Antolin M. Llorente. This chapter is largely based on previous work by the author, most notably Llorente et al., 1999, 2000.

Similar documents
LATINO DATA PROJECT. Astrid S. Rodríguez Ph.D. Candidate, Educational Psychology. Center for Latin American, Caribbean, and Latino Studies

CLACLS. Demographic, Economic, and Social Transformations in Bronx Community District 5:

Peruvians in the United States

CLACLS. A Profile of Latino Citizenship in the United States: Demographic, Educational and Economic Trends between 1990 and 2013

Demographic, Economic and Social Transformations in Bronx Community District 4: High Bridge, Concourse and Mount Eden,

Hispanic Employment in Construction

ESTIMATES OF INTERGENERATIONAL LANGUAGE SHIFT: SURVEYS, MEASURES, AND DOMAINS

Astrid S. Rodríguez Fellow, Center for Latin American, Caribbean & Latino Studies. Center for Latin American, Caribbean & Latino Studies

Demographic, Economic, and Social Transformations in Brooklyn Community District 4: Bushwick,

DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE Skagit County, Washington. Prepared by: Skagit Council of Governments 204 West Montgomery Street, Mount Vernon, WA 98273

Transnational Ties of Latino and Asian Americans by Immigrant Generation. Emi Tamaki University of Washington

Chapter 1: The Demographics of McLennan County

The Latino Population of New York City, 2008

Characteristics of People. The Latino population has more people under the age of 18 and fewer elderly people than the non-hispanic White population.

LATINOS IN AMERICA: A Demographic Profile

DEMOGRAPHIC AND SOCIOECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF CUBAN-AMERICANS: A FIRST LOOK FROM THE U.S POPULATION CENSUS

Hispanics, Immigration and the Nation s Changing Demographics

The Latino Population of the New York Metropolitan Area,

Ecuadorians in the United States

Demographic, Economic, and Social Transformations in Queens Community District 3: East Elmhurst, Jackson Heights, and North Corona,

LATINOS IN CALIFORNIA, TEXAS, NEW YORK, FLORIDA AND NEW JERSEY

Socio-Economic Mobility Among Foreign-Born Latin American and Caribbean Nationalities in New York City,

Older Immigrants in the United States By Aaron Terrazas Migration Policy Institute

Population Estimates

MIGRATION TRENDS IN SOUTH AMERICA

Latinos in Massachusetts Selected Areas: Framingham

Labor Force Characteristics by Race and Ethnicity, 2015

Trends in Poverty Rates Among Latinos in New York City and the United States,

Dominican and Colombian, Women in New York City: Household Structure and Employment Patterns

LATINOS NATIONALLY SAY THEY ARE BETTER OFF TODAY THAN FOUR YEARS AGO

PROJECTING DIVERSITY: THE METHODS, RESULTS, ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS OF THE U.S. CENSUS BUREAU S POPULATION PROJECTIONS

Appendix A. Environmental Justice Analysis

Attitudes toward Immigration: Findings from the Chicago- Area Survey

Mexicans in New York City, 2007: An Update

Geographic Mobility of New Jersey Residents. Migration affects the number and characteristics of our resident population

HMDA Race and Ethnicity Reporting Appendix B - Revised as of August 24, 2017

Being Latino-American: Experience of Discrimination and Oppression. Ashley O Donnell CNGC 529 Dr. Rawlins Summer Session I 2013

Community College Research Center

The Real Hispanic Challenge

GENERATIONAL DIFFERENCES

Migrant Youth: A statistical profile of recently arrived young migrants. immigration.govt.nz

Population Growth and California s Future. Hans Johnson

Mexico. Brazil. Colombia. Guatemala. El Salvador. Dominican Republic

NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES THE COMPLEXITY OF IMMIGRANT GENERATIONS: IMPLICATIONS FOR ASSESSING THE SOCIOECONOMIC INTEGRATION OF HISPANICS AND ASIANS

Illegal Immigration: How Should We Deal With It?

Choosing the Correct Version of Spanish

The foreign born are more geographically concentrated than the native population.

Inside the 2012 Latino Electorate

A Demographic Profile of Mexican Immigrants in the United States

HEALTH CARE EXPERIENCES

Brockton and Abington

Transitions to Work for Racial, Ethnic, and Immigrant Groups

DATA PROFILES OF IMMIGRANTS IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

The Importance of Being Latino in Minnesota

Second-Generation Immigrants? The 2.5 Generation in the United States n

Selected trends in Mexico-United States migration

Dominicans in New York City

Fatal and Nonfatal Injuries among Hispanic Construction Workers,

Tracking Intergenerational Progress for Immigrant Groups: The Problem of Ethnic Attrition

The Changing Racial and Ethnic Makeup of New York City Neighborhoods

8 Pathways Spring 2015

18 Pathways Spring 2015

Evaluating the Role of Immigration in U.S. Population Projections

SECTION 1. Demographic and Economic Profiles of California s Population

The Causes of Wage Differentials between Immigrant and Native Physicians

The Hispanic white wage gap has remained wide and relatively steady

Evaluating Methods for Estimating Foreign-Born Immigration Using the American Community Survey

Notes on People of Dominican Ancestry in Canada

Salvadorans. in Boston

ASSIMILATION AND LANGUAGE

Introduction. Background

The Popula(on of New York City Recent PaFerns and Trends

Redefining America: Findings from the 2006 Latino National Survey

INFOBRIEF SRS. Over the past decade, both the U.S. college-educated

Economic assimilation of Mexican and Chinese immigrants in the United States: is there wage convergence?

Understanding the Immigrant Experience Lessons and themes for economic opportunity. Owen J. Furuseth and Laura Simmons UNC Charlotte Urban Institute

The Impact of Age in the Acculturation of Latin American Immigrants to the U.S.

Will the Hispanic Homeownership Gap Persist?

Share of Children of Immigrants Ages Five to Seventeen, by State, Share of Children of Immigrants Ages Five to Seventeen, by State, 2008

Brazilians. in Boston

US Undocumented Population Drops Below 11 Million in 2014, with Continued Declines in the Mexican Undocumented Population

Immigrant Remittances: Trends and Impacts, Here and Abroad

The Complexity of Immigrant Generations: Implications for Assessing the Socioeconomic Integration of Hispanics and Asians

By the year 2100 the U.S. current 275 million

Why disaggregate data on U.S. children by immigrant status? Some lessons from the diversitydatakids.org project

Labor market integration within the NAFTA region: beyond the migration rhetoric. Miguel Jimenez. August, 2013

Learning from Other Countries---and from Ourselves: the case of demography. Cliff Adelman, Institute for Higher Education Policy March 5, 2013

Chapter 6: Women-Owned and Minority-Owned Businesses

European Parliament Elections: Turnout trends,

Explaining differences in access to home computers and the Internet: A comparison of Latino groups to other ethnic and racial groups

The Transmission of Economic Status and Inequality: U.S. Mexico in Comparative Perspective

Profiling the Eligible to Naturalize

California s Congressional District 37 Demographic Sketch

Promise or Peril: Immigrants, LEP Students and the No Child Left Behind Act

During the 1990s, the nation s immigrant

Immigrants and the Restructuring of the Boston Metropolitan Workforce,

City of Elk Grove Application for Appointment

Growth and Migration to a Third Country: The Case of Korean Migrants in Latin America

THE EFFECTS OF AGE AND POLITICAL EXPOSURE ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF PARTY IDENTIFICATION AMONG ASIAN AMERICAN AND LATINO IMMIGRANTS IN THE UNITED STATES

Joint Center for Housing Studies. Harvard University

Transcription:

Chapter 2 American Population Estimates, Trends in American Immigration, and Neuropsychology: Influences on Assessment and Inferential Processes with Hispanic Populations 1 Antolin M. Llorente A review of the most recent decennial U.S. Census (U.S. Census, 2001) indicates that Hispanics account for approximately 11% of the total American population. The conservative 11% estimate represents a total of approximately 32 million legal individuals of Hispanic origin living in the U.S. Table 2.1 presents a brief description of the most recent census estimates for the U.S. Hispanic population according to country of origin for selected nations (U.S. Census Bureau, 2001). The data collected by the U.S. Census is to a large extent impacted by patterns of American immigration, and although a comprehensive review of such patterns is beyond the scope of this book, a brief examination of American immigration trends for Hispanics will be reviewed. It is first proper to examine the biased nature of American migrations as they relate to Hispanics, in an attempt to understand with greater insight their subsequent impact on the acquisition and application of neuropsychological norms and standards. Close scrutiny of migrational patterns reveals that American migration, legal immigration to the U.S., is not the product of random mechanisms and processes (Hamilton and Chinchilla, 1991; U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1991; Portes and Rumbaut, 1990; Portes and Borocsz, 1989). The nonrandom nature of these migratory patterns is the result of selective factors associated with both the host and sending nations (Portes and Rumbaut, 1990). With regard to host country receiving factors, Garcia (1981), and reviews of historical records, convincingly have noted that the U.S. government has had selective immigration aims in the past that are arbitrary by their very nature and that significantly affect current and past immigration patterns. In addition, revisions in American immigration laws and guidelines during the past decades led to significant alterations in migrational patterns. The Immigration and Naturalization Service (U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 1991) notes that the predominant shift occurred due to the elimination of country specific quotas, replacing them with quotas partially based on humanitarian concerns and shifting American migrational patterns from European to Asian and Latin American immigration. This change in immigration 1 This chapter is largely based on previous work by the author, most notably Llorente et al., 1999, 2000. 29

30 A.M. Llorente Table 2.1 U.S. Census Estimate for the Hispanic Population According to Country of Origin Hispanic or latino by type Number Percent Mexican 20,640,711 58.5 Puerto Rican 3,406,178 9.6 Central American 1,686,937 4.8 South American 1,353,562 3.8 Cuban 1,241,685 3.5 Dominican 764,945 2.2 Spainiard 100,135 0.3 All Hispanic or Latino 6,111,665 17.3 (e.g., write in Hispanic or Latino) Total 35,305,818 100 Adapted from U.S. Census Bureau, 2001. Note: For the purpose of Census reporting, country of origin is defined by the origin of the head of household, the individual responsible for completing the Census. Thousands 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 France Norway/ Sweden Austrial Hungary Austrial Hungary Soviet Union Cuba Philippines Philippines China Koren Vietnam 0 1821-1840 1841-1860 1861-1880 1881-1900 1901-1920 Figure 2.1 Changes in U.S. Immigration (1901 1990) 1921-1940 1941-1960 1961-1980 1981-1990

2 American Population Estimates, Trends in American Immigration, and Neuropsychology 31 Thousands 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 1900 Figure 2.2 Total legal U.S. immigration (1901 1990) 1920 1940 1960 1980 policy altered the profile that typified U.S. migrations for over 200 years. This shift in migrational trends is best depicted by Figure 2.1. The substantial variability observed in the number of immigrants allowed to enter the U.S. during the past 90 to100 years is another marker capable of elucidating the nonrandom and rapidly shifting nature of American immigration patterns. Figure 2.2 clearly shows the toll that various socioeconomic and historical events (e.g., the Great Depression, World War II) had on the total number of immigrants allowed to enter the U.S. between the early 1930s and the mid to late 1940s. This figure additionally depicts the increasing number of legal immigrants that have been allowed to enter the U.S. in the last three to five decades and the sudden shifts in total migration that have taken place across time. Although reliable data are not yet available, significant alterations will be evidenced shortly after September 2001, and in particular after the Immigration and Naturalization Service was absorbed by the Department of Homeland Security, which led to new immigration guidelines as a result of governmental restructuring and which, most critically, selectively impacted specific groups of Hispanics. Although data for level of education are not available, Figure 2.3 shows the reported occupational allegiance of legal immigrants entering the U.S. from 1976 to 1990. These data indicate that the various occupational categories, closely associated with the educational attainment of such legal immigrants, during those two decades were not proportionally represented. Although great variability in immigrants occupational and educational attainment is observed in the literature, dis-

32 A.M. Llorente Figure 2.3 Immigration and occupational allegiance (1970) proportionate occupational representations are more pronounced for certain Hispanic groups relative to others (see Llorente, 1997; Llorente et al., 1999, 2000; U.S. Census Bureau, 2001.) Absolute and Relative Migrations Table 2.2 shows the number of legal immigrants entering the States from Argentina, Cuba, and, by decades, between 1931 and 1990. Perusal of this table indicates that the total number of immigrants from surpassed three million during the past 60 years, while the total number of immigrants from Argentina during the same period only reached a total of approximately 131,000 immigrants. During the same time span, the total number of immigrants from Cuba reached an approximate total of 732,000 individuals. A great deal of variability was observed in timing of maximum immigration and the magnitude of maximum immigration. Whereas immigration from peaked at approximately 1.5 million between 1981 and 1990, migration from Cuba peaked at approximately 264,000 during the 1970s, while migration from Argentina to the U.S. reached approximately 50,000 legal immigrants between 1961 and 1970. With regard to absolute migration, the number of Argentinean immigrants is approximately 24 times less than the number of Mexican immigrants and approximately six times less than the number of Cubans entering the U.S. during the same period. The total number of immigrants from Cuba also is four times less relative to the total number of immigrants from during the same six decades. Although analyses could have been conducted to determine whether the expected number of immigrants from each nation under investigation differed statistically for these countries across the six decades, such analyses are beyond

2 American Population Estimates, Trends in American Immigration, and Neuropsychology 33 Table 2.2 Total Number of Immigrants (Absolute Migration) Across Six Decades (1931 1990): Argentina, Cuba, and Country and number of legal immigrants Decade Argentina Cuba 1931 1940 1,349 9,575 22,319 1941 1950 3,338 26,313 60,589 1951 1960 19,486 78,948 299,811 1961 1970 49,721 208,536 453,937 1971 1980 29,897 264,863 640,294 1981 1990 27,327 144,578 1,655,843 Adapted from INS, 1991. the scope of this exposition. However, it should be noted that analyses conducted in the past for Hispanic data easily reached statistical significance (cf. Llorente et al., 1999, 2000 indicating that the expected distribution of absolute numbers of immigrants changed significantly over time and for each country). It is also clear from the data presented above that the interrelationship and intrarelationship for these nations as they relate to absolute immigration is in all likelihood statistically significant. These data also underscore the biased nature of American immigration patterns. An examination of the absolute number of immigrants was critical in an attempt to understand American migratory patterns. However, the proportion of immigrants for three separate decades (1961 to1970, 1971 to 1980, and 1981 to 1990) relative to the total population of each country at the end of those decades is just as important to our understanding of Hispanic migrations to the U.S. This analysis was thus conducted for each country. In 1970, Argentina had an approximate population of 24,300,000 inhabitants and an approximate migration to the U.S. (1961 to 1970) of 50,000 or 0.2% of its population. In 1970, Cuba and had respective populations of 8,500,000 and 48,000,000, and approximate American immigrations of 208,000 and 454,000, between 1961 and 1970 or 3% and 1% of their respective populations. In 1980, Argentina had a total estimated population of 27,000,000 and a U.S. immigration of approximately 30,000 or 0.1% of its population, whereas Cuba had a total estimated population of 10,000,000 inhabitants and a U.S. migration of 265,000 individuals, a total of 2.6% of that country s population. s U.S. immigration was 1% of its total number of inhabitants (total U.S. immigration, 1971 to1980 = 640,294 / total estimated population, 1980 = 72,000,000). In 1990, the relative population percentages for Argentina, Cuba, and were 0.1%, 1.3%, and 1.8%, respectively. In summary, in terms of relative immigration, migrations from Argentina have remained relatively constant and small in magnitude over the last three decades. Cuban immigration reached its peak during the 1970s and 1980s, with decreasing American immigration during the 1990s, while s relative immigration to the U.S. has been steadily increasing during the same period.

http://www.springer.com/978-0-387-71757-9