Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, UK.
Institute for Health Informatics, University College London, London, UK.
Lancet. 2018 Dec 15;392(10164):2606-2654. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32114-7. Epub 2018 Dec 5.
With one billion people on the move or having moved in 2018, migration is a global reality, which has also become a political lightning rod. Although estimates indicate that the majority of global migration occurs within low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), the most prominent dialogue focuses almost exclusively on migration from LMICs to high-income countries (HICs). Nowadays, populist discourse demonises the very same individuals who uphold economies, bolster social services, and contribute to health services in both origin and destination locations. Those in positions of political and economic power continue to restrict or publicly condemn migration to promote their own interests. Meanwhile nationalist movements assert so-called cultural sovereignty by delineating an us versus them rhetoric, creating a moral emergency. In response to these issues, the UCL- Commission on Migration and Health was convened to articulate evidence-based approaches to inform public discourse and policy. The Commission undertook analyses and consulted widely, with diverse international evidence and expertise spanning sociology, politics, public health science, law, humanitarianism, and anthropology. The result of this work is a report that aims to be a call to action for civil society, health leaders, academics, and policy makers to maximise the benefits and reduce the costs of migration on health locally and globally. The outputs of our work relate to five overarching goals that we thread throughout the report. First, we provide the latest evidence on migration and health outcomes. This evidence challenges common myths and highlights the diversity, dynamics, and benefits of modern migration and how it relates to population and individual health. Migrants generally contribute more to the wealth of host societies than they cost. Our Article shows that international migrants in HICs have, on average, lower mortality than the host country population. However, increased morbidity was found for some conditions and among certain subgroups of migrants, (eg, increased rates of mental illness in victims of trafficking and people fleeing conflict) and in populations left behind in the location of origin. Currently, in 2018, the full range of migrants’ health needs are difficult to assess because of poor quality data. We know very little, for example, about the health of undocumented migrants, people with disabilities, or lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual, or intersex (LGBTI) individuals who migrate or who are unable to move. Second, we examine multisector determinants of health and consider the implication of the current sector-siloed approaches. The health of people who migrate depends greatly on structural and political factors that determine the impetus for migration, the conditions of their journey, and their destination. Discrimination, gender inequalities, and exclusion from health and social services repeatedly emerge as negative health influences for migrants that require cross-sector responses. Third, we critically review key challenges to healthy migration. Population mobility provides economic, social, and cultural dividends for those who migrate and their host communities. Furthermore, the right to the highest attainable standard of health, regardless of location or migration status, is enshrined in numerous human rights instruments. However, national sovereignty concerns overshadow these benefits and legal norms. Attention to migration focuses largely on security concerns. When there is conjoining of the words health and migration, it is either focused on small subsets of society and policy, or negatively construed. International agreements, such as the UN Global Compact for Migration and the UN Global Compact on Refugees, represent an opportunity to ensure that international solidarity, unity of intent, and our shared humanity triumphs over nationalist and exclusionary policies, leading to concrete actions to protect the health of migrants. Fourth, we examine equity in access to health and health services and offer evidence-based solutions to improve the health of migrants. Migrants should be explicitly included in universal health coverage commitments. Ultimately, the cost of failing to be health-inclusive could be more expensive to national economies, health security, and global health than the modest investments required. Finally, we look ahead to outline how our evidence can contribute to synergistic and equitable health, social, and economic policies, and feasible strategies to inform and inspire action by migrants, policy makers, and civil society. We conclude that migration should be treated as a central feature of 21st century health and development. Commitments to the health of migrating populations should be considered across all Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and in the implementation of the Global Compact for Migration and Global Compact on Refugees. This Commission offers recommendations that view population mobility as an asset to global health by showing the meaning and reality of good health for all. We present four key messages that provide a focus for future action.
2018 年有 10 亿人在迁移或已经迁移,移民是一种全球现实,它也成为了一个政治焦点。尽管估计表明,大多数全球移民发生在低收入和中等收入国家(LMICs),但最突出的对话几乎完全集中在来自 LMICs 到高收入国家(HICs)的移民上。如今,民粹主义言论妖魔化了那些维持经济、支持社会服务和为原籍国和目的地的卫生服务做出贡献的人。那些处于政治和经济权力地位的人继续限制或公开谴责移民,以维护自己的利益。与此同时,民族主义运动通过划定一种“我们与他们”的言论来主张所谓的文化主权,制造了一种道德紧急状态。针对这些问题,UCL-移民与健康委员会召开会议,提出基于证据的方法,为公众舆论和政策提供信息。该委员会进行了分析并广泛征求意见,涉及社会学、政治学、公共卫生科学、法律、人道主义和人类学等多个领域的国际证据和专业知识。这项工作的结果是一份报告,旨在呼吁公民社会、卫生领导人、学者和政策制定者采取行动,最大限度地提高移民对当地和全球健康的益处,减少其成本。我们工作的成果涉及五个总体目标,我们贯穿整个报告。首先,我们提供有关移民和健康结果的最新证据。这些证据挑战了常见的误解,强调了现代移民的多样性、动态性和益处,以及它与人口和个人健康的关系。移民通常对东道社会的财富贡献大于他们的成本。我们的文章表明,高收入国家的国际移民的死亡率平均低于东道国人口。然而,一些情况下和某些移民群体(例如,贩运受害者和逃离冲突的人的精神疾病发病率增加)以及在原籍地留下的人群中,发病率有所增加。目前,在 2018 年,由于数据质量差,很难评估移民的全部健康需求。例如,我们对无证移民、残疾人和同性恋、双性恋、变性或双性人(LGBTI)移民或无法迁移的人的健康知之甚少。其次,我们考察了健康的多部门决定因素,并考虑了当前部门隔离方法的影响。移民的健康在很大程度上取决于决定移民动力、旅行条件和目的地的结构性和政治因素。歧视、性别不平等以及移民在健康和社会服务方面的排斥,反复成为移民的负面健康影响因素,需要跨部门应对。第三,我们批判性地审查了健康移民的关键挑战。人口流动为移民及其东道社区带来了经济、社会和文化红利。此外,无论其所在地或移民身份如何,都有多项人权文书规定了享有最高可达健康标准的权利。然而,国家主权关切超过了这些好处和法律规范。对移民的关注主要集中在安全问题上。当提到健康和移民这两个词时,要么是集中在社会和政策的小部分,要么是负面描述。《联合国全球移民契约》和《联合国难民问题全球契约》等国际协议代表着一个确保国际团结、意图统一和我们共同人性战胜民族主义和排斥性政策的机会,从而采取具体行动保护移民的健康。第四,我们考察了获得健康和卫生服务的公平性,并提供了改善移民健康的循证解决方案。移民应明确纳入全民健康覆盖承诺。最终,不采取包容健康的措施可能会比所需的适度投资对国家经济、卫生安全和全球健康造成更高的代价。最后,我们展望未来,概述我们的证据如何为协同和公平的健康、社会和经济政策做出贡献,并为移民、政策制定者和公民社会提供信息和激励行动的可行战略。我们的结论是,移民应该被视为 21 世纪健康和发展的核心特征。应考虑在所有可持续发展目标(SDGs)中以及在执行《全球移民契约》和《全球难民契约》中承诺移民人口的健康。本委员会提出了一些建议,认为人口流动是全球健康的一项资产,展示了全民健康的意义和现实。我们提出了四条关键信息,为未来的行动提供了重点。