Education for Immigrants in USA

(Literature Review)

Name of Student

Name of Instructor

Name of Institute

Date of Submission
 As a result of our worldwide environment, migration has become a major aspect.

According to current estimates, there are 272 million international migrants, who are defined by

the United Nations as people who have lived beyond their country of birth for at least one year

(UN DESA 2019). International migration has increased from 2.9 percent of the world's

population in 2005 to 3.5 percent in 2019, according to the United Nations Development

Programme. Overall, migration has contributed to global progress and prosperity; while

accounting for fewer than 4 percent of the world's population, the McKinsey Institute (2016)

estimates that migration generates more than 10 percent of global gross domestic product. World

Bank 2019 xvii estimates that international remittances flow at $550 billion per year, dwarfing

both international development assistance and foreign direct investment; remittances in the

country of origin are generally credited with poverty alleviation, food security, education and

social mobility in the recipient country (World Bank 2020). International migration, in addition

to having an economic impact, has led to cultural variety in nations that have accepted migrants.

While the vast majority of international movement is safe, orderly, and regular, around

10% of migrants worldwide are compelled to flee their homes, with many of these individuals

being recognized as refugees. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for

Refugees, around 26 million refugees, another 4 million asylum seekers, and more than 3 million

Venezuelans have fled their nation as a result of the country's political and economic situation

(UNHCR 2020). Eighty-five percent of the world's refugee population lives in poor nations, with

more than 68 percent hailing from five countries: Syria; Venezuela; Afghanistan; Afghanistan;

South Sudan; and Myanmar (UNHCR 2020). While COVID-19 has a unique impact on refugees

and war-displaced persons inside their nation's boundaries, this chapter focuses mostly on

migrants who have migrated to their country for a variety of reasons, such as improved
employment prospects, education, or family responsibilities. While we will concentrate on the

impact on foreign migrants, the number of internal migrants, particularly those migrating from

rural to urban regions, is projected to be almost 740 million individuals, or three and a half times

the number of international migrants (see Figure 1). (IOM 2018). In instance, China has over 280

million rural migrant laborers who migrate inside its boundaries in search of work, and who are

severely hampered by socio-economic imbalance. In this analysis, the fact that international

migrants prefer to work in sectors that are more at risk of contracting the virus is critical. These

sectors include the service sector, which includes everything from child and elder care to

restaurants and hotel industries to gig workers, as well as manufacturing and farm employees.

This raised their risk of getting the virus as well as their susceptibility as a result of limited

access to medical treatment. Undocumented workers, in particular, are at danger, not only

because they work in occupations where they may be exposed to the illness, but also because of

national legislation, financial limits, and the fear of prejudice or deportation that they may face.

This chapter, in particular, examines the impact of COVID-19 and legislative measures to

combat the pandemic on foreign travelers and the areas where they originate and end their

journeys. We will provide some migration assessments as a pandemic driver with special

reference to COVID-19, but first, we will discuss our primary research project. In December

2019, the WHO China Country Office received a report of an unknown cause of pneumonia;

within two weeks, a virus (SARS-CoV-2) was identified, described, and made public by the

World Health Organization. The World Health Organization (WHO) declared the novel

coronavirus (2019-nCov) an international public health emergency (PHEIC) on January 30, one

month after the formal report was received and after cases were reported in five WHO regions.

The PHEIC designation is specified in Annex 2 of the International Health Regulations (IHR)
2005. (According to the World Health Organization, 2005)? This one-of-a-kind virus evolved

from an unknown animal reservoir host and spread to humans during the annual Lunar New Year

Spring Festival, a time of high national and international travel by Chinese individuals during

which the virus spread. In fact, with an estimated three billion journeys made during this period,

travel is the world's greatest planned human movement, according to the United Nations. In the

year 2020, the virus appeared in the midst of the Spring Festival (January 10-18). Despite the

fact that Wuhan City was closed on January 24, restricting some travellers, many people had

already fled their houses for other provinces or countries by that time. Because Thailand and

Japan are among the most popular tourist destinations, it should come as no surprise that

Thailand was the first country outside of China to report on January 13.

The beginning, re-emergence, and spread of sickness are influenced by a variety of

factors, including but not limited to: the environment, the host-pathogen relationship, geography,

and socio-economic factors. Global cities are important hubs for international travel, trade, and

tourism, and they continue to attract foreign migrants and students in quest of better economic

and educational opportunities. Aside from that, they serve as a point of entry for disease import

and community transmission, which is particularly important for new and emerging respiratory

illnesses. As a result, some of the world's most well-connected countries were among the most

vulnerable during the early stages of the COVID-19 epidemic. As a result, the most severely

affected cities around the world, such as New York, Madrid, and the Lombardy region of Italy,

to name a few, are all centers for trade, commerce, and tourism, as well as having a higher-than-

average migrant presence, according to recent research by the International Migration

Organization (IOM), which is based in Rome (Guadagno, 2020). IHR (2005) seeks a
preventative strategy centered on capacity-building in order to respond to any potential

catastrophes of international concern as soon as they arise, no matter where they occur. This is

critical to underline. States In public health, the parties pledge to develop essential compliance

skills while also establishing networks to avoid local emergencies from becoming worldwide

disasters. The IHR was created in order to optimize infectious disease dispersion while causing

the least amount of travel and commerce disruption. Despite the fact that they are legally

required to do so, they lack a clear enforcement mechanism in the event that they fail to comply

with recommendations. As a result, numerous governments close borders or restrict travel in an

attempt to prevent disease from entering their borders, in complete contradiction to the

International Health Regulations and contrary to WHO advice. The role of migration in the

transmission and spread of respiratory disorders has been investigated for a number of different

viruses. Containment stages are implemented by countries in response to growing disease

concerns, usually before any cases are reported within their own borders. In contrast, the subject

of how mobility restrictions might aid in the prevention of epidemics at their source or in the

early stages of an outbreak was raised, particularly when combined with quick mitigation

measures in the countries of origin. We can look back at historic, devastating pandemics such as

the 1918 influenza pandemic, which claimed the lives of more than 50 million people worldwide

while targeting a large majority of young adults during a world war, and see how mobilization

and density of a vulnerable population resulted in rapid and widespread transmission. The 2009

H1N1 influenza pandemic (pH1N1), the 2014 and 2018 Ebola epidemics, and the continuing

MERS (2012), Zika (2014), and COVID-19 outbreaks must all be considered in order to foresee

how migration may effect the spread of epidemics and pandemics in today's globe (2019).
 On April 18, 2009, the United States and Mexico informed the WHO Regional Pan

American Health Organization (PAHO) Office of the presence of new influenza A virus H1N1 in

accordance with IHR guidelines. The first verified case in Mexico was announced on March 17,

and the first confirmed case in California was confirmed 11 days later. While officials in the

United States and Mexico were quick to identify and define the novel influenza virus, it wasn't

until April 25 that the World Health Organization (WHO) declared PHEIC. The announcement

of a pandemic took six weeks (11 June). By this time, the Centers for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC) estimated that around one million cases had occurred in the United States.

Various nations imposed travel restrictions during the early stages of the pandemic, although

they proved to have had little meaningful impact on the spread of H1N1. Over the course of three

months, the virus spread over the world, resulting in almost 254,000 infections and fatalities on

six continents (WHO 2009). Viral multiplication was facilitated by worldwide travel and human-

to-human transmission in each of the three locations visited. According to the findings of the

study, travel limitations were too minimal to have an impact (Bajardi et al 2009). Because of the

ease with which aerosol transmission occurs, the presence of a fully immune population, and the

ever-increasing mobility of the population, travel restrictions during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic

were unlikely to have been effective, and many experts at the time predicted that the situation

would be the same in a similar future pandemic as well.

The 2014 Ebola epidemic, like the H1N1 pandemic, was connected to individuals

traveling across borders. In 2014, three West African countries were confronted with an old

pathogen in an unfamiliar environment. Ebola, which was discovered in Guinea in December

2013 and spread quickly across Sierra Leone and Liberia as a result of a number of factors,
including weak health systems and widespread open border migration. The pandemic, which

lasted two years, resulted in extensive urban transmission and at least 11,300 fatalities across the

country. When an infected Liberian man arrived in Lagos, Africa's most populous metropolis and

a vital center for travel and trade, he began a transmission chain that resulted in the infection of

19 persons and the death of seven people (WHO 2014b). The World Health Organization

(WHO) eventually declared a public health emergency in response to the extraordinary scale of

the Ebola virus outbreak, geographic expansion, and international migration to Nigeria on

August 8, 2014. (WHO 2014a). Because of growing travel-related concerns, many airlines

suspended flights via Conakry, Monrovia, and Freetown, and governments shamelessly violated

International Humanitarian Relief (IHR) guidelines and rules. A review of the literature reveals

the best method for assessing travelers' health status and preventing forward transmission was

exit screening at airports (which was eventually implemented and required international support),

and that border closures did little to prevent the spread of Ebola from West Africa when they

were implemented (Bogoch et al 2015). It is possible that restricting mobility and closing borders

may cause disruption in trade and access to food and healthcare (consumables and personnel). A

travel ban placed a greater burden on countries themselves because of the low volume of

passengers passing through international airports in capital cities, their localized economies and

the mode of transmission for Ebola. As a result, transmission and infection rates in the most at-

risk groups in each country increased as a result of the travel ban.

Since the first report in Saudi Arabia in 2012, the coronavirus respiratory syndrome

(MERS-CoV) has been discovered in 27 different countries. Travel-associated outbreaks had a

significant role in the transmission of the virus outside of the Middle East. In 2015, a single

traveler who contracted the virus while overseas and sought treatment in an emergency
department and the hospital where he sought care initiated a chain reaction of exposures and

illnesses that spread around the world. A super spreader is a patient contact identified via

epidemiological study who played a significant impact in the spread of the disease. In sum,

patient 14 was linked to 82 instances, accounting for about 45 percent of the total number of

cases in South Korea. 186 individuals fell ill, 36 died, and hundreds of people were confined in

25 million places throughout the world. Despite the fact that it only took three months (May-

June), the economic toll was so severe that central banks were forced to lower interest rates (Cho

et al 2016).

When it comes to new and emerging illnesses, especially those that spread quickly by

aerosol droplets, living in a dynamic, networked global community may be extremely difficult.

Identification of infectious diseases, follow-up therapy (including possible patient confinement),

and contact tracking are all important in the fight against disease outbreaks and transmission

cycles. We have long noticed that travel limitations and border controls alone are insufficient to

prevent an epidemic or pandemic. Governments, on the other hand, were compelled to adopt

disease-related potential and risk reduction initiatives.

Displacement, often known as forced human movement, happens in all other sorts of

humanitarian crises, including those caused by conflict and environmental disasters. Despite the

fact that displacement is a survival strategy used by individuals to distance themselves from

dangers in their communities, when it comes to infectious diseases, governments frequently

restrict people's mobility both at home and across borders in an effort to reduce the spread of

disease (Edelstein et al 2014). For centuries, beginning with the plague in Europe in the

fourteenth century and continuing until the outbreak of Ebola in 2014, countries closed their

borders to visitors from disease-affected areas in order to prevent individuals from traveling to
other parts of their country from disease-affected areas (Kenny 2020). Following the outbreak of

Ebola in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in 2018, the governments of Uganda (IOM

2019) and Rwanda increased travel hygiene and temperature checks; Rwanda blocked and

reopened its border with Uganda for one day in August 2019. (World Health Organization,

2019).

Travel restrictions during epidemics are not recommended by the WHO's IHR (2005),

citing evidence that restricting international travel is not only ineffective at controlling disease

outbreaks, but it can also divert resources away from other, more effective interventions and

prevent health personnel and supplies from moving. Travel restrictions have economic

consequences as well, with the poorest and most disadvantaged populations bearing the brunt of

the burden. Furthermore, the World Health Organization does not believe that temperature

screening, which is a common practice in several countries, is effective in limiting illness spread

(WHO 2020b). Limits on people's freedom of movement, on the other hand, were one of

COVID-19's first and most often implemented legislative remedies. Indeed, as Chishti and Pierce

write, "the globe saw the biggest and quickest reduction in global human mobility" in a matter of

months (Chishti & Pierce 2020b).

The Chinese government officially reported a cluster of pneumonia cases on December

31, linked them to a new coronavirus on January 9, and quarantined the city of Wuhan

(population 11 million) on January 23, as seen in the following chart: (Holshue et al 2020). The

first incidence was documented in the United States on January 20, 2020, involving a patient
who had recently returned from Wuhan. Non-US citizens who had spent more than 14 days in

China were denied entry into the United States eleven days later (US White House 2020). It was

too little, too late, as analysts pointed out, because the ban excluded around 40,000 people from

China within two weeks of the limitation being implemented by US President Trump (Kessler

2020). (Eder et al 2020). Immigration restrictions in the United States were implemented on

February 29, followed by travel restrictions from Schengen nations on March 11, and limitations

in the United Kingdom and Ireland on March 14. (Chishti &Pierce 2020a). From the 17th of

March, Italy increased the strict quarantine rules for all entrants (Italy Ministry of Infrastructure

2020). The United States and Canada chose to seal their borders on March 21; the United States

and Mexico decided to restrict passage to their respective borders to non-essential items (US,

DHS 2020). The United States, Mexico, and Canada reached an agreement to prolong these

limitations until August 20, 2020 and November 21, 2020, respectively (Tate et al 2020; US

DOS 2020).

By the 8th of June 2020, 220 nations, territories, or travel-restricted zones will have been

established (IOM 2020b). These travel restrictions harmed international trade and hampered the

capacity of humanitarian actors to visit aid-related nations and individuals. They also destroyed

the tourism sector, as well as the millions of people who worked in it, many of whom were

migrants. Until the 20th of April, 2020, all locations were subject to travel restrictions (UNWTO

2020). Some nations, such as Norway and Italy, began allowing foreign passengers to enter their

borders as early as June. Some countries, such as New Zealand, were more positioned than

others to restrict international travel based on geography.

 Many countries imposed travel restrictions inside their own borders. By the 11th of July,

2020, roughly one-third of the states in the United States have adopted travel restrictions or

quarantine measures against people traveling from COVID-19 impacted countries (Schwartz

2020b). Indian migrants were ordered to return to their homes in late May, with 6.5 million of

them primarily from urban to rural regions, making it the country with the biggest internal

mobility (IOM 2020c). Other nations, including Australia, began tightening internal border

controls as COVID cases climbed six months after the original epidemic, a trend that has

continued to this day. To be sure, governments with centralized health systems, such as New

Zealand and Norway, had the ability to set and implement policies across their entire country,

whereas governments with decentralized health systems, like the United States, which delegated

pandemic response authority to subnational authorities, had more difficulty developing a

comprehensive response. When the pandemic was proclaimed, it created a particularly difficult

situation for travelers in international seas, since it prevented cruise ships from docking at

entrance ports and disembarking passengers, and it reduced the number of migrants rescued as

they crossed the Mediterranean.

While these steps were clearly intended to prevent the spread of COVID-19, there is no

evidence to suggest that travel restrictions have a negative impact on pandemics. For example,

Askitos et al (2020) discovered that international travel limitations, public transportation

shutdowns, and mobility restrictions across nations and regions had no influence on the

dissemination of COVID-19. They used advanced modeling tools to determine this. However,

they discovered that canceling public activities and remaining at home had an impact on the

transmission of illness. Additionally, community cluster identification may be accomplished by

monitoring, testing, and contact tracing, which are then followed by targeted measures to limit

disease transmission, educate, and notify those who are at risk of contracting the illness.

Despite the fact that the great majority of countries throughout the world maintained

border closures, travel limits on arrivals from specific regions, and quarantine procedures, these

measures were ineffective in preventing a worldwide pandemic. Furthermore, initiatives have a

variety of unwanted consequences.

The impact of limitations on asylum seekers and other individuals seeking international

protection is of particular concern. Upon reviewing the conditions of such travel restrictions, the

UNHCR and the International Organization for Migration (IOM) (2020) discovered that about 60

nations had not lifted travel restrictions by April 2020. The UN High Commissioner for

Refugees and the International Organization for Migration (IOM) have reported an increase in

incidences of nations refusing to allow rescued asylum seekers to disembark at sea, as well as an

increase in collective expulsions of migrants to protect public health. Indeed, the United States

banned asylum seekers from entering the country by "invoking the Surgeon-General Jurisdiction

of 1944 to restrict the admission of foreign nationals constituting a public health threat," thereby

prohibiting them from seeking shelter in the country. Many experts believed that this was a result

of Trump's long-standing border control policies, rather than a genuine health problem (Human

Rights First 2020). The United States justified strict immigration restrictions not because of the

threat of disease transmission, but rather because of their economic power. Because of this, the

United States halted the issuance of visas to some categories of permanent immigrants "during
the post-COVID-19 economic recovery, presenting an economic risk for the US labor market."

While unemployment in the United States was 3.5 percent in February 2020, it had increased to

14.7 percent by April of that year (Chishti & Pierce 2020b). In March, the vast majority of

immigrants from the United States ceased going to consular interviews and applying for visas.

Travel from 31 countries and their people to all but around 20 countries in the world is now

prohibited by the United States (Schwartz 2020a).

However, other countries have justified restrictions and crackdowns on public health

immigrants, but in ways that reinforce long-standing attempts to limit asylum seekers' access to

the United States. Fears of the spread of coronavirus were used by the Greek government in

order to justify plans to create a restricted number of refugee camps. According to Viktor Orbán,

the Prime Minister of Hungary, foreigners are to blame for COVID-19 because 'our experience

has shown that foreigners have caused the disease and that it spreads among foreigners'

(Banelescu-Bogdan et al 2020). This is consistent with his long-standing efforts to blame

migrants for terrorism (Kaminski 2015).

The responses of migrant policy ranged from country to country. In Portugal, the

government declared that all foreigners, including asylum seekers, would be deemed permanent

residents under the country's immigration laws (except for seasonal migrant workers and some

unauthorized migrants). Temporary employee permits in the United Kingdom and China were

immediately extended (doctors, nurses, etc.) Many undocumented immigrants in the United
States are expressly forbidden from receiving federal COVID payments (although certain states

provide exceptions) (Chishti & Pierce 2020b).

Although the European Union claims that the number of asylum seekers entering the

country as a result of COVID-19 border restrictions (European Asylum Support Office 2020) has

decreased dramatically, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime predicts that COVID-19

border restrictions will lead to an increase in migrant smuggling and trafficking (UNODC 2020).

More attention being paid to undocumented immigrants, ostensibly for health reasons, appears to

be encouraging undocumented immigrants to go underground and avoid access to healthcare. As

a result of their increasingly dire economic circumstances, it can also lead to people continuing

to work even while they are experiencing COVID-19 symptoms.

Despite the absence of evidence of viable COVID-19 spread mitigation techniques, it is

likely that these travel restriction requests would continue indefinitely. The United Nations High

Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) published guidelines for international protection

(UNHCR 2020b). Guidance on topics such as the International Organization for Migration 2020a

Consular and Mobility Corridors). The new coronavirus pandemic brought attention to the

vulnerability of migrants as an occupational group. Travel bans, lockdowns, and social isolation

were the most common consequences for local and international firms. There are around 300

million migrants worldwide. A significant proportion of migrants are low- or semi-skilled

employees who live in cramped quarters with poor sanitation and hygiene, creating an

environment that is conducive to disease transmission among workers and their families. While
the migrating population faces significant risks of exposure and illness, they also face an

increased risk of losing their jobs, income, and health coverage as a result of corporate and

service closures and closures.

The lack of communication networks among migrants living in rural or segregated areas

may cause them to lose out on critical infection prevention information at an early stage, and

they may underestimate their exposure risks. Outside of humanitarian situations, there were little

resources available on hand-washing, social separation, and other containment techniques.

Migrants may be discouraged from seeking treatment or help due to cultural and language

barriers, financial restrictions, and/or program ineligibility. They may also face obstacles in

meeting their most basic health requirements. Epidemics and pandemics are a global problem,

yet they operate under the radar of a variety of political and social institutions. Without

fundamental legal residence rights in their host country, undocumented migrants fall into the

same risk categories as other migrants, but they have no relationship or mode of communication

with the healthcare sector, and they have no source of treatment or care. They can also be further

burdened by underlying health conditions as a result of the lack of healthcare resources in their

host country (Bhopal 2020).

A diverse range of abilities and vocations are brought to the everyday routine by

migrants, who have become essential to the response to and recovery from pandemics.

Healthcare professionals, clerks, chefs, and farm laborers are all included. As an example, thirty

percent of doctors and twenty-seven percent of farmworkers are of foreign origin. Immigrants
account for 54 percent of doctors and 35 percent of nurses in Australia (Foresti 2020). The

associated economic plague has a negative influence on migrant families and communities as

well. The World Bank predicts a 20 percent decline in remittance flows in 2020 as a result of the

pandemic and associated shutdowns that will effect all parts of the world. A devastating blow to

low- and middle-income (LMIC) countries, as well as a loss of financial assistance for many

disadvantaged households, the fall is attributed to declining incomes and rising unemployment

among migrant workers. Reduce poverty in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs),

improve nutrition, increase investment in education, and reduce child labor in disadvantaged

households (World Bank 2020).

Singapore, a small country with a population of 5.7 million people, was one of the first

countries to discover COVID-19 activity in early February and was one of the first to take steps

to keep the virus contained inside the country's boundaries. People who had returned from other

countries were quarantined or given a 14-day notice to return, despite the fact that the number of

recorded incidences increased in March, mostly as a result of residents returning from other

countries. While local transmission was a contributing factor to the increase in April, the increase

in March was not. It was discovered that migrant dormitory workers constituted the bulk of new

cases, a group that had previously been disregarded by the Singaporean government in its efforts

to limit the number of cases. The majority of migrant dormitories in the nation were single-

dormitory arrangements as of early May, with 13,000 workers accounting for 12.5 percent of all

cases in the country (Singapore, Ministry of Health 2020). This was made possible by the fact

that Singapore neglected to account for the more than one million foreign workers who dwell in

the city state and account for a large share of its employment. The vast majority of migrants are

employed in building, both physical and domestic in nature. There are over 200,000 people in 43
purpose-built dorms, with approximately 10-20 individuals per house sharing toilet and shower

facilities, dining in separate communal rooms, and sleeping on the ground level, according to the

latest estimates. The largest dorms, which can house up to 25,000 people, were built for

communal living and contain on-site food preparation, recreational facilities, and remittance

services. The smallest dorms can accommodate up to 5,000 people (Singapore, Ministry of

Manpower 2020).

Singapore responded rapidly and successfully to the virus, putting up a task team,

erecting a dormitory quarantine, and providing day-to-day monitoring services for both healthy

and ill inhabitants alike. Websites have been created by the local community in order to educate

migrants with educational messages and to attract volunteer translators for their efforts.

Significant efforts are being made to maintain effective social isolation, monitoring and

enforcement of quarantine and food regulations, hygiene, and Wi-Fi with multinational families,

to name a few areas of emphasis (KOH 2020). If migrant health is not effectively examined and

incorporated in planning and pandemic preparation activities in the future, Singapore's reaction

to the increase in cases would be compromised. Migrant workers in Singapore are not only at

greater risk for COVID-19, but they are also at elevated risk for enteric fever and tuberculosis,

and they account for half of all known migrant-related hepatitis E outbreaks in the country.

Dengue, Zika, and chikungunya are just a few of the vector-borne diseases that can infect people

who do not have enough protection (Sadarangani et al 2017). It is imperative that Singapore and

other migrant-based nations develop policies and programs that combine hygiene, sanitation, and

nutrition education as well as vaccination campaigns for people at risk and access to healthcare if

they are to avoid comparable outbreaks.

 For the reasons outlined above, COVID-19's and the United States government's response

had an influence on virtually every area of the immigration system, including border closures,

the suspension of immigration procedures and limits on immigrant social assistance.

Undocumented immigrants and asylum seekers are being detained in immigration detention

facilities despite the fact that there is a significant risk of COVID-19 transmission to

overcrowded jail and detention facilities operated by the United States Immigration and Customs

Enforcement (ICE) to hold them. Apart from preventing refugees from seeking protection in the

United States, the outbreak effectively suspended practically all immigration court sessions and

prevented the few remaining open courts from functioning (American Immigration Council

2020).

In spite of the fact that immigrants are growing increasingly prominent in American

culture, the fact that they continue to be disproportionately impoverished and uninsured remains

a reality. The fact that many jobless persons must rely on publically funded healthcare to detect

and/or treat COVID-19 does not diminish the reality that many of them are unable to do so

owing to eligibility criteria. The likelihood of viral transmission throughout communities and

countries is increased when individuals do not receive proper treatment or do not have sufficient

knowledge about how to protect themselves. Additionally, when it comes to access to healthcare

in unemployment-stricken areas, it is a subject of anxiety for migrants as well. Several

possibilities for how unemployment affects the availability of health-care services in the United

States were highlighted by a recent Migration Policy Institute research, which is available online.

They estimate that around 4% (or 7.7 million) of the jobless did not have health insurance

coverage prior to the start of the pandemic, according to the researchers. They came at the
conclusion that 17.5 percent and 25 percent (respectively) of the population were uninsured in

the cases of medium and high employment, according to their estimations (Capps & Gelatt

2020).

Migration will continue to play an important part in the post-pandemic environment,

despite the fact that it should vary depending on the pandemic response.

While it is true that the authorities' initial response to COVID-19 development on a

global scale was to close borders, the fundamental reasons for the usage of linked words continue

to be valid to this day. "Information technology, social media, electronic payment systems,

sophisticated shipping systems, multinational corporations, and complex global economic

structures are all a part of modern life, and it is not expected that they will disappear in the

foreseeable future," writes the article's author. " [2020 Radoshitzkey] [2020 Radoshitzkey] [2020

Radoshitzkey] [2020 Radoshitzkey] [2020 Radoshitzkey] [2020 Radoshitzkey] [2020

Radoshitzkey] [2020 Radoshitzkey] Despite the fact that hundreds of millions of people reside

outside of their native countries, the global economy is based on the free movement of capital,

services, and migrant labor to function well. This is the truth of the world's economic situation.

Individuals gravitate toward areas where they and their family may live comfortably, despite the

fact that living conditions vary from person to person. And unless there is a significant reduction

in violence and human rights abuses, as well as an increase in the mobility of many people, it is

doubtful that internal or external displacement would decrease. An impact of the pandemic will
be felt in many areas, including domestic migrant policy, international migration control, and

forcibly relocated people, among others.

The COVID-19 and migration limitations, which are a goldmine for nativist nationalists

at the national level, are a continuation of a trend that has been observed in democratic regimes

over the preceding decade that have been governed by right-wing, anti-immigrant political

parties. After the Cold War ended and the terrorist events of September 11, 2001, the

conversation about migration shifted away from issues of economic, social, cultural, and

humanitarian concern and toward issues of international security and stability, according to the

authors. In light of the fact that migrants are now considered disease vectors, the COVID-19

pandemic adds a public health component to the usual security issues that have previously been

established. A medical component has recently been identified in the phenomenon known as "the

other's dread." When I think about this circumstance, the words illusion and xenophobia come to

mind as two adjectives that come to mind. U.N. 2020 (United Nations 2020)

The current situation, as Sandvik and Garnier (2020) point out, is anticipated to

exacerbate migrant herding, lockout, and marginalization, all of which are currently taking place.

Because modern industrialized economies rely on migrant labor for the vast majority of its

workforce, governments are faced with a difficult dilemma on how to proceed. According to

Statista 2020, if you live in a country like Singapore, where migrants account for more than 40%

of the population (as of 2020), curbing migration would need either a catastrophic economic

collapse or a dramatic reorganization of the economy. Migration workers should be integrated

into national health-care delivery systems, according to the World Health Organization (WHO).

Countries such as Portugal, Canada, and the United Kingdom have made great achievements in

enhancing the availability of migrants to health-care facilities in the past several decades. In

April 2020 (Montoya-Galvez 2020), the United States government evicted around 14,000

migrants, while the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia expelled a significant number of illegal Ethiopian

migrants who had already been deported by other nations, according to official figures

(Endeshaw & Paravicini 2020). While governments recognize the significance of migrant

workers' contributions, they may seek to impose more limits on their activities. In April 2020,

40,000 migrants were dispatched to Germany to harvest asparagus, but as a result of their

involvement in the harvest, the migrants were forced to onerous travel and community-related

restrictions. Migrant laborers may be forced to work in "quasi-quarantine" conditions in the

future, which may increase their chances of finding work (Hurst 2020). Other governments

create migratory "bubbles," which allow people to move freely between countries that are

generally believed to be safe while restricting movement between countries that are not usually

thought to be safe (Chugh 2020).

Other countries may give health care to migrants in acknowledgment of the fact that their

health is essential to their country's overall health, while others may marginalize immigrants in

general and illegal immigrants in particular, denying them access to social services such as

public health. If migrants continue to work in critical sectors and services while being denied

access to health care, illness will spread at a disproportionately high rate across the population,

according to the World Health Organization.

 Immediately following the epidemic, one of the most evident consequences was the

cessation of international collaboration, which was swiftly followed by a retreat inside the

country itself. There have been a number of notable incidents, including the criticism made at

United States President Donald Trump and the World Health Organization's intention to leave

the accord by the middle of 2020. Instead of taking the lead in global forums, the United States

has decided to participate more actively in international collaboration, notably in the area of

migration control. Increasing Chinese influence in international organizations such as the World

Health Organization may result from the United States' decision to withdraw from the World

Trade Organization (WTO).

A number of United Nations Security Council resolutions, including Resolutions 1308 on

HIV/AIDS in 2000 and 2177 on Ebola in 2014, have emphasized the significance of swift action

in the management of infectious diseases, as well as the importance of a coordinated global

response to epidemics. However, despite the fact that COVID-19 represented a far greater threat

to world peace and security at the time than either HIV/AIDS or Ebola, the United Nations

Security Council waited an excruciatingly long time to respond. A large part of this was due to

the United States' insistence for months on referring to the sickness as "Wuhan" or "Chinese,"

rather than "Wuhan virus," which was a more accurate description. COVID-19 was made public

in July of this year as a result of United Nations Security Council Resolution 2532. (UN Security

Council 2020). With thanks to the Secretary-General of the United Nations for establishing a

humanitarian truce, the resolution encouraged UN agencies and peacekeeping operations to

support COVID-19 in responding to the humanitarian catastrophe that has erupted across the

nation. Despite acknowledging the importance of collaboration, there was no evidence of a

commitment to building global institutions in response to the epidemic or the WHO's crucial role

in the response. ...

It is the lack of a successful multilateral response to the epidemic that illustrates an

increasing disengagement from international institutions and global governance, which has led in

the establishment of what some have dubbed the "ilberal global order." In order to overcome

global issues, such as the pandemic's impact on the global economy and migratory inclinations

(particularly the considerable fall in remittances), a concentrated global effort is required.. In the

absence of significant increases in international funding, the World Food Program predicts that

the number of people who are food insecure would rise from 149 billion to 270 million by the

end of 2020. This is a significant increase from the current level of 149 billion people (UN WFP

2020). It took an agonizingly long amount of time for a critical Security Council resolution on

the pandemic to be passed, which does not build confidence in the international community's

ability to respond correctly to long-term global challenges such as those addressed by the

COVID-19.

Global cooperation on migration appeared to be entering a new era in 2018, according to

the International Organization for Migration (IOM). The adoption of the Global Compact on

Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration in 2018 signaled the beginning of a new era of global

cooperation on migration, highlighting the need for countries to collaborate on issues such as

global health that they share with one another. As a watershed event in the history of global

collaboration on migration, the adoption of the Worldwide Compact on Safe, Orderly, and
Regular Migration was heralded as a watershed moment in the history of global cooperation on

migration. International collaboration on migration issues has historically been hampered as a

result of national sovereignty concerns, with countries claiming that the issue is critical to their

own national sovereignty. According to the most recent events, however, implementing the

Global Migration Compact would become much more challenging in the near term.

For disease prevention, containment, and response policies and procedures to remain up

to date with our growing understanding of disease risks, the environment, and human behavior, it

is critical to consider new disease risks, the environment, and human behavior when developing

policies and procedures for disease prevention, containment, and response (including migration).

With confidence, the amount of individuals who travel and move throughout the world, as well

as the frequency with which they do so, will continue to be major components of modern life

long after COVID-19 has come and gone. Until recently, there has been no proof that travel

limits and border closures were effective in reducing the transmission of infectious diseases.

There is now evidence that they are effective in doing so. According to current studies, they may

even be useful in some situations. As part of International Humanitarian Reaction (IHR), a heavy

focus is placed on identification and response at the point of origin, expanding surveillance and

response at the point of entrance, and building global communication channels rather than

shutting down borders as a result. Due to the rising concern about socio-economic health issues

throughout the world, it is more vital than ever for governments to include socio-economic

health aspects into their healthcare frameworks when planning and delivering services. Apart

from that, as previously stated, migration will continue to increase as more people choose to

relocate to regions where they can better meet their own personal needs as well as the needs of
their families, rather than remaining in their current locations. As a result of the contributions of

migrant workers, the core infrastructure, culture, and economy of many cities around the world

have been significantly improved. Migrant laborers have evolved into the backbone of a variety

of important services in many of these places, and they have become indispensable.

If we look at migration in general, the topic of migrant health is generally overlooked, if

not entirely neglected. The regrettable condition of migrants as a disregarded group in national

health initiatives is exacerbated by the lack of sufficient data available to advise and encourage

excellent migrants' health systems. However, despite the signing of the United Nations Global

Compact on Migration (UN 2018), the United Nations New York Declaration (UN 2016), the

Global Human Rights Framework (International Justice Resource Center), the World Health

Organization Constitution (WHO 2006), and the United Nations 2030 Sustainable Development

Agenda, the international community has failed to follow through on its promises. A key role of

government is to guarantee that the health requirements of migrants are satisfied. Given that

states have a legal obligation to protect public health and human rights, and given that emerging

infectious diseases continue to pose a threat to our interconnected world, we hope that

coordination will/can take place between governments and organizations in order to consider and

plan for the inclusion of migrant health in national health and pandemic programs in the near

term. If we are to avoid a global outbreak of the COVID-19 virus, we must ensure that migrants

have access to health care. This is not only a fundamental human right, but it is also a critical

component of the long-term growth and protection of healthcare systems worldwide and the

protection of global public health.

References:

1. American Immigration Council, (2020, May 27) The Impact of COVID-19 on Noncitizens

and Across the U.S. Immigration System, Special Report American Immigration Council.

https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/impact-covid-19-us-immigration-

system

2. Hoefer, M., Rytina, N. F., & Baker, B. (2012). Estimates of the unauthorized immigrant population

residing in the United States: January 2011 (pp. 1-7). Washington, DC: Department of Homeland

Security, Office of Immigration Statistics.

3. International Organization for Migration. (2018). World Migration Report.

https://www.iom.int/sites/default/files/country/docs/china/r5_world_migration_report_201

8_en.pdf

4. International Organization for Migration. (2019). Ebola prevention controls intensified at

Uganda’s borders. IOM. (August 2). https://www.iom.int/news/ebola-prevention-

intensified-ugandas-borders

5. International Organization for Migration (2020a, May 15) COVID-19 Emerging

Immigration, Consular and Visa Needs and Recommendations. IOM.

https://www.iom.int/sites/default/files/defaul/issue_brief_2_-_ ibm_052020r.pdf

6. International Organization for Migration. (2020b, June 8) Displacement Tracking Matrix -

Covid19 Travel

7. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2019).

International Migration 2019: Report (ST/ESA/SER.A/438).

8. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (2016, September 18) New York

Declaration for Refugees and Migrants UNHCR https://www.unhcr.org/en-us/new-york-

declaration-for-refugees-and-migrants.html
9. UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). (2020a). Figures at a Glance. UNHCR.

https://www.unhcr. org/en-us/figures-at-a-glance.html#:~:text=UNHCR

%20personnel&text=As%20of%2031%20May%20 2020,and%20sub%20and%20field

%20offices.

10. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (2020b. May 15) Key Legal

Considerations on access to territory for persons in need of international protection in the

context of the COVID-19 response, https:// www.refworld.org/docid/5e7132834.html

11. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees & International Organization for

Migration (2020). Access Challenges and Implication of Border Restrictions. IASC.

UNHCR and IOM. https://interagencystandingcommittee.org/system/files/2020-05/COVID

%2019%20-%20Access%20Challenges%20and%20Implication%20of%20Border

%20Restrictions%20%28UNHCR%20and%20IOM%29.pdf

12. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (2020, May 14) COVID-19 measures likely to

lead to an increase in migrant smuggling and human trafficking in longer term, UNODC

report finds. [press release] http://www.

unodc.org/unodc/en/press/releases/2020/May/covid-19-measures-likely-to-lead-to-an-

increase-in-migrantsmuggling-and-human-trafficking-in-longer-term--unodc-report-

finds.html

13. United Nations Security Council, Resolution 2532 (2020) Adopted by the Security Council

on 1 July 2020. https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/2532(2020)

14. United Nations. World Food Programme. (2020, July 17) New report shows hunger is due

to soar as coronavirus obliterates lives and livelihoods. UN WFP

 https://www.wfp.org/news/new-report-shows-hunger-due-soarcoronavirus-obliterates-

lives-and-livelihoods

15. UN World Tourism Organization. (2020, April 28) 100% OF GLOBAL DESTINATIONS

NOW HAVE COVID-19 TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS, UNWTO REPORTS. UNWTO.

https://www.unwto.org/news/covid-19-travelrestrictions

16. U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2020, June 16) Fact Sheet: DHS Measures on the

Border to Limit the Further Spread of Coronavirus. DHS.

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/06/16/fact-sheet-dhs-measuresborder-limit-further-spread-

coronavirus