and gynaecological problems in this patient group. Special training on the health problems of undocumented female immigrants for health providers is recommended.

1.INTRODUCTION Immigration and border enforcement is a contentious political issue in the United States. The existence .of over 10 million illegal immigrants in the United States, with 62% being from Mexico, has led to stricter border enforcement over the years (Hoefer, Rytina, and Baker 2010). An example of this was the law passed by the state of Arizona requiring police to detain anyone who they reasonably suspect may be an illegal immigrant (Archibold 2010). While the U.S. Supreme Court eventually ruled against many facets of this law, the initial passing of the law shows how important immigration is as an issue, especially for states in the West where the majority of illegal Mexican immigrants are located. Immigration was a major campaign issue for Obama and Romney in the 2012 presidential election. Since the passage of the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986, the United States has increased the number of border watch hours by an average of 10% per year (Mexican Migration Project 2012). The coal of increased enforcement has been to reduce the number of illegal immigrants entering, the United States from Mexico. This increased border enforcement has been prompted by policy makers' (and their constitutents') concerns about the impact of illegal immigration on the employment of native workers, crime, and public spending (Borjas 1999; Dodson 2001; Enchautegui 1997). Despite the intent of the legislation, the post-IRCA time period has seen a dramatic increase in the number of illegal immigrants crossing the border (Hanson and Spilimbergo 1999). The number of apprehensions from 1980 to 2008 is shown in Figure 1. The majority of these are from the Mexico-U.S. border. While these numbers may appear to be rather large, many of these are repeaters. This is because of the -revolving door nature of border enforcement (Durand 1994). Immigrants who are caught trying to illegally enter the United States are apprehended and dropped back in Mexico where they are free to attempt the crossing again. Studies have found the probability of apprehension to be consistently around 1 in 3 (Massey and Espinosa 1997: Massey and Singer 1995). While would-be immigrants are free to attempt another crossing. each crossing does pose significant dangers from both criminals and the elements. Eschbach et al. (1999) and Cornelius (2001) both discuss the dangers faced by people attempting to cross the border. Increased border enforcement and .apprehensions may be good, however, for one group of people: coyotes. Coyotes are smugglers who are paid to illegally bring people over the border from Mexico to the United States. (1) [FIGURE 1 OMITTED] The agricultural migration to the United States tends to be short term, with migrants working in the United States and then returning home to Mexico in the off-season. Even nonagricultural workers have engaged in repeated attempts, apprehensions, and short-term stays in the United States. If coyote use makes entering the United States too expensive or difficult then immigrants may choose to stay in the United States during the off-season. Given the large stock of Mexican immigrants already in the United States, moves to strengthen the border even further may not actually reduce the stock of illegal immigrants in the United States and could actually increase it. There are strong policy reasons to reduce the usage of coyotes, other than migration duration. The coyote industry has changed significantly over the years. Some of these changes have involved using new technology such as cell phones to remotely guide migrants across the border (Lacey 2011). However, other changes in the coyote business have been troubling. Mexican cartels such as the Gulf and Zetas have large-scale operations along the U.S. border. Coyotes now have to pay tolls to these criminal organizations in order to smuggle people through their territory (Beaubian 2011). These gangs also kidnap illegal immigrants who. …

PurposeIt is well understood that women’s work situations are critical to their well-being during pregnancy and in terms of potential risks to the fetus. It has also long been known that undocumented women workers face particularly difficult work conditions and being undocumented precludes access to key social benefits (i.e. public health insurance, paid maternity leave, child benefits and subsidized daycare) that support pregnant women and new mothers. Yet, this paper aims to write about the intersection of undocumented women’s pregnancy with work experiences.Design/methodology/approachDrawing on the results of a broader qualitative study that was focussed on access to healthcare for undocumented (and therefore, uninsured) women who were pregnant and gave birth in Montreal, Canada, the authors begin this paper with a review of the relevant literature for this topic related to the work conditions of undocumented women, how work exacerbates barriers to accessing healthcare and the resulting health outcomes, particularly in relation to pregnancy. The authors highlight the social determinants of health human rights framework (Solar and Irwin, 2010), before presenting methodology. In conclusion, the authors discuss how an understanding of undocumented women’s work situations sheds light on their pregnancy experiences.FindingsThe authors then present participants’ work conditions before becoming pregnant, working conditions while pregnant and employment options and pressures after giving birth.Originality/valueThe authors emphasize that attention to undocumented pregnant women’s work situations might help health and social service practitioners to better serve their needs at this critical point in a woman’s life and at the beginning of the life of their children, born as full citizens.

The statistics provide the background. The United Nations estimates that 3 per cent of the world's population (213 million people by 2010) live outside their country of origin.1 Most immigrants move from developing to developed countries, where international migrants constitute more than 10 per cent of the population. Global data for undocumented migrants are difficult to obtain, but estimates suggest that there may be 30 million undocumented migrants worldwide, as many as 11 million in the United States.2 Undocumented immigrants make up 4 per cent of the population of the US and 5.4 per cent of its workforce. Women now constitute more than half (51.4 per cent) of the international migrants in developed countries, only slightly more than 40 years ago. But women today migrate largely in search of their own work and security, rather than as dependents, traveling to live with their husbands.4'5 Studies from the US, Canada, Europe, and Asia report an excess of health problems among undocumented migrants. Poverty, less access to health services contraception, cervical cancer prevention, and prenatal care language barriers, stigma, abuse, and sexual vulnerability put them at greater risk. They experience unplanned pregnancies and labor complications more frequently. Mental illness, sexually transmitted diseases, HIV, and TB are more common.6"16 Because of fear and discrimination, as well as oppressive working and living situations, women may be unable to get health or social services. In their study 'Self rated and health problems of undocumented immigrant women in the Netherlands, a descriptive study', Schoevers and her co-authors add the voices of immigrant women in the

Border and immigration enforcement has been central to post-9/11 national security efforts, resulting in unprecedented resource allocations at and beyond the physical borders of the USA. This paper brings together feminist and postcolonial examinations of post-9/11 military interventions with examinations of US–Mexico border enforcement to examine a relatively unexplored aspect of US border enforcement policy—state-based ‘humanitarian’ efforts to reduce undocumented migrant deaths associated with unauthorized entry. Based on a discursive analysis of US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) press releases, CBP and Border Patrol videos and public statements, industry publications, state policies and congressional hearing transcripts, this paper examines the way in which ‘humanitarian’ objectives (i.e. reducing migrant deaths) have been integrated into US border enforcement discourse and policy. In particular, I draw on feminist and postcolonial theory to examine the gendered and racialized discursive maneuvers through which undocumented migrants are transformed from potential ‘terrorist threats’ or ‘criminals’ into ‘vulnerable victims’ deserving of assistance. I argue that gender and race are key to producing politically powerful and legible discourses of rescue and vulnerability and draw into question a contingent politics of life predicated on ideologies of gender, race and nation. In doing so, I bring a feminist postcolonial analytic framework to understandings of US–Mexico border enforcement efforts in order to query how gendered and racialized rescue narratives are key to justifying violent state projects that re-assert hegemonic power relations in the post-9/11 world.

Illegal immigration and border enforcement in the United States have increased concomitantly for over thirty years. One interpretation is that U.S. border policies have been ineffective. We offer an alternative view, extending the current immigration-enforcement literature by incorporating both the practice of people smuggling and a role for non-wage income into a two-country, dynamic general equilibrium model. We state conditions under which two steady state equilibria exist: one with a low level of capital and high amount of illegal immigration and the other with a high level of capital, but relatively little migration. We then analyze two shocks: a positive technology shock to smuggling services and an increase in border enforcement. In the low-capital steady state, the capital-labor ratio declines with technological progress in smuggling, while illegal immigration increases. In the high-capital steady state, a technology shock causes the capital-labor ratio to rise while the effect on migration is indeterminate. We show that an increase in border enforcement is qualitatively equivalent to a negative technology shock to smuggling. Finally we show that a developed country would never choose small levels of border enforcement over an open border. Moreover, a high level of border enforcement is optimal only if it significantly decreases capital accumulation. In addition, we provide conditions under which an increase in smuggler technology will lead to a decline in the optimal level of enforcement.

Introduction: Despite reductions in cervical cancer (CC) incidence in the US due to screening, CC continues to disproportionately affect certain populations, including immigrant women. Immigrant women are significantly less likely than US-born women to receive Pap test screening for CC. Barriers to screening are heightened among undocumented immigrants (without valid US visas or residency papers), who face additional obstacles that limit access and use of healthcare services. While undocumented status is a known barrier to CC screening, additional research is needed to explore causal factors for CC screening disparities among undocumented and legal immigrants. Methodological barriers to research among undocumented immigrants arise from the lack of a sampling frame from which to draw probability-based samples and from individuals’ reluctance to participate in research due to privacy concerns. Respondent driven sampling (RDS) is a new probability-based method that overcomes these barriers by accessing members of such “hidden populations” through their social networks. Despite its success in multiple populations, RDS has had minimum application among undocumented immigrants in the US. The purpose of this pilot study was to determine the effectiveness of using RDS to study healthcare behaviors among undocumented Central American immigrant women in Houston, Texas. Central Americans are the fastest-growing sector of the US Hispanic immigrant population and have high rates of CC. Methods: Recruitment was initiated by 3 non-randomly selected “seeds.” Seeds and eligible participants were given 3 serially-numbered coupons to recruit peers. Women were eligible to participate if they were from Guatemala, Honduras, or El Salvador, ages 18 to 50 years, and currently living in Houston without a valid US visa or residency papers. Participants received monetary compensation for completing the interview and for recruiting peers. RDS relies on key data to generate population-based estimates from the sample: 1) the size of each participant's social network (SN); and 2) recruitment patterns (who recruited whom). Recruitment patterns and homophily were used as an indicator of social clustering by country of origin and number of years of residency in the US (≤5 years vs. >5 years). Homophily (H) is a measure of the likelihood that recruiters recruit individuals like themselves; scores range from −1 to 1, where 1 indicates 100% homophily and 0 indicates random recruitment. Attainment of a stable equilibrium sample composition in regard to demographic and healthcare characteristics was used as an indicator of RDS's ability to generate population-based estimates. Analyses were conducted using RDSAT 6.0. Results: Beginning with 3 initial participants, we recruited a sample of 226 immigrant women over 16 weeks. Participants adopted the recruitment system with reasonable ease (46% recruited ≥ 1 peer) and SNs were dense (mean SN size=20). Homophily was moderate by country of origin (Guatemalans: H=0.52; El Salvadorans: H=0.42) and low by number of years of residency in the US (H≤0.25). Equilibrium was attained for all demographic and healthcare characteristics. Conclusions: This study is the first to evaluate RDS in a US immigrant population. SNs in this population were dense, allowing recruitment to be sustained. While recruitment was moderately influenced by country of origin, women did not affiliate exclusively with those like themselves. This sociometric diversity allowed the sample to attain an equilibrium composition independent of initial participants. Overall, RDS was easy to implement, attained a large sample in a relatively short period of time, and reached an otherwise hidden population. RDS is an effective method for recruiting undocumented Central American immigrant women for research on healthcare and CC screening behaviors. Citation Information: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2011;20(10 Suppl):B52.

Since 1986, the United States has made considerable efforts to curb undocumented immigration across the US–Mexico border, resulting in an increase in migration costs for undocumented immigrants from Mexico and placing a particularly heavy burden on undocumented immigrant women. Using data from the 1990, 2000 Decennial Census and the 2006–8 American Community Survey, this study finds three effects of rising migration costs for immigrants from Mexico: (1) A decrease in the relative flow of older and highly educated undocumented immigrant women relative to men; (2) An increase in the skill composition of immigrant women relative to men; and (3) An increase, due to stronger positive selection, in the average earnings of those groups most affected by increased migration costs, particularly women. This research has important implications in light of the barriers and increasing dangers that women across the globe may face when migrating.

In the 1990s, the U.S. border led the nation in the decline of property-related crimes, while violent crime rates fell twice as fast in the U.S. as in the median border county. This paper asks how changes in undocumented immigration and border enforcement have played a role in generating these divergent trends. We fithat migrant apprehensions are correlated with violent crime and that increased border enforcement has not had a deterrent effect on such crime. Rather, increased border enforcement in a sector has led to more violent crime in neighboring sectors. In contrast to the results for violent crime, property crime is not correlated with migrant apprehensions, and while there is some evidence that border enforcement has lowered property crime rates, this result is sensitive to the model’s specifi cation. Our fi ndings also indicate that the improved border economy over this period, specifi cally rapid job growth, played a signifi cant role in lowering property crime rates.

Using the 2005–2014 waves of the American Community Survey –a period characterized by the rapid expansion of interior immigration enforcement initiatives across the United States, we evaluate the impact of a tougher policy environment on undocumented immigrants’ fertility. We find that a one standard deviation increases in enforcement lowers childbearing among likely undocumented women by 5%. The effect stems from police-based measures linked to increased deportations, which may raise uncertainty about the future of the family unit and its resources.

Using the 2005-2014 waves of the American Community Survey –a period characterized by the rapid expansion of interior immigration enforcement initiatives across the United States, we evaluate the impact of a tougher policy environment on undocumented immigrants' fertility. We find that a one standard deviation increases in enforcement lowers childbearing among likely undocumented women by 5 percent. The effect emanates from police-based measures linked to increased deportations, which may raise uncertainty about the future of the family unit and its resources. Understanding these impacts is important given the critical contributions of immigrants and their offspring to diversity, the economy and the sustainability of the welfare state.

Postpartum depression and anxiety negatively affect maternal sense of self-efficacy, which may jeopardize mother-infant bonding. Migrant women are at two to three times higher risk for postpartum depression and anxiety. Therefore, they may experience lower maternal self-efficacy, but studies on the subject are lacking. The aims of this study were (1) to compare two groups of economic migrants of differing legal status in Geneva, Switzerland, to native Swiss women in terms of postpartum depression and anxiety rates, as well as maternal sense of self-efficacy, and (2) to examine the effects of postpartum depression, anxiety, and social support on maternal self-efficacy in the three groups. A sample of 25 undocumented migrant women, 42 documented migrant women, and 41 Swiss women were interviewed at 3 months postpartum. Depression was assessed with the Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale and anxiety with the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Maternal self-efficacy was assessed with the Maternal Self-Efficacy Scale. ANOVAs and multiple regression analysis were used to test mean-level differences among the three groups and identify factors associated with low maternal self-efficacy. Legal status was associated with living conditions and influenced the rates of postpartum distress. Swiss women and documented migrant women showed low depression and anxiety rates, whereas nearly half of the sample of undocumented women reported high levels of postpartum depression and anxiety. However, despite poor postpartum mental health, undocumented women showed a higher sense of maternal self-efficacy than did documented migrants and Swiss natives. The relationship between postpartum depression, maternal self-efficacy, social support, and legal status is discussed.

BackgroundMillions of women give birth annually without the support of a trained birth attendant. Generally and globally, countries provide maternal health services for their citizens but there is a coverage gap for undocumented migrant women who often can’t access the same care due to their legal status. The objective of this investigation is to explore undocumented migrants’ experiences and perceptions of maternal healthcare accessibility.MethodsWe held focus groups discussions with 64 pregnant women at 3 migrant health clinics on the Thailand–Myanmar border and asked how they learned about the clinic, their health care options, travel and past experiences with birth services. In this context undocumented women could sign up for migrant health insurance at the clinic that would allow them to be referred for tertiary care at government hospitals if needed.ResultsWomen learned about care options through a network approach often relying on information from community members and trusted care providers. For many, choice of alternate care was limited by lack of antenatal care services close to their homes, limited knowledge of other services and inability to pay fees associated with hospital care. Women travelled up to 4 h to get to the clinic by foot, bicycle, tractor, motorcycle or car, sometimes using multiple modes of transport. Journeys from the Myanmar side of the border were sometimes complicated by nighttime border crossing closures, limited transport and heavy rain.ConclusionsUndocumented migrant women in our study experienced a type of conditional or variable accessibility where time of day, transport and weather needed to align with the onset of labour to ensure that they could get to the migrant clinic on time to give birth. We anticipate that undocumented migrants in other countries may also experience conditional accessibility to birth care, especially where travel is necessary due to limited local services. Care providers may improve opportunities for undocumented pregnant women to access maternal care by disseminating information on available services through informal networks and addressing travel barriers through mobile services and other travel supports.Trial registration The research project was approved by Research Ethics Committee at the Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University (FAM-2560-05204), and the Department of Community Medicine and Global Health at the University of Oslo—Norwegian Centre for Research Data (58542).