The Acculturation Paradox: How Heightened Immigration Enforcement Activities Affect Hispanic Adult Mental Health

Backgound. Hispanic adults are facing systemic oppression due to increased U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement [ICE] activities. While research has linked systemic oppression to poor mental health outcomes, less is known about how the recent aggressive immigration enforcement policy (following the 2025 PAPAI executive order) impact mental health symptoms relative to individuals’ acculturation levels. Greater acculturation to the U.S. mainstream may increase Hispanic adults’ vulnerability to the mental health impacts of anti-immigrant policies, potentially through increased exposure to non-Hispanic White populations, though direct evidence remains limited. This study tested three hypotheses: 1) Greater acculturation would predict poorer mental health, 2) Greater exposure to immigration enforcement activities would predict poorer mental health, and 3) Level of acculturation would moderate the relationship between anti-immigrant policies and poorer mental health.

Methods. This secondary data analysis used data from 300 Hispanic adults recruited via Qualtrics (December 2025–January 2026). Inclusion criteria required participants to report having experienced discrimination in the last 30 days, have obesity (BMI ³ 30), being Hispanic, and reported at least one past month binge-drinking episode. Participants completed the Perceived Immigration Policy Effects Scale (PIPES), Short Acculturation Scale for Hispanics (SASH), Patient Health Questionnaire-8 (PHQ-8), and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7). Data were analyzed using Stata 18. Main effects using zero-inflated negative binomial regression models tested the effects of acculturation (SASH) and anti-immigrant policies (PIPES and subscales) on mental health symptoms (i.e., depression=PHQ-8; anxiety=GAD-7). Interaction effects were included to test whether acculturation moderated the effects of anti-immigrant policy perceptions (PIPES and subscales) on anxiety and depression symptoms.

Results. The average participant was 37 years old, male (65%), U.S.-born (93%), with some college education (52%). Main effects models revealed that exposure to anti-immigrant policies (PIPES total score) and all subscales (interpersonal discrimination, social exclusion, threat to family, and children’s vulnerability) were significantly associated with greater number of depression and anxiety symptoms (IRR=1.01-.1.29,p<.001). Acculturation alone was not a significant predictor of poorer mental health.

Moderation analysis showed that highly acculturated individuals were more sensitive to specific policy-related stressors. Specifically, acculturation moderated the impact of "threats to family" (IRR=1.01,p<.05) and "discrimination" (IRR=1.01,p<.05) on depression, as well as the impact of "threats to family" (IRR=1.01,p<.05) and "children’s vulnerability" (IRR=1.01,p<.05) on anxiety, where highly acculturated Hispanic adults experienced greater effects of these policy implications compared to less acculturated Hispanic adults.

Conclusion. Anti-immigrant policies negatively impacted Hispanic adults across all acculturation levels. Highly acculturated individuals often experienced the most severe mental health symptoms when policies threatened family stability or child safety. The predominance of U.S.-born individuals in this sample challenges the notion that anti-immigrant policies primarily affect recent immigrants. Mixed-status families in particular face heightened targeting, often resulting in traumatic familial separation. Social workers must be prepared to address the psychological distress of Hispanic. They play a vital role in supporting vulnerable parents who fear their children might be used as leverage for parents’ detention or targeted by enforcement. Future studies could use longitudinal data to assess these relationships and connect children’s responses to their parent’s mental health.