Search Results: 동탄업소✉ macho2˛Ｃoｍ☏동탄풀싸롱 동탄후불출장❉동탄업소✉✹동탄룸싸롱✯동탄홈타이
Latin America & the Caribbean Rapid Gender Analysis April 2020
Asylum seekers and migrants traveling through Central America and Mexico to the U.S. border face a range of risks, but women, girls, and other vulnerable groups—such as members of the LGBTQIA community—are confronted with additional threats to their health, safety, and well-being in their countries of origin, countries of transit, and in the U.S. As a result, asylum seekers and migrants who arrive at the U.S.–Mexico border often carry a heavy burden of trauma from experiences with violence. The lack of a system to appropriately support people on the move deepens pre-existing inequalities and exposes already vulnerable groups to additional, unnecessary, risks.
The U.S. Government’s Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), also known as the “Remain in Mexico” policy, returns asylum seekers and migrants from U.S. custody to Mexican territory, compelling them to face months of risk and uncertainty as they wait to complete their asylum processes. The asylum process itself is challenging and unclear, liable to change without warning, and largely opaque to affected populations. The asylum seekers and migrants waiting in Mexico’s Ciudad Juárez city, along the Mexico–U.S. border, face ever-present threats of extortion, gender-based violence (GBV), and kidnappings, which compound their trauma and restrict their freedom of movement and access to critical resources and services. Trauma and fear were the norm of the population that CARE surveyed, not the exception.
Lack of access to complete and reliable information made it difficult for asylum seekers and migrants— including pregnant women and GBV survivors—to make knowledgeable decisions about navigating the asylum process or finding basic services, including health care. Moreover, CARE did not find any mechanisms that allowed asylum seekers and migrants to report concerns or complaints of exploitation and abuse operating at the time of research.
At no point has there been a deliberate effort—by government authorities, policy makers, or those providing the scant services that exist—to systematically assess vulnerabilities and mitigate the risk of harm to at-risk groups. On the contrary, the lack of risk mitigation efforts has allowed several actors to emplace policies that put migrants and asylum seekers at increased risk of harm. For example, asylum seekers and migrants returned from U.S. detention to Mexico are often easily identified by visible markers of their detention, including a lack of shoelaces and the bags that they are issued to carry personal items. This visibility renders asylum seekers and migrants more vulnerable to detention or forced recruitment by armed groups, as well as kidnappings, which at times have taken place on the street directly outside the release area in plain sight of authorities. Read More...
The U.S. Government’s Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), also known as the “Remain in Mexico” policy, returns asylum seekers and migrants from U.S. custody to Mexican territory, compelling them to face months of risk and uncertainty as they wait to complete their asylum processes. The asylum process itself is challenging and unclear, liable to change without warning, and largely opaque to affected populations. The asylum seekers and migrants waiting in Mexico’s Ciudad Juárez city, along the Mexico–U.S. border, face ever-present threats of extortion, gender-based violence (GBV), and kidnappings, which compound their trauma and restrict their freedom of movement and access to critical resources and services. Trauma and fear were the norm of the population that CARE surveyed, not the exception.
Lack of access to complete and reliable information made it difficult for asylum seekers and migrants— including pregnant women and GBV survivors—to make knowledgeable decisions about navigating the asylum process or finding basic services, including health care. Moreover, CARE did not find any mechanisms that allowed asylum seekers and migrants to report concerns or complaints of exploitation and abuse operating at the time of research.
At no point has there been a deliberate effort—by government authorities, policy makers, or those providing the scant services that exist—to systematically assess vulnerabilities and mitigate the risk of harm to at-risk groups. On the contrary, the lack of risk mitigation efforts has allowed several actors to emplace policies that put migrants and asylum seekers at increased risk of harm. For example, asylum seekers and migrants returned from U.S. detention to Mexico are often easily identified by visible markers of their detention, including a lack of shoelaces and the bags that they are issued to carry personal items. This visibility renders asylum seekers and migrants more vulnerable to detention or forced recruitment by armed groups, as well as kidnappings, which at times have taken place on the street directly outside the release area in plain sight of authorities. Read More...
MÁS DERECHOS Y MENOS PREJUICIOS: Guía de buenas prácticas en comunicación para el desarrollo y salud mental, en el contexto de la migración venezolana
Ante la crisis migratoria venezolana en Perú y la pandemia por la COVID-19, en Tumbes, Piura, La Libertad, Lima y Callao, el Proyecto Alma Llanera se planteó al objetivo general de mejorar la autosuficiencia y la integración de personas refugiadas y migrantes venezolanas vulnerables en Perú, a través de un mayor acceso a los servicios de protección, salud mental y a los medios de vida.
Esta guía se centra en los servicios de salud mental. Particularmente, identifica las mejores prácticas de comunicación para el desarrollo en la promoción de la salud mental. Las mismas que responden a estas dos preguntas clave: (1) ¿Cómo derribamos el estigma asociado a la salud mental entre las personas migrantes para convertirlos en agentes de cambio?, y (2) ¿Cómo evitamos las generalizaciones y transformamos la eventual xenofobia en empatía y confianza? La guía cuenta con cinco capítulos. El primero narra los antecedentes de la intervención. El segundo la describe. Para ello, presenta sus conceptos clave, los territorios en los que operó y los criterios y las dimensiones sobre las que se calificaron las buenas prácticas. El tercer capítulo presenta las cuatro buenas prácticas seleccionadas. Al final de la guía encontrará tanto las conclusiones como las recomendaciones para promover la salud mental, a través de iniciativas de comunicación para el desarrollo.
Las cuatro buenas prácticas destacadas en esta publicación se centran en las personas y adoptan una comprensión integral de la salud mental que, para empoderar tanto a las comunidades venezolanas como de acogida, responde a los determinantes sociales, incluye la continuidad y calidad de cuidados integrales y requiere del trabajo interdisciplinario e intercultural. A través del arte, la música, la cocina y las historias personales, las buenas prácticas de esta guía generaron un espacio (físico o virtual) de divertimento, encuentro e intercambio.
Con el objetivo de promover la salud mental en el país, desde una perspectiva humana y de derechos, la guía tiene como uno de sus propósitos contribuir a que distintas iniciativas también sean culturalmente apropiadas y efectivas promoviendo el bienestar de las poblaciones migrantes y de acogida. Read More...
Esta guía se centra en los servicios de salud mental. Particularmente, identifica las mejores prácticas de comunicación para el desarrollo en la promoción de la salud mental. Las mismas que responden a estas dos preguntas clave: (1) ¿Cómo derribamos el estigma asociado a la salud mental entre las personas migrantes para convertirlos en agentes de cambio?, y (2) ¿Cómo evitamos las generalizaciones y transformamos la eventual xenofobia en empatía y confianza? La guía cuenta con cinco capítulos. El primero narra los antecedentes de la intervención. El segundo la describe. Para ello, presenta sus conceptos clave, los territorios en los que operó y los criterios y las dimensiones sobre las que se calificaron las buenas prácticas. El tercer capítulo presenta las cuatro buenas prácticas seleccionadas. Al final de la guía encontrará tanto las conclusiones como las recomendaciones para promover la salud mental, a través de iniciativas de comunicación para el desarrollo.
Las cuatro buenas prácticas destacadas en esta publicación se centran en las personas y adoptan una comprensión integral de la salud mental que, para empoderar tanto a las comunidades venezolanas como de acogida, responde a los determinantes sociales, incluye la continuidad y calidad de cuidados integrales y requiere del trabajo interdisciplinario e intercultural. A través del arte, la música, la cocina y las historias personales, las buenas prácticas de esta guía generaron un espacio (físico o virtual) de divertimento, encuentro e intercambio.
Con el objetivo de promover la salud mental en el país, desde una perspectiva humana y de derechos, la guía tiene como uno de sus propósitos contribuir a que distintas iniciativas también sean culturalmente apropiadas y efectivas promoviendo el bienestar de las poblaciones migrantes y de acogida. Read More...
CARE Rapid Gender Analysis Latin America & the Caribbean – Ciudad Juárez, Mexico
Asylum seekers and migrants traveling through Central America and Mexico to the U.S. border face a range of risks, but women, girls, and other vulnerable groups—such as members of the LGBTQIA community—are confronted with additional threats to their health, safety, and well-being in their countries of origin, countries of transit, and in the U.S. As a result, asylum seekers and migrants who arrive at the U.S.–Mexico border often carry a heavy burden of trauma from experiences with violence. The lack of a system to appropriately support people on the move deepens pre-existing inequalities and exposes already vulnerable groups to additional, unnecessary, risks.
The U.S. Government’s Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), also known as the “Remain in Mexico” policy, returns asylum seekers and migrants from U.S. custody to Mexican territory, compelling them to face months of risk and uncertainty as they wait to complete their asylum processes. The asylum process itself is challenging and unclear, liable to change without warning, and largely opaque to affected populations. The asylum seekers and migrants waiting in Mexico’s Ciudad Juárez city, along the Mexico–U.S. border, face ever-present threats of extortion, gender-based violence (GBV), and kidnappings, which compound their trauma and restrict their freedom of movement and access to critical resources and services. Trauma and fear were the norm of the population that CARE surveyed, not the
exception.
The female asylum-seekers and migrants in Ciudad Juárez that CARE spoke with reported feeling profoundly vulnerable and isolated. They consistently relayed a lack of trust in authorities and an increasing level of anti-migrant sentiment in the city. The lack of either confidential GBV screenings or formal complaint mechanisms left survivors with almost no one to turn to for support and services. Asylum seeking and migrant women, girls, and LGBTQIA individuals who feared for their safety reported remaining inside shelters as much as possible, leaving only when absolutely necessary. In Ciudad Juárez, some asylum seekers and migrants have found refuge in overwhelmed and
underfunded informal shelters. These shelters are largely run by local faith-based organizations, and could meet only a fraction of the need. Despite these efforts, the humanitarian response to the migration crisis is characterized by a haphazard and uncoordinated approach that is devoid of reference to the humanitarian standards that would be the norm in other emergencies. The shelters did not have appropriate intake procedures, such as vulnerability screenings. Few had sufficient water and sanitation facilities for the number of residents, and many shelters housed residents together in common spaces regardless of age or gender, amplifying the risk of harm to vulnerable persons. Asylum seekers and migrants in the shelters frequently lacked information about available health and legal services. Read More...
The U.S. Government’s Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), also known as the “Remain in Mexico” policy, returns asylum seekers and migrants from U.S. custody to Mexican territory, compelling them to face months of risk and uncertainty as they wait to complete their asylum processes. The asylum process itself is challenging and unclear, liable to change without warning, and largely opaque to affected populations. The asylum seekers and migrants waiting in Mexico’s Ciudad Juárez city, along the Mexico–U.S. border, face ever-present threats of extortion, gender-based violence (GBV), and kidnappings, which compound their trauma and restrict their freedom of movement and access to critical resources and services. Trauma and fear were the norm of the population that CARE surveyed, not the
exception.
The female asylum-seekers and migrants in Ciudad Juárez that CARE spoke with reported feeling profoundly vulnerable and isolated. They consistently relayed a lack of trust in authorities and an increasing level of anti-migrant sentiment in the city. The lack of either confidential GBV screenings or formal complaint mechanisms left survivors with almost no one to turn to for support and services. Asylum seeking and migrant women, girls, and LGBTQIA individuals who feared for their safety reported remaining inside shelters as much as possible, leaving only when absolutely necessary. In Ciudad Juárez, some asylum seekers and migrants have found refuge in overwhelmed and
underfunded informal shelters. These shelters are largely run by local faith-based organizations, and could meet only a fraction of the need. Despite these efforts, the humanitarian response to the migration crisis is characterized by a haphazard and uncoordinated approach that is devoid of reference to the humanitarian standards that would be the norm in other emergencies. The shelters did not have appropriate intake procedures, such as vulnerability screenings. Few had sufficient water and sanitation facilities for the number of residents, and many shelters housed residents together in common spaces regardless of age or gender, amplifying the risk of harm to vulnerable persons. Asylum seekers and migrants in the shelters frequently lacked information about available health and legal services. Read More...