Introduction:
Immigration Detention of Children in the US
Currently 80 percent of the world’s population internally
displaced due to social unrest, detrimental effects of globalization, and
natural calamities are women and children. In the United States the controversy
surrounding immigration detention has been ongoing since the 1890s with the
establishment of the first federal immigration detention center in Ellis
Island, New York (23). However, immigration policies and laws were not strictly
enforced until after New York City’s September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The
tragedy of these attacks combined with a strong sense of threat against
“American Freedom” intensified the US government’s concern regarding
immigration control and the protection of its national security interests (17).
From 2011 to 2012, the population of asylum, refugee, and undocumented migrant
children in the Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention centers in the
United States has grown substantially; from 6,855 in 2011 to approximately 14,000 in 2012 (18).
These children journey from their homelands to escape social unrest, gang
violence, abuse, torture, are victims of human trafficking, or are in search of
better lives and opportunities within the United States (21).
Poor management, lack of preventative medical services, poor
sanitation, and an influx of immigrants within the Immigration Customs
Enforcement centers has led to the spread of infectious diseases, creating a
public health disaster (1). Due to
these factors and the human rights violations associated with immigration
detention; the United Nations and the International Detention Coalition have
launched a global campaign on March 21, 2012 to end immigration detention of
children globally. This paper aims to critique the campaign’s effect on the
immigration detention of children within the United States and propose an
alternative method to immigration detention that will promote Social-Behavioral
theory and human rights frameworks.
Criticism
1: The Campaign Fails to Engage the Public & Generate Public Support
The
Intervention that aims to increase public awareness and advocate for the
undocumented children across the world, including the US is the UN and
International Detention Coalition Campaign to End Immigration Detention of
Children. However, since its initiation in 2012, there has been very little
media addressing the conditions and human rights violations of undocumented
children within US detention centers. According to the National Immigration
Forum, the public is largely unaware that immigration detention even exists in
today’s society (20). The undocumented children are detained within the
Immigration and Customs Enforcement centers in the US, which are usually
located away from the metropolitan areas and in remote areas such as Hutto,
Texas, which is 75 miles east of Houston (14). This makes it difficult for
“legal service providers, human rights observers, [the public], and families to
access (14). Majority of the
pro-bono law firms and lawyers are also underfunded and hours away from the
immigration detention centers, which makes legal care and knowledge of the
conditions of child detention difficult (8). Thus instead of promoting a
society of awareness, fairness, and justice; this influences the “out of sight
and out of mind” mentality that prevents the public from engaging and support
the mission to improve the conditions within the Immigration and Customs Enforcement
centers and end the immigration detention of children.
The UN
and International Detention Coalition Campaign to End Immigration Detention of
Children fails to engage the public and
generate public support because US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and
the Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE) have framed the issue of immigration
detention of children as “an immigration problem,” fighting “a new war,” and a “law
enforcement problem.” “People concerned with
immigration detention have tended to see it as an issue mainly involving
government policy makers, detainees and immigration officers” (3). This not only gives ownership of the definition of the
issue to US Department of Homeland Security and Immigration Customs Enforcement
but also the control of the debate. Utilizing
a strong core value such as security and portraying the Department of Homeland
Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement as the societal heroes preventing
undocumented children from fleeing from the government, using the nation’s
resources, and turning to a potential life of crime-as often happens to
homeless youths” (17). Another issue with the campaign’s effectiveness to
engage the public and generate support is that the campaign “is asking States to stop detaining children for sole immigration
reasons” (13). However, it is the state governments that are involved in the
detention of children as an administrative immigration solution.
The UN
and International Detention Coalition Campaign to End Immigration Detention of
Children does not address the principles of Social Learning Theory, which
hinders its effectiveness. Social or Observational Learning Theory has three
principles a) “attempts to explain how individuals observe other people’s
actions and how they come to adopt those patterns of action as personal modes
of response to problems [or] conditions,” b) individuals such as actors or messengers
who portray real people in the media such as TV, radio, or print can be
utilized as models for others to emulate, and c) provides an understanding
under which conditions people may observe and adopt specific coping behaviors
in group settings” (5).
Post- 9/11 anti-immigration rhetoric supported by
anti-immigrant laws and mass media have fueled US anti-immigration sentiment
and “veiled racism” (10). The mass media portrayals of the detainees within the
Guantanamo Bay as “potential or suspected terrorists,” as well as the
Department of Homeland Security’s main mission to stop criminal acts and
protect national security have evoked the principles of Social Learning theory.
In
2007, ICE began ACCESS INITIATIVE (agreements of cooperation in communities and
enhance safety and security) to create more programs aimed at greater
cooperation between state and local law enforcement & increased interior
enforcement (12). These initiatives have contributed to the socialization of
the public to thinking that it is the duty of all Americans to aid the
government and law enforcement in this new “War on Terror” because it will not
only help protect the public against future terrorist attacks but also by
redefining social norms and what it means to be an American in the post 9/11
era. Societal and peer influence on issues such as health, security, and
economy are important indicators of how individuals respond to problems and
situations, especially if their freedoms are threatened. With the government and
law officials as the actors the public utilizes as models for emulation, the
impact of mass media on anti-immigration slogans, and anti-immigration laws;
the UN and International Detention Coalition Campaign to End Immigration
Detention of Children is ineffective in its aim to engage the public and
generate support against the practice.
Criticism
2: The Campaign does not incorporate a “Newsworthy & Relatable” Messenger
The UN and International Detention Coalition Campaign to
End Immigration Detention of Children is carried out by organization bodies
such as the UN, International Detention Coalition, and the Detention Watch
Network, which is ineffective. “The source’ of
campaign messages combines both the sponsor (the sender who is responsible for
placing the messages, typically an organization) and the messenger (the model
appearing in the message who delivers information, demonstrates behavior, or
provides a testimonial)” (5). The UN and International Detention
Coalition Campaign to End Immigration Detention of Children in the US has an international sponsor, which is a
well-respected organization and entity but does not have a likeable nor newsworthy
messenger that the public can relate to. Messengers help personalize difficult
concepts through modeling, and enhance the formation of beliefs and retention
(5). “Celebrities help draw attention to a dull topic, experts enhance response
efficacy, ordinary people heighten self-efficacy, victims convey the severity
of harmful outcomes, and victims who share similar characteristics of the
audience can help to augment susceptibility claims” (5). The UN and
International Detention Coalition Campaign to End Immigration Detention of
Children in the US does not incorporate mass media
with a victim or celebrity messenger to help generate public awareness of the
critical issue, human rights violations, and detrimental impact of immigration
detention on a vulnerable population. Also this campaign fails to generate
support from Congress because it fails to fuel public outrage and action.
Law reviews and reports on the
effects of immigration detention on child well-being and health throughout the
past few years have highlighted cases of children detained within the US
Immigration Customs Enforcement centers. However, the mass media such as
newspapers, TV, and radio have failed to tell the stories of the invisible
children. Recently, the New York Times has generated articles on the issue of
solitary confinement in the US immigration centers but not much media nor press
has been generated accounting the stories of the lost children. Where are the
children and who will speak for them? The UN and International Detention Coalition
Campaign to End Immigration Detention of Children is invisible just like the children are in the US society. In order for
the campaign to be effective, it needs to come out of hiding, highlight the
human rights violations of child immigration detention, and promote America as
a human rights leader and not a human rights outlaw. To be able to achieve
this, the campaign against the immigration detention of children in the US
needs to have a newsworthy and relatable messenger.
Criticism
3: Cognitive Dissonance & Psychological Reactance Theory: The Vaccine
against the “New Kind of War”
In 1996, Congress established the Immigrant Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act
(IIRIRA), which dramatically prolonged obligatory immigration detention, established
an immigration detention budget for the US Department of Homeland Security, and
developed new expedited removal procedures (17). However, in 2001 the Bush
Administration established the US Patriot Act after the 9/11 Terrorist attacks
on the NYC Twin Towers, which codified into law that “any alien…who has not
been removed…and whose removal is unlikely in the reasonably foreseeable
future, may be detained for additional periods of up to six months only if the
release of the alien will endanger the national security of the United States
or the safety of the community or any person” (17). The Patriot Act also gives
the Attorney General the power to indefinitely detain undocumented immigrants
if he/she reasonably foresees them as a threat to national security (17). To
address some of the harsh conditions under which children were detained, the Flores Agreement was created in 1997 with
specific obligations on Immigration Customs Enforcement and the Department of
Homeland Security to: a) eliminate indefinite
detention, b) provide reasonable time limit during post-removal detention
period for children, and c) place children in least restrictive environments
(17). However,
because the Flores agreement is not mandated into law, the Department of
Homeland Security does not have to follow its provisions (17).
The UN and International Detention Coalition
Campaign to End Immigration Detention of Children is not
in accordance with current US immigration Policy. Instead, the campaign evokes
cognitive dissonance and Psychological Reactance Theory. Cognitive dissonance
is “A condition of conflict or anxiety resulting from
inconsistency between one's beliefs and one's actions” and the actions an
individual takes to alleviate his/her inner conflict (18). However, Psychological
Reactance Theory is the “aversive affective reaction in response to
regulations or impositions that impinge on freedom and autonomy” (19). For example when a group of individuals
were asked if free speech was a privilege rather than a right; 19 % agreed when
asked individually and 58 % agreed when asked in a group (11). Thus, it is not
uncommon for people or a society to temporarily give up their free speech or
rights in general when their freedom or security is threatened. If an
individual feels that immigration detention of children is unethical but
perceives that their security may be threatened by releasing undocumented child
immigrants into the community; they will agree to the “collective conservatism”
of Congress and US immigration policy than give up the ownership of their own
security and freedom. To reduce cognitive dissonance, a person may support the
detention of children within immigration detention centers by “establishing
that other people reacted the same way” as well use the current immigration
policy and Congress as justifications (4).
Although
the UN and International Detention Coalition Campaign to End Immigration
Detention of Children is the
best long-term approach to the protection of the fundamental human rights and well-being
of all undocumented children within the US Immigration Customs Enforcement
centers, it is not practical. That is because US society is shielded heavily by
anti-immigration policies and instilled with fears of “potential terrorist
attacks,” which people may utilize as their justification to allowing the
continuation of immigration detention of children. The campaign would need to
reframe their slogan so that it will not evoke fear or threat to security or
violation of US freedoms.
Alternative
Model to Immigration Detention
The new
Alternative Case-Management & Community Centered Model utilizes a
case-management approach and community monitoring process, which allows
children to be detained within a non-punitive environment during their
immigration and deportation process (16). Although some children are currently
detained within the foster care system or placed into the community by the
Office of Refugee Resettlement; which places children within various forms of
housing once released from Immigration Customs Enforcement or Department of
Homeland Security custody. The problem with the current system is that there
are still many more children detained within Immigration Customs Enforcement centers
due to the significant growth of the population in the last two years. To
accommodate these children, the Office of Refugee Resettlement has had to open
detention units in former army bases (21).
The new
Alternative Case-Management & Community Centered Model would work best if
the Flores Agreement was also codified into US law (17). This would force the
US Department of Homeland Security and the Immigration Customs Enforcement to
follow the provisions under the Flores Agreement, which mandates the use of
Best Interest model, least restrictive means of detention, and eliminates
indefinite detention (17). The alternative model to immigration detention with
the codification of the Flores Agreement into US law will promote the
fundamental human rights of the undocumented children, protect them from the abuses
faced in immigration detention, and uphold the American core values of justice,
autonomy, equality and freedom for all.
Defense
of New Intervention Campaign 1: Engages the Public through Mass Media
Unlike
the UN and International Detention Coalition Campaign to End Immigration
Detention of Children in the
US, the new Alternative Case-Management & Community Centered Model campaign
will change legislation and codify the Flores Agreement into US law by
utilizing the Agenda Setting Theory. Agenda Setting Theory developed by Maxwell and Shaw in the
1970s to assist “the public to understand the pervasive role of the media. The
theory necessitates salience transfer, which is the ability of the news media
to transfer issues of importance from their news media agendas to public
agendas” (2). Incorporating the Agenda Setting Theory in the new
campaign for the use of the alternative model to immigration detention of
children in the US, addresses the flaws of social learning theory in the UN and
International Detention Coalition Campaign to End Immigration Detention of
Children as well as reframes the issue of immigration
detention from “a national security interest” to “US freedom and autonomy
interest.” The theory addresses the
flaws created by the UN campaign by increasing mass media coverage of the
alternative model to child detention, which will increase public awareness of
the issue and influence public action.
Unlike
the UN campaign which invoked Social Learning Theory and strengthened the
“collective Conservatism” and “Veiled Racism;” the new Alternative
Case-Management & Community Centered Model campaign will address this by
using the Agenda Setting Model, which will change media, public, and policy
agenda. By altering the social agenda will also help to reform social norms in
relations to the immigration detention of children within the United States. By reframing the issue of immigration
detention of children to give ownership to the communities and to the
vulnerable population, as was done with the “I’m Here for Immigrant Women”
women’s immigration detention campaign, will help change the media agenda (15).
Changing the media agenda, an individual or group is able to change the public
and policy agenda. The media agenda will be changed by utilizing slogans such
as “I’m Here for Immigrant Children “All Children are Humans,” and “For Every
Child and For Us.”
The Agenda Setting Theory will help to
humanize and rid the conception that undocumented children are all criminals
and a threat to national security in the US. By changing the media agenda and
increasing media coverage through new slogans, TV, radio, and newspaper; will
help draw the public to a population of children that were once invisible. By
stating “Join America in Revealing its Invisible Children” and “We are all
Human Faces,” will influence the public agenda and outcry. A flaw within the UN
and International Detention Coalition Campaign to End Immigration Detention of
Children is that it does not bring the lost children back into the society.
However, the new alternative model for detention with a new campaign model will
not only bring the children back into the communities but also increase public
awareness of their existence, their stories, and human rights abuses. The new
alternative model will place children into the communities, help them to
connect with resources such as legal counsel, housing, guardian ad litem,
medical care, and education. Once the public agenda and the media agenda are
empowered to promote the new model of alternative detention, the policy agenda
will be easier to change. Therefore, influencing Congress that the only way the
new Alternative Case-Management & Community Centered Model will work is
with the codification of the Flores Agreement into US law.
Defense
of New Intervention Campaign 2: The Face of Fairness & Equality for All
Children
The new Alternative
Case-Management & Community Centered Model and campaign will incorporate an
effective, newsworthy, and relatable messenger, like Angelina Jolie. Unlike the UN and International Detention
Coalition Campaign to End Immigration Detention of Children, the new campaign
for the alternative model to child detention will empower its mission and
increase its effectiveness by utilizing a messenger like Special Envoy of UN High
Commissioner for Refugees, Angelina Jolie. She is a newsworthy actress that is respected
within US society and refugee populations, as well as expert in the area of
refugee rights and advocacy. Due to Angelina Jolie’s success and well-known
status, she is also an individual that may evoke the Social Learning Theory in
a positive direction; by influencing the public to follow her role as a human
rights leader and child refugee right advocate.
Media-Attractive celebrities
like Angelina Jolie will help the media draw attention to important issues such
as immigration detention of children and influence public awareness of social
problems that need advocates who will rally for change. The new
Alternative Case-Management & Community Centered Model campaign will be
more successful compared to the UN End Immigration Detention of Children
campaign because by utilizing a messenger like Angelina Jolie, will further
enforce the strengths of the Agenda Setting Theory; utilizing the media agenda
to influence both public and policy agenda. In addition to having a
celebrity like Angelina Jolie as the messenger of the campaign, it is also
important to incorporate a victim of child immigration detention, who will tell
his or her story. If the victim relates to all children within the US and
adults are able to visualize and conceptualize this child as if he/she were
their own; this would prove to be an effective approach to fueling public
agenda.
Defense
of New Intervention Campaign 3: Disregarding Dissonance & Reframing the
“New Kind of War”
The new Alternative
Case-Management & Community Centered Model and campaign will disregard
cognitive dissonance and promote US immigration policies, laws, and core
values. Campaigns are governed by “psychological principles that [direct] human
behavior and, in so doing, [give] the [campaign tactics] their power” (6). Child
immigration detention will exist as long as anti-immigrant sentiment,
discrimination, racism, anti-immigration policies, and anti-immigration laws
exist. Therefore, even though the concept of ending child immigration detention
is desirable; it is also idealistic and will most likely never occur.
The
Broken Windows Theory addresses this very concept; that “small acts of deviance -- littering, graffiti, broken
windows -- will, if ignored, escalate into more serious crime.” To be able to
advance to campaigns that end immigration detention of children permanently in
the US, society must first fix its broken windows such as broken immigration
detention systems that violate child fundamental human rights. The alternative
model to detention and campaign is the start of a long-term solution, which
will promote child fundamental rights by enabling them to be detained and
monitored during the immigration process in a safe community setting as
enforced by the codification of the Flores Agreement into law. This will allow
children to attain education, be monitored until they either achieve legal
status or are deported, and reduce the costs of detention.
The new Alternative Case-Management & Community
Centered Model campaign will reduce cognitive dissonance because through the
use of new slogans, Agenda Setting Theory, and Framing Theory; criminalization
of undocumented children and “New War” mentality will be refocused to address
the core values American’s value most, which are freedom and autonomy. The new
campaign will state “denying fairness and human rights to some puts all of our
freedoms at risk” and that violating the human rights of undocumented children
will not protect the US from terrorism nor abridges to national security (10).
Unlike the UN End Immigration Detention of Children campaign, which is not
accepted in this post 9/11 society; the new alternative will be because it does
not guarantee citizenship to everyone, is more cost effective, and promotes US
as a leader of human rights internationally. It is estimated that it 122
dollars per individual per day to be detained within the Immigration Customs
Enforcement Centers in the US compared to less than 22 dollars per individual
per day with a program like the Lutheran Immigration Service (24). The new
Alternative
Case-Management & Community Centered Model campaign does not contradict
with current US immigration Policy because it still allows for the detention of
those who are viewed as serious threats to national security, while maintaining
the protection and human rights of children arbitrarily detained. The new
Alternative Case-Management & Community Centered Model campaign will give
the US government and its public the ownership of their own security and
freedom by promoting and protecting international human rights.
Conclusion
Immigration Detention of undocumented children globally
has become a controversial problem in recent years. Over the past few years,
there has been a significant increase in undocumented children within the
Immigration Customs Enforcement centers in the US at risk for psychological,
physical, and emotional abuse; but has not raised enough public outcry nor
media. The UN End Immigration Detention of Children campaign was established to
target the detention of the vulnerable child population globally but has not
been very successful in raising nor changing media, public, nor policy agenda.
However, the new Alternative Case-Management & Community Centered Model
campaign addresses the flaws of the UN campaign by utilizing alternative social
theory models as techniques to enhance public awareness, persuasion, and
action.
References
1.
ACLU Calls For an End to
Overcrowded Prisons For Immigration Detainees. Dehra Miotke, LLC., 2007. (Accessed
March 25, 2013, at http://dmimmigration.com/ACLU_Calls_for_an_End_to_Overcrowded_Prisons_for_Immigration.aspx).
2.
Agenda-Setting Theory
Law & Legal Definition. US Legal. (Accessed on May 1,2013, at http://definitions.uslegal.com/a/agenda-setting-theory/).
3.
Bacon,
Christine. The Evolution of Immigration
Detention in the UK: The involvement of Private Prison Companies. Oxford,
UK. University of Oxford Refugee Studies Centre, 2005. (Accessed on April 30,
2013, at http://www.rsc.ox.ac.uk/publications/working-papers folder contents/RSCworkingpaper27.pdf).
4.
Behar,
Lenore. B., The Effects of Cognitive
Dissonance on Inappropriate Emotional Reactions. Journal of Personality,
2006. (Accessed on April 30, at
http://www.lenorebehar.com/assets/images/pdf/03.%20%20%20THE%20EFFECTS%20OF%20COGNITIVE%20DISSONANCE%20ON%20INAPPROPRIATE%20EMOTIONAL%20REACTIONS.pdf).
5.
Bonnie R.,J and M.E. O’Connell. Media Intervention Impact: Evidence and
Promising Strategies. Bethesda, MD. NCBI, 2004. (Accessed on April 25,
2013, at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK37580/).
6.
Cialdini,
Robert B. Influence: The Psychology of
Persuasion. New York, NY. Collins Business, 2007.
7.
Cognitive Dissonance. The Free Dictionary, 2013. (Accessed on May
1,2013, at http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Cognitive+dissonance+theory).
8.
Corlett, D.,
with Mitchell. G., Van Hove, J., Bowring. L.,Wright, K. Captured Children: Melbourne, International Detention Coalition,
2012 (Accessed March 10, 2013, at http://idcoalition.org/wp
content/uploads/2012/03/Captured_Childhood-report.pdf).
9.
DeFleur, Melvin L., Sandra J, Ball-Rokeach. Theories of Mass Communication. White
Plains, NY, 1989.
10.
Denying Fairness & Human Rights to Some
Puts All of Our Freedoms at Risk.
Detroit, MI. Detroit Coalition against Police Brutality, 2012. (Accessed on May
1, 2013, at http://detroitcoalition.org/denying-fairness-human-rights-to-some-puts-all-of-our-freedoms-at-risk/).
11.
Dionne, E.J., William A. Galston. Examining What it Means to Be American Ten
Years After 9/11. Washington, DC. Brookings Institution, 2011. (Accessed on
May 1, 2013, at
http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-front/posts/2011/09/09-american-dionne-galston).
12.
Elizabeth
Frankel. Detention and Deportation with
Inadequate Due Process: The Devastating Consequences of Juvenile Involvement
with Law Enforcement for Immigrant Youth. 64 Duke L.J. Vol 3:63 (2011).
13.
End Child Detention Campaign. International Detention Coalition, 2012.
(Accessed on April 29, 2013, at http://endchilddetention.org/about-us/)
14.
Expose
and Close. Polk Country, Texas. Immigration Detention Network. (Accessed
on April 29, 2013, at http://detentionwatchnetwork.org/sites/detentionwatchnetwork.org/files/ExposeClose/Expose-Polk11-15.pdf).
15.
# IM Here For Immigrant Women.
Breakthrough. (Accessed on May 1, 2013, at http://breakthrough.tv/imhere/).
16.
Jailed Without Justice: Immigration Detention
in the USA. Amnesty International,
2007. (Accessed March 28, 2013, at http://www.amnestyusa.org/pdfs/JailedWithoutJustice.pdf).
17.
Jessica G.
Taverna, Did the Government Finally Get It Right? An Analysis of the Former
INS, the Office of Refugee Resettlement and Unaccompanied Minor Aliens' Due
Process Rights, 12 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 939 (2004).
18.
Protecting
Unaccompanied Migrant Children. Baltimore, MD. Lutheran
Immigration and Refugee Service (Accessed April 15, 2013, at LIRS.org).
19.
Psychological Reactance Theory. Psychclopedia, 2008. (Accessed on May
1,2013, at http://www.psych-it.com.au/Psychlopedia/article.asp?id=65).
20.
Summaries of Recent Reports on Immigration
Detention. National Immigration
Forum, 2008. (Accessed April 25,, 2013, at
http://www.immigrationforum.org/images/uploads/2010/detentionreportsummaries.pdf)
21.
Susan Akram. Are
They Human Children or Just Border Rats? Public Interest. L.J. Vol. 15.
(2006).
22.
Thaler, Richard H., Cass R. Sunstein. Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health,
Wealth, and Happiness. New Haven, CT. Yale University Press, 2008.
23.
The History of Immigration Detention in the
USL A Rapidly-Expanding Detention System. Washington, DC. Detention Network, 2008. (Accessed February 27, 2013
at, http://www.detentionwatchnetwork.org/node/2381).
24.
Unlocking Liberty: A Way Forward for US
Immigration Detention Policy.
Baltimore, MD. Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service. (Accessed April 5,
2013, at http://www.lirs.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/RPTUNLOCKINGLIBERTY.pdf).
No comments:
Post a Comment