{"title":"The Safety and Comfort of Home: Can Medical Deportation Alleviate Suffering?","authors":"Medha Palnati","doi":"10.1086/734772","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>AbstractMedical deportation, or the forced removal of severely injured and chronically ill, low-income, uninsured migrants to their countries of origin, remains a practice implemented by hospitals throughout the United States. This practice has been rightfully highly criticized by immigration advocates and human rights organizations. In 2019, the U.S. government eliminated a deferred action program allowing migrants without documentation to avoid deportation while they or their relatives were undergoing lifesaving medical treatment, forcing patients with highly complex medical needs to give up specialized healthcare allowing them to survive and thrive. When meaningful recovery from severe disease and injury is possible, medical deportation is unquestionably abhorrent, often rooted in media-driven, racialized criminalization of U.S. residents without documentation. However, extreme circumstances call into question whether there is ever an appropriate implementation of this practice. This commentary on a case seeks to highlight that in circumstances where patients face no chance of meaningful recovery, medical deportation may serve as an avenue through which to alleviate suffering.</p>","PeriodicalId":39646,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Ethics","volume":"36 2","pages":"191-195"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/734772","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
AbstractMedical deportation, or the forced removal of severely injured and chronically ill, low-income, uninsured migrants to their countries of origin, remains a practice implemented by hospitals throughout the United States. This practice has been rightfully highly criticized by immigration advocates and human rights organizations. In 2019, the U.S. government eliminated a deferred action program allowing migrants without documentation to avoid deportation while they or their relatives were undergoing lifesaving medical treatment, forcing patients with highly complex medical needs to give up specialized healthcare allowing them to survive and thrive. When meaningful recovery from severe disease and injury is possible, medical deportation is unquestionably abhorrent, often rooted in media-driven, racialized criminalization of U.S. residents without documentation. However, extreme circumstances call into question whether there is ever an appropriate implementation of this practice. This commentary on a case seeks to highlight that in circumstances where patients face no chance of meaningful recovery, medical deportation may serve as an avenue through which to alleviate suffering.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Clinical Ethics is written for and by physicians, nurses, attorneys, clergy, ethicists, and others whose decisions directly affect patients. More than 70 percent of the articles are authored or co-authored by physicians. JCE is a double-blinded, peer-reviewed journal indexed in PubMed, Current Contents/Social & Behavioral Sciences, the Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature, and other indexes.