Individuals' experiences in U.S. immigration detention during the early period of the COVID-19 pandemic: major challenges and public health implications.

BACKGROUND: Individuals held in carceral settings were significantly impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. However, limited research exists of the direct experiences of individuals detained by the United States (U.S.) Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). This study illustrates the major challenges described by individuals held in ICE's immigration detention centers during the initial spread of COVID-19. METHODS: We interviewed 50 individuals who were released from ICE detention between March 15, 2020 until August 31, 2020. Participants were recruited through immigration attorneys. Responses to a semi-structured interview were documented. Quotes from these interviews were thematically analyzed. RESULTS: Study participants were detained in 22 different ICE detention centers, which were located across 12 states, in both county (41%) and privately-contracted facilities (59%). The major themes that emerged from interviews included inadequate protections against COVID-19, denial of physical and mental healthcare, and experiences of retaliation in response to self-advocacy. These issues perpetuated emotions of fear, distrust, and helplessness in individuals in immigration detention centers. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the largest analysis of experiences of ICE-detained immigrants during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic. To ensure the rights to health and wellbeing for this population, further actions should include improving public health conditions, protecting against human rights violations, addressing barriers to healthcare access, ensuring transparency about conditions in detention centers, and moving toward decarceration.

Health professionals' perspectives on the impact of COVID-19 on sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) and SGBV services in Rohingya refugee communities in Bangladesh.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has acutely affected Rohingya refugees living in camps in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh. Reported increases in sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) were attributed in part to pandemic-related public health measures. In addition, the Government of Bangladesh's restrictions to prevent the spread of COVID-19 have impacted the provision of comprehensive care for survivors of sexual violence. This study sought to understand how the COVID-19 pandemic affected SGBV and the provision of services for Rohingya survivors in Bangladesh. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with 13 professionals who provided or managed health care or related services for Rohingya refugees after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020. RESULTS: At the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, organizations observed an increase in the incidences of SGBV. However, health care workers noted that the overall number of survivors formally reporting or accessing services decreased. The pandemic produced multiple challenges that affected health workers' ability to provide essential care and services to Rohingya survivors, including access to the camps, initial designation of SGBV-related services as non-essential, communications and telehealth, difficulty maintaining confidentiality, and donor pressure. Some emerging best practices were also reported, including engaging Rohingya volunteers to continue services and adapting programming modalities and content to the COVID-19 context. CONCLUSIONS: Comprehensive SGBV services being deemed non-essential by the Government of Bangladesh was a key barrier to providing services to Rohingya survivors. Government restrictions adversely affected the ability of service providers to ensure that comprehensive SGBV care and services were available and accessible. The Government of Bangladesh has not been alone in struggling to balance the needs of displaced populations with the necessary precautions to prevent the spread of COVID-19 and its response can provide lessons to others overseeing the provision of services during epidemics and pandemics in other humanitarian settings. The designation of comprehensive services for survivors of SGBV as essential is vital and should be done early in establishing disease prevention and mitigation strategies.

Clinicians' perceptions of the health status of formerly detained immigrants.

BACKGROUND: In the past decade, the U.S. immigration detention system regularly detained more than 30,000 people per day; in 2019 prior to the pandemic, the daily detention population exceeded 52,000 people. Inhumane detention conditions have been documented by internal government watchdogs, and news media and human rights groups who have observed over-crowding, poor hygiene and sanitation and poor and delayed medical care, as well as verbal, physical and sexual abuse. METHODS: This study surveyed health professionals across the United States who had provided care for immigrants who were recently released from immigration detention to assess clinician perceptions about the adverse health impact of immigration detention on migrant populations based on real-life clinical encounters. There were 150 survey responses, of which 85 clinicians observed medical conditions attributed to detention. RESULTS: These 85 clinicians reported seeing a combined estimate of 1300 patients with a medical issue related to their time in detention, including patients with delayed access to medical care or medicine in detention, patients with new or acute health conditions such as infection and injury attributed to detention, and patients with worsened chronic or special needs conditions. Clinicians also provided details regarding sentinel cases, categorized into the following themes: Pregnant women, Children, Mentally Ill, COVID-19, and Other serious health issue. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first survey, to our knowledge, of health care professionals treating individuals upon release from detention. Due to the lack of transparency by federal entities and limited access to detainees, this survey serves as a source of credible information about conditions experienced within immigration detention facilities and is a means of corroborating immigrant testimonials and media reports. These findings can help inform policy discussions regarding systematic changes to the delivery of healthcare in detention, quality assurance and transparent reporting.

Conducting remote medical asylum evaluations in the United States during COVID-19: Clinicians' perspectives on acceptability, challenges and opportunities.

BACKGROUND: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, medical evaluations for asylum are being performed predominantly remotely. We sought to describe these evaluations and identify barriers. METHODOLOGY: This study utilized an online survey to assess clinician perspectives and experiences regarding remote asylum evaluations. RESULTS: Clinicians reported positive experiences regarding remote interpretation (85%, 51/60), history taking (82.4%, 61/74), rapport building (81.3%, 61/75), and conducting the psychiatric exam (65.7%, 44/67). Concerns were more frequently reported with performing remote physical examinations (83.3%, 15/18). Although the majority denied challenges with technology (62.5%, 45/72), internet (60.8%, 45/74) or clients having difficulty acquiring technology (58.6%, 41/70) or finding private spaces (54.2%, 39/72), these aspects did represent barriers. DISCUSSION: Remote evaluations were relatively easy to perform and acceptable to clinicians. This may facilitate easier access for asylum seekers beyond the pandemic.

Preventing the Spread of COVID-19 in Immigration Detention Centers Requires the Release of Detainees.

Immigration detention centers are densely populated facilities in which restrictive conditions limit detainees' abilities to engage in social distancing or hygiene practices designed to prevent the spread of COVID-19. With tens of thousands of adults and children in more than 200 immigration detention centers across the United States, immigration detention centers are likely to experience COVID-19 outbreaks and add substantially to the population of those infected.Despite compelling evidence indicating a heightened risk of infection among detainees, state and federal governments have done little to protect the health of detained im-migrants. An evidence-based public health framework must guide the COVID-19 response in immigration detention centers.We draw on the hierarchy of controls framework to demonstrate how immigration detention centers are failing to implement even the least effective control strategies. Drawing on this framework and recent legal and medical advocacy efforts, we argue that safely releasing detainees from immigration detention centers into their communities is the most effective way to prevent COVID-19 outbreaks in immigration detention settings. Failure to do so will result in infection and death among those detained and deepen existing health and social inequities.

Protecting providers and patients: results of an Internet survey of health care workers' risk perceptions and ethical concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has generated worldwide scarcity of critical resources to protect against and treat disease. Shortages of face masks and other protective equipment place health workers, already on the frontline of the disease, at higher risk. Moral distress from making difficult decisions about allocating scarce resources and care to patients ill with COVID-19 can further add to burdens health workers face. This study investigates clinical health workers' risk perceptions and concerns about the ethics of their clinical decision-making, the actions of their institutions to address resource scarcity concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic, and their ability to voice safety concerns, as well as their own views on how scarce resources should be allocated. METHODS: An online survey was open to health care workers who provide clinical care to patients, with no specialty training or geographic location requirements, from May 19 to June 30, 2020. Participants were recruited through purposive sampling using medical association and institutional email lists, and by snowball sampling. RESULTS: Of 839 participants, a majority were physicians (540, 69.4%) working in academic medical centers (270, 35.2%) or private health systems in the community (234, 30.5%) in the USA (760, 90.7%). Most reported being concerned about their own health (494, 73.6%) and about the possibility of spreading COVID-19 to family and friends (534, 85.9%) during the pandemic. All respondents reported shortages or rationing of at least one type of medical resource (e.g., sanitizing supplies and personal protective equipment). More than half of respondents (351, 53.9%) did not feel they received sufficient training in how to allocate scarce resources in the pandemic. Many felt moral distress related to conflicts between institutional constraints and what they believed was right (459, 66.5%). Though a majority (459, 67.7%) reported feeling "comfortable" internally communicating with their administration about safety issues, far fewer reported feeling "confident" speaking publicly about safety issues without retaliation from their institution (255, 37.3%). CONCLUSIONS: In the face of limited resources, surveyed health care workers reported concern about their own and their families' health from exposure. Securing adequate protective equipment must be a high priority for pandemic management. In addition, more governmental and facility-level ethical guidance is required for allocation of resources given ongoing scarcity, and facilities must create conditions so health care workers can speak openly about safety issues without fear of retaliation.

The impact of COVID-19 on services for people affected by sexual and gender-based violence.

Sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV), and particularly intimate partner violence (IPV), has spiked dramatically during the COVID-19 pandemic. At the same time, the pandemic is impacting and interrupting SGBV and IPV services of all kinds. This paper focuses on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on clinical care and forensic medical documentation for SGBV survivors, including an analysis of the response in the UK and Kenya, and provides recommendations for safe implementation of these services during the pandemic.