Central American immigrant women living in the Mexico-Guatemala border city of Tapachula routinely face multiple barriers to availing themselves and their children of rights entitled to them by law. In many cases, these denials unfold at the scale of the everyday, through interactions with low-to mid-level officials. As embodiments of the state, low-to mid-level officials such as bureaucrats, educators, social workers and healthcare officials possess the power to regulate immigrant citizenship and belonging through their everyday actions. However, we know very little about how officials working on the ground interpret and implement their power on an everyday basis; how this impacts immigrant experience and exercise of social and political citizenship rights; and how immigrants in turn respond to and negotiate results of interactions in their lives. Women and their Mexican-born children are disproportionately affected by this phenomenon, inducing consequences, such as exclusion from political and social citizenship, barring of children from the education system, and increased vulnerability to exploitation and domestic violence. Building upon literature on the changing geographies of the state, citizenship and migration in Geography, this dissertation seeks to broaden and deepen our understanding of how interactions between immigrant women and the micro-level state play out at the scale of the everyday and how these processes are significant in the lives of immigrants as well as low-to mid-level officials. Another goal of this work is to go beyond one-sided views of officials, to understand the overarching institutional contexts for their actions. To meet these objectives, I analyze data obtained during over a year of fieldwork conducted in Tapachula. My research consisted of in-depth interviews with low-to mid-level officials and Central American immigrant women, participatory workshops, and participant observation working in a local government agency. My findings suggest that low-to-mid level officials' actions constitute a form of everyday restriction, which, implemented through minute, mundane actions has major impacts on immigrant women's sense of citizenship in Tapachula. However, officials' actions are informed by complex institutional and socio-spatial factors and power-relations, which provide valuable context for our understanding of this phenomenon. / text

Thesis advisor: Pratyusha Tummala-Narra / The present-day sociopolitical climate, with its noxious anti-immigrant sentiment and policies, has increased the emotional stress experienced by immigrant-origin populations. This dissertation presents findings from research that explored the relationship between race-and ethnicity-based discrimination, exposure to trauma, and psychological distress among a sample of Central American–origin immigrants and refugees in the United States. Informed by socio-ecological and contemporary acculturation theory, this research extended the traumatic stress and migration literature by examining how a global sense of social connectedness, as well as a sense of belonging to one’s ethnic community or the mainstream community, may mitigate or exacerbate the influence of discrimination and trauma on mental health. In addition, this research explored the potential moderating role of immigrant generation and documentation status. Participants (N=89) between 18 and 70 years of age completed surveys both online (N=28) and in person (N=61). Survey instruments included a demographic questionnaire, the Perceived Racism Scale for Latinos (PRSL), the Trauma History Questionnaire (THQ), the Social Connectedness Scale – Revised (SCS-R), the Social Connectedness in Mainstream (SCMN) and the Social Connectedness in the Ethnic Community (SCETH) scales, as well as measures to assess for symptoms of depression (PHQ-9), anxiety (GAD-7), posttraumatic stress (PCL-C), and somatization (SSS-8). Ordinary least-squares regression analyses revealed that discrimination and exposure to trauma significantly predicted psychological distress. Higher levels of social connectedness predicted lower levels of depression, anxiety, and PTSD. Mainstream social connectedness was found to moderate the association between exposure to trauma and PTSD such that for individuals with low levels of SCMN, posttraumatic stress was consistently relatively high regardless of the degree of trauma exposure. For those individuals with high SCMN, posttraumatic stress symptoms were low when trauma exposure was low. However, all individuals regardless of their sense of mainstream belonging experienced high PTSD when trauma exposure was high. In addition, a lower sense of mainstream belonging augmented the strength of the association between discrimination on depression, whereas a stronger sense of mainstream belonging reduced the strength of this relation. Specifically, individuals with low SCMN reported higher depressive symptoms with increasing perceived discrimination, while individuals with high SCMN reported similar levels of depression even at increasing levels of discrimination. Analyses did not support moderation effects for ethnic social connectedness, immigrant generation and documentation status. The study’s strengths and limitations as well as its significance for future research and practice are discussed. Implications highlight the multifaceted and dynamic nature of belongingness in the context of discrimination and trauma, and speak to the importance of culturally responsive and multi-systemic interventions. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2018. / Submitted to: Boston College. Lynch School of Education. / Discipline: Counseling, Developmental and Educational Psychology.