Poster #110 - The critical need of a shared lens: The process of collaboration between lawyers and psychologists for children seeking asylum

• In Event: 2-002 - Special Poster Session 05 with Continental Breakfast Reception
  In Poster Session: PS 05 - Interdisciplinary Section

Integrative Statement

U.S. border agents are denying children a fair chance to have their asylum cases reviewed at a time when many are running in fear, seeking to escape the Northern Triangle (Schatz, 2017). Between the years of 2013 and 2015, only 313 minors received legal immigration or asylum status. Currently, the number of pending minor asylum cases has reached 88,069 (TRAC Immigration, 2017). According to the American Bar Association, children were denied because persecution due to a specific class was not proven. When a lawyer cannot establish credibility, and therefore cannot connect the minor’s experiences to persecution, the claim for asylum is denied and the minor is deported (Chen, 2014). Therefore, lawyers obtain affidavits based on psychological evaluations by mental health providers, which can potentially establish credibility and persecution. Yet, studies have not considered how mental health and legal professionals can best work together to increase the chances of successful outcomes.
The present study aims to identify specific challenges and best practices that facilitate productive lawyer-psychologist collaborations. A qualitative research design was used to answer what aspects of the psychiatrist and lawyer collaboration are important for a successful asylum process. Data were collected through semi-structured, open-ended interviews with professionals experienced with the court process of children from Central America seeking asylum. Data analysis was conducted according to the inductive analysis method by which themes emerge from the data and are systemically analyzed toward an overarching objective (Boyatzia,1998). The overall goal of this study is to interview 10 lawyers and 10 psychiatrists. Currently, 2 lawyers and 1 mental health professional have been interviewed.
Based on preliminary data analysis, overlaps and divergence were found. The lawyers explained harassment and discrimination are not grounds for asylum, and that specifically, credibility and persecution of a class need to be proven by testimony and affidavits. The lawyers shared it is extremely difficult to prove persecution and therefore mental health professionals can aid in the process by uncovering the minor’s narrative regarding their victimization. The lawyers emphasized that despite the vulnerability of children and their experiences with abuse, neglect and violence, the ‘sadness’ of their story does not matter to a judge. The psychiatrist explained how when a lawyer takes the time to discuss a case, they better understand how to frame the child’s narrative and provide a more effective affidavit. Most lawyers simply send the client to the psychologist without communicating the specific needs for court. Additionally, both professionals spoke to the role of the affidavit to ‘educate’ the court by providing information regarding the science of trauma, the impact on development, and whether the minor presents in a developmentally appropriate way. This contextualizes the impact of the minor’s experiences to understand why a minor may provide an incomplete or confused testimony and to understand what is at stake for the child. These preliminary findings highlight how professionals can work together to ensure greater numbers of children have a better chance of obtaining asylum.

Author

• Pratima Patil, student member
  Presenting Author