At present, despite critical needs and interest, relatively few health professionals are sufficiently prepared to conduct forensic assessments of asylum. In addition, resource constraints limit the availability of training opportunities. In this article, we set out to provide an overview of standard practices for forensic assessment of asylum seekers so that clinicians feel better prepared to participate in refugee assessments. It is clear that much remains to be done in this area, including rigorous discussions and an evidence-based assessment of standard practices. At present, the most important and consistent factors that influence the final outcome of an asylum procedure are responsibility and the fact that a lawyer represents the asylum seeker.32 Asylum seekers and all their family members waiting to join them remain in uncertainty while their case is pending. Backlogs and delays can lead to longer separation of refugee families, leave family members abroad in dangerous situations, and make it more difficult to retain volunteer lawyers who are able to engage in legal services for a longer period of time during the claimant`s case. A person who has not suffered persecution may still show a well-founded fear. In Mogharrabi, the BIA set out the following four elements that a refugee claimant must demonstrate in order to establish a well-founded fear of persecution: Judges interpreted broadly what constitutes a group that the government cannot or will not control. Some decisions state that crimes committed by family members against the applicant may constitute prosecution if the government is unwilling or unable to protect the victim or prosecute the offender. In In re Kasinga, for example, the complainant justified a well-founded fear of persecution by threats by her husband and other family members that they would inflict FGM on her. Although the government itself was allegedly not involved in the act of mutilation, the BIA noted that this would not have prevented his family from acting. 94 Requests for medical reports from immigration authorities involve an often undesirable responsibility.
By taking a complete history and developing sensitive and culturally appropriate wording, any management plan is more likely to effectively cushion the negative effects of a lengthy legal process, and every decision is more likely to be fair. Clinical care for asylum-seeking patients may be affected if there is a lack of training in cross-cultural medicine, if prejudice and counter-transmission are not recognized, or if there are inadequate interpretation services. While the asylum process is a human right and an essential part of obtaining citizenship, it is important that our systems strive to improve the social capital of every individual, regardless of legal status. While refugee claimants can apply for a work permit after their case has been pending for 150 days (or more in some circumstances), uncertainty about their future hinders opportunities for employment, education and recovery from trauma. The established jurisprudence of the VwGH requires a comprehensive justification for denying the causality between the alleged torture and the visible scars, including through an expert opinion indicating the likelihood that the alleged torture will cause the visible effects. [5] In the same decision, the Court recalled previous case law according to which psychiatric disorders must be taken into account with respect to discrepancies in the testimony of a refugee claimant. With or without a lawyer, an asylum seeker has the burden of proving that he or she meets the definition of refugee. Asylum seekers often provide substantial evidence throughout affirmative and defensive processes, either by proving persecution in the past or by showing that they have a “well-founded fear” of future persecution in their home country. However, the individual`s declaration is usually decisive for his asylum decision. Asylum seekers include some of the most vulnerable members of society – children, single mothers, victims of domestic violence or torture, and others who have suffered persecution and trauma.
While U.S. law grants arriving asylum seekers the right to remain in the U.S. while their application for protection is pending, the government has argued that it has the right to detain these people instead of releasing them into the community. Some courts have rejected this interpretation and have ruled that asylum seekers who meet certain criteria are entitled to a hearing. Lawyers have questioned the practice of detaining asylum seekers without providing a meaningful opportunity to apply for parole, including class action lawsuits documenting the long detention – sometimes for years – of people with credible anxiety awaiting a decision on their asylum claims. Even if he is finally allowed to stay here for treatment, the idea that this boy has been threatened with deportation at a time when he is fighting for his life is a real horror. From my perspective, the fact that we are having this conversation is extraordinarily repugnant. That our country mistreats people – especially children – in this way is a black spot on our nation (unfortunately one among many). Overall, here I would like to answer the question of whether these medical patients (and their family members/caregivers) can make a viable asylum claim so that they can try to stay in the country? Table 1.
Common medical and psychiatric findings after torture or ill-treatment Second, in some cases of deferred measures, there is more than one family member in the United States (for example, a sick child and a parent of a caregiver).