Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 12 de 12
Filter
3.
Int J Prison Health ; ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print)2021 May 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1467465

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The purpose of this paper is to give an overview of management of the COVID-19 epidemic in a French immigration detention center. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: During containment in France because of COVID-19, the judicial authorities had to deal with the risk of contamination within immigration detention centers (IDC). In the Paris IDC, which can usually receive up to 240 individuals, measures have been taken to limit the risk of contamination by releasing individuals without prior judicial conviction and testing the others by a nasal swab. FINDINGS: The test was done for all the present individuals (48), except two who refused. Eight tests (17.4%) were positive and only one was symptomatic. Individuals testing positive for COVID-19 were transferred into COVID-centers specially created during this health crisis. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: Management of the COVID-19 epidemic in this French IDC illustrates the necessity of good cooperation between judicial authorities and medical teams in charge of those centers and the difficulty of balancing public health actions with state security.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Testing , COVID-19/diagnosis , Emigrants and Immigrants/legislation & jurisprudence , Jails , Public Health , Adult , France/epidemiology , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2
4.
PLoS One ; 16(10): e0257912, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1463307

ABSTRACT

Dehumanization is a topic of significant interest for academia and society at large. Empirical studies often have people rate the evolved nature of outgroups and prior work suggests immigrants are common victims of less-than-human treatment. Despite existing work that suggests who dehumanizes particular outgroups and who is often dehumanized, the extant literature knows less about why people dehumanize outgroups such as immigrants. The current work takes up this opportunity by examining why people dehumanize immigrants said to be illegal and how measurement format affects dehumanization ratings. Participants (N = 672) dehumanized such immigrants more if their ratings were made on a slider versus clicking images of hominids, an effect most pronounced for Republicans. Dehumanization was negatively associated with warmth toward illegal immigrants and the perceived unhappiness felt by illegal immigrants from U.S. immigration policies. Finally, most dehumanization is not entirely blatant but instead, captured by virtuous violence and affect as well, suggesting the many ways that dehumanization can manifest as predicted by theory. This work offers a mechanistic account for why people dehumanize immigrants and addresses how survey measurement artifacts (e.g., clicking on images of hominids vs. using a slider) affect dehumanization rates. We discuss how these data extend dehumanization theory and inform empirical research.


Subject(s)
Dehumanization , Emigrants and Immigrants/psychology , Emigration and Immigration/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Emigrants and Immigrants/legislation & jurisprudence , Female , Humans , Male , Undocumented Immigrants/psychology , Undocumented Immigrants/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiology , Violence/legislation & jurisprudence , Violence/prevention & control
5.
PLoS One ; 16(9): e0256073, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1403299

ABSTRACT

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Heightened immigration enforcement may induce fear in undocumented patients when coming to the Emergency Department (ED) for care. Limited literature examining health system policies to reduce immigrant fear exists. In this multi-site qualitative study, we sought to assess provider and system-level policies on caring for undocumented patients in three California EDs. METHODS: We recruited 41 ED providers and administrators from three California EDs (in San Francisco, Oakland, and Sylmar) with large immigrant populations. Participants were recruited using a trusted gatekeeper and snowball sampling. We conducted semi-structured interviews and analyzed the transcripts using constructivist grounded theory. RESULTS: We interviewed 10 physicians, 11 nurses, 9 social workers, and 11 administrators, and identified 7 themes. Providers described existing policies and recent policy changes that facilitate access to care for undocumented patients. Providers reported that current training and communication around policies is limited, there are variations between who asks about and documents status, and there remains uncertainty around policy details, laws, and jurisdiction of staff. Providers also stated they are taking an active role in building safety and trust and see their role as supporting undocumented patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study introduces ED-level health system perspectives and recommendations for caring for undocumented patients. There is a need for active, multi-disciplinary ED policy training, clear policy details including the extent of providers' roles, protocols on the screening and documentation of status, and continual reassessment of our health systems to reduce fear and build safety and trust with our undocumented communities.


Subject(s)
Administrative Personnel/psychology , Emergency Service, Hospital/standards , Emigrants and Immigrants/psychology , Emigration and Immigration/legislation & jurisprudence , Fear , Health Policy , Trust , Emergency Service, Hospital/organization & administration , Emigrants and Immigrants/legislation & jurisprudence , Emigrants and Immigrants/statistics & numerical data , Health Plan Implementation , Humans , Qualitative Research
7.
PLoS One ; 15(12): e0244054, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-979822

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Immigrants in the United States (US) today are facing a dynamic policy landscape. The Trump administration has threatened or curtailed access to basic services for 10.5 million undocumented immigrants currently in the US. We sought to examine the historical effects that punitive laws have had on health outcomes in US immigrant communities. METHODS: In this systematic review, we searched the following databases from inception-May 2020 for original research articles with no language restrictions: Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Cochrane Library (Wiley), Web of Science Core Collection (Clarivate), CINAHL (EBSCO), and Social Work Abstracts (Ovid). This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42019138817. Articles with cohort sizes >10 that directly evaluated the health-related effects of a punitive immigrant law or policy within the US were included. FINDINGS: 6,357 studies were screened for eligibility. Of these, 32 studies were selected for inclusion and qualitatively synthesized based upon four themes that appeared throughout our analysis: (1) impact on healthcare utilization, (2) impact on women's and children's health, (3) impact on mental health services, and (4) impact on public health. The impact of each law, policy, mandate, and directive since 1990 is briefly discussed, as are the limitations and risk of bias of each study. INTERPRETATION: Many punitive immigrant policies have decreased immigrant access to and utilization of basic healthcare services, while instilling fear, confusion, and anxiety in these communities. The federal government should preserve and expand access for undocumented individuals without threat of deportation to improve health outcomes for US citizens and noncitizens.


Subject(s)
Emigrants and Immigrants/statistics & numerical data , Emigration and Immigration/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Status , Child Health/statistics & numerical data , Emigrants and Immigrants/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/statistics & numerical data , United States , Women's Health/statistics & numerical data
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL