More Than an Afterthought: Importance of Family in U.S. Refugee Resettlement

Kaitlin Roselius, masters candidate, doctoral student; Julie A. Tippens, Dr.P.H., Assistant Professor; Kara Kohel, M.A.; Irene Padasas, M.A., doctoral student, Department of Child, Youth, and Family Studies, University of Nebraska–Lincoln
/ Summer 2020 NCFR Report
Roselius, Tippens, Kohel & Padasas
Roselius, Tippens, Kohel & Padasas

See all articles from this issue

In Brief

  • Family separation causes refugees distress.
  • Recent changes to United States refugee resettlement have created barriers to family reunification.
  • Family Science practitioners and researchers are situated to document effects of family separation, to support refugees through family-centered interventions, to advocate for improved policies, and to educate future leaders.

 

The first refugee legislation in the United States was drafted in 1948 following World War II, although the refugee program in its current form dates to the 1980 Refugee Act, which standardized public–private partnerships and the provision of services to refugees across the country (Office of Refugee Resettlement, 2019). In the past decade, the refugee ceiling, or the number of refugees who may be admitted annually to the United States, has hovered between 70,000 and 85,000. Recent changes to immigration policy and surrounding rhetoric not only have turned the emphasis away from family but also have resulted in a drastic reduction of admitted refugees from 84,995 in 2016 to a proposed 18,000 for fiscal year 2020, the lowest on record since the enactment of the Refugee Act (Migration Policy Institute, 2019). These reduced numbers—in tandem with sweeping executive orders since January 2017—have limited opportunities for family reunification, prolonging the time that refugees spend without family support. This has implications for refugees’ psychosocial well-being and integration (Miller, Hess, Bybee, & Goodkind, 2018).

Family Science researchers and practitioners are uniquely positioned to document how family separation affects refugees’ health and social well-being, to support refugees’ well-being in precarious times through evidence-informed clinical and community interventions, and to engage in advocacy and education in order to support policies that facilitate family reunification and prepare future researchers, human service professionals, and mental health providers for work with refugees.

 

Context of Family Separation and the Importance of Refugees’ Family Support

Policies enacted over the past decade have rendered refugees vulnerable within U.S. structures and systems (Quesada, Hart, & Bourgois, 2011; see Table 1). Largely unprecedented changes to the U.S. Refugee Resettlement Program during this time have increased refugees’ susceptibility to poor physical, mental, and psychosocial health outcomes (Grove & Zwi, 2006; Perreira, Yoshikawa, & Oberlander, 2018; Vesely, Bravo, & Guzzardo, 2019). Many refugees experience toxic stress caused by being in a state of constant heightened fear associated with the potential for separation and deportation (Vesely et al., 2019) while also remaining at risk for increased anxiety, depression, suicidality, and post-traumatic stress disorder (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2013; Miller et al., 2018). Additional deleterious effects on mental and emotional well-being result from refugees’ experiences of discrimination due to increased anti-immigrant rhetoric, including Islamophobic and racist discourse that perpetuates othering and questions refugees’ (U.S.) “Americanness” through symbolic yet impermeable boundaries (e.g., race, religion; Boutwell, 2015; Gale, 2004; Grove & Zwi, 2006).

Importantly, separation from family members and loved ones is both intrinsic to the experience of forced migration and a major cause of distress in post-migration contexts. Family separation predicted depression among Sudanese refugees resettled in Australia (Schweitzer, Melville, Steel, & Lacherez, 2006). Previous and current separation from families have been suggested as criteria for refugee-specific adverse childhood experiences (R-ACE) for displaced children, to be added to the existing CDC criteria (Hanes, Sung, Mutch, & Cherian, 2017). Similarly, in a photovoice study we recently conducted with ethno-religious Yazidi women who are refugees in the U.S. Midwest (Tippens, Roselius, Khalaf, Padasas, & Kohel, 2020), family separation emerged as a central cause of emotional distress, as illustrated by the following quotes:

Most of us are tired and have low self-esteem. We are depressed because when we were scattered, it was not something we had planned for and we did not have a chance to say goodbye or to have a proper farewell. (age 63)

Whenever I am on the phone with my son . . . I know that he is alive, that ISIS has not harmed him, and that everything is all right. (age 45)

These women’s responses are consistent with existing research highlighting associations between family separation and refugees’ increased anxiety, which results in a sense of hopelessness regarding family reunification and the future in a new host country (Miller et al., 2018; Sourander, 2003).

Family networks buffer against stress and are essential to enhancing refugees’ post-migration adaptive capacity and ability to cope with such everyday and extraordinary stressors in new (re)settlement settings (Lewis, 2008; Weine et al., 2004). Family members and fictive kin provide critical emotional, informational, and material support such as housing, childcare, and access to social networks. Family members are often more trusted than individuals from the host country, social service agencies, and sometimes even individuals from one’s country of origin (Tippens, 2020). Yet it remains important for researchers and practitioners to view family support through critical theoretical lenses, as studies have demonstrated how disrupted family dynamics in post-migration contexts can exacerbate familial stress and conflict (e.g., Lewis, 2008).

Expansion of Family Detention


 

Table 1.
Year Policy Description
2010 Expansion of U.S.–Mexico Border Security The administration requested an additional $500 million for border security and the Department of Homeland Security deployed over 1,200 National Guard troops to the U.S.–Mexico border (Archibold & Lacey, 2010).
2014 Expansion of Family Detention Family detention was implemented in an attempt to deter families, especially women and children, from seeking asylum in the United States (Human Rights First, 2015). In 2015, a federal court ruled that the practice violated the 1997 Flores settlement (Detention Watch Network, 2020). However, family detention was still being carried out as of Februrary 2020 (Physicians for Human Rights, 2020).
2017 Executive Orders 13769 and 13780: “Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the U.S.” This EO was issued with the intent to temporarily bar entry of noncitizens from seven Muslim-majority countries, including individuals vetted for U.S. refugee resettlement (Center for Migration Studies, 2020), earning it the nickname “Muslim Ban.” Although the ban was challenged, revised, and ultimately deemed constitutional, four Supreme Court justices emphasized the need for caution in its use, raising concerns about discrimination and religious bias toward refugees and immigrants (Chishti, Pierce, & Plata, 2018).
2017 Executive Order 13815: “Resuming the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program With Enhanced Vetting Capabilities” This EO placed a hold on I-730 relative petitions (i.e., “follow-to-join” visas), completely halted the resettlement of Syrian refugees, banned seven other Muslim-majority countries, and implemented a subjective and potentially discriminatory vetting process for individuals of certain religions and income levels (Center for Migration Studies, 2020).
2017 Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Rescission The administration announced rescission of the 2012 DACA program in 2017 (Gubernaskaya & Dreby, 2017). Under the terms of termination, no new requests or applications will be accepted. The Department of Homeland Security (2019) announced it would accept renewal requests and applications of current individuals until March 5, 2018.
2018 Zero-Tolerance Policy for Offenses In April, it was announced that any individual—no exception—would be forcefully detained if crossing the U.S. border without permission (Vesely et al., 2019), which led to dramatic increases in family separation and child detention (Chishti & Bolter, 2018).
2019 Executive Order 13888: “Enhancing State and Local Involvement in Refugee Resettlement” This EO required all resettlement agencies to have written consent by January 21, 2020, from all local and state officials before any future resettlement (Center for Migration Studies, 2020). After a lawsuit was brought forth by the refugee groups Church World Service, Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, and the Lutheran Immigration and Refugree Service, this EO was challenged by a federal district judge in Maryland as unlawful and in violation of the Refugee Act of 1980 (Allyn, 2020).
2019 Temporary Protected Status (TPS) Terminated In 2017, the DHS announced the termination of TPS status for over 250,000 individuals from several previously eligible countries (Ferriss, 2017). However, in November, 2019, DHS instead chose to grant TPS status to individuals from El Salvador, Haiti, and Honduras (National Immigration Forum, 2020).
2020 Public Charge Rule Changes In February, changes to the public charge rule came into effect (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, 2020). Under the new guidelines, situations for many refugees and their families remain in flux.

 

Implications for Family Science and Refugee Resettlement

Current U.S. resettlement policies emphasize self-sufficiency, resulting in programming that primarily focuses on integration through short-term case management, job readiness, and employment (Hayes, 2019). However, these policies rarely include provisions for family support and family networks, despite evidence that they enhance well-being and social connectedness (Posselt, Eaton, Ferguson, Keegan, & Procter, 2019). We argue that family as a factor in individual refugees’ resettlement experiences should not be an afterthought but should be central to discussions on refugee integration and well-being. Family Science scholars and practitioners can contribute the following expertise in refugee resettlement:

  • Research. Documenting the effects of family separation has never been more critical. In addition to traditionally used measures (e.g., Adverse Childhood Expereinces), also consider refugee-specific measures such as the R-ACE (Hanes et al., 2017) and the Refugee Health Screener (RHS-15) (Hollifield et al., 2013) to examine health risks. Qualitative inquiry is also crucial to gleaning a deep insight into refugees’ resilience, health promotion factors, and experiences and perceptions of well-being (e.g., Choummanivong, Poole, & Cooper, 2014). We also recommend identifying the needs of groups that have received less overall attention in refugee research (e.g., newcomers, older adults).
  • Community-based interventions and clinical support. Practitioners are well positioned to support refugee families both in community and in clinical (e.g., family counseling) contexts. Interventions that seek to strengthen all types of family relationships (e.g., parent–child, couple, sibling) can mitigate risk (Weine et al., 2004). Furthermore, services that help ameliorate the stress of family separation associated with transnational families may improve refugees’ post-migration adaptive capacity. For example, Stewart et al. (2011) piloted a culture-based peer-support intervention among refugees from Somalia and Sudan in Canada. Participants reported increased support and self-efficacy as well as decreased loneliness. Family Science researchers could leverage cultural strengths such as intergenerational support by developing similar interventions that include children, youth, adults, and older adults (Das, 2019).
  • Education and advocacy. Family scholars and practitioners are uniquely positioned to speak to the deleterious effects of family separation and the importance of family reunification. Despite compounding evidence of the harmful effects of detention on children and their caregivers (e.g., impaired cognition, anxiety, depression), the United States continues to forcibly separate families (Center for Migration Studies, 2020). Sustained advocacy might help eliminate these practices. Additionally, practitioners and policymakers can advocate for the creation of new policies and programs that support all needs of refugees and their families and remove barriers for accessing necessary social welfare services and benefits such as health care and housing. Finally, Family Science departments can consider adding new courses on refugee families while also integrating refugee-specific information into existing classes in order to build the capacity of future human service professionals and researchers to address the needs of refugees.

 

Complete References

Allyn, B. (2020). Judge blocks Trump’s executive order allowing local officials to reject refugees. NPR. Retrieved from www.npr.org/2020/01/15/796658527/judge-blocks-trumps-executive-order-allowing-local-officials-to-reject-refugees

Archibold, R. C., & Lacey, M. (2010). Obama requests money for border security. New York Times. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com/2010/06/23/us/23border.html

Boutwell, L. (2015). “I don’t want to claim America”: African refugee girls and discourses of othering. Girlhood Studies, 8(2), 103–118.

Center for Migration Studies. (2020). President Trump’s executive orders on immigration and refugees. Retrieved from https://cmsny.org/trumps-executive-orders-immigration-refugees/

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2013). Suicide and suicidal ideation among Bhutanese refugees—United States, 2009–2012. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 62, 533–536.

Chishti, M., & Bolter, J. (2018). Family separation and “zero-tolerance” policies rolled out to stem unwanted migrants, but may face challenges. Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute. Retrieved from www.migrationpolicy.org/article/family-separation-and-zero-tolerance- policies-rolled-out-stem-unwanted-migrants-may-face

Chishti, M., Pierce, S., & Plata, L. (2018). In upholding travel ban, Supreme Court endorse presidential authority while leaving door open for future challenges. Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute. Retrieved from www.migrationpolicy.org/article/upholding-travel-ban-supreme-court-endo…

Choummanivong, C., Poole, G. E., & Cooper, A. (2014). Refugee family reunification and mental health in resettlement. Kotuitui: New Zealand Journal of Social Sciences Online, 9(2), 89–100.

Das, B. (2019). Mental health trauma treatment within the current Mediterranean refugee crisis. International Journal for the Advancement of Counselling, 41(4), 481–491.

Department of Homeland Security. (2019). Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). Retrieved from www.dhs.gov/deferred-action-childhood-arrivals-daca

Detention Watch Network. (2020). Family detention. Retrieved from www.detentionwatchnetwork.org/issues/family-detention

Ferriss, S. (2017). Thousands of immigrants with “protected status” face possible deportation. Washington, DC: Center for Public Integrity. Retrieved from https://publicintegrity.org/immigration/ thousands-of-immigrants-with-protected- status-face-possible-deportation/

Gale, P. (2004). The refugee crisis and fear: Populist politics and media discourse. Journal of Sociology, 40(4), 321–340.

Grove, N. J., & Zwi, A. B. (2006). Our health and theirs: Forced migration, othering, and public health. Social Science & Medicine, 62(8), 1931–1942.

Gubernaskaya, Z., & Dreby, J. (2017). US immigration policy and the case for family unity. Journal on Migration and Human Security, 5(2), 417–430.

Hanes, G., Sung, L., Mutch, R., & Cherian, S. (2017). Adversity and resilience amongst resettling Western Australian paediatric refugees. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, 53(9), 882–888. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpc.13559

Hayes, J. H. (2019). Family self sufficiency plan requirements (Policy Letter 19-07). Office of Refugee Resettlement. Retrieved from www.acf.hhs.gov/orr/resource/family-self-sufficiency-plan-requirements

Hollifield, M., Verbillis-Kolp, S., Farmer, B., Toolson, E. C., Woldehaimanot, T., Yamazaki, J., . . . SooHoo, J. (2013). The Refugee Health Screener-15 (RHS-15): Development and validation of an instrument for anxiety, depression, and PTSD in refugees. General Hospital Psychiatry, 35, 202–209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2012.12.002

Human Rights First. (2015). U.S. detention of families seeking asylum: A one-year update. Retrieved from www.humanrightsfirst.org/sites/default/files/hrf-one-yr-family-detentio…

Lewis, D. C. (2008). Types, meanings and ambivalence in intergenerational exchanges among Cambodian refugee families in the United States. Ageing & Society, 28(5), 693–715. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0144686X08007034

Migration Policy Institute. (2019). Refugee resettlement ceilings and number of refugees admitted, 1980–present. Retrieved from www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/charts/us-annual-refugee-rese…

Miller, A., Hess, J. H., Bybee, D., & Goodkind, J. R. (2018). Understanding the mental health consequences of family separation for refugees: Implications for policy and practice. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 88, 26–37. https://doi.org/10.1037/ort0000272

National Immigration Forum. (2020). Fact sheet: Temporary Protected Status. Retrieved from https://immigrationforum.org/article/fact-sheet-temporary-protected-sta…

Office of Refugee Resettlement. (2019). Annual refugee arrival data by resettlement state and country of origin. Retrieved from www.acf.hhs.gov/orr/about/history

Perreira, K. M., Yoshikawa, H., & Oberlander, J. (2018). A new threat to immigrants’ health—The public-charge rule. New England Journal of Medicine, 379(10), 901–903.

Physicians for Human Rights. (2020). “You will never see your child again”: The persistent psychological effects of family separation. Retrieved from https://phr.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/PHR-Report-2020-Family-Separation-Full-Report.pdf

Posselt, M., Eaton, H., Ferguson, M., Keegan, D., & Procter, N. (2019). Enablers of psychological well‐being for refugees and asylum seekers living in transitional countries: A systematic review. Health & Social Care in the Community27(4), 808-823. doi:10.1111/hsc.12680

Quesada, J., Hart, L. K., & Bourgois, P. (2011). Structural vulnerability and health: Latino migrant laborers in the United States. Medical Anthropology, 30(4), 339–362.

Schweitzer, R., Melville, F., Steel, Z., & Lacherez, P. (2006). Trauma, post-migration living difficulties, and social support as predictors of psychological adjustment in resettled Sudanese refugees. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 40(2), 179–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/j.1440-1614.2006.01766.x

Sourander, A. (2003). Refugee families during asylum seeking. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 57(3), 203–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/08039480310001364

Stewart, M., Simich, L., Beiser, M., Makumbe, K., Makwarimba, E., & Shizha, E. (2011). Impacts of a social support intervention for Somali and Sudanese refugees in Canada. Ethnicity and Inequalities in Health and Social Care, 4(4), 186–199.

Tippens, J. A. (2020). Generational perceptions of support among Congolese refugees in Urban Tanzania. Global Social Welfare, 7, 69-80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40609-019-00155-2

Tippens, J. A., Roselius, K., Khalaf, G., Padasas, I., & Kohel, K. (2020). Negotiating cultural bereavement and community resilience: Findings from a multigenerational photovoice project with ethnoreligious Yazidi women in the Midwest U.S. [Manuscript in preparation]. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska–Lincoln.

Vesely, C. K., Bravo, D. Y., & Guzzardo, M. T. (2019, July). Immigrant families across the life course: Policy impacts on physical and mental health [Policy brief]. St. Paul, MN: National Council on Family Relations. Retrieved from www.ncfr.org/resources/research-and-policy-briefs/immigrant-families-ac…

Weine, S., Muzurovic, N., Kulauzovic, Y., Besic, S., Lezic, A., Mujagic, A., . . . Pavkovic, I. (2004). Family consequences of refugee trauma. Family Process, 43(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-5300.2004.04302002.x

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. (2020). Public charge. Retrieved from www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-processes-and-procedures/public-cha…