Integration policies shape ethnic-racial majorities' threat reactions to increasing diversity.

Increasing ethnic and racial diversity often fuels feelings of threat among ethnic-racial majorities (e.g., self-identified white Americans and European nationals). We contend that these threat perceptions depend on the policy context. Across four studies, we test whether more inclusive immigrant integration policies attenuate ethnic-racial majorities' threat reactions. Studies 1 to 3 (n = 469, 733, and 1745, respectively) used experimental methods with white American participants in the United States. Study 4 (n = 499,075) used secondary analysis of survey data comparing attitudes of nationals in 30 European countries and measured the impact of actual changes in diversity and policies over 10 years. Our results show that integration policies shape threat reactions even in those situations when increasing diversity could be seen as the most threatening: when narratives highlight the majority's impending minority position or when diversity suddenly increases. When policies are more inclusive toward immigrants, ethnic-racial majority participants report less threat (or no threat) in response to increasing diversity.

Mechanism mapping: A qualitative study of how different forms of instability mediate the relationship between legal status and immigrant mental well-being.

Scholarship on undocumented immigrants has linked irregular forms of legal status to depressed mental health experiences and outcomes. The children of undocumented immigrants have also been shown to report mental health issues. More regular forms of legal status, like Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), have been shown to improve psychological outcomes for migrants and their children. Though the relationship between legal status and mental well-being has appeared again and again in the literature, less work has explored the mechanisms through which legal status impacts mental well-being. This paper aims to help detail this link by drawing on 50 in-depth interviews with DACA-recipient and undocumented (DACA-ineligible) immigrants conducted from 2017 to 2018 (pre- and post-DACA rescindment). Thematic analysis identified three forms of instability (nation-state, residential and household) that mediate the influence of legal status on the mental well-being of immigrants and their families. Coping with nation-state, residential and household changes depleted immigrant's mental and emotional resources, hurting their mental well-being. More regular forms of legal status (like DACA) suppressed the occurrence of instability, bolstering the mental well-being reports of DACA-recipients compared to their undocumented counterparts. Yet the program's rescission in September 2017, spiked the threat of future instability for DACA-respondents leading their negative mental well-being reports to echo those of undocumented respondents. We propose that experiencing or even expecting these forms of instability to occur mediates the influence of legal status on mental well-being. Findings shed light on how legal status influences mental well-being and contribute to the immigrant mental health literature.

Local policy proposals can bridge Latino and (most) white Americans' response to immigration.

In the past 15 years, the adoption of subnational immigration policies in the United States, such as those established by individual states, has gone from nearly zero to over 300 per year. These include welcoming policies aimed at attracting and incorporating immigrants, as well as unwelcoming policies directed at denying immigrants access to public resources and services. Using data from a 2016 random digit-dialing telephone survey with an embedded experiment, we examine whether institutional support for policies that are either welcoming or hostile toward immigrants differentially shape Latinos' and whites' feelings of belonging in their state (Arizona/New Mexico, adjacent states with contrasting immigration policies). We randomly assigned individuals from the representative sample (n = 1,903) of Latinos (US and foreign born) and whites (all US born) to consider policies that were either welcoming of or hostile toward immigrants. Across both states of residence, Latinos, especially those foreign born, regardless of citizenship, expressed more positive affect and greater belonging when primed with a welcoming (vs. hostile) policy. Demonstrating the importance of local norms, these patterns held among US-born whites, except among self-identified politically conservative whites, who showed more negative affect and lower levels of belonging in response to welcoming policies. Thus, welcoming immigration policies, supported by institutional authorities, can create a sense of belonging not only among newcomers that is vital to successful integration but also among a large segment of the population that is not a direct beneficiary of such policies-US-born whites.

Protecting unauthorized immigrant mothers improves their children's mental health.

The United States is embroiled in a debate about whether to protect or deport its estimated 11 million unauthorized immigrants, but the fact that these immigrants are also parents to more than 4 million U.S.-born children is often overlooked. We provide causal evidence of the impact of parents' unauthorized immigration status on the health of their U.S. citizen children. The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program granted temporary protection from deportation to more than 780,000 unauthorized immigrants. We used Medicaid claims data from Oregon and exploited the quasi-random assignment of DACA eligibility among mothers with birthdates close to the DACA age qualification cutoff. Mothers' DACA eligibility significantly decreased adjustment and anxiety disorder diagnoses among their children. Parents' unauthorized status is thus a substantial barrier to normal child development and perpetuates health inequalities through the intergenerational transmission of disadvantage.

Intergenerational Mobility of the Mexican-Origin Population in California and Texas Relative to a Changing Regional Mainstream.

We combine two approaches to gauge the achievements of the Mexican-origin second generation: one the intergenerational progress between immigrant parents and children, the other the gap between the second generation and non-Latino whites. We measure advancement of the Mexican-origin second generation using a suite of census-derived outcomes applied to immigrant parents in 1980 and grown children in 2005, as observed in California and Texas. Patterns of second-generation upward mobility are similar in the two states, with important differences across outcome indicators. Assessments are less favorable for men than women, especially in Texas. We compare Mexican-Americans to a non-Latino white reference group, as do most assimilation studies. However, we separate the reference group into those born in the same state as the second generation and those who have migrated in. We find that selective in-migration of more highly-educated whites has raised the bar on some, not all, measures of attainment. This poses a challenge to studies of assimilation that do not compare grown-children to their fellow natives of a state. Our model of greater temporal and regional specificity has broad applicability to studies guided by all theories of immigrant assimilation, integration and advancement.

Presencia de familiares en los procedimientos realizados en urgencias de pediatría: opinión de la familia y de los profesionales / Family presence during pediatric emergency procedures: the perspectives of family

Objetivo: Conocer la opinión de familiares y profesionales sobre la presencia de familiares(PF) en los procedimientos realizados en un servicio de urgencias de pediatría(SUP).Métodos: Se realizaron dos estudios descriptivos transversales mediante encuestas anónimas semiestructuradas a 200 familiares elegidos aleatoriamente y a 36 profesionales(12 pediatras y 24 enfermeras) del SUP. Resultados: Entre los familiares, el deseo de presencia fue inversamente proporcional al grado de invasividad (aspiración secreciones 92%, canalización venosa 84%, sedoanalgesia81%, sondaje vesical 80%, suturas 79%, punción lumbar 66%, maniobras de reanimación pulmonar 44%). Las razones para estar presentes fueron tranquilizar al niño, sufrir menos angustia y vigilar el procedimiento. Y para no estar, interferencia con los profesionales, no tranquilizar al hijo y aumento de su angustia. Un 80% creían que la presencia familiar (PF) podría ser beneficiosa. Entre los profesionales las razones para permitirla fueron la colaboración en la contención emocional y la mejora en la relación con la familia. Y para rechazarla, menor tasa de éxitos, nerviosismo en los profesionales y angustia del familiar. Un 70% opinaron que puede resultar beneficiosa. Conclusiones: La mayoría de familiares desean estar presentes en los procedimientos realizados en un SUP. Su argumento principal es tranquilizar al niño. Los principales para no estar presentes son la interferencia con los sanitarios y su angustia. La categoría profesional influye en ofertar la PF. La razón principal para ofertarla es la contención emocional; para no hacerlo, la interferencia con la técnica y el aumento de fracasos. La mayoría tanto de familiares como de sanitarios cree que puede ser beneficiosa (AU)

Objective: To determine the opinions of family members and health care staff regarding the presence of the family during procedures carried out in our pediatric emergency department. Methods: Two cross-sectional surveys were performed. Semistructured questionnaires were answered by 200 randomly selected families and by 36 health-care professionals (12 pediatricians and 24 nurses) on our pediatric staff. Results: Among the families, the desire to be present was inversely proportional to the invasiveness of the procedure: aspiration of secretions, 92%; venous catheterization, 84%; sedation and analgesia, 81%; bladder catheterization, 80%;sutures, 79%; lumbar puncture, 66%; and cardiopulmonary resuscitation maneuvers, 44%. The families’ reasons for being present included calming the child, suffering less anxiety, and watching over the procedure. Reasons for not being present included not interfering with the professionals’ work, not being a calming influence on the child, and suffering greater anxiety. Eighty percent thought that the family’s presence could be beneficial. The professionals’ reasons for allowing family to be present included containing the child’s emotional response and improving relations with the family. Reasons for refusing family presence included a reduced success rate, staff nervousness, and family anxiety. Seventy percent of the professionals thought that the family’s presence could be beneficial (..) (AU)

Mexican immigrant replenishment and the continuing significance of ethnicity and race.

The literature on assimilation and ethnic identity formation largely assumes that the durability of ethnic boundaries is a function of the assimilation measures that sociologists commonly employ. But this literature fails to account adequately for the role of immigration patterns in explaining the durability and nature of ethnic boundaries. Using 123 in-depth interviews with later-generation Mexican Americans, this article shows that Mexican immigrant replenishment shapes ethnic boundaries and ethnic identity formation. The sizable immigrant population sharpens intergroup boundaries through the indirect effects of nativism and by contributing to the continuing significance of race in the lives of later-generation Mexican Americans. The presence of a large immigrant population also creates intragroup boundaries that run through the Mexican-origin population and that are animated by expectations about ethnic authenticity. The article illustrates the importance of immigrant replenishment to processes of assimilation and ethnic identity formation.