The Trump administration has shut down a deal that would have provided mental health services for migrant families left traumatized after being forcibly separated.
What We Know:
- In October 2019, lawyer Mark Rosenbaum with Public Counsel, a pro bono interest law firm, stated that the Justice Department finally agreed to an $8 million settlement with lawyers representing migrant families. After nine months of negotiating, this settlement allowed for the screening and counseling of thousands of migrants.
- NBC reported that three anonymous sources associated with the case said the decision to dismiss the settlement came from the Office of White House Counsel after meeting with Trump’s senior advisor Stephen Miller. Most of the immigration policies set forth by Trump are heavily influenced by Miller, including the separation of families.
- One administration official admitted, collectively the Department of Justice approved of the settlement. However, “not all agencies involved were on the same page”. In the end it was denied “at the direction of the White House counsel’s office”, said the official. Another unnamed administration official pointed a blameful finger at Miller saying, “it was Stephen who prevailed. He squashed it[the settlement].”
- White House officials have rejected the accusations against the senior advisor stating that he was not involved “and any suggestion that he was is false”. Rosenbaum said they had a good deal and everyone was feeling good about it. “Then they came back and said no”, he continued.
- During the time of the negotiations the pressure to reach an agreement was rising. A lot of the children believed their parents left them as stated by Rosenbaum. He said “the longer the trauma goes unredressed, the more severe the consequences”. Last November, the New York Times recorded under the zero tolerance policy, presented by the Trump administration, close to 3,000 children were forcibly taken from their families. The government then said another 1,556 migrant families were torn apart between July 2017 and June 2018.
- The government took “affirmative steps to implement the zero-tolerance policy,” according to Judge John A. Kronstadt of the United States District Court in Los Angeles. He found that because of this implication parents and their children suffered “severe mental trauma”. Government lawyers made the argument that it could not be held responsible for future mental health issues that may uprise. They claimed there was no evidence of irreversible abuse done to anyone affected by the policy.
- The U.S. government rarely addresses the seriousness of mental health. Services are often scarce within the nation even though 1 in 5 adults live with mental illness. Open Minds Market Intelligence Report stated national spending on mental health services equaled $225.1 billion and accounted for only 5.5% of all health spending in 2019. In arguing against mental health services for migrants, government lawyers disputed that all damages to their mental health would diminish after being reunited with their family.
Paige Chan executive director of the nonprofit Seneca Family of Agencies said, “Reunification does not erase the trauma caused by the separation. It is just the first step in the healing process. The need to connect families to services is urgent, because when treatment is delayed, it may exacerbate and compound the trauma of the separation.”
