Everyday Violence: Immigration Enforcement, COVID-19, and Depression among Undocumented Young Adults in California.

Background: The immigration enforcement system has significant effects on the health of immigrants, their families, and society. Exposure to the immigration enforcement system is linked to adverse mental health outcomes, which may have been exacerbated by sustained immigration enforcement activities during the COVID-19 pandemic. Objectives: This study was conducted to investigate the association between exposure to immigration enforcement and the mental health of undocumented young adults in California during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Data are from the COVID-19 BRAVE (Building Community Raising All Immigrant Voices for Health Equity) Study, a community-engaged cross-sectional survey of the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on undocumented immigrants in California. A total of 366 undocumented immigrants between 18 and 39 years of age completed the online survey, which was conducted between September 2020 and February 2021. Multivariable logistic regression models were fit to examine the association between immigration enforcement exposure and depression. Results: Almost all participants (91.4%) disclosed exposure to the immigration enforcement system, with most reporting an average of 3.52 (SD=2.06) experiences. Multivariate analyses revealed that an increase in the immigration enforcement exposure score was significantly associated with higher odds of depression (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]=1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.10, 1.40), and women were 92% more likely to report depression than were men (aOR=1.92; 95% CI: 1.12, 3.31). Those who reported deportation fears were significantly more likely to be depressed (aOR=1.24; 95% CI: 1.10, 1.40). Conclusions: Researchers should consider the mental health implications of a punitive immigration enforcement system, and policymakers should examine the impacts of immigration policies on local communities.

Perinatal mortality among pregnant undocumented migrants in Norway 1999-2020: A register-based population study.

BACKGROUND: Irregular legal status is a recognized health risk factor in the context of migration. However, undocumented migrants are rarely included in health surveys and register studies. Adverse perinatal outcomes are especially important because they have long-term consequences and societal risk factors are modifiable. In this study, we compare perinatal outcomes in undocumented migrants to foreign-born and Norwegian-born residents, using a population-based register. METHODS: We included women 18-49 years old giving birth to singletons as registered in the Medical Birth Registry of Norway from 1999 to 2020. Women were categorized as 'undocumented migrants' (without an identity number), 'documented migrants' (with an identity number and born abroad), and 'non-migrants' (with an identity number and born in Norway). The main outcome was perinatal mortality, i.e., death of a foetus ≥ gestational week 22, or neonate up to seven days after birth. We used log-binominal regression to estimate the association between legal status and perinatal mortality, adjusting for several maternal pre-gestational and gestational factors. Direct standardization was used to adjust for maternal region of origin. ETHICAL APPROVAL: Regional Ethical Committee (REK South East, case number 68329). RESULTS: We retrieved information on 5856 undocumented migrant women who gave birth during the study period representing 0.5% of the 1 247 537 births in Norway. Undocumented migrants had a relative risk of 6.17 (95% confidence interval 5.29 ̶7.20) of perinatal mortality compared to non-migrants and a relative risk of 4.17 (95% confidence interval 3.51 ̶4.93) compared to documented migrants. Adjusting for maternal region of origin attenuated the results slightly. CONCLUSION: Being undocumented is strongly associated with perinatal mortality in the offspring. Disparities were not explained by maternal origin or maternal health factors, indicating that social determinants of health through delays in receiving adequate care and factors negatively influencing gestational length may be of importance.

Exploring risky health behaviors and vulnerability to sexually transmitted diseases among transnational undocumented labor migrants from Bangladesh: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: In Bangladesh, remittances constitute a substantial portion of the country's foreign exchange earnings and serve as a primary source of income. However, a considerable number of Bangladeshi citizens reside overseas without proper documentation, exposing them to significant challenges such as limited access to healthcare and socioeconomic opportunities. Moreover, their irregular migration status often results in engaging in risky health behaviors that further exacerbate their vulnerability. Hence, this study aimed to investigate the risky health behavior and HIV/STI susceptibility of Bangladeshi irregular international migrants residing across the globe with undocumented status. METHODS: Using a qualitative Interpretative Phenomenological Approach (IPA), 25 illegal migrants were interviewed who are currently living illegally or returned to their home country. The author used a thematic approach to code and analyze the data, combining an integrated data-driven inductive approach with a deductive approach. Concurrent processing and coding were facilitated by employing the Granheim model in data analysis. RESULTS: The study identified four risky health behaviors among irregular Bangladeshi migrants: hazardous living conditions, risky jobs, suicidal ideation, and tobacco consumption. Additionally, the authors found some HIV/STI risk behavior among them including engaging in unprotected sex, consuming alcohol and drugs during sexual activity, and having limited access to medical facilities. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study can be used by health professional, governments, policymakers, NGOs, and concerned agencies to develop welfare strategies and initiatives for vulnerable undocumented migrant workers.

"Because We Are Afraid": voices of the undocumented in a new immigrant destination in the United States.

The purpose of this study is to explore immigrants' perceptions of their daily lives in a state with anti-immigrant policies in the United States. Using snowball sampling, researchers recruited a sample of 30 Latino immigrants in southwest Montana. The research team conducted semi-structured interviews in Spanish and analyzed the data using thematic analysis. We identified four themes: difficulty accessing healthcare, frustration over the inability to obtain driver's licenses, challenges related to employment, and desire to make a life in Montana. Fear permeated all topics. Lack of documentation presents complex economic, health, and social challenges that prevent immigrants from fully integrating into their communities. These are exacerbated in states that employ anti-immigrant policies. As Western states continue to experience growth in immigrant populations, it is critical to develop policies to support integration and equitable access to health and social services.

COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake in Undocumented Latinx Patients Presenting to the Emergency Department.

This cross-sectional study examines COVID-19 infection status, vaccination uptake, and perceptions about the vaccine among Latinx patients presenting to the emergency department in California.

State Public Insurance Coverage Policies and Postpartum Care Among Immigrants.

Importance: Professional medical organizations recommend that adults receive routine postpartum care. Yet, some states restrict public insurance coverage for undocumented immigrants and recently documented immigrants (those who received legal documentation status within the past 5 years). Objective: To examine the association between public insurance coverage and postpartum care among low-income immigrants and the difference in receipt of postpartum care among immigrants relative to nonimmigrants. Design, Setting, and Participants: A pooled, cross-sectional analysis was conducted using data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System for 19 states and New York City including low-income adults with a live birth between 2012 and 2019. Exposure: Giving birth in a state that offered public insurance coverage for postpartum care to recently documented or undocumented immigrants. Main Outcomes and Measures: Self-reported receipt of postpartum care by the category of coverage offered (full coverage: states that offered publicly funded postpartum care regardless of immigration status; moderate coverage: states that offered publicly funded postpartum care to lawfully residing immigrants without a 5-year waiting period, but did not offer postpartum care to undocumented immigrants; no coverage: states that did not offer publicly funded postpartum care to lawfully present immigrants before 5 years of legal residence or to undocumented immigrants). Results: The study included 72 981 low-income adults (20 971 immigrants [29%] and 52 010 nonimmigrants [71%]). Of the 19 included states and New York City, 6 offered full coverage, 9 offered moderate coverage, and 4 offered no coverage; 1 state (Oregon) switched from offering moderate coverage to offering full coverage. Compared with the states that offered full coverage, receipt of postpartum care among immigrants was 7.0-percentage-points lower (95% CI, -10.6 to -3.4 percentage points) in the states that offered moderate coverage and 11.3-percentage-points lower (95% CI, -13.9 to -8.8 percentage points) in the states that offered no coverage. The differences in the receipt of postpartum care among immigrants relative to nonimmigrants were also associated with the coverage categories. Compared with the states that offered full coverage, there was a 3.3-percentage-point larger difference (95% CI, -5.3 to -1.4 percentage points) in the states that offered moderate coverage and a 7.7-percentage-point larger difference (95% CI, -10.3 to -5.0 percentage points) in the states that offered no coverage. Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with states without insurance restrictions, immigrants living in states with public insurance restrictions were less likely to receive postpartum care. Restricting public insurance coverage may be an important policy-driven barrier to receipt of recommended pregnancy care and improved maternal health among immigrants.

Emergency Department Utilization Among Undocumented Latino Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether Latino undocumented immigrants had a steeper decline in Emergency Department (ED) utilization compared to Latino Medi-Cal patients in a Los Angeles safety-net hospital, March 13, 2020, to May 8, 2020. STUDY DESIGN: The data were extracted from patient medical records for ED visits at LAC + USC Medical Center from January 2018 to September 2020. We analyzed weekly ED encounters among undocumented Latino patients in the nine-week period after COVID was declared a national emergency. We applied time-series routines to identify and remove autocorrelation in ED encounters before examining its relation with the COVID-19 pandemic. We included Latino patients 18 years of age and older who were either on restricted or full-scope Medi-Cal (n = 230,195). RESULTS: All low-income Latino patients, regardless of immigration status, experienced a significant decline in ED utilization during the first nine weeks of the pandemic. Undocumented patients, however, experienced an even steeper decline. ED visits for this group fall below expected levels between March 13, 2020, and May 8, 2020 (coef. = - 38.67; 95% CI = - 71.71, - 5.63). When applied to the weekly mean of ED visits, this translates to a 10% reduction below expected levels in ED visits during this time period. CONCLUSION: Undocumented immigrants' health care utilization was influenced by external events that occurred early in the pandemic, such as strict stay-at-home orders and the public charge rule change. Health care institutions and local policy efforts could work to ensure that hospitals are safer spaces for undocumented immigrants to receive care without immigration concerns.

Undocumented Older Latino Immigrants in the United States: Population Projections and Share of Older Undocumented Latinos by Health Insurance Coverage and Chronic Health Conditions, 2018-2038.

OBJECTIVES: This article focuses on the older Latino undocumented population and anticipates how their current demographic characteristics and health insurance coverage might affect future population size and health insurance trends. METHODS: We use the 2013-2018 American Community Survey as a baseline to project growth in the Latino 55 and older undocumented population over the next 20 years. We use the cohort component method to estimate population size across different migration scenarios and distinguish between aging in place and new immigration. We also examine contemporary health insurance coverage and chronic health conditions among 55 and older undocumented Latinos from the 2003-2014 California Health Interview Survey. We then project health insurance rates in 2038 among Latino immigrants under different migration and policy scenarios. RESULTS: If current mortality, migration, and policy trends continue, projections estimate that 40% of undocumented Latino immigrants will be 55 years or older by 2038-nearly all of whom will have aged in place. Currently, 40% of older Latino undocumented immigrants do not have insurance. Without policies that increase access to insurance, projections estimate that the share who are uninsured among all older Latinos immigrants will rise from 15% to 21%, and the share who is both uninsured and living with a chronic health condition will rise from 5% to 9%. DISCUSSION: Without access to health care, older undocumented immigrants may experience delayed care and more severe morbidity. Our projections highlight the need to develop and enact policies that can address impending health access concerns for an increasingly older undocumented Latino population.

Measuring the invisible: perinatal health outcomes of unregistered women giving birth in Belgium, a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: The unregistered population remains under-researched because of its "invisible" status in statistics. Studies on perinatal health outcomes of unregistered women remains particularly limited. Our objectives were 1) to describe the sociodemographic profiles of women who are not legally residing in Belgium and 2) to analyze the associations of registration status with pregnancy outcomes according to socioeconomic status and nationality. METHODS: We analysed data from birth and death certificates taken from the Belgian civil registration system, linked with the National Population Registry (NPR). The data relates to all singleton babies born between 2010 and 2016 (n = 871,283), independent of their mother's NPR registration status. We used logistic regression to estimate the odds ratios for the associations between perinatal outcomes (perinatal mortality, prematurity and low birth weight) and maternal NPR registration status according to socioeconomic status and maternal nationality. RESULTS: Over the study period, 1.9% of births were to mothers without NPR-registration. Unregistered women from newer EU member states and non-European countries were particularly disadvantaged from a socioeconomic point of view. Apart from women with a South American nationality, all other groups of unregistered women had higher rates of prematurity, low birth weight, and perinatal mortality, compared to registered mothers (p < 0.0001). Unregistered women from Belgium and EU15 nationalities had particularly higher rates of prematurity, low birth weight, and perinatal mortality, compared to registered mothers, even after adjustment for socioeconomic status (p < 0.0001). The excess of perinatal mortality for non-European unregistered mothers could partly be explained by their precarious socioeconomic situation. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to include data on mothers who were not legally residing in Belgium. Unregistered women giving birth in Belgium are likely a heterogeneous socioeconomic group. Overall, unregistered women have increased risks of adverse perinatal outcomes, but it is likely that the causal mechanisms differ starkly between Belgian, European and non-European women. Further research is needed to understand the mechanisms behind these accrued rates. It is important to keep measuring the health outcomes of the populations which are "invisible" in national statistics, in order to identify the groups in most need of integration and access to services.

Why we dehumanize illegal immigrants: A US mixed-methods study.

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.

Association of Expanded Prenatal Care Coverage for Immigrant Women With Postpartum Contraception and Short Interpregnancy Interval Births.

Importance: Access to prenatal and postpartum care is restricted among women with low income who are recent or undocumented immigrants enrolled in Emergency Medicaid. Objective: To examine the association of extending prenatal care coverage to Emergency Medicaid enrollees with postpartum contraception and short interpregnancy interval births. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used a difference-in-differences design to compare the staggered rollout of prenatal care in Oregon with South Carolina, a state that does not cover prenatal or postpartum care. Linked Medicaid claims and birth certificate data from 2010 to 2016 were examined for an association between prenatal care coverage for women whose births were covered by Emergency Medicaid and subsequent short IPI births. Additional maternal and infant health outcomes were also examined, including postpartum contraceptive use, preterm birth, and neonatal intensive care unit admission. The association between the policy change and measures of policy implementation (number of prenatal visits) and quality of care (receipt of 8 guideline-based screenings) was also analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed from August 2020 to March 2021. Exposures: Medicaid coverage of prenatal care. Main Outcomes and Measures: Postpartum contraceptive use, defined as receipt of any contraceptive method within 60 days of delivery; short IPI births, defined as occurring within 18 months of a previous pregnancy. Results: The study population consisted of 26 586 births to women enrolled in Emergency Medicaid in Oregon and South Carolina. Among these women, 14 749 (55.5%) were aged 25 to 35 years, 25 894 (97.4%) were Black, Hispanic, Native American, Alaskan, Pacific Islander, or Asian women or women with unknown race/ethnicity, and 17 905 (67.3%) lived in areas with urban zip codes. Coverage of prenatal care for women in Emergency Medicaid was associated with significant increases in mean (SD) prenatal visits (increase of 10.3 [0.9] prenatal visits) and prenatal quality. Prenatal care screenings (eg, anemia screening: increase of 65.7 percentage points [95% CI, 54.2 to 77.1 percentage points]) and vaccinations (eg, influenza vaccination: increase of 31.9 percentage points [95% CI, 27.4 to 36.3 percentage points]) increased significantly following the policy change. Although postpartum contraceptive use increased following prenatal care expansion (increase of 1.5 percentage points [95% CI, 0.4 to 2.6 percentage points]), the policy change was not associated with a reduction in short IPI births (-4.5 percentage points [95% CI, -9.5 to 0.5 percentage points), preterm births (-0.6 percentage points [95% CI, -3.2 to 2.0 percentage points]), or neonatal intensive care unit admissions (increase of 0.8 percentage points [95% CI, -2.0 to 3.6 percentage points]). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that expanding Emergency Medicaid benefits to include prenatal care significantly improved receipt of guideline-concordant prenatal care. Prenatal care coverage alone was not associated with a meaningful increase in postpartum contraception or a reduction in subsequent short IPI births.

Anti-immigrant Rhetoric and the Experiences of Latino Immigrants in the Emergency Department.

INTRODUCTION: Anti-immigrant rhetoric and increased enforcement of immigration laws have induced worry and safety concerns among undocumented Latino immigrants (UDLI) and legal Latino residents/citizens (LLRC), with some delaying the time to care. In this study, we conducted a qualitative analysis of statements made by emergency department (ED) patients - a majority of whom were UDLI and LLRC - participating in a study to better understand their experiences and fears with regard to anti-immigrant rhetoric, immigration enforcement, and ED utilization. METHODS: We conducted a multi-site study, surveying patients in three California safety-net EDs serving large immigrant populations from June 2017-December 2018. Of 1684 patients approached, 1337 (79.4%) agreed to participate; when given the option to provide open-ended comments, 260 participants provided perspectives about their experiences during the years immediately following the 2016 United States presidential election. We analyzed these qualitative data using constructivist grounded theory. RESULTS: We analyzed comments from 260 individuals. Among ED patients who provided qualitative data, 59% were women and their median age was 45 years (Interquartile range 33-57 years). Undocumented Latino immigrants comprised 49%, 31% were LLRC, and 20% were non-Latino legal residents. As their primary language, 68% spoke Spanish. We identified six themes: fear as a barrier to care (especially for UDLI); the negative impact of fear on health and wellness (physical and mental health, delays in care); factors influencing fear (eg, media coverage); and future solutions, including the need for increased communication about rights. CONCLUSION: Anti-immigrant rhetoric during the 2016 US presidential campaign contributed to fear and safety concerns among UDLI and LLRC accessing healthcare. This is one of the few studies that captured firsthand experiences of UDLI in the ED. Our findings revealed fear-based barriers to accessing emergency care, protective and contributing factors to fear, and the negative impact of fear. There is a need for increased culturally informed patient communication about rights and resources, strategic media campaigns, and improved access to healthcare for undocumented individuals.

Perceived structural vulnerabilities among detained noncitizen immigrants in Minnesota.

Across several decades there has been an unprecedented increase in immigration enforcement including detention and deportation. Immigration detention profoundly impacts those experiencing detention and their family members. An emerging area of research has found that immigrants experience a number of challenges which constrain and limit their decisions, choices, and options for security and integration in the United States due to social, political and structural determinants. These determinants lead to greater structural vulnerabilities among immigrants. The purpose of the current study was to illuminate the perceived vulnerabilities of detained noncitizen immigrants as they are raised and described while attending case hearings at the Bloomington, Minnesota immigration court. Through conducting a thematic analysis of notes derived from third party immigration court observers, three areas of perceived vulnerability were identified. These perceived vulnerabilities include 1) migration and motivations to migrate, 2) structural vulnerabilities (e.g., discrimination, financial insecurity, social ties and family support, stable or fixed residence, English language proficiency, health and mental health) in the US, and 3) challenges in navigating immigration detention. These findings demonstrate that noncitizen immigrants who are undergoing immigration detention are experiencing multiple intersecting vulnerabilities which profoundly impact their lives. Collaborative efforts across sectors are needed to work towards comprehensive immigration reforms including both short-term and long-term solutions to address pressing issues for noncitizens undergoing immigration detention.

Immigration Detention in the United States: Identifying Alternatives That Comply With Human Rights and Advance Public Health.

Under international law, the United States is obligated to uphold noncitizens' fundamental rights, including their rights to health. However, current US immigration laws-and their enforcement-not only fail to fulfill migrants' health rights but actively undermine their realization and worsen the pandemic's spread. Specifically, the US immigration system's reliance on detention, which precludes effective social distancing, increases risks of exposure and infection for detainees, staff, and their broader communities. International agreements clearly state that the prolonged, mandatory, or automatic detention of people solely because of their migration status is a human rights violation on its own. But in the context of COVID-19, the consequences for migrants' right to health are particularly acute. Effective alternatives exist: other countries demonstrate the feasibility of adopting and implementing immigration laws that establish far less restrictive, social services-based approaches to enforcement that respect human rights. To protect public health and realize its global commitments, the United States must shift away from detaining migrants as standard practice and adopt effective, humane alternatives-both amid COVID-19 and permanently.

Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric, Deteriorating Health Access, and COVID-19 in the Rio Grande Valley, Texas.

The Rio Grande Valley of Texas has an exceptionally high number of COVID-19 cases and case fatality rate. The region makes up only 3% of the Texas population but, as of April 2021, accounted for 9% of the state's COVID-19 deaths. Additionally, during the summer of 2020, the Rio Grande Valley had one of the highest per capita infection rates in the United States. This paper explores the social-ecological elements that impact health-seeking behaviors in this community using interviews conducted with healthcare personnel and nonprofit leaders in the Rio Grande Valley between 2019 and 2020. Using this data, we found that anti-immigrant rhetoric has increased levels of fear among immigrants and mixed-status families, which has made them less willing to access healthcare. Additionally, we found that changes in the public charge rule has led to a decreasing number of children accessing government-provided health insurance. Our findings suggest that these outcomes likely contributed to the severity of the COVID-19 outbreak in the Rio Grande Valley.

Maternal health care utilization and the obstetric outcomes of undocumented women in Finland - a retrospective register-based study.

BACKGROUND: Undocumented pregnant women constitute a vulnerable group of people who lack equal access to pregnancy care. Previous research has shown that undocumented migrants encounter difficulties in accessing health services, the onset of prenatal care is delayed, and women have an increased risk for infectious diseases. The aim of this study was to describe the use of maternal health care services and the obstetric outcomes of undocumented women in Helsinki, capital city of Finland, in addition to comparing the results with all pregnant women in Finland. METHODS: The study was a retrospective register-based study consisting of data collected between 2014 to 2018 from the electronic medical records of the public maternity clinic and maternity hospital in Helsinki, Finland. The study population consists of 62 individual pregnancies of undocumented women. The results of the study were compared with national data on parturients and deliveries (N = 47,274 women) and with prenatal screening tests for infectious diseases (N = 51,447 [HIV, HBV], N = 51,446 [syphilis]). RESULTS: The majority (91%) of the undocumented women attended public prenatal care. However, four women received no prenatal care and three women were denied access to care. Undocumented women entered prenatal care later and had fewer visits compared with all pregnant women. The majority (71%) of the undocumented women received inadequate prenatal care as the number of visits was less than eight. Of the study population, 5% (3/59) tested positive for HIV, 3% (2/59) for HBV, and 2% (1/57) for syphilis. The prevalence of HIV (p-value < 0.001) and HBV (p-value = 0.007) was significantly higher amongst undocumented women compared with all pregnant women. CONCLUSIONS: Undocumented women entered prenatal care later than recommended. Most women received inadequate prenatal care and some of them did not receive prenatal care at all. The prevalence of infectious diseases was significantly higher and the coverage of prenatal screenings deficient amongst undocumented pregnant women.

Comparing immigration status and health patterns between Latinos and Asians: Evidence from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.

Undocumented status is widely recognized as an important social determinant of health. While undocumented immigrants have lower levels of health care access, they do not have consistently poorer physical health than the US-born or other immigrant groups. Furthermore, heterogeneity by race/ethnicity has been largely ignored in this growing literature. This paper used the 2001, 2004, 2008 panels of the restricted Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), one of the only representative surveys equipped to adequately identify Asian undocumented immigrants, to compare health patterns between Asians and Latinos by immigration status. We examined three general measures of health/health access: self-rated health, disability, and current health insurance. Latino undocumented immigrants displayed some advantages in self-rated health and disability but had lower insurance coverage compared to US-born Latinos. In contrast, Asian undocumented immigrants did not differ from US-born Asians in any of the three outcomes. While undocumented status has been proposed as a fundamental cause of disease, we found no evidence that Latino and Asian undocumented immigrants consistently fare worse in health access or physical health outcomes than immigrants in other status categories. Different racial groups also appeared to have unique patterns between immigration status and health outcomes from one another.