Suffer the Children

With all their chatter about "family values" why the hell would our government enact legislation that forcibly separates children from their parents?

According to the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, anyone born in the United States is a citizen, entitled to all the rights, privileges, and responsibilities thereof. Unless, of course, your parents are illegal immigrants. In that case, you have no right to be raised by them. The government’s immigration enforcement is having the effect of either a) forcibly separating U.S.-born citizens from their parents or b) violating the U.S. Constitution by forcing the young citizen to leave the country with said parents.

The article is a gut-wrenching story about the many minors who face their parents’ unwilling abandonment at the hands of this nation’s immigration laws and policies. It is filled will faulty arguments and leads to a compassionless solution.

Comparing this situation to those of incarcerated parents is simply a misnomer. For one thing, prisoners still have the right to see their children. In many cases inmates are able to keep their young children with them during incarceration. In addition, judges' sentences are often modified based on hardship to families, especially those where there is no one to care for young children. Third, a jailed parent is protected, given regular food and water, and generally receives resources for rehabilitation. So even if the child is living away from his or her parents, at least the child can feel some sense of security knowing that the parent is safe. Not so for young citizens of deported parents, many of whom came to the US for political refuge or asylum, or to be able to feed their families. And finally, a prison term typically has a *start and end* point. Deportation has no identified end-point and may in fact be forever.

And this talk about "Jack-pot" kids is repugnant. Should we deride families in the U.S. that view their children as "another tax write-off” or “an additional hand around the farm?” Whether or not we think it’s a good thing, our country has structured benefits that encourage people to have and raise children. But most loving people are not reproducing for the tangible rewards—especially not rewards that couldn’t be obtained for 21 years! To suggest otherwise is to imply that illegal immigrants do not have the same hearts, the same souls, the same intelligences, and the same cognitive complexities, as any other human being.

But that, I fear, is where this immigration debate is going to lead us.

Growing up, I was taught that *all people* deserve the utmost respect and appreciation; that what we do to the "least" in our community is what we do to the "greatest." This means two things: the judgments, rules, and values we impose on one person or group of people should be the same judgments, rules, and values we impose on all people or groups of people. To do otherwise perpetuates a societal schism where, in this case, citizens of illegal parents would bear “second class” status.

But it also means that what we tolerate from, and demand for, the world’s poorest and downtrodden will "trickle up;" if we can tolerate violating the rights of a group that has no financial resources, voice, or protection then we shouldn’t be surprised when our own rights are similarly violated. In small steps we chip away at those rights for the groups with higher status. More important, we chip away at our collective soul. If we cannot even show compassion to the people who have no control over their destinies, how can we show compassion to anyone?

For all the grass-roots good our society has done to appreciate diversity and to develop innovative ways to implement and promote equality of achievement, the government can find two or three ways to frack it up. Not only is the government unconstitutionally taking away rights and privileges from some US citizens, but it is also indoctrinating a very dangerous precedent: that anyone whose parents are not who the government wants them to be isn't deserving of our nation's sympathy or protection.

We can argue the facts with regard to these issues all we want and we will probably never agree. But why do we have to agree on those facts? Can't we all concur that what is happening to a segment of our American youth--legal American youth--is a travesty? Can't we all agree that there has to be a better, more compassionate solution than forcibly separating the child from his/her parents? Can't we all agree that violating a citizen's rights is *never* an appropriate solution?

In Chinese philosophy, yin and yang are described as two opposing and co-existing forces. Nothing is wholly good or wholly bad. And so it must be when legislating governmental policy. So of course I realize that there is no perfect solution to the immigration debate—we will all lose, even as we all win. But we must strive to agree on the priorities of outcomes and consequences. I myself am not certain of my outcomes priority. But I can tell you unequivocally that leaving a young U.S. citizen without the care of his/her willing parents is at the top of my list of consequences that must be avoided at all costs.