Cargando…

Evaluation of the US detention standards to protect the health and dignity of migrants: a systematic review of national health standards

OBJECTIVE: The US government detains hundreds of thousands of migrants across a network of facilities each year. This research aims to evaluate the completeness of standards across US detention agencies to protect the health and dignity of migrants. DESIGN: Five documents from three US agencies were...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tejkl, Lauren, Tellez, David, McLaughlin, Dana, Savold, Jordan, Vasquez, Cyndy, Abrahim, Orit, Spiegel, Paul
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10124238/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37072359
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069949
_version_ 1785029796097425408
author Tejkl, Lauren
Tellez, David
McLaughlin, Dana
Savold, Jordan
Vasquez, Cyndy
Abrahim, Orit
Spiegel, Paul
author_facet Tejkl, Lauren
Tellez, David
McLaughlin, Dana
Savold, Jordan
Vasquez, Cyndy
Abrahim, Orit
Spiegel, Paul
author_sort Tejkl, Lauren
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The US government detains hundreds of thousands of migrants across a network of facilities each year. This research aims to evaluate the completeness of standards across US detention agencies to protect the health and dignity of migrants. DESIGN: Five documents from three US agencies were examined in a systematic review: Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE; 3), Customs and Border Protection (CBP; 1) and Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR; 1). Standards within five public health categories (health, hygiene, shelter, food and nutrition, protection) were extracted from each document and coded by subcategory and area. Areas were classified as critical, essential or supportive. Standards were measured for specificity, measurability, attainability, relevancy and timeliness (SMART), resulting in a sufficiency score (0%–100%). Average sufficiency scores were calculated for areas and agencies. RESULTS: 711 standards were extracted within 5 categories, 12 subcategories and 56 areas. 284 standards of the 711 standards were included in multiple (2–7) areas, resulting in 1173 standards counted as many times as each was included. On average, 85.4% of standards were specific, 87.1% measurable, 96.6% attainable and 74.9% time-bound. All standards were considered relevant. CBP standards were the least sufficient across all other SMART components, when compared with ICE and ORR. CONCLUSIONS: There are disparate detention standards based on agencies’ mandates and type of facility contracts. Migrants should be ensured of their public health rights and services in all spaces they occupy, and for any length of time regardless of who manages the facility. As long as detention remains a policy, the US should develop comprehensive, consistent and complementary standards for all detention facilities or pursue alternatives to detention.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10124238
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101242382023-04-25 Evaluation of the US detention standards to protect the health and dignity of migrants: a systematic review of national health standards Tejkl, Lauren Tellez, David McLaughlin, Dana Savold, Jordan Vasquez, Cyndy Abrahim, Orit Spiegel, Paul BMJ Open Health Policy OBJECTIVE: The US government detains hundreds of thousands of migrants across a network of facilities each year. This research aims to evaluate the completeness of standards across US detention agencies to protect the health and dignity of migrants. DESIGN: Five documents from three US agencies were examined in a systematic review: Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE; 3), Customs and Border Protection (CBP; 1) and Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR; 1). Standards within five public health categories (health, hygiene, shelter, food and nutrition, protection) were extracted from each document and coded by subcategory and area. Areas were classified as critical, essential or supportive. Standards were measured for specificity, measurability, attainability, relevancy and timeliness (SMART), resulting in a sufficiency score (0%–100%). Average sufficiency scores were calculated for areas and agencies. RESULTS: 711 standards were extracted within 5 categories, 12 subcategories and 56 areas. 284 standards of the 711 standards were included in multiple (2–7) areas, resulting in 1173 standards counted as many times as each was included. On average, 85.4% of standards were specific, 87.1% measurable, 96.6% attainable and 74.9% time-bound. All standards were considered relevant. CBP standards were the least sufficient across all other SMART components, when compared with ICE and ORR. CONCLUSIONS: There are disparate detention standards based on agencies’ mandates and type of facility contracts. Migrants should be ensured of their public health rights and services in all spaces they occupy, and for any length of time regardless of who manages the facility. As long as detention remains a policy, the US should develop comprehensive, consistent and complementary standards for all detention facilities or pursue alternatives to detention. BMJ Publishing Group 2023-04-18 /pmc/articles/PMC10124238/ /pubmed/37072359 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069949 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Health Policy
Tejkl, Lauren
Tellez, David
McLaughlin, Dana
Savold, Jordan
Vasquez, Cyndy
Abrahim, Orit
Spiegel, Paul
Evaluation of the US detention standards to protect the health and dignity of migrants: a systematic review of national health standards
title Evaluation of the US detention standards to protect the health and dignity of migrants: a systematic review of national health standards
title_full Evaluation of the US detention standards to protect the health and dignity of migrants: a systematic review of national health standards
title_fullStr Evaluation of the US detention standards to protect the health and dignity of migrants: a systematic review of national health standards
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of the US detention standards to protect the health and dignity of migrants: a systematic review of national health standards
title_short Evaluation of the US detention standards to protect the health and dignity of migrants: a systematic review of national health standards
title_sort evaluation of the us detention standards to protect the health and dignity of migrants: a systematic review of national health standards
topic Health Policy
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10124238/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37072359
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069949
work_keys_str_mv AT tejkllauren evaluationoftheusdetentionstandardstoprotectthehealthanddignityofmigrantsasystematicreviewofnationalhealthstandards
AT tellezdavid evaluationoftheusdetentionstandardstoprotectthehealthanddignityofmigrantsasystematicreviewofnationalhealthstandards
AT mclaughlindana evaluationoftheusdetentionstandardstoprotectthehealthanddignityofmigrantsasystematicreviewofnationalhealthstandards
AT savoldjordan evaluationoftheusdetentionstandardstoprotectthehealthanddignityofmigrantsasystematicreviewofnationalhealthstandards
AT vasquezcyndy evaluationoftheusdetentionstandardstoprotectthehealthanddignityofmigrantsasystematicreviewofnationalhealthstandards
AT abrahimorit evaluationoftheusdetentionstandardstoprotectthehealthanddignityofmigrantsasystematicreviewofnationalhealthstandards
AT spiegelpaul evaluationoftheusdetentionstandardstoprotectthehealthanddignityofmigrantsasystematicreviewofnationalhealthstandards