Bacong Adrian Matias, Menjívar Cecilia
Department of Community Health Sciences, UCLA, Fielding School of Public Health, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Department of Sociology, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
J Immigr Minor Health. 2021 Oct;23(5):1092-1104. doi: 10.1007/s10903-021-01162-2. Epub 2021 Mar 3.
Immigrant health research has often noted an "immigrant health paradox", the observation that immigrants are "healthier" compared to their native-born peers of similar demographic and socioeconomic profile. This paradox disappears as immigrants stay longer in the host country. Multiple arguments, including migrant selectivity and cultural and behavioral factors have been proposed as reasons for the apparent paradox. Recently, the field has focused on immigrant legal status, especially its racialization. We review the literature on the immigrant health paradox, legal status, and racialized legal status to examine how this debate has taken a more structural approach. We find that immigrant health research has taken a needed intersectional approach, a productive development that examines how different markers of disadvantage work concurrently to shape immigrants' health. This approach, which factors in immigration enforcement practices, aligns with explanations for poor health outcomes among other racialized groups, and promises a fruitful avenue for future research.
移民健康研究常常提到一种“移民健康悖论”,即观察发现,与具有相似人口统计学特征和社会经济状况的本土同龄人相比,移民“更健康”。随着移民在东道国停留时间的延长,这种悖论就会消失。人们提出了多种观点,包括移民选择性以及文化和行为因素,作为这一明显悖论的原因。最近,该领域关注的是移民的法律地位,尤其是其种族化问题。我们回顾了关于移民健康悖论、法律地位和种族化法律地位的文献,以审视这场辩论是如何采取了一种更具结构性的方法。我们发现,移民健康研究采取了一种必要的交叉性方法,这是一种富有成效的发展,它审视了不同的劣势指标如何共同作用来塑造移民的健康状况。这种将移民执法实践考虑在内的方法,与对其他种族化群体健康状况不佳的解释相一致,并为未来的研究提供了一条富有成果的途径。