Legal Status and Health Care: Mexican-Origin Children in California, 2001-2014

Selection, experience, and disadvantage: Examining sources of health inequalities among naturalized US citizens

Objectives

We integrated major theories in immigrant health and assimilation into a single analytical framework to quantify the degrees to which demographic composition, pathways to citizenship, and socioeconomic assimilation account for physical and mental health disparities between naturalized immigrants by region of origin.

Methods

Using the restricted data from the 2015–2016 California Health Interview Survey, we decomposed differences in physical and mental health into demographic factors, path to citizenship, and socioeconomic characteristics by region of origin using the Karlson, Holm, and Breen (KHB) method.

Results

Differences in socioeconomic status mediated most of the disparity in physical health between naturalized immigrants from different regions. Factors associated with major immigrant health theories—demographic composition, pathways to citizenship, and socioeconomic assimilation—did not mediate disparities in mental health.

Conclusion

This article argues that the study of health disparities among immigrants must simultaneously account for differences in demographic composition, immigration experience, and socioeconomic disadvantage. The findings also underscore the need for theory development that can better explain mental health disparities among immigrants.

•

Socioeconomic disadvantage accounted for poorer physical health among naturalized citizens who were born in Mexico.

•

Psychological distress is pervasive among naturalized citizens from Central and Latin America.

•

Differences in SES mediated the disparity in physical health between naturalized immigrants from different regions.

•

Demographic characteristics, time to citizenship, and SES did not mediate disparities in mental health.

Health Inequities Among Latinos/Hispanics: Documentation Status as a Determinant of Health

The Hispanic/Latino population is the largest minority group in the USA. Research has documented health disadvantages of undocumented Latinos/Hispanics compared to their documented counterparts. The economic and social conditions that influence immigrant health may operate differently for undocumented immigrants compared to their documented counterparts. Access to healthcare, access to health-protective resources (social, economic, and political contributors), and immigration enforcement actions are three mechanisms that affect immigrants and contribute to the social and health inequities within the Latino/Hispanic population. We argue that social factors within these three mechanisms distinctly affect undocumented immigrants. We discuss these factors by synthesizing the existing literature on documentation status and health. In doing so, we highlight opportunities for future research and provide recommendations for policies and interventions that can ease the taxing effects of documentation status on health among Latinos/Hispanics.

State-Level Immigrant Prenatal Health Care Policy and Inequities in Health Insurance Among Children in Mixed-Status Families

Children in immigrant families are twice as likely to be uninsured as their counterparts, and states may influence these inequities by facilitating or restricting immigrant families' access to coverage. Our objective was to measure differences in insurance by mother's documentation status among a nationally representative sample of US-born children in immigrant families and to examine the role of state-level immigrant health care policy-namely, state-level immigrant access to prenatal coverage. Compared with US-born children in immigrant families with citizen mothers, children with undocumented immigrant mothers had a 17.0 percentage point (P < .001) higher uninsurance rate (8.8 percentage points higher in adjusted models, P < .05). However, in states with nonrestrictive prenatal coverage for immigrants, there were no differences in children's insurance by mother's documentation status, while large inequities were observed within states with restrictive policies. Our findings demonstrate the potential for state-level immigrant health care policy to mitigate or exacerbate inequities in children's insurance.

Policies of Exclusion: Implications for the Health of Immigrants and Their Children

Public policies play a crucial role in shaping how immigrants adapt to life in the United States. Federal, state, and local laws and administrative practices impact immigrants' access to education, health insurance and medical care, cash assistance, food assistance, and other vital services. Additionally, immigration enforcement activities have substantial effects on immigrants' health and participation in public programs, as well as effects on immigrants' families. This review summarizes the growing literature on the consequences of public policies for immigrants' health. Some policies are inclusive and promote immigrants' adaptation to the United States, whereas other policies are exclusionary and restrict immigrants' access to public programs as well as educational and economic opportunities. We explore the strategies that researchers have employed to tease out these effects, the methodological challenges of undertaking such studies, their varying impacts on immigrant health, and steps that can be undertaken to improve the health of immigrants and their families.

Experiences in Care According to Parental Citizenship and Language Use Among Latino Children in California

OBJECTIVE

To assess differences in health care access, utilization, and experiences among Latino children in California according to parental citizenship status and language use.

METHODS

Data are from the 2011 and 2012 California Health Interview Survey public use child files. A total of 2841 interviews of parents of Latino children younger than the age of 12 years were conducted. Analyses were conducted to determine the associations between access (usual of source of care, delay in receiving needed care, health insurance), utilization (physician visits in past year, emergency department visits), and experiences (doctor listens, doctor explains instructions clearly, communication via telephone or e-mail) according to parental citizenship status and household language use after adjusting for confounders.

RESULTS

In multivariate analyses, there were no significant differences in access to care according to parental citizenship status. Children with 2 noncitizen parents had fewer doctor visits and were less likely to go to the emergency department in the past year than those with 2 citizen parents. Among children with 1 or 2 noncitizen parents, their parents reported worse experiences in care than those with 2 citizen parents. Similar results were observed for language use. Parents of children in bilingual and Spanish-only households were less likely to report that their children's doctors explained things clearly, and parents in Spanish-only households were less likely to communicate via telephone or e-mail than those in English-only households.

CONCLUSIONS

Health policy should focus on provider-parent communication to ensure health care equity for Latino children whose parents are not citizens or do not speak English.

How does legal status matter for oral health care among Mexican-origin children in California?

This research examines the relationship between legal status and oral health care among Mexican-origin children. Using the 2001–2014 California Health Interview Surveys, the objectives are: (1) to demonstrate population-level changes in the legal statuses of parents, the legal statuses of children, and the likelihood of receiving dental care; (2) to reveal how the roles of legal status boundaries in dental care are changing; and (3) to determine whether the salience of these boundaries is attributable to legal status per se. The results reveal increases in the native-born share and dental care utilization for the total Mexican-origin population. Although dental care was primarily linked to parental citizenship early in this period, parental legal statuses are no longer a unique source of variation in utilization (despite the greater likelihood of insurance among citizens). These results imply that future gains in utilization among Mexican-origin children will mainly come from overcoming barriers to care among the native born.

•

Speculation exists on the importance of documentation status for dental care.

•

Parental documentation has not been uniquely important for dental care.

•

Parental citizenship predicted differences in child dental care in the early 2000s.

•

These differences subsequently decreased by 2014 when dental care rose for all children.

•

Increases were especially prominent among categories of non-citizens.

•

Declines in immigration imply that increasing attention to the native born is needed.

Fear of Immigration Enforcement Among Older Latino Immigrants in the United States

OBJECTIVE

The passage of the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) and other subsequent restrictive immigration policies have created fear among Latino immigrants. This study examines whether fear of immigration enforcement is socially significant among older (50+ years) foreign-born Latino individuals in the United States without citizenship or permanent residence, and whether disapproval of immigrant enforcement policies is directly associated with fear of immigration enforcement among this older population.

METHOD

Data used in the analysis come from 2007, 2008, 2010, and 2013 national Latino surveys conducted by the Pew Research Center. Cross-sectional regression models are used to estimate the probabilities of fearing immigration enforcement in the Latino samples, as well as to examine the association between disapproval and fear of immigration enforcement.

RESULTS

The study finds that the predicted probabilities of fearing immigration enforcement among foreign-born individuals aged 50 and over without citizenship or permanent residence are not negligible. Moreover, the study finds evidence of a direct association between the disapproval of enforcement measures and fear of immigration enforcement.

DISCUSSION

Restrictive immigration measures have implications for conditions of fear and other stressors affecting the well-being of older immigrants.