« Publications Galore | Main | Examining the Impact of Lau v. Nichols »

Report: Immigration Raids Affect Children


Schools and social service agencies in communities with a lot of immigrants should create plans for how to respond if federal immigration authorities conduct workplace raids, according to a study by the Urban Institute that was commissioned by the Washington-based National Council of La Raza, a Latino advocacy group.

Researchers studied three communities that experienced work site immigration raids in the last year to see what impact the raids had on children. I interviewed Steve Joel, the superintendent of the public school district in Grand Island, Neb., one of the communities featured in the report, for an immigration article published in September. He's also quoted in an Associated Press story about the report published yesterday.

The Urban Institute researchers found that many parents who were arrested were afraid to divulge they had children because they thought their children would be detained as well. Thus churches, social service agencies, schools, and other organizations were left to ensure that some children were cared for. The researchers note that five million children in the United States have at least one parent who is undocumented. Many of those children are U.S. citizens.


Here again is another example of agencies being depended on to take care of the illegals, in this case their children. Why does the American taxpayer always end up taking the brunt because of the poor decisions the illegals have made. It is up to them to realize that due to their law breaking, they may get caught. They need to consider this and make plans for the children they obviously do not want to take back with them. Thats sad in itself. The government is just doing its job, enforcing the laws. These parents are pathetic and they are the ones who cause undue stress on their children.

I understand the frustration of some about public institutions being depended on to clean up the mess of our immigration system.

The reason schools and local governments have to clean up the mess is because these kids are here. You may wish for a different reality, but that is the way it is. Our immigration laws and the laws of supply and demand are in conflict, and supply/demand is winning.

Had the government had a functioning immigration system so that coming and working was something that could reasonably be done with a visa -- also arguably the government doing its job -- we wouldn't be deporting the taxpayer or her child.

But those most frustrated with illegal immigration and immigrants are the ones preventing such solutions from even being debated. We have had two filabusters this year in Congress on reforms that would have either widened legal immigration channels (replacing illegal/chaotic with legal/regulated immigration) or legalizing the status for those already here who can show they are contributing...or both, combined with ethical, humane, but strict enforcement.

But such debates by our policy makers are not even allowed under the current regime of strongly anti-immigration constiuencies, mostly in the Republican Party.

We could solve a number of these problems if lawmakers are allowed to debate and vote. Or perhaps we should have new lawmakers...

Until then: chaos. And the underfunded institutions at the street level are left to clean up the mess.

The fact the illegal aliens would put their children at risk proves that they are also unfit parents. A parents number one priority should be the safety of their children.
Child indangerment is another charge that should be looked into when dealing with the illegal entry issue.

Arresting people who have children is just wrong. Anyone who has children should be immune from arrest - no matter what laws they have broken.

Living in another country when there are available jobs only a few hundred miles or a few thousand dollars away while letting your children remain malnourished, attending sub-standard schools, and facing a lifetime of poverty because there are no visas available to go to those jobs legally is not my definition of “fit” parenting either.

Of course, they could have left the children there to be raised by someone else, but that is gut wrenching for a parent, especially when the prospects of being able to visit or come and go seasonally are next to zero or cost-prohibitive. Not having the kid? Frankly, that isn’t an option for most women in the countries from which many immigrants come.

So coming to work at available jobs to support your family while risking arrest and deportation is a decision rational parents are making every day and will continue to make. That’s reality.

We want them to work here, they want to work here. We want them to have visas, they want to have visas. And yet those who dominate the immigration debate have ensured that those visas aren’t available and therefore, their employment is illegal and they live in constant jeopardy. This isn’t accidental, folks.

Funny how raids and 'tough' laws break families but over there in MExico there's thousands of families without parents, the 'migrants' never had remorse about leaving everyone else behind...

I'm surprised that so many seem so misinformed about the poltical system and immigration in general.

The Democrat majority felt there had been sufficient debate on the immigration bill this bill summer. The majority leader called for a cloture vote, which would have stopped debate. A cloture vote requires a 2/3 majority rather then a simple majority. Several Democrats joined with mainly Republicans against the Cloture. Several Republicans voted for Cloture with Democrats.

There was debate durning the immigration bill on CPAN. The Congressional Record is available online. However, those voting against cloture were not satisfied with the bill and felt that more amendments should be allowed. The cloture would have limited amendments as well as requiring a vote within a certain, limited time (I forget the exact length of time).

As I understand it the argument is that since the people of Mexico (I assume the comment "country when there are available jobs only a few hundred miles" is referring to Mexico) are so economically disadvantaged we should not enforce our laws on immigration.
We normally do not allow economic disadvantage as relief for other crimes. Reason tells me that it would be unfair to treat one group of the economically disadvanged differently then another group, especially the group that is not legally in this country. If I were to give allowance it would be to those here legally or citizens first.

The CIA world book says Mexico has a lower death rate then the US, life expectancy at birth is close to the US. Infant mortality rate is relativy high next to ours.
First, Mexico has a respectable GDP (Gross Domestic Product).
The richest man in the would is a Mexican citizen (Carlos Slim).
Mexico death rate 4.76 deaths/1,000
US death rate 8.26 deaths/1,000

Comments are now closed for this post.

Follow This Blog


Most Viewed on Education Week



Recent Comments