Claim Making on Child Immigration Detention in the U.S.

Introduction

Since coming to office, Trump’s administration has made strict immigration policies, a cornerstone of his presidency (U. N. I. C. E. F., 2016). Under his “zero-tolerance” policy at the border, his government implemented a practice of separating families (Madara, 2018). Following the public outrage, Trump formally ended the practice in 2008, but immigration advocates say family separation continues in other ways (Ho, 2011). Separating children as has been done by the Trump administration, from their parents and even small children at the Mexican-US border, is prohibited by the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Many would call it inhuman treatment for both the parents and the children (APA, 2018).

Many administrations that are executing other care arrangements and reception plans as options in contrast to detainment for minors and families have seen them as more financially savvy and bringing about low paces of departing suddenly and high rhythms of consistence with status assurance forms, including evacuation orders (NSCDC, 2005). Keeping families together through the span of migration procedures doesn’t require confinement. This is a bogus decision (Jordan et al. 2018). Detainment is costly and troublesome to manage, and there is no proof that it stops people from moving or guaranteeing haven (Cassidy and Shaver, (Eds.), 2012).

Detention Context

The militarization and privatization of the development of coercively dislodged individuals see governments progressively redistributing their border control and security to individual elements (Vogt, 2013). This is the situation in the United States:

Make sure your essay is 100% unique

Our experts will write for you an essay on any topic, with any deadline and requirements from scratch

127 our experts are available
right now

Get custom essay

The U.S. revenue driven organizations, for example, Geo Group and non-benefit organizations like Southwest Key, who runs the present USA kid detainment business make up to $775 per youngster every day, which is paid by the U.S. state. A strategy of imprisonment of coercively detained minors is along these lines a deliberate political choice. The politically soaks settings inside which held children end up entangled are in this manner supremacist as well as xenophobic and profiteering (Paxton et al., 2015).

The U.S. is currently being sued for a considerable number of dollars by individual families who say their minors were hurt by being held in confinement. The United States ought not to be viewed as a nation that dispenses further injury on people who are encountering escalated affliction and are looking for shelter and help in a neighboring country (Sawyer and Márquez, 2017).

Child Detention Claims-making in the U.S. Immigration Family Separation

The critical stages in the child detention claims-making process are: assembling, presenting, and contesting the claim.

Assembling the family separation problem against child detention

The first stage for claims-makers, namely assembling the claim, primarily involves the initial steps of identifying and elaborating the problem, determining the basis of the claim, and establishing who could be held responsible for acting on the claim (Epps and Furman, 2016). The family separation dispute includes the effects of several conferences that were held by the international migration organization in 2015.

a. Discovering the problem: changing international community perception of the child detention

The campaign to do away with child detention after family separation at the U.S. borders needs to be placed in the context of changing community values and attitudes towards the immigration policy (Hughes et al., 2017). Concerns on the effects of child detention were seen in the community protests.

The United Nations Network on Migration unequivocally keeps up its position that child movement confinement must be done away with at the U.S. borders:

Detainment of kids for purposes of immigration – regardless of whether they are voyaging alone or with their families – has been perceived as a youngster rights infringement and can be exceptionally harming to their physical and mental wellbeing and prosperity. Confinement of minors dependent on their transient status is accordingly never to their most significant advantage (Epps and Furman, 2016).

b. Determining the basis of the claim

After the identification of the problem, the next step is to determine the moral foundation of that claim. In the child detention dispute, two events were necessary for this process. From 2005, there were forums and conferences which focused on child detention and its problems. Both of them discussed and published what was known about the immigration policy (Jordan, Benner, and Nixon, 2018). The activists gave their concerns as follows:

The risky and debasing states of the insensitive child revenue-driven confinement centers in the United States have become a crisis. Right around 20000 unaccompanied minors have been secured by the previous spring 2019 by U.S. border control authorities (Jordan et al. 2018).

A significant number of these kids have family in the nation frantically anticipating them with no news. Global Detention Project Statistics show the number of kept unaccompanied minors in the U.S. overrides the nation’s whole detainment limit (NSCDC, 2005).

The conditions under which the children are detained in the U.S. facilities are abysmal (Madara, 2018). It is additionally stressful to persevere through this detainment. Prison like offices neglect to furnish minors with quotidian necessities for their wellbeing, security, and prosperity; toothbrushes, garments, cleaner, legitimate beds, covers and customary access to showers and family appearance are denied the detained kids who are as youthful as five months old and incorporate pregnantly and breastfeeding adolescent moms (Keller et al., 2015). Numerous minors rest on solid floors under foil covers and eat the equivalent innutritious feast each day which contains no organic product, vegetable or mellow:

Albeit United States law should confine detainment of kids to a limit of 72 hours, minors are ordinarily found to have been in the confinement camps for quite a long time with no entrance to essential restorative consideration or sanitation. The children experience extraordinary cold, lights on 24 hours every day and usually not gave adequate nourishment or water, with a significant number of the kids detailing awakening for the duration of the night from hunger torments. Practically all conditions are seriously packed (Sawyer and Márquez, 2017).

Many children have kicked the bucket in the U.S. federal immigration custody or not long after being discharged for this present year up until this point. In the confinement places, more kids’ lives might be lost except if the circumstance is radically improved (Keller et al., 2015). The activists who visit the kids discover them wearing dresses stressed with organic liquids, including bodily fluid, breastmilk, and pee (NSCDC, 2005). The inability to give mediators or to keep medicinal records has been accounted for. Staff explicitly manhandling kids have been considered for. Kid self-hurt has been accounted for. Within sight of writers, numerous minors cry in their meetings, and some can’t talk. According to Ho (2011), the conditions inside which the kids are held could be contrasted with torment offices.

c. Establishing the parameters of the claim

After the basis of the claim, the next step is to develop the parameters of the claim. It involves identifying who is responsible for acting on the claim. The Trump administration is solely responsible for this (Keller et al., 2015).

Presenting the child detention problem claim: attracting attention and legitimizing it

In terms of health, it is a brain-wiring concern, and early experiences are built into the child’s brain and body. Years of peer-reviewed studies show that detaining children away from their primary caregivers or parents is not suitable for their health (Epps and Furman, 2016). Responsive and stable relationships support healthy brain architecture. If these associations are interrupted, young children are affected by the double whammy of a brain that is disadvantaged of the positive motivation it requires and attacked by a stress reaction that disturbs its developing circuitry (Madara, 2018).

Detention and family separation are traumatic and horrible encounters that have a significant adverse effect on minors’ wellbeing and long haul intellectual and physical improvement (Jordan et al. 2018). This mischief can happen in any event, when the confinement is of brief length, paying little mind to the conditions in which kids are held, and in any event, when kids are kept with their families (Laurent et al., 2014). Kids in confinement are in danger of enduring gloom, uneasiness, and psychosomatic issues, for example, sleep deprivation and bad dreams. Migrant children who are detained face almost universal traumatic histories. It would be better to have specific therapies to help children recover and reunite with their families since there are severe consequences if this goes unattended (Solomon and Heide, 2009).

Contesting the child detention problem: invoking action and mobilizing support

The government says that immigration done illegally is a security threat. But activists say the international community has to weigh up the moral values against the implementation of the policy.

Case management, other human rights-based alternatives, and community-based programs have shown exceptionally viable, and the U.S. government should work to replace immigration detention for children and families with suitable care arrangements and reception (Keller et al., 2015).

Reference

1. American Psychological Association. (2018). Statement of APA President regarding executive order rescinding immigrant family separation policy.
2. Cassidy, J., & Shaver, P. R. (Eds.). (2012). Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications. Rough Guides.
3. De Thierry, B. (2015). Teaching the child on the trauma continuum. Grosvenor House Publishing Limited.
4. Epps, D., & Furman, R. (2016). The’alien other’: A culture of dehumanizing immigrants in the United States. Social Work & Society, 14(2).
5. Ho, C. (2011). Violating Human Rights in the U.S. Immigration Detention System. Anthropology News, 52(2), 27-27. doi: 10.1111/j.1556-3502.2011.52227.x
6. Hughes, K., Bellis, M. A., Hardcastle, K. A., Sethi, D., Butchart, A., Mikton, C., … & Dunne, M. P. (2017). The effect of multiple adverse childhood experiences on health: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The Lancet Public Health, 2(8), e356-e366.
7. Jordan, M., Benner, K., & Nixon, R. (2018). 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.
8. Keller, A., Joscelyne, A., Granski, M., & Rosenfeld, B. (2017). Pre-migration trauma exposure and mental health functioning among Central American migrants arriving at the U.S. border. PloS one, 12(1).
9. Laurent, H. K., Gilliam, K. S., Bruce, J., & Fisher, P. A. (2014). HPA stability for children in foster care: Mental health implications and moderation by early intervention. Developmental psychobiology, 56(6), 1406-1415.
10. Madara, J. L. (2018). AMA urges the administration to withdraw zero-tolerance policy. American Medical Association, June 20, 2018.
11. NSCDC (2005). National Scientific Council on the Developing Child Excessive stress disrupts the architecture of the developing brain. Working Paper No, 3.
12. Paxton, G., Tosif, S., Graham, H., Smith, A., Reveley, C., Standish, J., … & Marais, B. (2015). Perspective:‘The forgotten children: National inquiry into children in immigration detention (2014)’. Journal of pediatrics and child health, 51(4), 365-368.
13. Sawyer, C. B., & Márquez, J. (2017). Senseless violence against Central American unaccompanied minors: historical background and call for help. The Journal of Psychology, 151(1), 69-75.
14. Solomon, E. P., & Heide, K. M. (2009). Type III trauma: Toward a more effective conceptualization of psychological trauma. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 43(2), 202-210.
15. U. N. I. C. E. F. (2016). The growing crisis for refugee and migrant children. New York: UNICEF.
16. Vogt, W. A. (2013). Crossing Mexico: Structural violence and the commodification of undocumented Central American migrants. American Ethnologist, 40(4), 764-780.