Anti-immigrant sentiment particularly against Mexicans in the United States has had a dramatic influence on the lives of immigrants and on how they perceive the host society. Today, little research has addressed the extent to which this enmity has affected the mental-well being of immigrants. Based on 30 in-depth interviews in Houston this study investigates the degree to which nativism contributes to depression among Mexican-origin immigrant women. The findings reveal that undocumented status was salient and contributed to symptoms of depression. Additionally, my respondents revealed perceptions of intra-ethnic conflict among Mexican Americans. This thesis further explores how segmented assimilation theory can be expanded to better understand the complexities and nuances that Mexican immigrant women endure taking into consideration immigration status, racial/ethnic identity, and the structural barriers which plays a major role in their integration and mental health well-being.

Immigration and its impact on aggregate welfare state preferences and welfare state reform has been the subject of numerous academic and political debates. Despite prolonged attention to these issues, however, empirical research has yielded mixed results concerning what effect, if any, immigration has the structure and generosity of the welfare state. This issue is further exacerbated by the absence of concerted conceptual cross-germination between the various theoretical literatures that examine immigration's effect on various social, economic, and political outcomes, making it difficult to identify the mechanisms through which immigration may shape the welfare state. To address these issues, I draw on social psychological research, theories of the welfare state, research on radical right-wing parties, and case studies from the United States to argue that changes in both the volume and characteristics of immigrants entering Western Europe might: 1) undermine the cross-class alliances necessary for maintaining the welfare state, 2) reduce public support for welfare programs, and 3) provide politicians on the far-right with a symbolic resource that can be used to justify cutting/restructuring welfare state programs believed to benefit immigrants. Empirical examinations of these arguments using a wide range of data sources indicate that immigration may be directly and indirectly related to welfare state spending. With regard to the former, the data indicate that the influx of migrants from less-developed countries into social and Christian democratic countries has contributed to rising program demand and corresponding increases in expenditures on more reactive welfare state programs (i.e., unemployment benefits). With regard to the indirect impact of immigration on the welfare state, analyses of voting and public opinion data demonstrate that changes in immigration have contributed to the electoral success of predominantly neoliberal, far-right, nationalist parties and contributed to rising levels of anti-immigrant sentiment over time. These factors, in turn, resulted in: 1) declines in popular support for those social and Christian democratic parties that are dedicated to the maintenance and/or expansion of the welfare state, and 2) reductions in average levels of support for welfare state programs designed to address issues of unemployment, making the welfare state more vulnerable to future retrenchment.

abstract: Using integrated threat theory as the theoretical framework, this study examines the impact of perceived realistic threats (threats to welfare) and symbolic threats (threats to worldview) on anti-immigrant sentiment among a nationally representative sample in the U.S. Analysis of the antecedents of prejudice is particularly relevant today as anti-immigrant sentiment and hostile policies toward the population have risen in the past two decades. Perceived discrimination has also become salient within immigrant communities, negatively impacting both mental and physical health. Using logistic ordinal regressions with realistic threat, symbolic threat, and immigrant sentiment scales, this study found that both realistic and symbolic threats increased participants' likelihood of selecting a higher level of anti-immigrant sentiment, suggesting both are predictive of prejudice. However, symbolic threats emerged as a greater predictor of anti-immigrant sentiment, with an effect size over twice that of realistic threats. Implications for social work policy, practice, and future research are made. / Dissertation/Thesis / M.S.W. Social Work 2014

My thesis is about the evolution of the garment industry, both in the U.S and worldwide, with particular emphasis on how this has impacted Latinas and other poor immigrant groups. The thesis traces the rise of garment unions in the U.S. and their subsequent decline as a consequence of competition from the East Asian garment industry and U.S. trade policy. It also discusses the vulnerability of Latinos in the U.S. as a group to exploitation by low wage industries as a result of racial and gender prejudice and legal status.