Explore the vast range of titles available.

Drawing on a model in which utility is derived from consumption and effort (labor supply), we ask how the deportation of a number of undocumented migrants influences the decisions regarding labor supply, consumption, and savings of the remaining undocumented migrants. We assume that the intensity of deportation serves as an indicator to the remaining undocumented migrants when they assess the probability of being deported. We find that a higher rate of deportation induces undocumented migrants to work harder, consume less and, as a result of those responses, to save more. Assuming that the purpose of deportation policy is to reduce the aggregate labor supply of undocumented migrants in order to raise the wages of low-skilled native workers, we conclude that the policy can backfire: an increase in the labor supply of the remaining undocumented migrants can more than offset the reduction in the labor supply arising from the deportation of some undocumented migrants. Simulation shows that if the number of deportations in relation to the size of the undocumented migrant workforce is small, then the combined effect of the reduction in the labor supply of the deportees and the increase in the labor supply of the remaining undocumented migrants can be that the aggregate labor supply of undocumented migrants will increase. It follows that an effective deportation policy has to involve the expulsion of a substantial proportion of the total number of undocumented migrants in the workforce.

Redefining Multicultural Families in South Korea  provides an in-depth look at the lives of families in Korea that include immigrants. Ten original chapters in this volume, written by scholars in multiple social science disciplines and covering different methodological approaches, aim to reinvigorate contemporary discussions about these multicultural families. Specially, the volume expands the scope of “multicultural families” by examining the diverse configurations of families with immigrants who crossed the Korean border during and after the 1990s, such as the families of undocumented migrant workers, divorced marriage immigrants, and the families of Korean women with Muslim immigrant husbands. Second, instead of looking at immigrants as newcomers, the volume takes a discursive turn, viewing them as settlers or first-generation immigrants in Korea whose post-migration lives have evolved and whose membership in Korean society has matured, by examining immigrants’ identities, need for political representation, their fights through the court system, and the aspirations of second-generation immigrants.

Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed various health risks and inequities experienced by international migrant workers. The number of migrant workers in the Republic of Korea (ROK) is rapidly growing and is expected to continue growing. Health related research on migrant workers in ROK is limited, especially among undocumented migrant workers who were more vulnerable to the pandemic. This study aims to examine the experiences of migrant workers and their knowledge and awareness of treatment and immigration policies during the pandemic. Methods We used data from the International Migrant Workers’ COVID-19 Health Literacy and Access to Medical Care project, a cross-sectional survey conducted with international migrant workers residing in ROK in 2021 ( n  = 537). Descriptive statistics and multivariable regression models were employed to understand different demographic, occupational, and immigration factors affecting migrant workers’ knowledge and awareness of treatment and immigration policies. Results Undocumented migrant workers had a longer length of residence in ROK and earned less compared to workers with work visa status. None of the undocumented migrant workers had access to health insurance since they were ineligible to enroll in the national health insurance scheme. In the early days of the pandemic, most undocumented migrant workers experienced a decrease in their average income. After adjusting for demographic differences and language proficiency, undocumented migrant workers (AOR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.21, 0.78) were less likely to be aware of the policy allowing foreigners, including undocumented individuals, to access COVID-19 testing and treatment without the risk of deportation. Workers with a longer length of residence (AOR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.09, 1.53) were more likely to be aware of this policy. Conclusion Undocumented migrant workers were often less informed about COVID-19 policies. While most of the survey respondents were knowledgeable about governmental policies regarding COVID-19 treatment and immigration, our results reveal multiple occupational and health insurance vulnerabilities of undocumented migrant workers living in ROK. More attention is needed to understand healthcare service barriers and how to provide adequate resources for this vulnerable population.

An estimated 2 million foreign-born migrants of working age (15–64) were living in South Africa (SA) in 2017. Structural and practical xenophobia has driven asylum-seekers, refugees, and undocumented migrants in SA to abject poverty and misery. The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) containment measures adopted by the SA government through the lockdown of the nation have tremendously deepened the unequal treatment of asylum-seekers and refugees in SA. This can be seen through the South African government’s lack of consideration of this marginalized population in economic, poverty, and hunger alleviation schemes. Leaving this category of our society out of the national response safety nets may lead to negative coping strategies causing mental health issues and secondary health concerns. An effective response to the socioeconomic challenges imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic should consider the economic and health impact of the pandemic on asylum-seekers, refugees, and undocumented migrants.

Background Undocumented migrants often face significant socio-economic and health vulnerabilities, which are further intensified during global crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Among these challenges, food insecurity emerges as a critical concern, particularly for migrants lacking legal status, social protection, and access to basic services. This study examines the prevalence of food insecurity and food-seeking behaviour-related coping mechanisms among Bangladeshi undocumented migrants living in Malaysia, Iraq, and Libya during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods Twenty-seven undocumented Bangladeshi migrants were interviewed using a qualitative Interpretative Phenomenological Approach (IPA). The author combined an integrated data-driven inductive technique to code and analyse the data. The data analysis followed the six-step process of Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA). Results The study reveals that COVID-19 has significantly impacted their food security, including food unavailability and inaccessibility, decreasing consumption, increasing reliance on cheaper and malnutrition food, as well as hunger and starvation. To cope, they adopted various food-seeking behaviors, such as receiving support from friends and relatives, taking loans, seeking food assistance from different sources, and selling personal belongings. Conclusion The findings highlight the vulnerability of undocumented migrants during crises and suggest the need for targeted policy interventions to enhance food security for this marginalized group. The study offers critical insights for policymakers, aid organizations, and stakeholders to develop effective strategies and policies that mitigate food insecurity among undocumented migrants, thereby contributing to achieving sustainable development goals by 2030.

Background: Emerging evidence suggests that the COVID-19 pandemic is widening pre-pandemic health, social, and economic inequalities between refugees, migrants, and asylum seekers and the general population. This global scoping review examined the impact of the pandemic on community-based asylum seekers and undocumented migrants in high- and upper-middle-income countries. Methods: We conducted a systematic search of peer-reviewed articles in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and ProQuest Central. We applied Katikireddi’s framework of understanding and addressing inequalities to examine the differential impact of the pandemic across exposure, vulnerability to infection, disease consequences, social consequences, effectiveness of control measures, and adverse consequences of control measures. Results: We included 32 articles in the review. The analysis showed that asylum seekers and undocumented migrants experienced greater exposure to the COVID-19 virus and higher infection rates. They also experienced differential social consequences in the form of job loss and lost and/or reduced work hours. The effectiveness of pandemic response measures on asylum seekers and undocumented migrants was also affected by pre-pandemic social and economic marginalisation, exclusion from pandemic-induced policy measures, lack of appropriate pandemic communication, and variable trust in governments and authority. Pandemic control measures had greater adverse consequences on asylum seekers and undocumented migrants than the general population, with the majority of studies included in this review reporting worsened mental health and social isolation conditions and reduced access to health care. Conclusions: Asylum seekers and undocumented migrants experienced a disproportionate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic across the six thematic areas of comparison. Policies that reduce exposure and vulnerability to the infection, grant equitable access to health and social care, and build capacities and resilience, are critical to enable asylum seekers and undocumented migrants to cope with and recover from pre-pandemic and pandemic-induced inequalities.

Access to health care and financial protection for migrants can be promoted through diverse health insurance schemes, designed to suit migrants’ needs within a specific context. The Migrant Fund (M-Fund) is a voluntary, non-profit health insurance scheme operating along the Thai–Myanmar border in Thailand since 2017 and aims to protect the health of migrants uncovered by existing government insurance schemes. A qualitative evaluation was conducted between December 2018 and March 2019 to determine M-Fund’s operational impacts, provide recommendations for improvement, and draw suggestions about its role in protecting migrant health. In-depth interviews with 20 individuals and 5 groups were conducted in three categories: (1) International, national, and local partners; (2) M-Fund clients; and (3) M-Fund staff. Interview information was triangulated with findings from other informants, a document review, and researchers’ observations. Despite covering a small number of 9131 migrants, the M-Fund has contributed to improving access to care for migrants, raised awareness about migrant health protection, and reduced the financial burden for public hospitals. The M-Fund acts as a safety-net initiative for those left behind due to unclear government policy to protect the health of undocumented/illegal migrants. Despite clear merits, the issue of adverse selection to the scheme is a critical challenge. Evidence from this evaluation is useful to inform the future design of government insurance schemes for migrants.

Abstract Background The objective of this article is to present an overview of the burden, spectrum of diseases and risk factors for mental illness among subgroups of migrants, namely, immigrants, refugees and individuals with precarious legal status. This expert review summarises some of the implications for primary care services in migrant receiving countries in the global North. Methods A broad literature review was conducted on the epidemiology of mental health disorders in migrants and the available evidence on mental health services for this population focusing on key issues for primary care practitioners in high-income countries. Results Although most migrants are resilient, migration is associated with an over-representation of mental disorder in specific subpopulations. There is a general consensus that stress-related disorders are more prevalent among refugee populations of all ages compared to the general population. Relative to refugees, migrants with precarious legal status may be at even higher risk of depression and anxiety disorders. Persistence and severity of psychiatric disorders among migrant populations can be attributed to a combination of factors including severity of trauma exposures during the migration process. Exposure to stressors after resettlement, such as poverty and limited social support, also impacts mental illness. Services for migrants are affected by restricted accessibility and should address cultural and linguistic barriers to and issues in the larger social environment that impact psychosocial functioning. Conclusion There is substantial burden of mental illness among some migrant populations. Primary care providers seeking to assist individuals need to be cognizant of language barriers to and challenges of working with interpreters as well as sensitive to cultural and social contexts within the diagnosis and service delivery process. In addition, best practices in screening migrants and providing intervention services for mental disorders need to be sensitive to where individuals and families are in the resettlement trajectory.

Background Literature on health and access to care of undocumented migrants in the European Union (EU) is limited and heterogeneous in focus and quality. Authors conducted a scoping review to identify the extent, nature and distribution of existing primary research (1990-2012), thus clarifying what is known, key gaps, and potential next steps. Methods Authors used Arksey and O'Malley's six-stage scoping framework, with Levac, Colquhoun and O'Brien's revisions, to review identified sources. Findings were summarized thematically: (i) physical, mental and social health issues, (ii) access and barriers to care, (iii) vulnerable groups and (iv) policy and rights. Results Fifty-four sources were included of 598 identified, with 93% (50/54) published during 2005-2012. EU member states from Eastern Europe were underrepresented, particularly in single-country studies. Most study designs (52%) were qualitative. Sampling descriptions were generally poor, and sampling purposeful, with only four studies using any randomization. Demographic descriptions were far from uniform and only two studies focused on undocumented children and youth. Most (80%) included findings on health-care access, with obstacles reported at primary, secondary and tertiary levels. Major access barriers included fear, lack of awareness of rights, socioeconomics. Mental disorders appeared widespread, while obstetric needs and injuries were key reasons for seeking care. Pregnant women, children and detainees appeared most vulnerable. While EU policy supports health-care access for undocumented migrants, practices remain haphazard, with studies reporting differing interpretation and implementation of rights at regional, institutional and individual levels. Conclusions This scoping review is an initial attempt to describe available primary evidence on health and access to care for undocumented migrants in the European Union. It underlines the need for more and better-quality research, increased co-operation between gatekeepers, providers, researchers and policy makers, and reduced ambiguities in health-care rights and obligations for undocumented migrants.

Background Undocumented migrants face particular challenges in accessing healthcare services in many European countries. The aim of this study was to systematically review the academic literature on the utilization of healthcare services by undocumented migrants in Europe. Methods The databases Embase, Medline, Global Health and Cinahl Plus were searched systematically to identify quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods studies published in 2007–2017. Results A total of 908 articles were retrieved. Deletion of duplicates left 531. After screening titles, abstracts and full texts according to pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria, 29 articles were included in the review. Overall, quantitative studies showed an underutilization of different types of healthcare services by undocumented migrants. Qualitative studies reported that, even when care was received, it was often inadequate or insufficient, and that many undocumented migrants were unfamiliar with their entitlements and faced barriers in utilizing healthcare services. Conclusions Although it is difficult to generalize findings from the included studies due to methodological differences, they provide further evidence that undocumented migrants in Europe face particular problems in utilizing healthcare services.