Toward a typology of government-sanctioned child maltreatment: A scoping review of the harms of U.S. immigration enforcement.

With increasing emphasis and awareness of U.S. immigration enforcement actions against immigrant families, there have been contested assertions by political and medical leaders that these actions by government agents constitute a form of child abuse. Substantial research documents the health impacts of U.S. immigration enforcement on children's well-being; however, findings remain scattered across disciplines. This scoping review aims to (1) identify mechanisms through which immigration enforcement produces harm to children and (2) assess whether these harms align with child welfare definitions of child maltreatment, with the goal of developing a typology of government-sanctioned child maltreatment. Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, we searched academic databases and identified 71 empirical articles. We identified three primary mechanisms of harm: parental detention and deportation, child detention and deportation, and intensified enforcement climate and threat. Of the studies examined, 79% described harms that aligned with federal child maltreatment definitions, and 93% of state-specific articles aligned with at least one component of state-level conceptualizations, including threat/risk of harm, neglect/failure to provide, neglect due to caregiver unavailability, and emotional abuse. While most documented harms align with definitions of child maltreatment, there are challenges in classifying these as such due to legal frameworks not recognizing the government as a potential perpetrator, despite the government's own contradicting acknowledgement of the responsibility for child safety within the child welfare system. These findings support conceptualizing immigration enforcement as government-sanctioned child maltreatment. Future research should build on this typology and develop actionable frameworks to inform policy, practice, and accountability.