Parenting Strain among Mexican-origin Mothers: Differences by Parental Legal Status and Neighborhood.

Despite increasing recognition of the critical importance of legal status for understanding the well-being of immigrants and their families, there has been scant research on this topic due to data limitations. Using Wave 1 of the Los Angles Family and Neighborhood Survey (2000-2002) and the 2000 decennial census, we investigate how parenting strain among Mexican-origin mothers varies by legal status and neighborhood context. We find significant differences in parenting strain by nativity and legal status, with undocumented mothers reporting the lowest level. Results from multilevel models with cross-level interactions reveal that the influence of neighborhood immigrant concentration differs by legal status. Percent foreign born in the neighborhood is associated with reduced parenting strain for documented Mexican-origin mothers while it is associated with heightened parenting strain for undocumented Mexican-origin mothers. Findings provide empirical support for the need to recognize legal status distinctions in studies of the well-being of immigrants and their families.

Experiencing discrimination in Los Angeles: Latinos at the intersection of legal status and socioeconomic status.

Despite its recent slowdown, immigration from Latin America continues to be a controversial issue. Some scholars argue that the social climate is increasingly inhospitable to Latinos, potentially fueling discriminatory attitudes and behaviors. However, little research has examined Latinos' experiences with discrimination, especially variation by nativity and legal status. We address this issue with research on perceived discrimination among Mexican and Central American residents of Los Angeles County, a major destination for Latin American immigrants. Using data from the Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey and the American Community Survey, the analyses consider immigrants' legal status, intersectionality, and competing perspectives on assimilation. The results show that undocumented immigrants do not report especially high levels of discrimination. Instead, young U.S.-born Latinos are the most likely to report mistreatment in interpersonal and institutional domains. Neighborhood ethnoracial and income diversity also have implications for perceived exposure to different types of discrimination.

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.

SEARCHING FOR THE FAMILY LEGAL STATUS OF MEXICAN-ORIGIN CHILDREN: A PRIMER ON DIFFERENT MEASUREMENT STRATEGIES.

Interest in the consequences of family legal status for children has grown in response to immigration-related changes in the ethnic composition of American society. However, few population-based empirical studies devote attention to family legal status due to data limitations. Using restricted data from the California Health Interview Survey (2009), the primary objectives of this research are to identify and evaluate strategies for measuring this important determinant of life chances among Mexican-origin children. The results indicate that measurement strategies matter. Estimates of the size of status-specific segments of this population and their risks of living in poverty are sensitive to how family legal status is operationalized. These findings provide the foundation for a discussion of how various "combinatorial" measurement strategies may rely on untenable assumptions that can be avoided with less reductionist approaches.

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

Using restricted data from the 2001-2014 California Health Interview Surveys, this research illuminates the role of legal status in health care among Mexican-origin children. The first objective is to provide a population-level overview of trends in health care access and utilization, along with the legal statuses of parents and children. The second objective is to examine the nature of associations between children's health care and legal status over time. We identify specific status-based distinctions that matter and investigate how their importance is changing. Despite the continuing significance of child nativity for health care, the descriptive analysis shows that the proportion of Mexican-origin children who are foreign born is declining. This trend suggests a potentially greater role of parental legal status in children's health care. Logistic regression analyses demonstrate that the importance of parental legal status varies with the health care indicator examined and the inclusion of child nativity in models. Moreover, variation in some aspects of children's health care coalesced more around parents' citizenship than documentation status in the past. With one exception, the salience of such distinctions has dissipated over time.

Early cognitive skills of Mexican-origin children: The roles of parental nativity and legal status.

Although one-third of children of immigrants have undocumented parents, little is known about their early development. Using data from the Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey and decennial census, we assessed how children's cognitive skills at ages 3 to 5 vary by ethnicity, maternal nativity, and maternal legal status. Specifically, Mexican children of undocumented mothers were contrasted with Mexican children of documented mothers and Mexican, white, and black children with U.S.-born mothers. Mexican children of undocumented mothers had lower emergent reading skills than all other groups and lower emergent mathematics skills than all groups with U.S.-born mothers. Multilevel regression models showed that differences in reading skills are explained by aspects of the home environment, but the neighborhood context also matters. Cross-level interactions suggest that immigrant concentration boosts emergent reading and mathematics skills for children with undocumented parents, but does not similarly benefit children whose parents are native born.

Family legal status and health: Measurement dilemmas in studies of Mexican-origin children.

Family legal status is a potentially important source of variation in the health of Mexican-origin children. However, a comprehensive understanding of its role has been elusive due to data limitations and inconsistent measurement procedures. Using restricted data from the 2011-2012 California Health Interview Survey, we investigate the implications of measurement strategies for estimating the share of children in undocumented families and inferences about how legal status affects children's health. The results show that inferences are sensitive to how this "fundamental cause" is operationalized under various combinatorial approaches used in previous studies. We recommend alternative procedures with greater capacity to reveal how the statuses of both parents affect children's well-being. The results suggest that the legal statuses of both parents matter, but the status of mothers is especially important for assessments of child health. The investigation concludes with a discussion of possible explanations for these findings.

How Does the Context of Reception Matter? The Role of Residential Enclaves in Maternal Smoking During Pregnancy Among Mexican-Origin Mothers.

This study investigated whether and how different patterns of group exposure within residential contexts (i.e., living in a Mexican immigrant enclave, a Mexican ethnic enclave, a pan-Hispanic enclave, or a non-Hispanic white neighborhood) are associated with smoking during pregnancy among Mexican-origin mothers. Using a hierarchical linear modeling approach, we found that Mexican-origin mothers' residential contexts are important for understanding their smoking during pregnancy. Residence in an ethnic enclave is associated with decreased odds of smoking during pregnancy, while residence in a non-Hispanic white neighborhood is associated with increased odds of smoking during pregnancy, above and beyond the mothers' individual characteristics. The magnitude of the associations between residence in an ethnic enclave and smoking during pregnancy is similar across the different types of ethnic enclaves examined. The important roles of inter- and intra-group exposures suggests that in order to help Mexican-origin women, policy makers should more carefully design place-based programs and interventions that target geographic areas and the specific types of residential contexts in which women are at greater risk.

Behavioral functioning among Mexican-origin children: does parental legal status matter?

Using data on 2,535 children included in the Los Angeles Family and Neighborhood Survey, we investigate how the legal status of immigrant parents shapes their children's behavioral functioning. Variation in internalizing and externalizing problems among Mexican youth with undocumented mothers, documented or naturalized citizen mothers, and U.S.-born mothers is analyzed using a comparative framework that contrasts their experience with that of other ethnoracial groups. Our findings reinforce the importance of differentiating children of immigrants by parental legal status in studying health and well-being. Children of undocumented Mexican migrants have significantly higher risks of internalizing and externalizing behavior problems than their counterparts with documented or naturalized citizen mothers. Regression results are inconsistent with simple explanations that emphasize group differences in socioeconomic status, maternal mental health, or family routines.

Asthma in US Mexican-Origin Children in Early Childhood: Differences in Risk and Protective Factors by Parental Nativity.

OBJECTIVE: Over 900,000 Mexican-origin children in the United States have asthma, but little is known about the extent to which development of this condition reflects early childhood exposure to social and environmental risks. The objectives of this research are to demonstrate the roles of risk and protective factors in the prevalence and severity of asthma in this population and provide comparisons with other racial/ethnic groups. METHODS: Nationally representative data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Birth Cohort (n = 6900), with county-level ozone data appended to this file were analyzed using descriptive and multivariate regression methods. RESULTS: The odds of asthma diagnosis by 60 months are approximately 50% higher among Mexican-origin children than for non-Hispanic whites (P < .05) in multivariate analyses. Compared to those with foreign-born parents, Mexican-origin children with native-born parents have a lower likelihood of being breast-fed and greater chances of having risks including a family history of asthma, having respiratory illnesses and allergies, living with a smoker, and attending center-based child care. Mexican-origin children live in counties with over 3 times more elevated ozone days annually than non-Hispanic whites. CONCLUSIONS: Mexican-origin children experience a constellation of risk and protective factors, but those with US-born parents have elevated asthma risks compared to those with foreign-born parents. Asthma incidence and severity will likely increase as this population becomes increasingly integrated into US society.

Immigration and the Family Circumstances of Mexican-Origin Children: A Binational Longitudinal Analysis.

Using data from the birth cohort of the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study (n = 1,200) and the Mexican Family Life Survey (n = 1,013), this study investigated the living arrangements of Mexican-origin preschool children. The analysis examined children's family circumstances in both sending and receiving countries, used longitudinal data to capture family transitions, and considered the intersection between nuclear and extended family structures. Between ages 0-1 and 4-5, Mexican children of immigrants experienced significantly more family instability than children in Mexico. They were more likely to transition from 2-parent to single-parent families and from extended family households to simple households. There were fewer differences between U.S. children with immigrant versus native parents, but the higher level of single parenthood among children of natives at ages 0-1 and the greater share making transitions from a 2-parent to a single-parent family suggest ongoing erosion of children's family support across generations in the United States.

Profiles of Risk: Maternal Health, Socioeconomic Status, and Child Health.

Child health is fundamental to well-being and achievement throughout the life course. Prior research has demonstrated strong associations between familial socioeconomic resources and children's health outcomes, with especially poor health outcomes among disadvantaged youth who experience a concentration of risks, yet little is known about the influence of maternal health as a dimension of risk for children. This research used nationally representative U.S. data from the National Health Interview Surveys in 2007 and 2008 (N = 7,361) to evaluate the joint implications of maternal health and socioeconomic disadvantage for youth. Analyses revealed that maternal health problems were present in a substantial minority of families, clustered meaningfully with other risk factors, and had serious implications for children's health. These findings support the development of health policies and interventions aimed at families.

Measuring early childhood health and health disparities: a new approach.

Efforts to improve the health of U.S. children and reduce disparities have been hampered by lack of a rigorous way to summarize the multi-dimensional nature of children's health. This research employed a novel statistical approach to measurement to provide an integrated, comprehensive perspective on early childhood health and disparities. Nationally-representative data (n = 8,800) came from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Birth Cohort. Latent class analysis was used to classify health at 48 months, incorporating health conditions, functioning, and aspects of physical, cognitive, and emotional development. Health disparities by gender, poverty, race/ethnicity, and birthweight were examined. Over half of all children were classified as healthy using multidimensional latent class methodology; others fell into one of seven less optimal health statuses. The analyses highlighted pervasive disparities in health, with poor children at increased risk of being classified into the most disadvantaged health status consisting of chronic conditions and a cluster of developmental problems including low cognitive achievement, poor social skills, and behavior problems. Children with very low birthweight had the highest rate of being in the most disadvantaged health status (25.2 %), but moderately low birthweight children were also at elevated risk (7.9 vs. 3.4 % among non-low birthweight children). Latent class analysis provides a uniquely comprehensive picture of child health and health disparities that identifies clusters of problems experienced by some groups. The findings underscore the importance of continued efforts to reduce preterm birth, and to ameliorate poverty's effects on children's health through access to high-quality healthcare and other services.

Health and development among Mexican, black and white preschool children: An integrative approach using latent class analysis.

BACKGROUND: Building on an emerging scientific consensus that the concept of child health should encompass chronic conditions, functional abilities, and developmental domains, we delineate the multidimensional health statuses of Mexican, non-Hispanic black, and non-Hispanic white preschool children in the United States. This integrative approach provides the foundation for an in-depth analysis of health disparities. OBJECTIVE: The research objectives are: (1) to demonstrate a new methodological approach to identifying the major child health statuses; (2) to document differences in the prevalence of those health statuses among children in the largest ethnoracial groups in the U.S.; and (3) to assess whether key sources of disadvantage account for ethnoracial disparities in children's health. METHODS: With data from a nationally representative sample, we use latent class analysis to estimate a set of latent health statuses that capture the nature of health at age four. The latent class membership of children is predicted using multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS: Mexican and non-Hispanic black children are more likely than non-Hispanic white children to fall into health statuses distinguished by low cognitive achievement and multiple developmental problems. Mexican children are the most likely to be classified into these problematic health statuses. This pattern persists in multivariate models that incorporate potential explanatory factors, including health at birth, socio-demographic characteristics, home environment, well-child care and center-based child care. CONCLUSIONS: Latent class analysis is a useful method for incorporating measures of physical conditions, functional problems, and development into a single analysis in order to identify key dimensions of childhood health and locate ethnoracial health disparities.

Academic achievement of legal immigrants' children: the roles of parents' pre- and postmigration characteristics in origin-group differences.

Using data from the New Immigrant Survey, a study based on a nationally representative sample of legal immigrants, the present study extends prior research on the academic outcomes of immigrants' children by examining the roles of pre- and postmigration parental characteristics and the home environment. An analysis of 2,147 children aged 6-12 shows that parents' premigration education is more strongly associated with children's academic achievement than any other pre- or postmigration attribute. Premigration parental attributes account for the test score disadvantage of Mexican-origin children of legal immigrants, relative to their non-Latino counterparts. The findings reveal continuities and discontinuities in parental socioeconomic status and demonstrate that what parents bring to the United States and their experiences after arrival influence children's academic achievement.

The living arrangements of children of immigrants.

Children of immigrants are a rapidly growing part of the U.S. child population. Their health, development, educational attainment, and social and economic integration into the nation's life will play a defining role in the nation's future. Nancy Landale, Kevin Thomas, and Jennifer Van Hook explore the challenges facing immigrant families as they adapt to the United States, as well as their many strengths, most notably high levels of marriage and family commitment. The authors examine differences by country of origin in the human capital, legal status, and social resources of immigrant families and describe their varied living arrangements, focusing on children of Mexican, Southeast Asian, and black Caribbean origin. Problems such as poverty and discrimination may be offset for children to some extent by living, as many do, in a two-parent family. But the strong parental bonds that initially protect them erode as immigrant families spend more time in the United States and are swept up in the same social forces that are increasing single parenthood among American families. The nation, say the authors, should pay special heed to how this aspect of immigrants' Americanization heightens the vulnerability of their children. One risk factor for immigrant families is the migration itself, which sometimes separates parents from their children. Another is the mixed legal status of family members. Parents' unauthorized status can mire children in poverty and unstable living arrangements. Sometimes unauthorized parents are too fearful of deportation even to claim the public benefits for which their children qualify. A risk factor unique to refugees, such as Southeast Asian immigrants, is the death of family members from war or hardship in refugee camps. The authors conclude by discussing how U.S. immigration policies shape family circumstances and suggest ways to alter policies to strengthen immigrant families. Reducing poverty, they say, is essential. The United States has no explicit immigrant integration policy or programs, so policy makers must direct more attention and resources toward immigrant settlement, especially ensuring that children have access to the social safety net.

Adolescent overweight, social relationships and the transition to first sex: gender and racial variations.

CONTEXT: Being overweight influences adolescents' relationships by increasing their likelihood of experiencing social alienation and discrimination. Its role in sexual development is relatively understudied, as are potential mechanisms through which weight may influence early sexual activity. METHODS: Data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health were used in discrete-time event history analyses investigating the association between body weight, social relationships and timing of sexual debut among 8,197 respondents who were in grades 7-12 in 1994-1995 (Wave 1) and were young adults in 2001-2002 (Wave 3). Subgroup analyses explored gender and racial and ethnic variations in the association. RESULTS: Overweight adolescents were less likely than their normal-weight peers to report first intercourse between Waves 1 and 3 (odds ratio, 0.9). Characteristics reflecting social alienation, including having relatively few close friends and no experience with romantic relationships, were negatively associated with first intercourse among overweight youths. Results differed by gender and race and ethnicity. Overweight females had a lower likelihood than normal-weight females of experiencing first intercourse (0.8), but no such association was evident among males. Similarly, overweight white youths--but not those from other racial and ethnic groups--had reduced odds of sexual debut (0.7). CONCLUSIONS: Future studies should seek to understand the broader implications of adolescent weight status for social relationships and subsequent development, and practitioners should apply this knowledge to prevention programs. Postponement of sexual activity may benefit youths, but potential benefits and risks may depend upon the social processes involved.

Adolescent Precursors of Early Union Formation among Asian Americans and Whites.

Using a framework that emphasizes independent vs. interdependent self-construals, this study investigates the relatively low rates of early marriage and cohabitation among Asian Americans compared to Whites. Data from Waves 1 and 3 of Add Health are used to test five hypotheses that focus on family value socialization and other precursors measured in adolescence. Analyses of early marriage indicate that the Asian-White difference is driven primarily by differences in adolescent sexual and romantic relationship experiences, and several measures of family values play a stronger role among Asian Americans than Whites. Asian-White differences in cohabitation persist net of SES and other adolescent precursors, but differences are attenuated when parental value socialization, intimate relationship experiences, and educational investments are controlled. These results are interpreted within a culturally sensitive conceptual framework that emphasizes interdependent construals of the self among Asian Americans.

Early Family Formation among White, Black and Mexican American Women.

Using data from Waves I and III of Add Health, we examine early family formation among 6,144 White, Black, and Mexican American women. Drawing on cultural and structural perspectives, we estimate models of the first and second family transitions (cohabitation, marriage, or childbearing) using discrete time multinomial logistic regression. Complex differences by race/ethnicity and generation are partially explained by differences in attitudes and values in adolescence and family SES; marriage values are especially important in first-generation Mexican women's early entry into marriage. Examination of sequential family transitions sheds light on race/ethnic differences in the meaning and consequences of early cohabitation and pre-union births.