Literature Review Example of Immigrant Teen Mom Under Foster Care System
BMJ Paediatr Open. 2018; 2(ane): e000338.
Touch of castigating immigration policies, parent-kid separation and child detention on the mental wellness and development of children
Laura C North Wood
Section of Sociology, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
Received 2018 Jul 24; Revised 2018 Aug 29; Accepted 2018 Aug 30.
- Supplementary Materials
-
Reviewer comments
GUID: 276C6E48-3E9F-4FC2-819F-FA425E75EF7F
Author'due south manuscript
GUID: 9DC3C821-4FC7-456D-A699-6FEE86D0DFCF
Abstract
In April 2018, the United states of america government introduced a 'nil tolerance' illegal immigration control strategy at the US-Mexico edge resulting in the detention of all adults awaiting federal prosecution for illegal entry and the subsequent removal of their children to separate kid shelters across the U.s.. By June 2018, over 2300 immigrant children, including infants, had been separated from their parents for immigration purposes. Media reports and scenes of distraught families ignited global condemnation of U.s.a. clearing policy and fresh criticism of clearing detention practices.
Detention of children for clearing purposes is known to be practised in over 100 countries worldwide, despite a significant body of research demonstrating the extensive impairment of such policies. This review explores and contextualises the key potential impacts of family unit separation and detention of children for clearing purposes including damaged zipper relationships, traumatisation, toxic stress and wider detrimental impacts on immigrant communities. As such, it is critical for host nation governments to stop the exercise of family separation and child detention for immigration control and promote postmigration policies that protect children from further harm, promote resilience and enable recovery.
Keywords: children'south rights, child abuse, comm child health, neurodevelopment, race and health
Introduction
In recent months, the Trump assistants has been bailiwick to damning condemnation from child wellness and man rights experts for their pursuit of a 'zero tolerance' immigration strategy requiring the detention and federal prosecution of all adults apprehended for illegal entry at the The states-United mexican states border, including those seeking asylum.1 ii Equally United states law does not permit child detention in federal jail, the consequences of such parental arrests included the enforced removal of accompanying children to separate detention facilities. Between April and June 2018, over 2300 immigrant children, reportedly including preverbal, breastfed infants were relocated to separate child detention shelters across the USA to await resolution of their parent'south example and hopeful, but not guaranteed, reunion.3
In late June 2018, afterwards extensive public and political outrage President Trump signed an executive club ending the policy of separating children from their parents at the US-Mexico border. Promises of ongoing 'nada-tolerance', prosecution of adults and family detention remained. Subsequent reunification of separated families has been hampered by a grievous lack of foreplanning and circuitous interactions with parents regarding kid render and repatriation. By August 2018, reports estimated that 700 children, including 40 children under the age of 4 years remained separated from their parents.iv
The U.s. is non lonely in the castigating management of immigrant children. Over 100 countries are known to detain children for migration-related reasons including the UK, Australia and Canada despite emphatic criticism of the do equally a child rights violation, in contravention of the principle of the best interests of the child and significantly detrimental to kid well-beingness.v The Purple College of Paediatrics and Kid Health,6 the American Academy of Pediatrics,7 the Canadian Paediatric Society,8 the American Medical Clan,9 the Canadian Medical Clan10 and the International Gild for Social Pediatrics & Kid Wellness11 all recently produced potent statements condemning the systematic splitting of immigrant families, bringing concerns over immigrant kid detention and welfare in the U.s. and their own nations to the fore.
This article considers the contempo Us immigration practise every bit a case case and context to explore the fundamental potential impacts of castigating clearing policies on the well-being of afflicted children, the wider sequelae of hostility towards immigrant families and a call to advocate for children subject to detention and detrimental immigration policy.
Global child migration and detention
In 2016, the United Nations High Commission for Refugees estimated that 50 meg children had migrated beyond state borders or were forcibly displaced. Twenty-eight meg (1 in every 80) children fled violence and insecurity, a effigy that has more than doubled betwixt 2005 and 2015.12 Twelve one thousand thousand of these children were recorded every bit refugees or aviary-seekers. Sixteen meg children were internally displaced inside their habitation country borders. A further seven million children had been displaced due to natural disasters. In 2015 and 2016, at least 300 000 children were registered unaccompanied or separated as they crossed borders in over 80 countries.13
No validated data are bachelor regarding the number of children in immigration detention worldwide at any given time. The number of children impacted per solar day through personal or parental detention is estimated in millions.xiv In many countries, clearing detention remains synonymous with widespread human right violations, lamentable weather condition, kid maltreatment, abuse and torture.15 Lack of transparency regarding immigration detention is widespread, severely hampering monitoring of practice and informed public and policy debate.16
There is no research available evidencing child detention as beneficial to children or functioning as a successful immigration control strategy.
At the end of May 2018, the US Section of Health and Human being Services reported 10 773 unaccompanied immigrant children in its custody, including the 20% bully in numbers since April 2018 due to enforced separation of children from parents at the U.s.-Mexico edge.17 In 2013, Australia experienced a large surge of illegal maritime arrivals leading to the detention of 2000 children.18 As of Apr 2018, 7 children under the historic period of 18 years were in immigration detention in Australia with 22 children in the highly controversial offshore Nauru Regional Processing Middle.19 In Canada, 155 minors accept been kept in detention facilities in the past year. While Canada separates children from parents only as a last resort, by keeping immigrant children in adult detention facilities with their mother (fathers are detained separately) as 'housed minors' rather than detainees, child rights remain violated.20 In the U.k., 42 immigrant children were detained in 201721. Data on child immigration detention across Europe are poorly aggregated leaving the state of affairs unclear. Concern continues to mount regarding the number and condition of kid detainees in Greece, with Save the Children reporting 'bloodcurdling conditions' driving a mental health crisis.22
While few countries tin take the moral high ground regarding the detention of children for immigration purposes, the systematic separation and detention of immigrant families en masse, without warning or opportunity to challenge, is a phenomenon specific to contempo US Trump administration policy.23
Illegal immigration at the The states-Mexico border
Immigrants detained at the Us-Mexico border are primarily aviary-seekers from Republic of guatemala, Honduras and El salvador; chronically destabilised regions plagued by grave levels of human rights violations, insecurity, poverty, drug cartel infiltration, violence and corrupt justice systems. Criminal gangs target children and mechanisms of exploitation and control are notoriously roughshod.24 Migration through Mexico to the USA is equally gruelling and perilous with immigrants reporting violence, kidnapping, sexual and physical abuse, human trafficking, extortion and ill treatment by officials.25 Access to adequate shelter, nourishment and medical care is precarious. As immigrant children accomplish the US-United mexican states edge, their compounding exposures to detrimental social determinants of wellness and cumulative adverse experience places them at eminent risk of developmental, mental and physical harm.26
Kid immigration detention in the United states
Concerns regarding child detention in the USA are not new. In 2017, the American Academy of Pediatrics reported that the basic standards of intendance for immigrant children in detention were non met. Egregious conditions in processing centres included inadequate bathing and toilet facilities, constant light exposure, children sleeping on physical floors, confiscation of belongings, bereft food, denial of access to thorough medical intendance, lack of mental wellness support plus physical and emotional maltreatment. Health assessments are performed without parental presence and medical history.27
Recent reports of conditions for detained children too include indiscriminate use of the 'no touch' rules designed to prevent inappropriate concrete contact.28 While such rules may have their place in safeguarding unaccompanied adolescents, depriving very young children of physical comfort serves to significantly enhance distress. Such circumstances clearly increment the gamble of undetected, undertreated, exacerbated and new-onset health weather condition. Research is clear even so, that even with the provision of safe and sanitary environments the separation of a vulnerable child from their parents may carry severe consequences.29
The trauma continuum
Childhood trauma occurs when a child is in a state of affairs that induces a sense of intense fear and helplessness.30 Traumatic stress responses are best viewed every bit a continuum (tabular array 1)—nuanced and dependent on a range of features of the traumatic issue(due south), internal kid resilience and the post-trauma surround of the child.31 Type I trauma occurs primarily later on time-express exposure to an extreme event such as a road traffic blow, recovering without significant injury in an surroundings of supportive adult relationships. Type II trauma is characterised by repeated, prolonged trauma exposure such as sexual abuse in the home.32 Blazon 3 trauma occurs when a child experiences multiple, pervasive, prolonged, violent deportment initiating at an early on age (even in utero—such as domestic violence during pregnancy), creating an extremely hostile environment for development.33 It is vitally important to recognise different forms and severity of childhood adverse experience as a guide to the extent of traumatic stress and damage to the developing child'southward brain.
Tabular array 1
The trauma continuum
| Type I trauma | Type II trauma | Blazon Iii trauma |
| Unmarried incident trauma | Multiple traumas | Multiple pervasive traumas from an early age that continue over a length of time |
 | ||
It is the combination of witting and deep, subconscious experiences of threat that drives the subsequent neurological and concrete damage caused by childhood adversity and trauma. When a lack of condom or threat is perceived, chief neural activity in the brainstem initiates the 'fight, flight or freeze' response, promoting the outpouring of stress hormones epinephrine and cortisol that prepare the physical trunk to respond in a protective manner. During intense fear, the rational considerations of the prefrontal cortex are bypassed leading to behaviour greatly driven by the subconscious. Children'south brains take a remarkable level of neuroplasticity, and in situations of multiple, prolonged, pervasive adversity their brain will chronically adapt to a level of functioning that seeks to preserve and protect life at the expense of all peripheral learning and relationship.34 Such children may develop complex patterns of protective responses that can include hyperarousal—hypervigilance, agitation, flashbacks and emotional reactivity, or hypoarousal—dissociative responses, emotional numbing (self-harm may be used equally a tool to 'feel alive'), passive compliance and poor access to cognitive functioning.35 The well-known diagnosis of mail service-traumatic stress disorder fails to capture the wider developmental out-workings of complex trauma, including the impact on preverbal children and it should not be considered the only marker of trauma response.36
Threatened zipper
The separation of children from their parents threatens the attachment bond, forming an additional root of fearfulness and lack of rubber. This deep, indelible affectional bail between a child and caregiver begins in infancy and is disquisitional to the kid's inherent sense of safety and protection. Neurologically, attachment relationships drive the encephalon evolution foundational for subsequent physical, emotional, social and cognitive maturation. When parents are removed from a child's life of a sudden and without adequate support, the zipper relationship is threatened.37
Children tend to respond to separation from their caregiver in three fluid phases. First, children enter an acute phase of protest characterised past fear, distress, crying and urgent seeking of their caregiver that may last from a few hours to days. Every bit the length of separation continues, children enter a phase of despair during which crying weakens, movement lessens and children reject the approach of alternative adults. With prolonged parental absenteeism, children may become passively compliant with care staff, giving the advent of having 'settled in' to their new environment. Disturbingly, this can signify that the kid has detached from the parents and is at present living in a perceived state of 'fright without resolution'. Children reunited while they are in the early separation protestation stage usually fare well. Children in despair may reply to the reappearance of their parent with hostility or ambivalence, taking many weeks to rebuild their bail. Children who accept detached from their parents may reject their approaches or care for them every bit strangers.29 Additionally, when children interpret themselves as 'abandoned' past parents, they may develop a profound sense that they have done something wrong to cause their caregiver to leave, igniting shame and complex emotions that can damage the lifelong relationships with themselves and others.38
Immigration detention also grossly undermines parenting capacity and parental mental health, whether separated or in family detention settings.39 This can farther damage the zipper human relationship, adding to the precarious conditions for children in need of a stable, caring adult relationship to support them in trauma processing.
Through the lens of attachment, it has been apropos to observe the recorded reunions of parents and children following immigration release in the Usa. While some reunions accept been joyful, others evidence warning flags of meaning attachment damage.40
Toxic stress
The chronic pounding of stress hormones through the physical bodies of children risks becoming toxic, driving architectural organ damage with lifelong developmental and health sequalae. Stress hormone cascades activate inflammatory and allowed changes, considered to be a response to the increased risk of physical injury and healing required in situations of danger. Such processes bulldoze the evolution of disease and disorder. A kid with high adversity exposure has triple the lifetime relative risk of lung cancer, 3.5 times the relative risk of ischaemic heart disease and up to a 20-yr reduction in life expectancy.26 Cancers, diabetes, autoimmune disease and numerous other health bug (tabular array 2) are associated directly with toxic stress (non just secondary to unhealthy coping habits, ie, smoking). Worryingly, the outcomes most strongly linked with childhood adversity impact the adjacent generation; notably, substance apply, violence and mental disease.41
Tabular array 2
Disease and disorder outcomes associated with multiple adverse childhood experiences and toxic stress (not exhaustive)
| Behaviour with significant wellness consequences | Mental health | Social inclusion difficulties | Chronic disease and organ harm |
| Excessive nutrient consumption leading to high trunk mass index and obesity | Mental sick health and psychiatric diagnoses Anxiety | Harms to life prospects including: instruction, employment, poverty and healthy relationships | Cancer Center disease |
| Smoking | Low | Respiratory affliction | |
| Heavy or problematic booze use | Suicidality | Liver or digestive disease | |
| Problematic drug apply | Self-directed and interpersonal violence | Diabetes mellitus | |
| Sexual risk taking and teenage pregnancy | Poor life satisfaction |
Given our agreement of the background levels of circuitous, intergenerational adverse circumstances faced by Central American families seeking asylum in the United states, in that location is considerable concern about the levels of child traumatisation and mental wellness needs prior to US entry.42 For such children to then be separated from their chief caregivers and resilience relationships, detained for unknown elapsing in unsuitable kid detention facilities and deprived of relational environments to back up resilience and stress response stabilisation, we are witnessing a perfect storm for the development of toxic stress and severe, complex, type Iii trauma.
Wider impacts on immigrant health
Hostile policy and rhetoric regarding immigrant families can create a form of structural racism rendering immigrants (particularly those entering illegally) racialised, devalued, dehumanised 'others',43 with wider gild increasingly normalised to the stereotyping and suffering of this group. This in plow impacts the social determinants of health for immigrants via multiple pathways that increase and drive cyclical inequalities in health and well-being.44 Hostile policies impact those straight affected and extend influence over wider immigrant communities, of whom children are some of the most vulnerable.45 Patterns of 'othering' of societal groups accept fed many of the near aggressive acts in human history.46
In the United states, Hispanics (including Key Americans) are the largest minority ethnic grouping, projected to represent 29% of the The states population by 2060. They are besides the youngest ethnic group with 32% of Hispanics nether the age of xviii years and 26% betwixt the ages of 18 and 33 years. Hispanics remain disproportionately afflicted by poor conditions of daily life, the social determinants of health (SDH) shaped past complex structural and social factors including immigration status, income and health policy. SDH too exert health effects on individuals via chronically activated stress pathways, eliciting biological processes aligned with toxic stress. Significant physical and mental health disparities have been detected compared with white peers yet rates of wellness insurance and utilisation of health services remain unduly depression. While the causes are circuitous and the group heterogenous, fear of stigmatisation and deportation are cited as key reasons why Hispanic immigrant children have unmet health needs.47
Contempo US policy decisions risk further Hispanic isolation, stress and disengagement with wellness services creating substantial health inequalities for immigrant children.
Resilience, recovery and prevention of further harm
While it is recognised that babyhood trauma, corruption and adversity can have greatly damaging effects on children's wellness and development, decades of research regarding the resilience of children has evidenced that many children are indeed, given time, able to overcome serious threat and adversity, specially when protective relationships and safety are restored.48 49 Resilience has been poetically described as an 'ordinary magic'—a normal, dynamic, positive process of aligning and development in spite of astringent stressors and agin experiences.48 49 Refugees, every bit individuals who have experienced profound, complex, multilayered threats and hardships are oft described as 'remarkably resilient'—belongings the ability and determination to overcome and atomic number 82 productive, healthy lives that contribute significantly to their local communities and host nations.50
The ability of a child to outwork their inherent capacity for resilience tin can be impacted by many factors including primal social and ecology influences that compromise or enhance the protective systems around them. Host countries have pregnant opportunities to mitigate further impairment to asylum-seeking and refugee children past developing postmigration policies, processes and environments at individual, family unit and customs levels that are trauma-informed and protective.51 Key considerations include the disquisitional need for each kid to have admission to safety, protection and health services. This includes admission to culturally competent psychological and psychiatric support where necessary for children deeply wounded and developmentally disrupted past trauma. At family level, the reunification of parents and children must be prioritised and expedited with ongoing back up for families to remain intact. At community level, asylum claims must be resolved as quickly equally possible to enable stable settlement and integration. Protracted bureaucratic processes, instability, delays and frequent relocations negatively impact parent and child mental health. Concerted efforts demand to be made to reduce inequalities and inequities of access to education, health, social, economical and political resources.51
Conclusion: a phone call for the end of family separation and kid detention
Separation of vulnerable immigrant children from their parents on the background of chronic and astute adversity creates a perfect storm for attachment harm, toxic stress and trauma. Children in immigration detention remain at significantly increased risk of physical, mental, emotional and relational disorders in the short and long term. Hostility towards immigrants raises further barriers to wellness service engagement and risks increasing the health disparities and number of children living with unmet health needs.
Host countries have a decisive opportunity to reduce harm and promote the resilience and recovery of traumatised children by developing protective postmigration policies and processes. Information technology is crucial that the U.s. and other countries practising kid immigration detention expedite the reunion of immigrant families and terminate child detention. It is also critical for policy leaders to recognise that family detention is not a 'kinder' alternative and the 'othering' of immigrants and normalisation of suffering should never be tolerated.52 All forms of immigration detention are highly detrimental to children and adults and the many effective alternatives must exist considered.53 Paediatricians, healthcare professionals and researchers must proceed to advocate for children and families exposed needlessly to immigration detention by bringing robust evidence of harms to the policy debate. We must likewise engage with policy makers regarding health-promoting practices, enabling all children to thrive and contribute positively to order.
We must urge our leaders to terminate detention in our homelands, promote justice and enjoyment of child rights for all children and call on the Usa to end its castigating practice of child and family detention.
Supplementary Textile
Footnotes
Funding: This study was supported by Economic and Social Research Quango (grant number: PhD CASE Collaboration Studentship Award).
Competing interests: None declared.
Patient consent: Not required.
Provenance and peer review: Deputed; externally peer reviewed.
References
1. Henderson DJ. Statement of APA President regarding executive order rescinding immigrant family separation policy. Washington, Usa, 2018. [Google Scholar]
3. United Nations Human Rights Part of the High Commissioner. News. UN experts to US: Release migrant children from detention and terminate using them to deter irregular migration. Geneva, 2018. [Google Scholar]
5. UNICEF. Uprooted. The growing crisis for refugee and migrant children. 2016:39.
10. Madara JL. AMA urges administration to withdraw zero tolerance policy: American Medical Association, 2018. [Google Scholar]
12. UNICEF. The growing crisis for refugee and migrant children. New York, NY 10017, Usa: UNICEF, 2016. [Google Scholar]
sixteen. Global Detention Project, 2015. The Uncounted: Detention of Migrants and Asylum Seekers in Europe – 2015. Admission Info Europe/Global Detention Project. file:///C:/Users/home/Downloads/The%20Uncounted.pdf
18. Australian Regime Section of Domicile Affairs. Immigration detention and community statistics summary: Edge Force, Australian Government Department of Dwelling house Affairs, 2018. [Google Scholar]
24. Sawyer CB, Márquez J. Senseless violence against Central American unaccompanied minors: historical groundwork and phone call for help. J Psychol 2017;151:69–75. 10.1080/00223980.2016.1226743 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
25. Vogt WA. Crossing Mexico: Structural violence and the commodification of undocumented Primal American migrants. American Ethnologist 2013;40:764–fourscore. x.1111/amet.12053 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
26. Felitti VJ, Anda RF, Nordenberg D, et al. . Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to many of the leading causes of death in adults. The Adverse Babyhood Experiences (ACE) Report. Am J Prev Med 1998;14:245–58. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
27. Linton JM, Griffin M, Shapiro AJ. Detention of Immigrant Children. Pediatrics 2017;139:e20170483 10.1542/peds.2017-0483 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
30. Perry B, Szalavitz M. Built-in for love: why empathy is essential and endangered. New York: Harper Collins, 2011. [Google Scholar]
31. De Thierry E. Teaching the child on the trauma continuum. Guildford: Grosvenor House Publishing, 2015. [Google Scholar]
32. Terr LC. Childhood traumas: an outline and overview. Am J Psychiatry 1991;148:10–20. 10.1176/ajp.148.1.10 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
33. Heide Grand, Solomon E. Blazon Three Trauma: toward a more effective conceptualisation of psychological trauma. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol 1999;43:202–10. [Google Scholar]
34. National Scientific Council on the Developing Child (2005/2014). Excessive stress disrupts the architecture of the developing brain: working paper No. 3, 2014. [Google Scholar]
35. Siegel D. The developing mind: towards a neurobiology of interpersonal experience. New York: Guildford, 1999. [Google Scholar]
36. Cook A, Spinazzola J, Ford J, et al. . Circuitous trauma in children and adolescents. Psychiatric Annals 2005;35:390–8. 10.3928/00485713-20050501-05 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
37. Cassidy J, Shaver PR, Handbook of attachment: theory, enquiry, and clinical applications. New York: The Guilford Press, 2002. [Google Scholar]
38. Claesson K, Sohlberg S. Internalized shame and early interactions characterized by indifference, abandonment and rejection: replicated findings. Clin Psychol Psychother 2002;9:277–84. 10.1002/cpp.331 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
39. Mares Due south, Newman L, Dudley M, et al. . Seeking refuge, losing hope: parents and children in immigration detention. Australasian Psychiatry 2002;ten:91–6. 10.1046/j.1440-1665.2002.00414.ten [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
40. Hashemite kingdom of jordan Grand, Benner K, Nixon R, et al. . As migrant families are reunited, some children don't recognize their mothers. bbc news (2018). migrant children: mum and seven-year-old reunited. New York Times 2018. [Google Scholar]
41. Hughes G, Bellis MA, Hardcastle KA, et al. . The effect of multiple adverse childhood experiences on health: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Public Wellness 2017;2:e356–half-dozen. 10.1016/S2468-2667(17)30118-iv [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
42. Keller A, Joscelyne A, Granski Chiliad, et al. . Pre-Migration trauma exposure and mental health functioning among primal american migrants arriving at the Us border. PLoS 1 2017;12:e0168692 ten.1371/journal.pone.0168692 [PMC gratis article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
43. Gee GC, Ford CL. Structural racism and health inequities. Bois Rev Soc Sci Res Race 2011;8:e132:115–32. 10.1017/S1742058X11000130 [PMC complimentary commodity] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
44. Epps D, Furman R. The 'alien other': A civilization of dehumanizing immigrants in the The states. Soc Work Soc Int J 2016;14. [Google Scholar]
45. Sabo Due south, Lee AE. The spillover of US immigration policy on citizens and permanent residents of mexican descent: how internalizing "illegality" impacts public health in the borderlands. Front end Public Wellness 2015;3:e9 10.3389/fpubh.2015.00155 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
46. Holslag A. The process of othering from the social imaginaire to physical acts: an anthropological approach, genocide studies and prevention. An Int J 2015;ix:96–113. [Google Scholar]
47. Pérez-Escamilla R, Garcia J, Song D. Health care admission among hispanic immigrants: ¿Alguien Está Escuchando?[Is everyone listening?]. NAPA Bull 2010;34:47–67. 10.1111/j.1556-4797.2010.01051.x [PMC free commodity] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
48. Masten As. Ordinary magic. Resilience processes in development. Am Psychol 2001;56:227–38. 10.1037/0003-066X.56.three.227 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
49. Laurent HK, Gilliam KS, Bruce J, et al. . HPA stability for children in foster intendance: mental wellness implications and moderation by early intervention. Dev Psychobiol 2014;56:1406–fifteen. ten.1002/dev.21226 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
fifty. Geltman PL, Grant-Knight W, Mehta SD, et al. . The "lost boys of Sudan": functional and behavioral health of unaccompanied refugee minors re-settled in the The states. Curvation Pediatr Adolesc Med 2005;159:585 x.1001/archpedi.159.6.585 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
51. Fazel M, Reed RV, Panter-Brick C, et al. . Mental wellness of displaced and refugee children resettled in high-income countries: take a chance and protective factors. Lancet 2012;379:266–82. 10.1016/S0140-6736(eleven)60051-2 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
52. Commonwealth of australia Human Rights Committee. The forgotten children: national inquiry into children in clearing detention: Australia Human Rights Committee, 2014. [Google Scholar]
53. Immigration Detention Coalition. There are alternatives. A handbook for preventing unnecessary immigration detention: Immigration Detention Coalition Australia, 2015. [Google Scholar]
Manufactures from BMJ Paediatrics Open are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Grouping
Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6173255/
0 Response to "Literature Review Example of Immigrant Teen Mom Under Foster Care System"
Post a Comment