Abstract: Through detailed analysis of archival records, Anita Casavantes Bradford traces the history of the clinical, academic, and popular understandings of trauma as it influenced US immigration policy for unaccompanied migrant children during the twentieth century. She questions why adults charged with the care of unaccompanied minors have "(mis)understood … (mis)managed … and (mis)represented" children as traumatized, both unintentionally and deliberately, in order to advance adult objectives. Casavantes Bradford provides a historical overview of US immigration and refugee polices since the 1930s as applied to unaccompanied migrant children. This history also traces the evolution of clinical and popular definitions of trauma and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)—officially recognized by psychologists in 1980—and suggests that policies for managing and mitigating trauma among unaccompanied minors often led to negative consequences. These polices, above all, were often based on geopolitical and domestic political considerations rather than the welfare of children, according to Casavantes Bradford. Thus, during the 1980s, unaccompanied minors from Haiti and Central America reaching the United States faced detention and deportation, while Sudanese "lost boys" were granted preferential treatment that aligned with US national security interests in Africa. Since the 1930s, markers of difference such as race, class, and religion have also played fundamental roles in which unaccompanied minors have been given the "right to be traumatized" and resettlement. Casavantes Bradford cautions researchers against interpreting migrant children's experiences through biased or ahistorical notions of trauma that oversimplify individual young people's experiences and their potential resilience. Historians and others should critically examine their own assumptions when studying trauma and the experiences of unaccompanied migrant children.
Read full abstract