Participate!

Moral Uncertainty in Community Health (MUCH) Study 

Our goal is to learn from the clinical leadership of FQHCs and FQHC look-alikes about situations, patient cases, social issues, or policies that “keep you up at night.” Interviewees will be asked to share instances when they’ve asked themselves or others “What’s the right thing to do here?” or experienced barriers to “doing the right thing.” 

Interviews will inform the development of future collaborative projects that address these practice challenges. 

This interview study is directed by Johanna Crane, PhD, a medical anthropologist at Albany (NY) Medical College, in collaboration with The Hastings Center. Our research was approved by the Albany Medical College IRB. The project is funded by The Greenwall Foundation. The interviews are one component of a larger mixed-methods study of moral uncertainty in community health. 

Our study will involve 25-30 interviews with clinical providers (NPs, APRNs, DOs, MDs) who occupy clinical leadership positions within their workplaces. Participants will be asked to participate in one 60-minute qualitative interview (via Zoom or phone) and will be compensated with a $35 gift card. All interviews are confidential.  

Will you consider participating?   If you are interested, would like more information, or can suggest colleagues who may also be interested, please click here or email Sana Baban, Hastings Center Project Manager at babans@thehastingscenter.org. 

Undocumented Immigrants in the United States: Demographics and Socioeconomic Status

How many undocumented immigrants live in the United States?

As of March 2010, an estimated 11.2 million undocumented immigrants were living in the United States, a figure equivalent to 3.7% of the nation’s population.{{1}} This estimate includes persons who entered the U.S. without valid documents and persons who are living outside the terms of their entry visas. This estimate does not include U.S. citizens or legal residents who are members of “mixed-status” families that include undocumented immigrants.

The size of the undocumented immigrant population has become relatively stable in recent years. From 2000 to 2007 the estimated number of undocumented immigrants in the US had steadily increased from 8.4 million to 12.0 million, then declined slightly, reaching its current level by 2009. The decline in new immigration has been attributed to a variety of factors, including tighter border control, increased deportations, and decreased opportunities for employment due to the recession.{{2}}^,{{3}}

The undocumented immigrant population in the US is disproportionately male. Men between the ages of 18 and 39 make up 35% of the undocumented immigrant population in the US, compared with 14% of the US-born population and 18% of the legal immigrant population. Compared with the US-born population, the undocumented immigrant population includes few older people and children, excluding citizens or legal residents who are members of mixed-status families.

Where do undocumented immigrants live?

Undocumented immigrants live in every state and are concentrated in a relatively small number of states, reflecting the availability of work and social networks. About half of this population lives in one of four states: California, Texas, Florida or New York. Nearly a quarter (23%) lives in California alone. Some states, such as Georgia and North Carolina, where relatively few undocumented immigrants resided two decades ago, have seen significant increases in the number of undocumented immigrant residents in recent years.{{4}}

Where are undocumented immigrants from?

Most (80%) of the undocumented immigrants in the U.S. emigrated from Latin American countries.{{5}} In 2007, the leading countries of birth for undocumented immigrants were Mexico (6,980,000), El Salvador (540,000), Guatemala (500,000), the Philippines (290,000) and China (290,000).{{6}}

Why do undocumented immigrants come to the U.S.?

Most undocumented immigrants came to the U.S. to find work.{{7}} Among undocumented immigrants who are men aged 18-64, 98% were part of the paid work force in 2008. Undocumented immigrants make up 25% of farm workers, 19% of building, grounds-keeping, and maintenance workers, 17% of construction workers, and 12% of food preparation and service workers and make up 5.2% of the paid work force in the U.S.{{8}} A smaller percentage (58%) of female undocumented immigrants in the same age range participate in the paid work force. This discrepancy may reflect women’s unpaid role in childcare, as many undocumented immigrants have children at home.{{9}}

What is the household income of undocumented immigrants in the U.S.?

Undocumented immigrants have lower median household incomes than legal immigrants and U.S.-born citizens, despite having more workers per household on average (1.75) than U.S.-born households (1.23).{{10}} In 2007, the median annual household income of undocumented immigrants was $36,000, compared with $50,000 for people born in the U.S. The median household income of undocumented immigrants remains largely unchanged even after they have been in the U.S. for more than a decade.{{11}}

What is the typical household structure for undocumented immigrants in the U.S.?

The majority of undocumented immigrants live with their families. Nearly half of undocumented immigrant households (47%) consist of a couple with children, while 15% consist of couples without children. Single-person households make up 13% of undocumented immigrant households.{{12}}

The establishment of family households by undocumented immigrants is reflected in the fact that by 2008, 73% of children of undocumented immigrants were U.S. citizens by birth. From 2004 to 2008, the number of U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants increased from 2.7 million to 4 million. Some mixed-status families include both U.S.-born children and undocumented immigrant children. From 2004 to 2008, the number of children who are undocumented immigrants themselves remained at roughly 1.5 million and, according to some estimates, may have even declined slightly since 2005, reflecting the general trend toward declining new immigration and the establishment of households in which most children are born in the U.S.{{13}}

What is the education level of undocumented immigrants?

Undocumented immigrants have lower levels of education than U.S. born residents in the same age range. Among all undocumented immigrants ages 25-64, 47% have not completed high school (compared with 8% of U.S. born adults in the same age range) and of these, more than half (29% of total) have less than a ninth grade education.

Among adults age 25-64, 29% of undocumented immigrants have less than a 9^th grade education compared with only 2% among U.S. born adults in this age cohort. A total of 47% of undocumented immigrants age 25-64 have less than a high school education, compared with only 8% among US-born population adults in this age cohort (See Figure 1).

Figure 1: Education Levels Among Undocumented Immigrants and U.S. Born Citizens

Education	U.S. Born	Undocumented Immigrants
Less than 9th Grade	2%	29%
Less than High School	6%	18%
High School Degree	31%	18%
Some College	30%	10%
Bachelor’s Degree or Higher	32%	15%

{{Figure 1 source}}

[[1]]1. Passel, Jeffrey S. Unauthorized Immigrant Population: National and State Trends, 2010. Pew Hispanic Center, February 2011. Estimates are based on the U.S. Census Bureau’s Current Population Surveys, March 2010 Supplement. The Pew Hispanic Center’s report is available at: Read Now[[1]]

[[2]]2. Camarota, Steven A. and Karen Jensenius. A Shifting Tide: Recent Trends in the Illegal Immigrant Population. Center for Immigration Studies, July 2009. Available at: Read Now[[2]]

[[3]]3. Another contributing factor may be the decline in the birth rate in Mexico (the birthplace of most undocumented immigrants to the U.S.) from an average of 7 children per family in the 1960s to 2.2 children per family, or just over replacement rate, today. See Raúl Hinojosa-Ojeda. Raising the Floor for American Workers: The Economic Benefits of Comprehensive Immigration Reform. Center for American Progress and the Immigration Policy Center, American Immigration Council, January 2010. Available at: Read Now[[3]]

[[4]]4. Passel, Unauthorized Immigrant Population: National and State Trends, 2010.[[4]]

[[5]]5. Passel, Jeffrey S. and D’Vera Cohn. Trends in Unauthorized Immigration: Undocumented Inflow Now Trails Legal Inflow. Pew Hispanic Center. 2008. Available at: Read Now.[[5]]

[[6]]6. Hoefer, Michael, Nancy Rytina, and Bryan C. Baker. Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States. Office of Immigration Statistics, September 2008. Available at: Read Now[[6]]

[[7]]7. Ledford, Meredith King. Immigrants and the U.S. Health Care System: Five Myths that Misinform the American Public. Center for American Progress, June 2007. Available at: Read Now[[7]]

[[8]]8. Passel, Unauthorized Immigrant Population: National and State Trends, 2010.[[8]]

[[9]]9. Passel, Jeffrey S. and D’Vera Cohn. A Portrait of Unauthorized Immigrants in the United States. Pew Hispanic Center, April 2009. Available at: Read Now[[9]]

[[10]]10. Passel, Jeffrey S. and D’Vera Cohn. A Portrait of Unauthorized Immigrants in the United States. Pew Hispanic Center, April 2009. Available at: Read Now[[10]]

[[11]]11. Passel, Jeffrey S. and D’Vera Cohn. A Portrait of Unauthorized Immigrants in the United States. Pew Hispanic Center, April 2009. Available at: Read Now[[11]]

[[12]]12. Passel, Jeffrey S. and D’Vera Cohn. A Portrait of Unauthorized Immigrants in the United States. Pew Hispanic Center, April 2009. Available at: Read Now[[12]]

[[13]]13. Passel, Jeffrey S. and D’Vera Cohn. A Portrait of Unauthorized Immigrants in the United States. Pew Hispanic Center, April 2009. Available at: Read Now[[13]]

[[Figure 1 source]]Source: Pew Hispanic Center tabulations based on 2008 Current Population Survey.[[Figure 1 source]]

Health Care Access for Undocumented Immigrants under the Trump Administration

Updated February 27, 2017

Health care access is local; creating, financing, expanding, or restricting health care access for a low-income population involves local, state, and federal policies. During the Obama administration, health insurance for the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States remained severely restricted by this population’s broad exclusion from federally financed public benefits such as Medicare, Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and Affordable Care Act (ACA) insurance subsidies. This same period saw moves by some states and major cities to expand health care access for the nation’s remaining uninsured, including many undocumented immigrants. These state and local initiatives have included the creation of programs offering low-cost primary care through public and nonprofit facilities, plus care coordination, in San Francisco (Healthy San Francisco), Los Angeles (My Health LA), and New York City (ActionHealthNYC), and legislative efforts in California and New York to expand public insurance coverage, using state funds, for some undocumented immigrants.

The Obama Administration’s 2012 executive action establishing Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) to allow young undocumented immigrants to work legally sparked the creation of further state, local, and institutional efforts to support this group. Some of these reforms mirrored ACA initiatives targeting millennials and aimed for equity for undocumented immigrants excluded from the ACA. California enacted legislation to allow income-eligible DACA recipients to enroll in Medi-Cal using state funds; DACA recipients in New York State became eligible, under 2001 case law relevant to certain undocumented immigrants, to enroll in state-funded Medicaid. California also expanded Medi-Cal to include undocumented children. New York City’s popular community ID program, IDNYC , launched in 2014 to provide local residents with a recognized form of identification for access to city facilities and services, is being used to connect undocumented immigrants with the city’s public health and hospital system, with benefits such as pharmacy discounts, and as a membership card for the ActionHealthNYC direct-access pilot program now underway.

What will be the fate of these state and local efforts under the new administration? Three sets of issues in health care financing for low-income people in the U.S. are important to watch during a period of uncertainty and apprehension for immigrants, and in the context of the continuing challenge of providing medically appropriate health care to low-income populations lacking access to public insurance. These issues overlap with health care access for specific undocumented populations, such as immigrants in detention centers and victims of trafficking and with access to types of health care, such as prenatal care, that are likely to be used by the undocumented population due to its demographics. They also overlap with efforts to protect the basic civil rights of undocumented immigrants, other immigrants, and members of minority groups as persons entitled to equal protection under the law.

Cities as sanctuary and safety-net: Public policy at federal, state, and local levels, even if not directly related to health,can affect local health care access for immigrants if it reinforces civil rights, or, by contrast, reinforces undocumented immigrants’ avoidance of situations in which they fear being asked for identifying information or confronted by authorities. One question following the February 21, 2017 release of new Department of Homeland Security rules expanding criteria for deportation is whether this policy will affect health care access.  Two public health studies from Arizona suggest that crackdowns change health-seeking behavior.

During and following the 2010 enactment of Arizona SB 1070, a highly controversial law reflecting state lawmakers’ goal of “attrition through enforcement,” public health researchers conducting an unrelated study  of childhood obesity among residents of a Latino neighborhood in Flagstaff noticed that the new law was creating “a generalized climate of fear . . . In a neighborhood with no major grocery store and several fast food and gas station markets, fear of travel in public could severely skew food purchasing and consumption behaviors . . . Residents also reported reluctance to allow their children to engage in physical exercise outside the home.” Community health professionals interviewed “noted dramatic changes in clinic intake and service use, suggesting rapid behavioral change” among neighborhood residents. A later study that focused on the impact of SB 1070 on health-seeking behavior among families of Mexican origin found that parents were less likely to take babies to the doctor, and adolescents were less likely to seek routine health care. These effects were not limited to immigrants; U.S.-born citizens were also reluctant to use public assistance.  The study’s authors concluded that “this law is likely associated with heightened perceptions of fear and lack of community safety, even among . . . US citizens.”

In 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down certain provisions of Arizona’s law, and decisions by lower courts weakened similar laws in other states.

The passage in October 2015 of North Carolina HB 318 (“Protect North Carolina Workers Act”) suggested the continuing appeal of state-level immigration policymaking. In addition to prioritizing cooperation with federal immigration authorities, HB 318 prohibited local “sanctuary city” policies and the issuance of “community IDs” to help city residents without other identification to gain access to public facilities, including hospitals and clinics. In the immediate aftermath of the 2016 presidential election, the mayors of many major cities affirmed “sanctuary city” policies limiting cooperation with federal authorities in efforts to enforce federal immigration law. The consequences of these actions remain to be seen, and could include cutoffs of federal aid. New York City’s mayor has further affirmed that he will delete the IDNYC database if ordered to disclose these records to federal authorities. Sanctuary cities (also states and institutions such as campuses and hospitals) may serve as important sources of civic identity, values, and action; the need for cities to make this declaration underscores the gravity of the national problem.

DACA, immigration policy, and the states: Immigrants and their advocates are bracing for the possibility that DACA, as a process of the Department of Homeland Security, could be eliminated. This action would imperil the immigration status of the 740,000 individuals who have qualified for this program (and who, along with their parents, are now on record as undocumented), and also call into question whether state-level Medicaid access, financial aid, eligibility for licensures, and other programs tied to DACA status will survive. Advocates are reporting an increased demand for health services among the DACA population that reflects the high stress over their uncertain status and future prospects.

Obamacare and Medicaid: Even though undocumented immigrants were formally excluded from the insurance provisions of the ACA – namely, Medicaid expansion in 31 states, and federally subsidized insurance policies – this population benefits indirectly from Medicaid block grants to states that finance safety-net health care programs, such as primary care clinics. This population may also have benefited indirectly from expanded Medicaid criteria, which reduce hospitals’ unreimbursed expenses and in theory free up funds for services to the remaining uninsured. Medicaid spending is a likely early target of the Republican-led Congress, despite the crucial role of Congress in the financing of hospitals, nursing homes, and clinics. If the current federal Medicaid program, which matches eligible state expenditures, is replaced by block grants to states, waivers of state-level requirements for participation, or a mix of both, the  result will certainly be reduced safety-net services coupled with more demand for existing services. As people who are currently covered by Medicaid become ineligible, or underinsured relative to their health care needs, they will turn to the same safety-net services – namely, emergency departments and community health centers – that the undocumented and other uninsured populations already rely on.

See Also: Quick Guide to State and County-Level Data and Resources: Undocumented Patients in the Local Safety-Net

Undocumented Immigrants in the United States: U.S. Health Policy and Access to Care

Access to health care for undocumented immigrants in the U.S. is shaped by several policies and programs at the federal state and local level. This issue brief provides an overview of key federal and state policies.

Are undocumented immigrants eligible for public insurance programs?

With the exception of emergency medical care, undocumented immigrants are not eligible for federally funded public health insurance programs, including Medicare, Medicaid and the Child Health Insurance Program (CHIP).{{1}}Medicare is a social insurance program that provides health insurance to people age 65 and over, as well as people with permanent disabilities and end-stage renal disease. Medicaid is a means-tested social welfare program that provides health insurance to certain categories of poor people. CHIP, created in 1997, is a block grant program to expand coverage to children in families with incomes that exceed Medicaid eligibility.{{2}} There is no organized, national program to provide health care for undocumented children. U.S.-born children in mixed-status families may be eligible for Medicaid or CHIP if they qualify on the basis of income and age.

Although federal funds may not be used to provide non-emergency health care to undocumented immigrants, some states and local governments use their own funds to offer coverage to undocumented children.{{3}} For example, the Healthy Kids program in San Francisco covers uninsured children under the age of 19, including undocumented children.{{4}} Similarly, the All Kids program Illinois covers all children under the age of 19 who meet program income requirements, regardless of immigration status.{{5}}

PRUCOL (Permanent Residence Under Color of Law) is a public benefits eligibility category that refers to individuals who are in the U.S. with the knowledge of immigration services and are not likely to be deported.Before the adoption of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996,{{6}} people with PRUCOL status were eligible for Medicaid, but PRWORA eliminated their eligibility with the exception of emergency services. In New York, the State Court of Appeals (Aliessa et al. v. Novello) concluded that denying access to Medicaid violated the equal protection clauses of the New York and U.S. constitutions. As a result, New York provides Medicaid to this population using state funds only.

In about half of the U.S. states, immigrant children under the age of 21 and pregnant woman who have been granted deferred action on their immigration status are allowed to apply for Medicaid and the CHIP or enroll in their state’s high risk insurance pool. An exception to this, however, are the so-called “dreamers” – the estimated 1.7 million undocumented teenagers and young adults granted deferred action by the Obama Administration on June 15, 2012.{{7}} President Obama announced that undocumented immigrants who were brought to the U.S. before they turned 16 and are younger than 30, have been in the country for at least five continuous years, have no criminal history, graduated from a U.S. high school or earned their GED, or honorably discharged from the military will be immune from deportation and can apply for a work permit that will be good for two years with no limits on renewal.On August 28, 2012, the Obama Administration announced that the young people affected by this directive would not meet the definition of being “lawfully present”and would therefore be ineligible for Medicaid, the CHIP and the insurance benefits of the ACA.{{8}}

How is emergency medical care available to undocumented immigrants?

In 1986 the Congress enacted the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) as part of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA) (Pub. L. 99-272). The law was designed to provide patients with access to emergency medical care and to prevent hospitals from “dumping” unstable patients that could not afford to pay for their care.”{{9}} Under the law, “any patient arriving at an Emergency Department (ED) in a hospital that participates in the Medicare program must be given an initial screening, and if found to be in need of emergency treatment (or in active labor), must be treated until stable.”{{10}} The law defines an emergency medical condition as a “medical condition manifesting itself by acute symptoms of sufficient severity such that the absence of immediate medical attention could reasonably be expected to result in – (i) [p]lacing the health of the individual . . . in serious jeopardy; (ii) [s]erious impairment to bodily functions; or (iii) [s]erious dysfunction of any bodily organ part[.]” It requires hospitals covered by the law to provide patients with an emergency medical condition with “an appropriate medical screening examination within the capability of the hospital’s emergency department, including ancillary services routinely available to the emergency department, to determine whether or not an emergency medical condition (EMC) exists.” (42 C.F.R 489.24(a)(1)(i)). the medical screening examination “must be conducted by an individual(s) who is determined qualified by hospital bylaws or rules and regulations” (42 C.F.R. § 489.24(a)(1)(i)).

Although the law refers specifically to hospitals with an ED, the guidelines from the federal government have applied EMTALA requirements to all facilities that participate in the Medicare program and offer emergency services.{{11}} Met, while EMTALA requires covered hospitals to stabilize patients with emergency medical conditions, it does not require these facilities to provide additional treatment. There is a legal dispute over whether the stabilization requirement in EMTALA continues to apply if a patient has been admitted to the hospital.{{12}} Decisions by the Fourth, Ninth and Eleventh Circuit Courts held that hospitals have no stabilization duties once patients are admitted,{{13}} but the Sixth Circuit held the opposite.{{14}}

In addition to EMTALA, it is also possible for undocumented immigrants to qualify for Medicaid coverage for emergency care. The definition of emergency care and the scope of services available through the Medicaid programs vary by state. For example, in New York State Medicaid for Emergency Care may be used to provide chemotherapy and radiation therapy to undocumented patients with cancer. In New York State, California, and North Carolina, it may be used to provide outpatient dialysis to undocumented patients.{{15}}

Do undocumented immigrants have access to care through the health care safety net?

To care for the lower income residents, including undocumented immigrants, the U.S. relies on a patchwork “system” of safety-net providers, including public and not-for-profit hospitals, federally qualified community health centers (FQHCs), and migrant health centers. Since the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981, a hospital recognized as “disproportionate share hospital” (DSH) with respect to the percentages of low-income and uninsured patients it treats receives additional payments from Medicaid to support uncompensated care. Congress also required Medicare to allocate DSH funds to hospitals. The DSH programs fund hospital care for uninsured patients. Together, the Medicare and Medicaid DSH programs provide more than $20 billion to qualified hospitals annually, but these programs are scheduled to be reduced significantly under health care reform.{{16}}

Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) and Migrant Health Centers are not-for-profit organizations{{17}} funded by the federal Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA). Both offer comprehensive primary care to vulnerable populations that include Medicaid patients, uninsured patients, and patients in underserved urban, suburban, and rural areas. They provide care regardless of ability to pay, insurance status or immigration status. Both are required to have a board of directors with a majority (at least 51%) of the members from the community served by the center. In addition, both types of health centers are required to use a sliding fee scale. The main difference between them is that migrant health centers are only allowed to serve migrant and seasonal farm workers and their families.{{*}}

Federal support for FQHCs increased significantly under the George W. Bush administration and they have received continued support from the Obama administration.{{18}} Between 1996 and 2010, direct federal funding for FQHCs increased from $750 million to $2.2 billion. As of 2010, there were 1,214 FQHCs operating more than 8,000 service sites.{{19}} In addition, there were 159 federally funded migrant health center sites, operating more than 700 service sites.{{20}}

How will the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act influence access to health care for undocumented immigrants?

The PPACA does not provide undocumented immigrants with eligibility for public insurance programs. Because undocumented immigrants are not regarded as “qualified individuals” under the law, it also does not allow undocumented immigrants to purchase health insurance through the new state health exchanges even if they are able to do so with their own money.{{21}} Section 1312 of the Act states, “If an individual is not, or is not reasonably expected to be for the entire period for which enrollment is sought, a citizen or national of the United States or an alien lawfully present in the United States, the individual shall not be treated as a qualified individual and may not be covered under a qualified health plan in the individual market that is offered through an Exchange.”{{22}}

Despite these restrictions, the law does include additional funding for the health care safety-net, including an $11 billion increase for FQHCs and the law’s expansion of the Medicaid program may provide additional revenue to many FQHCs and other safety-net providers. Yet, the PPACA also calls for an $18 billion dollar reduction in Medicaid DSH payments and a $22 billion reduction in Medicare DSH payments through 2020. The DSH cuts are based on the assumption that hospitals will not need to provide as much charity care once the health reform is implemented. Because undocumented immigrants will not receive public or private insurance coverage under health reform, they are likely to represent a larger percentage of the nation’s uninsured population. This raises important question about future political support for the health care safety-net.{{23}}

[[*]]* According to the Health Resources and Services Administration, “Principal employment for both migrant and seasonal workers must be in agriculture (ht;://bphc.hrsa.gov/about/specialpopulations/; accessed on March 15, 2012)[[*]]

[[1]]1. Rayden Llano. “Immigrants and Barriers to Healthcare: Comparing Policies in the United States and the United Kingdom.” Stamford Journal of Public Health 2011. Available at: http://www.stanford.edu/group/sjph/cgi-bin/sjphsite/2011/06/immigrants-and-barriers-to-healthcare-comparing-policies-in-the-united-states-and-the-united-kingdom/.[[1]]

[[2]]2. Lawrence D. Brown and Michael Sparer. “Poor program’s progress: The unanticipated politics of Medicaid policy.” Health Affairs 2003; 22(1): 31.[[2]]

[[3]]3. S. Fremstad and L. Cox, “Covering New Americans: A Review of Federal and State Policies Related to Immigrants’ Eligibility and Access to Publicly Funded Health Insurance” Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured, November, 2004.[[3]]

[[4]]4. Available at: Read Now; accessed on February 18, 2012.[[4]]

[[5]]5. Available at: Read Now; accessed on February 18, 2012.[[5]]

[[6]]6. 62 Fed. Reg. 61344, November 17, 1997.[[6]]

[[7]]7. National Immigration Law Center. “FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS: Exclusion of People Granted “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals” from Affordable Health Care,” Washington DC: National Immigration Law Center, September 20, 2012 Available at: http://www.nilc.org/FAQdeferredactionyouth.html.[[7]]

[[8]]8. Robert Pear, “Limits Placed on Immigrants in Health Law,” New York Times, September 18, 2012; A1.[[8]]

[[9]]9. Joseph Zibulewsky. “The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA): what it is and what it means for physicians.” Proc Bayl Univ Med Cent 2001 October; 14(4): 339–346.[[9]]

[[10]]10. 42 U.S.C. § 1395dd[[10]]

[[11]]11. Zibulewsky: 342.[[11]]

[[12]]12. Edward C. Liu. EMTALA: Access to Emergency Medical Care. CRS Report for Congress, July 2010.[[12]]

[[13]]13. Bryan v. Rectors & Visitors of the Univ. of Virginia, 95 F.3d 349, 352 (4th Cir. 1996), Bryant v. Adventist Health Sys., 289 F.3d 1162, 1168-1169 (9th Cir. 2002), Harry v. Marchant, 291 F.3d 767 (11th Cir. 2002).[[13]]

[[14]]14. Thornton v. Southwest Detroit Hosp., 895 F.2d 1131, 1135 (6th Cir. 1990).[[14]]

[[15]]15. Nina Bernstein, “For Illegal Resident, Line is Drawn at Transplant,” New York Times December 21, 2011: A1.[[15]]

[[16]]16. Michael K. Gusmano and Frank Thompson. 2012. “The Safety Net At The Crossroads? Whither Medicaid DSH,” Chapter 7 in The Health Care Safety-Net and Universal Coverage. Edited by Mark Hall and Sara Rosenbaum. Rutgers University Press, forthcoming.[[16]]

[[17]]17. Some of the migrant health centers are operated by state and local health departments.[[17]]

[[18]]18. Aaron Katz, Laurie E. Felland, Ian Hill, Lucy B. Stark. “A Long and Winding Road: Federally Qualified Health Centers, Community Variation and Prospects Under Reform.” HSC Research Brief No. 21, November 2011.[[18]]

[[19]]19. Read Now; accessed on February 19, 2012.[[19]]

[[20]]20. Read Now; accessed on February 19, 2012.[[20]]

[[21]]21. Timothy Stoltzfus Jost. Health Insurance Exchanges and the Affordable Care Act: Eight Difficult Issues. The Commonwealth Fund, September 2010.[[21]]

[[22]]22. § 1312 (f) (3).[[22]]

[[23]]23. Mark A. Hall. “Rethinking Safety-Net Access for the Uninsured.” NEJM 364;1: 7-9.[[23]]

Undocumented Immigrants in the United States: Use of Health Care

Public debates and media coverage about health care for undocumented immigrants often focus on individual cases in which undocumented patients are seriously ill and require expensive treatment. While such cases do occur, studies have repeatedly shown that undocumented immigrants consume less health care than U.S. citizens or legal immigrants.{{1}}

There is also considerable evidence that many undocumented immigrants live with unmet health care needs. Undocumented immigrants are much less likely than U.S. citizens or legal immigrants to have private health insurance. They are ineligible for Medicare and their access to Medicaid is usually restricted to emergency provisions, which means that they lack access to the two major public insurance programs in the U.S. Their access to health care may also be hampered by factors ranging from language, to lack of transportation, to fear of deportation, to the inability to leave work to attend to health care needs.{{2}} In this issue brief, we summarize evidence regarding the use of health care services by undocumented immigrants and the existing barriers to their use of health care.

How does the use of health care services among undocumented immigrants compare with U.S. citizens and legal residents?

As noted, comparisons of health care spending consistently find that total per capita spending on undocumented immigrants is lower than spending on legal immigrants and citizens. A 2010 study based on data from last decade concluded that spending on health care for all immigrants is lower than for U.S. born citizens, and that “immigrants are not contributing disproportionately to high health care costs in public programs such as Medicaid.”{{3}} This study found that national health expenditures for immigrant adults were 55% lower than for U.S. born adults. A 2006 study that looked specifically at undocumented immigrants found that health expenditures were 39% lower for undocumented men and 54% lower for undocumented women when compared to U.S. born men and women.{{4}} In Los Angeles County, where the undocumented population represents 12% of the total population, undocumented immigrants consume only 6% of medical expenditures.{{5}}

Use of health care services is lower among undocumented adults and their children – regardless of the immigration status of those children – than it is among adult U.S. citizens and their children. Undocumented adults and their children are less likely than U.S. citizens to use emergency department care, visit a physician or nurse on an outpatient basis, or use mental health or dental services.{{6}} A 2007 survey of undocumented Latinos reported that they are less likely than U.S. born citizens to have a usual source of care (58% vs. 79%) or to have their blood pressure (67% vs. 87%) and cholesterol (56% vs. 83%) checked annually.{{7}} When undocumented immigrants do use health care services, they are more likely than U.S. citizens to pay out of pocket for this care.{{8}}

Which health care services are used most frequently by undocumented immigrants?

Most of the health care services used by undocumented immigrants are for childbirth. A study of emergency Medicaid expenditures for undocumented and recent immigrants in North Carolina between 2001 and 2004 found that between 82.2% and 86.4% of health care spending was related to childbirth. These findings reflect the fact that almost half (47%) of undocumented immigrants live in households comprised of couples with children.{{9}} Of the remaining health care expenditures in North Carolina, about one third was spent on the treatment of injuries and poisoning (which may be a consequence of, for example, exposure to pesticides or other toxins in the workplace). These uses of health care services reflect not only the relatively young age of most undocumented immigrants but also the type of work that they do (See the Hastings Center Issue Brief: Undocumented Immigrants in the United States: Demographics and Socioeconomic Status for additional detail).

Why do undocumented immigrants use fewer health care services than citizens or legal residents?

While age may help to explain why undocumented immigrants, on average, use less health care than U.S. citizens and legal immigrants, there is significant evidence that undocumented immigrants face barriers to care.{{10}} As noted, undocumented immigrants are less likely to have a usual source of care, and they are more likely to report having a negative experience when then do access health care services.{{11}} While some undocumented immigrants are able to obtain private insurance (whether through an employer or on the open market), as noted, most are uninsured (Figure 2).{{12}}^,{{13}}^,{{14}} The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) of 2010 prohibits undocumented immigrants from purchasing private health insurance with their own money through the new insurance exchanges established by the health care reform law.{{15}} This means that a significant percentage of the U.S. population, consisting of 11.2 million individuals, will be left without health care coverage even as a primary aim of the law is to reduce this very problem.

Figure 2: Percent without health insurance by residency status

{{Figure 2 source}}

Most children (73%) born to undocumented immigrants in the U.S. were born in this country and so are U.S. citizens, while the remainder (27%) are undocumented.{{16}} Overall, 45% of children born to undocumented immigrant parents do not have health insurance. This figure includes U.S. born children, of whom 25% lack health insurance even though they are likely to qualify for Medicaid or the State Child Health Insurance Program (SCHIP).{{17}} By contrast, only 8% of U.S.-born children with U.S.-born parents lack health insurance. In other words, children born in the U.S. whose parents are undocumented are three times more likely to be uninsured than are other children born in the U.S. Undocumented immigrants may have difficulty enrolling their U.S. born children in Medicaid or SCHIP due to language or literacy barriers, or may avoid insurance enrollment and other activities that, they fear, will bring them to the attention of authorities.{{18}}

Low levels of insurance often discourage people from seeking appropriate care in a timely fashion, resulting in higher rates of hospital admission for avoidable conditions.{{19}} A 2007 study of immigrant families concluded that immigrant children make fewer visits to the Emergency Department compared to U.S. born children, but are sicker when they are brought to the ED.{{20}}

In addition to lack of insurance coverage, individual and local-level barriers may limit access to health care services among undocumented immigrants as well as other immigrants.{{21}}^,{{22}} The first language of most undocumented residents is a language other than English. A California study found that children whose parents do not speak English fluently experience poorer access to health care.{{23}} As noted, undocumented immigrants may avoid seeking care because they fear deportation, a and this fear may create an additional barrier to health care beyond those that may be experienced both by undocumented immigrants and by other low income, uninsured people in the U.S.{{24}}

[[1]]1. Sabin, Jim. “Tragic Choices at Grady Hospital.” Healthcare Organizational Ethics. December 29, 2009. Available at: Read Now[[1]]

[[2]]2. Medicaid eligibility varies by state. We review Medicaid, Medicare and other relevant health policies that influence access to health care for undocumented immigrants in another issue brief.[[2]]

[[3]]3. Stimpson, Jim P., Fernando A. Wilson, and Karl Eschbach. “Trends in Health Care Spending for Immigrants in the United States.” Health Affairs 2010; 29(3): 544-50.[[3]]

[[4]]4. DuBard, C. Annette and Mark W. Massing. “Trends in Emergency Medicaid Expenditures for Recent and Undocumented Immigrants.” JAMA 2007; 297(10): 1085-92.[[4]]

[[5]]5. Goldman, Dana P., James P. Smith, and Neeraj Sood. “Immigrants and the Cost of Medical Care.” Health Affairs2006; 25(6): 1700–11.[[5]]

[[6]]6. Derose, Kathryn Pitkin, Benjamin W. Bahney, Nicole Lurie, and José J. Escarce. “Review: Immigrants and Health Care Access, Quality, and Cost.” Medical Care Research and Review 2009; 66(4): 355-408.[[6]]

[[7]]7. Rodríguez, Michael A., Arturo Vargas Bustamante, and Alfonso Ang. “Perceived Quality of Care, Receipt of Preventive Care, and Usual Source of Health Care Among Undocumented and Other Latinos.” Journal of General Internal Medicine 2009; 24(Suppl 3): 508–13.[[7]]

[[8]]8. Derose, Kathryn Pitkin, Benjamin W. Bahney, Nicole Lurie, and José J. Escarce. “Review: Immigrants and Health Care Access, Quality, and Cost.” Medical Care Research and Review 2009; 66(4): 355-408.[[8]]

[[9]]9. Passel, Jeffrey S. and D’Vera Cohn. A Portrait of Unauthorized Immigrants in the United States. Pew Hispanic Center, April 2009. Available at: Read Now[[9]]

[[10]]10. Wolf, Richard. “Rising Health Care Costs Put Focus on Illegal Immigrants.” USA Today. January 22, 2008. Available at: Read Now[[10]]

[[11]]11. Ortega, Alexander N., Hai Fang, Victor H. Perez, John A. Rizzo, Olivia Carter-Pokras, Steven P. Wallace, and Lillian Gelberg. “Health Care Access, Use of Services, and Experiences Among Undocumented Mexicans and Other Latinos.” Archives of Internal Medicine 2007; 167(21): 2354-2360.[[11]]

[[12]]12. Rodríguez, Michael A., Arturo Vargas Bustamante, and Alfonso Ang. “Perceived Quality of Care, Receipt of Preventive Care, and Usual Source of Health Care Among Undocumented and Other Latinos.” Journal of General Internal Medicine 2009; 24(Suppl 3): 508–13.[[12]]

[[13]]13. Zuckerman, Stephen, Timothy A. Waidmann, and Emily Lawton. “Undocumented Immigrants, Left Out Of Health Reform, Likely To Continue To Grow as a Share of the Uninsured.” Health Affairs 2011; 30(10): 1997-2004.[[13]]

[[14]]14. Undocumented immigrants who qualify as Permanent Residence Under Color of Law (PRUCOL) may qualify for emergency Medicaid services. We will review policies that influence access to care in a subsequent brief.[[14]]

[[15]]15. Stewart, Kristen. “Illegal Immigrants to Face New Barriers to Health Insurance.” Salt Lake Tribune. January 12, 2011. Available at: Read Now[[15]]

[[16]]16. Passel, Jeffrey S. and D’Vera Cohn. A Portrait of Unauthorized Immigrants in the United States. Pew Hispanic Center, April 2009. Available at: Read Now[[16]]

[[17]]17. Medicaid, enacted along with Medicare in 1965, is the largest health insurance program in the U.S. It is a jointly financed, jointly administered, federal-state health insurance program for low-income people. Within overall guidelines established by the federal government, each state has great flexibility with regard to the size and scope of its Medicaid program. SCHIP, enacted in 1997, is public health insurance coverage that provides coverage to uninsured, low income children who do not qualify for Medicaid. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 calls for expanding eligibility to these programs as a strategy for reducing the uninsured.[[17]]

[[18]]18. “Five Questions for Karina Fortuny on Children of Immigrants.” Urban Institute, October 2011. Available at: Read Now[[18]]

[[19]]19. Gusmano, Michael K., Victor G. Rodwin, and Daniel Weisz. Health Care in World Cities: London, New York and Paris (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2010).[[19]]

[[20]]20. Ledford, Meredith King. Immigrants and the U.S. Health Care System: Five Myths that Misinform the American Public. Center for American Progress, June 2007. Available at: Read Now[[20]]

[[21]]21. Kirby, James B. and Toshiko Kaneda. “Neighborhood Socioeconomic Disadvantage and Access to Health Care,” Journal of Health and Social Behavior 2005; 46(1): 15-31.[[21]]

[[22]]22. Blewett, Lynn A., Pamela Jo Johnson, and Annie L. Mach. “Immigrant Children’s Access to Health Care: Differences by Global Region of Birth.” Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved 2010; 21: 13–31.[[22]]

[[23]]23. Yu, Stella M., Zhihuan J. Huang, and Michael D. Kogan. “State-Level Health Care Access and Use Among Children in US Immigrant Families.” American Journal of Public Health 2008; 98(11): 1996-2003.[[23]]

[[24]]24. The Health of Immigrants in New York City: A Report from the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, June 2006.[[24]]

[[Figure 2 source]]Source: Pew Hispanic Center tabulations based on 2008 Current Population Survey.[[Figure 2 source]]

Undocumented Immigrants in the United States: Access to Prenatal Care

This issue brief was drafted by Rachel Fabi with research assistance from Mohini Banerjee, edited by Michael K. Gusmano and Nancy Berlinger, and designed by Mohini Banerjee. Special thanks to expert reviewers Evan A. Ashkin, MD, Associate Professor of Family Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Kate Bicego, Consumer Assistance Program Manager, Health Care For All, Boston, MA; Caroline Rath, physician assistant, Gouverneur Healthcare Services, New York City; and Eva Turbiner, President and CEO, Zufall Health Center, Dover, NJ. Information about policy mechanisms was compiled using publicly available documents, including Medicaid Provider Manuals for each state; see References. All information is current as of September 12, 2014.

Click Here for Slideset Version

On undocumented immigrants’ general use of health care, see here. On relevant U.S. health policy, see here. On relevant demographics, see here.

Access to prenatal care for women who are undocumented immigrants varies widely across the United States due to differences in state policies and differing state-level interpretations of federal policies that fund health services for pregnant women. This issue brief provides an overview of this access problem and the consequences of policy-related uncertainty or variation for undocumented patients, their families, and the health care safety-net.

Why is access to prenatal care for undocumented immigrants important?

There is long-established medical consensus that prenatal care is fundamental to reproductive and infant health; however, undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. are significantly less likely to have “adequate” prenatal care, compared to other immigrants and to U.S. born citizens. [1-4] The reasons for this gap include lack of means to pay for prenatal care, lack of access to sources of prenatal care, and mistrust of the health care system. [5] Other barriers to health care that undocumented immigrants face include difficulties navigating the health care system; linguistic, literacy, and other challenges in communicating about health care needs; inability to take time off from work; misinformation about the immigration-related consequences of using health care services; and perceived and actual risks of encountering immigration authorities or local law enforcement in the course of seeking health care.

The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), which prevents hospitals from turning away uninsured patients in need of emergency treatment, encompasses labor and delivery, and most “emergency” health care services used by undocumented immigrants are related to childbirth. [6-8] State-level Emergency Medicaid programs provide some reimbursement to hospitals for treatment provided under EMTALA. In some states, undocumented immigrants may account for as much as 99% of Emergency Medicaid expenditures; approximately 80% of these costs are related to childbirth or to complications of pregnancy and labor. [8] Because access under EMTALA is restricted to emergent conditions, it is not a mechanism for access to routine prenatal care that could prevent or monitor pregnancy-related complications.

Lack of access to prenatal care increases the risk of premature birth and low birth-weight, and may be a factor in a range of poor health outcomes experienced by undocumented pregnant women and their babies, including higher rates of labor and delivery complications such as precipitous labor, excessive bleeding, breech presentation, cord prolapse, and fetal distress. [9, 10] These risks and outcomes have consequences for the viability and health of newborns, infant and child development, and the health of mothers, and for costs associated with treating medical conditions that could have be prevented or managed before birth.

What policy provisions may offer access to prenatal care for undocumented immigrants?

1. CHIP Unborn Child Option

As of September 2014, 16 states have implemented a State Plan Amendment (SPA) to the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), which is jointly supported by federal and state funds. An unborn child may be considered a “targeted low-income child” who is eligible for this program. [11] This provision would enable an undocumented immigrant to enroll her unborn child in the program so she can obtain coverage for prenatal care and labor and delivery services, in the interest of protecting the child’s future health. Under this provision, services such as prenatal vitamins and ultrasounds may be covered but services perceived as unrelated to pregnancy may not be covered.

2. Presumptive Eligibility for Medicaid (PE)

Presumptive eligibility (PE) is a state-level mechanism that enables pregnant women to obtain immediate temporary Medicaid coverage without having to wait for a Medicaid application to be processed. As of September 12, 2014, PE was available in 30 states, 13 of which explicitly restrict access to women with legal immigration status. Physicians who are “qualified providers” of Medicaid services and eligible to determine PE based on a patient’s self-reported income can provide Medicaid-funded care to any pregnant woman whose self-reported income meets that state’s eligibility threshold. During the time-limited PE period, the woman is expected but not required to submit an application for regular Medicaid coverage. PE coverage typically lasts two months, or until a decision approving the applicant for Medicaid is made. The scope of services covered under PE differs by state; some states cover only ambulatory prenatal care, while others cover the full Medicaid scope of services.

For information on the Hospital Presumptive Eligibility provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), which enables qualified hospitals to determine PE, see References.

3. Other Policy Mechanisms

Expanding eligibility for safety-net health insurance programs to include coverage for low-income pregnant women regardless of immigration status is another way that undocumented women in some jurisdictions can obtain coverage for prenatal care. Three states (New York, Massachusetts, and New Jersey) offer public insurance for the duration of a pregnancy and for two months after delivery. In New York, this coverage is offered as an entitlement program through a state-funded expansion of Medicaid. In Massachusetts, coverage is provided through a state-funded Medicaid expansion, supplemented by the CHIP Unborn Child Option (see above) to cover ambulatory prenatal care services. In New Jersey, Medicaid coverage for prenatal care only is funded through the state budget and offered through community health centers and hospitals subject to the availability of grant funds.

In some cities, undocumented immigrants are eligible for coverage for prenatal care and other health care services through locally-funded programs. In Washington D.C, for example, the D.C. Healthcare Alliance provides insurance coverage for low-income city residents who do not have Medicaid or other insurance.

Beyond these publicly-funded insurance mechanisms, access to prenatal care for undocumented immigrants may also be provided directly by public health clinics and nonprofit organizations (such as Federally Qualified Health Centers) that offer health services for patients without insurance that are available for free or at a sliding-scale fee based on a patient’s ability to pay.

References

1. American Academy of Pediatrics, Guidelines for Perinatal Care, 7th ed. 2012.
2. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 425: health care for undocumented immigrants. Obstet Gynecol, 2009. 113(1): 251-4.
3. Cohen, G.J., The prenatal visit. Pediatrics, 2009. 124(4): 1227-32.
4. Korinek, K. and K.R. Smith, Prenatal care among immigrant and racial-ethnic minority women in a new immigrant destination: exploring the impact of immigrant legal status. Soc Sci Med, 2011. 72(10): 1695-703.
5. Frisbie, W.P., S. Echevarria, and R.A. Hummer, Prenatal care utilization among non-Hispanic Whites, African Americans, and Mexican Americans. Matern Child Health J, 2001. 5(1): 21-33.
6. Federal Funding for Unauthorized Aliens’ Emergency Medical Expenses, in CRS Report For Congress. 2004.
7. United States Congressional Budget Office, The Impact of Unauthorized Immigrants on the Budgets of State and Local Governments. 2007.
8. DuBard, C.A. and M.W. Massing, Trends in emergency Medicaid expenditures for recent and undocumented immigrants. Jama, 2007. 297(10):1085-92.
9. Lu, M.C., et al., Elimination of public funding of prenatal care for undocumented immigrants in California: a cost/benefit analysis. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2000. 182 (1 Pt 1): 233-9.
10. Reed, M.M., et al., Birth outcomes in Colorado’s undocumented immigrant population. BMC Public Health, 2005. 5: 100.
11. State Children’s Health Insurance Program; Eligility for Prenatal Care and Other Health Services for Unborn Children, F. Register, Editor. 2002: 61956-61974.

CHART–Prenatal Care: State-Level Policy Provisions

SLIDESET–Access to Prenatal Care Teaching Tool

State-Level and Local-Level Programs

On immigrants’ eligibility provisions for public benefits, including Medicaid and CHIP, see Overview of Immigrants’ Eligibility for SNAP, TANF, Medicaid, and CHIP, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (March 2012): http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/11/ImmigrantAccess/Eligibility/ib.shtml (accessed on August 27, 2014).

Medicaid Provider Manuals for presumptive eligibility in many states are available on the website of Enroll America, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization (March 2014): http://www.enrollamerica.org/toolkits/pe/states.html
(accessed on August 20, 2014). See also links below.

For a list of states that had Presumptive Eligibility as of January 2013, see the Kaiser Family Foundation state indicator: http://kff.org/medicaid/state-indicator/presumptive-eligibility/ (accessed on August 27, 2014).
(The chart that accompanies this Issue Brief reflects subsequent changes to this list current as of September 1, 2014)
See also: Getting into Gear for 2014: Findings from a 50-State Survey of Eligibility, Enrollment, Renewal, and Cost-Sharing Policies in Medicaid and CHIP, 2012-2013, Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured (January 2013): http://kaiserfamilyfoundation.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/8401.pdf (accessed on August 27, 2014)

On Hospital Presumptive Eligibility, see Implementation of the Affordable Care Act’s Hospital Presumptive Eligibility Option: Considerations for States, Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (November 2013): http://www.medicaid.gov/State-Resource-Center/MAC-Learning-Collaboratives/Learning-Collaborative-State-Toolbox/Downloads/State-Network-CHCS-Implementation-of-the-Affordable-Care-Acts-Hospital-P.pdf (accessed on August 27, 2014); see also The New Hospital Presumptive Eligibility Opportunity. Enroll America. March 10, 2014. http://www.enrollamerica.org/toolkits/pe/home.html (accessed on August 26, 2014).

State Medicaid Provider Manuals and Related State-level Documents

Alabama:

Alabama Medicaid Agency. Provider Manual – Maternity Care – Chapter 24. July 2014.
Read Now (accessed 20 August 2014).

Alaska:

Alaska Department of Health and Social Services. Medicaid. 2012. Read Now (accessed 26 August 2014).

Arizona:

Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System. AHCCCS Health Plans. 2014. Read Now (accessed 26 August 2014)

Arkansas:

Arkansas Department of Human Services. Medical Services Policy Manual, Section B. January 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 20, 2014).

California:

Access for Infants and Mothers (AIM). AIM Handbook. April 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 20, 2014).

Colorado:

Colorado Department of Health Care Policy & Financing. Medicaid Provider Information Billing Manual. February 2014. 19-20. Read Now (accessed on August 20, 2014).

Connecticut:

Connecticut Department of Social Services. U.S. Citizenship: What you need to know for your benefits in Medicaid, HUSKY A and HUSKY B. February 2010. Read Now (accessed on August 20, 2014).

Delaware:

Delaware Department of Health and Social Services, Division of Medicaid and Medical Assistance. 31 Del.C. §512: Delaware Medicaid Modified Adjusted Gross Income (MAGI) Eligibility and Benefits State Plan Amendments MAGI-Based Eligibility Groups. December 2013. Read Now and Read Now (accessed on August 20, 2014).

Florida:

State of Florida Department of Children and Families. Presumptive Medicaid Eligibility for Pregnant Women. January 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 20, 2014).

Georgia:

Georgia Department of Community Health, Division of Medical Assistance Plans. Part II: Policies and Procedures Affordable Care Act For Presumptive Eligibility Pregnant Women Medicaid. July 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 20, 2014).

Hawaii:

State of Hawaii. My Benefits. 2014, Read Now. (accessed 26 August 2014).

Idaho:

Idaho Department of Health and Welfare. Presumptive Eligibility for Medicaid: Provider Training. January 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 20, 2014).

Illinois:

State of Illinois All Kids. Moms & Babies Programs for Pregnant Women. 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 20, 2014).

Indiana:

State of Indiana Family and Social Services Administration. Presumptive Eligibility for Pregnant Women. 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 20, 2014).

Iowa:

Iowa Department of Human Services. All Providers II Member Eligibility. August 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 20, 2014).

Kansas:

Kansas Department of Health and Environment. KanCare. 2012-2014. Read Now (accessed 26 August 2014).

Kentucky:

Kentucky Cabinet for Health and Family Services. Presumptive Eligibility (PE) for Pregnant Women. April 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 20, 2014).

Louisiana:

Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals. Louisiana Medicaid Eligibility Manual (MEM). May 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 20, 2014).

Maine:

Maine Department of Health and Human Services. Mainecare Eligibility Manual. June 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 20, 2014).

Maryland:

Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. Maryland Medical Assistance Programs. February 2014, Read Now (accessed 26 August 2014).

Massachusetts:

Massachusetts Executive Office of Health and Human Services. Member Booklet for Health Coverage and Help Paying Costs. March 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 20, 2014).

Massachusetts Executive Office of Health and Human Services. MassHealth Regulations, 130 CMR 505.002(D). January 2014.
Read Now (Accessed on August 27, 2014).

Michigan:

Michigan Department of Community Health. Health Care Programs Eligibility. 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 20, 2014).

Minnesota:

Minnesota Department of Human Services. People Who Are Not U.S. Citizens. December 2013. Read Now (accessed on August 20, 2014).

Mississippi:

Mississippi Division of Medicaid. Medicaid. 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 27, 2014).

Missouri:

Missouri Department of Social Services. TEMP Eligibility Determination. 2008. Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

See also : Lieb, D. Missouri governor signs health care expansion. St. Louis Post-Dispatch. July 10, 2014.
Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

Montana:

Montana Department of Health and Human Services. Presumptive Eligibility 2014 Qualified Entity Reference Guide. 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

Nebraska:

Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services. New Adjunct Eligible Program. July 2012. Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

The Undocumented and the Unborn. April 23, 2013. The New York Times. Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

Nevada:

Nevada Department of Health and Human Services. Division of Health Care Financing and Policy. Read Now (accessed 26 August 2014).

New Hampshire:

New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services. Application for Medicaid Presumptive Eligibility (PE). 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

New Jersey:

New Jersey Department of Human Services. Medicaid Communication No. 11-07: New Jersey Supplemental Prenatal Care Program (NJSPCP). July 2011. Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

New Jersey Administrative Code. 10:72-3.10: New Jersey Care Special Medicaid Programs Manual. 18 August 2014.
Read Now (accessed on August 26, 2014).

New Mexico:

New Mexico Administrative Code. 8.291.400: Eligibility Requirements. 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

New Mexico Human Services Department. Presumptive Eligibility (PE) Applicant Information Form. May 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

New York:

New York State Department of Health. New York State Medicaid Update, Prenatal Care Special Edition. February 2010. Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

North Carolina:

North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services. Family and Children’s Medicaid MA-3245 Presumptive Eligibility for Pregnant Women. March 2012. Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services. Presumptive Eligibility Determination Form for Pregnancy-Related Care. July 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

North Dakota:

North Dakota Department of Human Services. North Dakota Medicaid. 2010. Read Now (accessed 26 August 2014).

Ohio:

Ohio Department of Job and Family Services. 5160:1-2-50 Medicaid: Presumptive Eligibility for Pregnant Women. March 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

Oklahoma:

Oklahoma Health Care Authority. What is SoonerCare?. Read Now (accessed 26 August 2014).

Oregon:

Oregon Health Authority. Oregon’s Medicaid State Plan. Read Now (accessed 26 August 2014).

Pennsylvania:

Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare. Provider Instructions Presumptive Eligibility Application. May 2006. Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

Rhode Island:

Rhode Island KIDS COUNT. RIte Care Coverage for Immigrant Children and Families. October 2010. Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

South Carolina:

South Carolina Department of Health and Human Services. Health Connections Medicaid. Read Now (accessed 26 August 2014).

South Dakota:

South Dakota Department of Social Services. Medical Services. 2011. Read Now (accessed 26 August 2014).

Tennessee:

Tennessee Department of Finance and Administration Division of Insurance Administration. Chapter 0620-05-01 Cover Kids Rules. June 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

Texas:

Texas Health and Human Services Commission. CHIP State Plan. March 2012. Read Now (accessed on August 27, 2014).

Texas Department of State Health Services. Title V MCH Fee For Service Policy Manual. September 2013. Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

Utah:

Utah Department of Health. Baby Your Baby Eligibility Chart. 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

Vermont:

Green Mountain Care. Medicaid. 2014, Read Now (accessed 26 August 2014).

Virginia:

Virginia’s Medicaid Program. Department of Medical Assistance Services. 2009. Read Now (accessed 26 August 2014).

Washington:

Washington State Department of Social and Health Services. Pregnancy and Women’s Health – Medical Programs. November 2013. Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

Washington D.C.:

DC Department of Human Services. Chapter 4 – DC Healthcare Alliance. (2011) Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

West Virginia:

West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources. West Virginia Bureau for Medical Services. 2011. Read Now (accessed 26 August 2014).

Wisconsin:

Wisconsin Department of Health Services. BadgerCare+ Prenatal Services. February 2014. Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

Wyoming:

Wyoming Department of Health. Presumptive Eligibility (PE). 2013. Read Now (accessed on August 21, 2014).

Rachel Fabi is a PhD student in the Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, and in the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics. She is a 2014 intern on the Undocumented Patients Project.

Immigrant Health

(Incorporating Undocumented Patients website archive, 2011-21)

What is Immigrant Health?

Immigrant health (or migrant health) encompasses research, practice, and policy concerning the health and wellbeing of non-citizens, immigrant households, and immigrant communities, with attention to health inequities related to migration or immigration status. Immigrant health also encompasses the health and wellbeing of refugees, displaced persons, and asylum seekers.

Sources of immigrant health inequities include unequal access to health care and health-related programs due to legal exclusions based on immigration status. Increased risk of occupational injury due to physically demanding or unsafe working conditions and health risks produced by overcrowded or unsafe housing are other sources of health inequities for immigrants. Immigration-related policies and political speech become sources of health inequities when they obstruct immigrants’ ability to seek and use health-related programs or put a community at increased risk of harassment and threats to safety.

Community health centers have broad mandates, supported through funding from the federal Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), to serve patients facing barriers to health care. Community health practitioners frequently serve immigrants who face barriers that include lack of insurance, transportation, childcare, and workplace protections such as sick days, in addition to language, literacy, and cultural barriers. Hospitals that participate in Medicare are required under the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act of 1986 (EMTALA) to provide medical screening to all patients presenting in the emergency department and, if there is a need for emergency medical treatment, to treat the patient until stable. Hospital care for uninsured patients, including immigrants, may be reimbursed through application to a state’s Emergency Medicaid program.

---

Ethical Challenges in Immigrant Health

Ethical challenges concerning how to provide medically appropriate health care arise in the care of undocumented immigrants, who are excluded from federally funded health insurance programs because they lack or no longer have authorization to be present in the country where they are living. Undocumented immigrants have limited access to state or other public insurance programs. Ethical challenges also arise when an undocumented immigrant (or other uninsured or underinsured patient) needs non-emergency specialty medical treatment or diagnostics beyond the scope of a community health center and not covered by a state’s Emergency Medicaid program. These challenges are especially likely to arise in metropolitan areas, where most undocumented immigrants live and work.

Ethical challenges in immigrant health, and in community health broadly, frequently reflect gaps in health care financing. Individual practitioners can rarely fill these gaps on their own. Resources for practitioners seeking to secure and coordinate needed care for immigrant patients include medical social workers, medical legal partnership attorneys with expert knowledge of immigration law, and local community-based organizations serving immigrant communities. Crucial skills for practitioners in immigrant health include learning how to effectively collaborate across organizations and how to provide language services and culturally sensitive care.

---

Hastings Center: Research on Immigrant Health

The Hastings Center has conducted research on ethical challenges in immigrant health since 2011. Selected projects and publications are summarized below.

Funded by: Overbrook Foundation Domestic Human Rights Program

This foundational project explored ethical, legal, and policymaking challenges in access to health care for undocumented immigrants and their families in the United States. The project produced a special report, issue briefs, and other publications, plus a public database of key literature on this topic.

Issue Briefs: Undocumented Immigrants in the United States

• Demographics and Socioeconomic Status (2013)
• U.S. Health Policy and Access to Care (2013); updated 2017
• Use of Health Care (2013)
• Access to Prenatal Care (2014)

Undocumented Immigrants and Healthcare Access in New York City (2014-15)

Funded by: The Robert Sterling Clerk Foundation

This public health convening of the New York Immigration Coalition and the Undocumented Patients Project of The Hastings Center explored opportunities for the City of New York to close gaps in health care access for undocumented, uninsured city residents ineligible for state-funded Medicaid, with attention to values questions: how could a program be fair, equitable, and locally sustainable? The convening produced policy recommendations to the Office of the Mayor of New York City. The principal recommendation of this report – for a direct access program offering health care plus care coordination – informed a pilot that was developed into NYC Care, a program that provides low-cost or free health care and other services to more than 50,000 New Yorkers.

Creating Systems of Safety for Immigrant Health (2018)

Funded by: Open Society Foundations Public Health Program

This public health convening reflected accelerating threats and harms to the health of immigrants and their families, including policies intended to curtail use of federally funded health-related programs by applicants for green cards (lawful permanent residents). The convening produced a working paper to identify realistic system-level responses for hospitals, clinics, and public health systems and continues to inform thinking concerning how to structurally support practitioners in immigrant health.

Related publications (2016-21)

Responding to Low-Wage Migrant Workers’ Health During Covid-19 (2020-21)

Funded by: World Health Organization Health Ethics and Governance Unit, World Health Organization (WHO) 

This rapid-response collaboration with the University of Augsburg and investigators in the US and South Africa aimed to help practitioners, advocates, and researchers in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) to identify promising practices and policy ideas concerning migrant health that were preserved in unindexed (“grey”) literature, such as newsletters and social media posts from community-based organizations in addition to working papers from academic sources.  The project produced a normative framework and practical toolkit for distribution via the WHO’s Public Health Emergency Preparedness and Response Ethics Network (PHEPREN).

Motivations Study Supplement

Meeting the Follow-up Needs of All of Us Research Participants from Federally Qualified Health Centers 

Funder: Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health

A key early finding from the Motivations Study is that returning genetic information to FQHC patients introduces ethical challenges for FQHC practitioners and administrators. Given pre-existing barriers to securing medically recommended follow-up care beyond the scope of a primary healthcare setting, how would All of Us participants from FQHCs secure appropriate precision medicine follow-up based on return of results?

Our project team convened five of the six FQHCs participating in All of Us, plus expert advisors from bioethics and community health, to explore these new challenges.

Project Advisors

Project Team