The HIV/AIDS epidemic poses a major concern for global health. There are approximately 36.7 million people living with HIV/AIDS worldwide (WHO, 2017). Due to the increased phenomenon of global migration and movement we see a proportion of individuals who are HIV positive migrating. In Canada alone, over 300,000 new immigrants were welcomed into the country in 2016 (CIC; Globe And Mail, 2016). As a result we can infer that certain proportion out of all immigration applicants into Canada were HIV positive, therefore this paper seeks to question if it is easier or more difficult to be accepted as a immigrant into Canada if you are HIV positive? In addition, under what circumstances are individuals who are HIV positive admissible into Canada, …show more content…
An analysis between the sources was conducted, in search of differing viewpoints, personal experiences and hard data and statistics. The key sources were chosen as they highlight policy updates and laws on immigration regarding HIV/AIDS from 2000-2017. The paper relies on resources with an immigrant-centered viewpoint, state centered, and health centered viewpoints during this said timeframe. The data and resources that have been complied shed light on the complexities associated with HIV/AIDS and Canadian immigration policy.
From 2002, Canada has required HIV testing for all persons aged 15 and above who are seeking Canadian permanent residency (immigrants and refuges) and temporary residency from designated countries (migrant workers, students and long-term visitors) (Bisaillon, 2010). The screening process for HIV takes place during immigration medical examinations which are conducted in sanctioned Canadian and foreign medical officers (Bisaillon, 2010). This process is a mandatory component of the Canadian immigration procedure (Bisaillon, 2010). In Canada, HIV is not considered to be a threat to public health and safety, thus being HIV positive does not make one inadmissible to Canada (Bisaillon, 2010). However, individuals may be deemed inadmissible if they are a threat to public safety and health (eg. a HIV positive sexual offender) or if
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysGet Access
Canada is a preferred country for immigrants from developing and poor nations. Since founding of the country, Canada has always allowed rather encouraged migration with the dual objective of expanding country’s population and to ensure an expanding and vibrant economy. Most of the Canadian governments in the past have pursued polices to accomplish these objectives (Kelley & Trebilcock 36-39)
First, they must pass a health-screening process beforehand. In Canada, health screening was implemented to ensure that no immigrant becomes a burden on health or social services or “is a danger to public health or safety” (Government of Canada, 2002:np). Canada has no list of diseases that will automatically disqualify would-be immigrants, but infectious conditions such as HIV-AIDS can decrease their chances of acceptance (Zencovich, Kennedy, MacPherson, & Gushulak 2006). Screening does not guarantee that the host country will receive immigrants that are healthier than its own citizens, but it does ensure that people with serious health problems are not allowed to immigrate; consequently, the cohort of immigrants coming to North America tends to be healthy.
A research report in 2011 by the Health Protection Agency (HPA) shows that a majority of long-term migrants entering the UK are young people entering to study or work. The health concerns of those entering the UK should be similar to the health concerns of UK born people of the same age group but in 2010, 60% of newly diagnosed cases of HIV and 80% of cases of Hepatitis B were found in non-UK born people. This research also
Better research on immigrant health and health outcomes would go a long way to shining a light on how to tackle these problems. The current debate in the research concentrates on social determinants of health such as acculturation, which of course influences a lot of other health and healthcare decisions made by immigrants. However, only focusing on social determinants of health undermines the importance of other factors that also heavily affect immigrant health in the United States. Specifically in the case of undocumented immigrants, the debate need to focus on systemic issues impeding access to healthcare as well as pre and post migratory social, political, and economic factors. Some examples that Martinez et al listed include, “specific environmental conditions such as pollution and contamination of water, as well as pre-and-post migration experiences ranging from rape, sexual assault, and abuse to extortion and several other specific geopolitical and economic factors” (966). Social strife, political persecution or famines are real problems that can affect an individuals’ health and specifically their mental health for the rest of their lives. Torres et al urge “those involved in public health research, policy, and practice” to
Canada has always been recognized as a multicultural country with a diversity of ethnic groups. According to the 2006 census (Statistics Canada, 2006), there was a total of 1,109,980 new immigrants arriving Canada from various countries between 2001 and 2006. The Multiculturalism Act (1988) is adopted to encourage ethnic groups to preserve their own languages and cultural heritages while integrating into the Canadian culture (Minster of Justice, 1984). Despite that, constant barriers remain in immigrants’ experiences of acculturation. Newcomers who failed to acculturate into the host country may experience social exclusion, which could result in a reduction in their health statuses. Although recent immigrants are often healthier than the general Canadian population, their health status tend to converge to the Canadian-born population with increased length of residence; for instance, statistics revealed worsening immigrant health in chronic conditions like diabetes and tuberculosis (Statistics Canada, 2002). This is referred as the “healthy immigrant effect”. Immigrants’ initial healthy status is explained by self-selection reasons, and screenings that are regulated by the Immigration Act (Statistics Canada, 2002). However, it is more crucial to understand the reasons for their deterioration in health over time. In this paper, we will explore a framework that explains the pathway between social exclusion, an important social determinant of health, and the deterioration in the
The AIDS epidemic in the 1980s, consisted entirely of deaths, illnesses and most of all fear, changing the way society viewed gay men. Being that it was only happening to homosexuals and everyone became super homophobic and believed that the disease was a cause of being gay until it started happening to women too. This affected the entire medical metaphysics in society on what is considered safe methods of having sex and health precautions as well. Before the 1980s hit HIV was thought to originate form Kinshasa which is in Congo. In the 1920 HIV crossed between chimpanzees to humans on the Democratic Republic of humans.(Avert 1). AIDS is caused by HIV and is the last stage of HIV and can lead to death. It attacks every single
The decline in immigrant health status over time can be attributed to the acculturation process (Singh & Siahpush, 2001; Akresh, 2007)This hypothesis implies that culture that initially induces better health outcomes and lower mortality rates among immigrants begins to erode as immigrants acculturate and adapt to the negative health behaviors and lifestyles within the host society (Akresh, 2007; Angel, Buckley, & Sakamoto, 2001).In addition, the literature stresses other factors, such as: lack of access to the health care system (Abraído-Lanza, Chao, & Flórez, 2005), stress associated with migration (Newbold & Danforth, 2003; Biddle, Kennedy, & McDonald, 2007; Dean & Wilson, 2010), exposure to racism and anti-immigrant discrimination as well
To further add to the strengths of Canadian immigration policy, Canadian views on immigration are supported by a qualitative support, rather than misconceived narrative of immigrants. To elaborate, the media has created a narrative where certain races of immigrants are more prone to committing crimes through the over-reporting of immigrant crimes and incidents (Rossiter & Rossiter, 2009, p.2). This then creates a false impression of them that is reflected in the immigration policy, which then further fuels the discrimination. Statistically speaking, this impression is false as immigrants do not commit crimes at a greater rate than native population (Rossiter & Rossiter, 2009, p.5). In fact, according to empirical research, immigrants who have
Throughout many years, people from various countries throughout the world have immigrated to other countries for their own life necessities. Some countries provide a minimize of the things people need, so they come to the conclusion that finding another home with better options might be better for their lives. The United States having the most immigrants with 44 million, and Ukraine having the most emigrants with 6.6 million for different reasons. Many people go through tough phases during their existence in their own countries, wanting to live a better life with, and for their family members. The number of immigrants that come to Canada in a year is 250 000. But why is it that people immigrant to Canada? Canada provides 3 major
This study examines two important aspects of the mental and physical health of immigrants and this was referred to as the ‘healthy immigrant effect’. The article compares the mental health of immigrants and minorities in Canada to those who are Canadian (native born), or were brought to Canada at a young age. It shows that the mental health of Asians and Blacks was significantly better compared to their native born Canadian counterparts. Latin American men were also found to have better mental health compared to their native born Canadian counterparts. Even though mental health declines the longer they reside in Canada, evidence has suggested that living among your community is a factor that helps immigrants’ mental health. The weakness in
The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) is Canada’s significant policy that impacts the lives of many at the micro, macro and mezzo levels of social work practice. Pero (2011) has claimed that immigration has been a building block in shaping Canada’s identity. In consideration of the rich ethno-cultural diversity of Canadian society, social workers might come across opportunities to work with populations that identify as immigrants and refugees. Hence, understanding the influence of political ideologies on immigration and refugee policies is important for all future social workers, who must not only recognize, but also occasionally analyze policies that influence their role as social
A big part of understanding immigrant health is to make sure you know how it is determined by structural concepts. There are three types of concepts, the social determinant of health, structural violence, and structural vulnerability. The first being the social determinants of health, a key concept in public health, “focuses on the structural factors, aside from medical care, that are determined by social and economic policies and inequalities and have important effects on health” (Castaneda et al. 2014, 376). Immigration in itself is a health determinant because of its direct impact it has on social positioning. Im/migrants have an “ambiguous and often hostile relationship to the state and its institutions, including health services” (378). These have a direct impact on their health and wellbeing.
Today, in the early 21st century, immigration to Canada is a complicated process that encompasses a very restricted and limited guaranteed entry rate. In fact, being a potential immigration to Canada includes meeting many requirements ranging from education level, languages spoken and present family and economic situation.
The first cases of AIDS that were reported in the United States began in the early 1980s. Today, more than 1.1 million people are living with HIV. In response to this HIV epidemic, at least 35 states have implemented HIV-specific criminal laws that penalize HIV-positive people for exposing others to the virus. These laws impose criminal penalties to HIV positive people that knowingly and potentially expose others to the virus. The Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency Act, also known as the CARE Act, provides states with funds for AIDS treatment and care. In 1990, the CARE Act required every state to certify that its “criminal laws were adequate to prosecute any HIV-infected individual who knowingly exposed another person to HIV.” Criminal laws regarding potential HIV exposure vary largely from state to state. Some federal legislation addresses the criminal penalties for intentional exposure such as through blood donation. CDC and Department of Justice researches found that, “ by 2011, a total of 67 laws explicitly focused on persons living with HIV had been enacted in 33 states… In 24 states, laws require persons who are aware that they have HIV disclose their status to sexual partners and 14 states require disclosure to needle-sharing partners.” The criminal laws vary as to what behaviors are criminalized or result in additional penalties. The criminal statutes regarding intentional exposure to AIDS for Louisiana, Mississippi, Arkansas, Alabama ,Georgia, and