Promoting a Child Welfare Response for Unaccompanied Immigrant Children

Background/Purpose: 

Very little is known about how unaccompanied immigrant children (UIC) – young people who crossed the US border without a primary caregiver and without legal immigration status– are faring and integrating into US communities, or about the services they utilize and their outstanding needs. This is true for both the 1,837 (January 2014 – January 2018) UIC released from Office of Refugee Resettlement detention centers to live with sponsors and the unknown number of non-apprehended UIC who live in Illinois – the state with the 6th largest concentration of undocumented residents.

This paper advances knowledge about the perceived service needs of these young people and community-based strategies for promoting the well-being and integration of these and other vulnerable child migrants in context of guiding best interest and child welfare principles; the current political climate; and decreasing services and protections afforded to non-naturalized immigrants of various legal status. 

Methods: 

This paper presents findings from a study examining the service needs of UIC and their families living in Illinois, as well as the community assets and services available to address these needs.  This study uses a mixed methods approach and relies on primary data from in-depth interviews (n=20) with education, human, health, and legal service providers and advocates that accompany this population and four focus groups (n=40) with professionals who work with or on behalf of immigrant children and/or children involved with state child welfare systems.  

A semi-structured interview guide was developed for the interviews, which included questions the presenting problems/needs of the population served, program and services offered, and perceptions regarding unmet needs of the client population.

Each focus groups concentrated on one critical issues applicable to both US children involved with state welfare systems and UIC: best interest, well-being, permanency, and aging-out of system care.  A structured group facilitation guide was developed for each topic.  The guides included questions about system outcomes and goals, strategies for community-based supports, and opportunities for cross-sector collaboration. 

Findings: 

Data suggests metropolitan Chicago service providers lack the necessary resources to address the needs of UIC and their families. Notably, public schools and mental health providers lack both funding and qualified staff to provide culturally competent and language-specific services to address educational and mental health needs.  Moreover, providers possess limited resources to prepare and support UIC who age-out and no longer qualify for government-funded support.  Participants note that no community strategy exists on how to best support UIC and their families who often lack or have mixed legal immigration status and may not trust government and community providers. 

Conclusion/Implications:

Findings highlight that communities are only beginning to understand the needs of these young people and their families who may feel threatened in the current political environment.  The government and community providers must work collaboratively to develop a support system guided by child welfare principles that promote the best interest of children.  The continued failure to do so places UIC at increased risk of harm and threatens their potential for full and healthy development.