Why is everybody so concerned with migrant family separation?

[David1967]

Deaths from car accidents are 1.3 million and deaths from suicide are 43,000 per year. So why do we care so much about some kids being separated? Its just a fallacious appeal to emotion-- "WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!! =-(". I really don't get it. The people who are so concerned aren't spending a second worrying about the millions who die every year from preventable causes. And yet they think this family separation thing is the worst atrocity since the holocaust.

Also, before anyone makes the strawman that i'm somehow saying we can only care about the largest cause of deaths, that's not what i'm saying. I'm saying that we should care proportionally based on those things that have the most impact. Lets prioritize things that have the most negative effect. So basically, I care about migrant family separations compared to car accidents about 3000 / 1.3 million %, assuming I cared about deaths vs family separations the same, which I obviously don't because death is much worse than separation. At best that's .2%. Where's the logic in me caring about family separations of migrants when so many die in car accidents, for example?

And let me also just mention that this has been happening for several decades, and nobody has cared or mentioned it at all. This is simply politicized nonsense.

We should care about all these things. I'm not saying everyone who sneaks across the boarder should be allowed to stay. But separating parents from their children is an unnecessary not to mention traumatizing thing for parents and children alike. We must keep in mind that legal or not, they are still human beings and deserve to be treated as such. I think that the reasonable solution is to let the kids stay with their parents while it is being determined whether to let them stay or send them home.

 

[BSM1]

Many of the immigrants in custody did enter the country legally.

And for the ones that didn't: the US government is prohibited by law from prosecuting a refugee claimant merely for entering the country by means that would normally be illegal.

Not the ones that have family separation. You are not detained if you enter a country legally. That's the whole point of not trying to cross the border of a sovereign state without permission.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Not the ones that have family separation. You are not detained if you enter a country legally. That's the whole point of not trying to cross the border of a sovereign state without permission.

It's not illegal for an asylum-seeker to sneak into a country.

From what I gather, most of the detainees entered legally but violated the terms of their entry in some way (e.g. overstayed their visa) so that they ended up having a deportment order. In some cases, the immigrant may have done everything right and not even have been aware that the order was issued. I've been reading about cases where people have been ordered deported because their student visa was cancelled after their school failed to provide required info to USCIS, or because USCIS sent a request for information to the person's old address (even though the person updated USCIS with their new address when they moved) and cancelled the visa after getting no response.

There are also weird situations around H1-B visas: IIRC, if you apply for a change to your visa (e.g. to work in a different field because you got laid off from your job), you're legally permitted to stay for 240 days after your visa expires while you're waiting for your hearing... and in fact you aren't allowed to leave the country until you have your hearing. However, there's such a backlog that people often wait way longer than the 240 days before they get their hearing, so they end up in a situation where they're both in the country illegally AND prohibited from leaving.

 

[Shad]

It's not illegal for an asylum-seeker to sneak into a country.

Seekers are not penalized for breaking immigration laws until an evaluation is complete. That is not the same as not being illegal for them to do X. If the claim is bust people can still face punishment for entry violations and stronger penalties such as the ban on asylum applications for a number of years.

 

[serp777]

First, your figure for deaths from car accidents is either meaningless (because you don't specify the time period over which the "1.3 million" deaths occur), or absurdly exaggerated (because the annual number of deaths is much, much less than that).

Second, who are you to tell people what they should be concerned about?

Third, you have not demonstrated that the concern most people are showing for the families is politically motivated because you have not supported your reasoning with empirical evidence. You are merely speculating.

Fourth, your calculus for how much you feel others should be concerned about things is overly simplistic. For one thing, you again fail to provide empirical evidence that those responding to the family separations are not responding also to other matters, such as suicides.

All in all, your argument fails.

I forgot to include that the 1.3 million figure is referencing the global car accident deaths per year. The point was just to pick a large number to demonstrate how much more significant certain issues are.

Second, who are you to tell people what they should be concerned about?

Who are you to tell people whether they can tell people what they should be concerned about? I'm a human being with opinions and so that gives me the ability to comment on what people should or shouldn't care about. I'm sure you and many others think we SHOULD care about migrant family separation. Anyways your whole point here is a red herring fallacy.

Third, you have not demonstrated that the concern most people are showing for the families is politically motivated because you have not supported your reasoning with empirical evidence. You are merely speculating.

I didn't claim that most are concerned about migrant family separation because they are looking to score political points. I'm sure people are genuinely concerned. This is a straw man. I said it was politicized, meaning that CNN and other news organizations as well as democratic leaders in the house and senate were using it to score political points. This got it hyped up and in the attention of the public eye. It was a very convenient tool to blast Donald trump on his aggressive immigration tactics.

If you want evidence that family separations are more prevalent, I could get you the recent number of google searches for migrant family separation vs suicide. Furthermore, you can absolutely look at twitter and news outlets and clearly see the focus is on migrant family separation, and not on vastly more important issues like cancer, or suicides, or a plethora of other things. You can also just look at how many news articles have been posted recently about it. I'm not going to be able to get you some peer reviewed paper though, but we can make a reasonable conclusion based on the social media footprint. I'm not saying this would be certain proof, but any reasonable person would accept that currently, the focus is likely on migrant family separation. Its a fad.

Fourth, your calculus for how much you feel others should be concerned about things is overly simplistic. For one thing, you again fail to provide empirical evidence that those responding to the family separations are not responding also to other matters, such as suicides.

I didn't claim it was a bulletproof calculation. It was a decent approximation to show the relative importance generally speaking. I actually even gave a justification or why it wouldn't be that simple by specifying that migrant family separations have less impact than deaths. Regardless, they also certainly aren't responding to other matters proportionally as much. If you look at twitter posts regarding suicide and twitter posts regarding family migrant separation for example, you will see that migrant separation is much more popular currently.

I just don't see any justification why we should care about 3000 people when there are millions dying. THe millions dying should take priority.

 

[serp777]

I could drive over a family of baby ducklings and use the OP's argument to justify that action. Unneeded harm to others is always immoral and should be avoided. What need is there to separate a mother from her baby?

I didn't say its needed. I'm not justifying Donald trump's actions. I Just don't understand why we should care about this issue when there are so many other important issues that should take precedence. The public is hysterical and obsessed with this relatively inconsequential issue currently.

 

[serp777]

This OP is nonsense.

Do you have any other brilliant contributions?

 

[serp777]

If you did, I would care precisely .00007% what I would care if you drove over a flock of 1000 chickens.

Your math is wrong, but you should definitely care a lot less about some ducklings being separated than a chicken genocide.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I didn't say its needed. I'm not justifying Donald trump's actions. I Just don't understand why we should care about this issue when there are so many other important issues that should take precedence. The public is hysterical and obsessed with this relatively inconsequential issue currently.

Your attitude is inexcusable. This problem can be easily fixed. You found some problems that are hard to fix and tried to use that as an excuse not to fix what we can fix.

We work on the big problems all of the time, but that is no excuse to ignore the small easily solved problems.

 

[serp777]

If you really think we should prioritize our actions this way, why did you spend your energies on this post?

Surely the fact that people care about suffering children more than you think they should is much less of a problem than all the things you listed off, too... as well as less of a problem than the suffering everyone is concerned about.

So what “percentage of caring” do you give to your concern that people care too much about immigrant kids being separated from their parents? I can only assume that you care more about this issue than you do about any other problem you’re aware of but not doing anything about, right?

Take the epidemic of opioid deaths: surely you’ve heard about it, right? So why are you spending time and energy to complain about kids too much when you could have used that time and energy doing something about that... or any other problem?

How did “people care too much about immigrant kids” become enough of a priority for you to work on it right now?

If you really think we should prioritize our actions this way, why did you spend your energies on this post?

This is a fallacious strawman and most of your post is just a repetition of this strawman. I never said anything about prioritizing actions. I simply talked about what we should care about. And even if I was talking about prioritizing actions based on this approach, this would only refer to larger global and political issues, not everything we do in life.

Nor does your point negate what I said at all. Even if I was acting hypocritical, i'm still rationally justified in caring way more about much larger issues.

Surely the fact that people care about suffering children more than you think they should is much less of a problem than all the things you listed off, too... as well as less of a problem than the suffering everyone is concerned about.

They should care about the millions of children dying every year from preventable diseases a lot more than a few separations. I care about more important and substantial issues.

Take the epidemic of opioid deaths: surely you’ve heard about it, right? So why are you spending time and energy to complain about kids too much when you could have used that time and energy doing something about that... or any other problem?

Another fallacious strawman which is the same as your first point essentially. Again i'm not saying everything in life needs to apply to my approach on how much to care about large political issues.

 

[serp777]

Your attitude is inexcusable. This problem can be easily fixed. You found some problems that are hard to fix and tried to use that as an excuse not to fix what we can fix.

We work on the big problems all of the time, but that is no excuse to ignore the small easily solved problems.

It was easily fixed. i don't think its a big deal at all, but people are losing their minds over it and they're so concerned about it. In fact i'm in favor of fixing it. I just don't really care about it because there are simply much bigger issues for me to care about before i care about such a small number. I also think your attitude is inexcusable. People like you get so concerned about these tiny, irrelevant issues and ignore the much more serious and pressing problems since they're too distracted.

 

[serp777]

I try not to hate Trump's fan base, but it isn't easy, my emotional response arises from a very genuine concern for the well being of others, not to mention the security and stability of this planet.

When you have people like this posting nonsense, trying to excuse or justify Trump's cruelty, you soon realise how desperate they are, and how ignorant they are.

These 'people' want to normalise pitilessness toward children and others, they are in my view, the worst of the worst of our kind. Certainly no friends of mine.

I'm not sure if you have reading comprehension problems or you're just blinded by emotion, but i never said Trump's actions are justified. In fact, I was just saying that i'm simply MORE concerned about the millions more preventable deaths that occur from actual, serious issues. I wouldn't be opposed at all to families being re united. I just don't care relative to the millions of childrens who die from preventable causes while we're over concerned about 3000 separations.

I couldn't tolerate being your friend in a million years given your lack of understanding, presumptuousness, and of course fallacious emotional appeals.

 

[serp777]

You are comparing 'accidents' with a deliberate act!

So? That's like saying "You're comparing losing 5 million in the stock market with 5 dollars getting pick pocketed!" Of course i'm more concerned about the 5 million. I couldn't care at all about the 5 dollars when i'm at risk of losing 5 million. The scale makes the deliberate part irrelevant to my point.

 

[serp777]

.... and if we are going to compare these two things, look at how much time and effort goes into preventing car accidents. From the decades of engineering of the cars themselves designed to prevent accidents and to prevent injuries or fatalities when accidents occur. Consider construction and engineering of roads. Not to mention the constant upkeep. Consider the billions of traffic signs and lights designed to prevent car accidents. Consider the manufacturing and maintenance of those signs. Consider the billions of pages of regulations and legislation all with the purpose of preventing car accidents. Consider the work of police and courts that enforce those laws designed to prevent car accidents, not to mention other emergency services that work to make car accidents survive-able. Consider all this time and effort dedicated to the issue of car accidents.

Now consider that for the other issue there have been some protests and demonstrations. Actually more time and effort has gone into separating these families than has gone into preventing the separations.

If the proportional response is off, it is off the other way.

There's still a lot more to do and that was just one example. How about preventable diseases in African countries that are hardly being addressed. Hundreds of thousands die from easily preventable causes like unclean drinking water and no TB vaccines. You're just addressing a red herring and missing my point.

 

[serp777]

12 jul 2018 stvdv 017 15

How you phrase it you practically say "I do not feel any empathy for them"

Its true. Its like saying "I don't care about 5 dollars being stolen when i'm at risk of losing 5 million in the stock market". its completely true. I simply can't care about all issues equally.

 

[serp777]

Because a governing regime that most people voted against instituted a policy that results in this immoral outcome.
As opposed to car accidents and suicide that most Government institutions attempt, however unsuccessfully, to prevent.
It's completely different.
Tom

I'm just going to copy paste a previous response:


Him/her: You are comparing 'accidents' with a deliberate act!


Me: So? That's like saying "You're comparing losing 5 million in the stock market with 5 dollars getting pick pocketed!" Of course i'm more concerned about the 5 million. I couldn't care at all about the 5 dollars when i'm at risk of losing 5 million. The scale makes the deliberate part irrelevant to my point.

 

[serp777]

Maybe study the Holocaust and see that this same exact tactic was used by the NAZI's, although they obviously took it much further.

According to an ICE spokesperson a couple of weeks ago, they estimate that about half of those trying to get in are likely legitimate refugees trying to save their families, including their children. Wouldn't you do the same if push came to shove? Would you want to be separated from your children?

The Trump administration created this mess, and now it's up to them to fix it. IMO, to defend the administration's actions is utterly deplorable, thus showing so little empathy even towards infants.

I gotta say that i'm so tired of this "Won't somebody think of the children" thing. I care about adults just as much as children and I don't defend the administrations actions. i just don't care about 3000 people relative to the millions who die of preventable causes.

Would you be happy knowing, if you were in Africa, that the United states was consumed with 3000 family separations, when they could save hundreds of thousands, including your family, from preventable diseases? I don't accept your emotional appear of "THINK IF IT WAS YOUR KIDS", Well let me tell you, I already did, and I'd rather have them separated than die.

 

[Sunstone]

Your math is wrong, but you should definitely care a lot less about some ducklings being separated than a chicken genocide.

You can't grasp a joke when you see it?

 

[Sunstone]

Who are you to tell people whether they can tell people what they should be concerned about? I'm a human being with opinions and so that gives me the ability to comment on what people should or shouldn't care about. I'm sure you and many others think we SHOULD care about migrant family separation. Anyways your whole point here is a red herring fallacy.

In the OP, you are not encouraging people to care about something, you are dictating to people how much they should care about this thing or that thing.

By the way, you don't seem to understand what a red herring fallacy is.

I didn't claim that most are concerned about migrant family separation because they are looking to score political points. I'm sure people are genuinely concerned. This is a straw man. I said it was politicized, meaning that CNN and other news organizations as well as democratic leaders in the house and senate were using it to score political points. This got it hyped up and in the attention of the public eye. It was a very convenient tool to blast Donald trump on his aggressive immigration tactics.

Fair enough.

If you want evidence that family separations are more prevalent, I could get you the recent number of google searches for migrant family separation vs suicide. Furthermore, you can absolutely look at twitter and news outlets and clearly see the focus is on migrant family separation, and not on vastly more important issues like cancer, or suicides, or a plethora of other things. You can also just look at how many news articles have been posted recently about it. I'm not going to be able to get you some peer reviewed paper though, but we can make a reasonable conclusion based on the social media footprint. I'm not saying this would be certain proof, but any reasonable person would accept that currently, the focus is likely on migrant family separation. Its a fad.

You seem to be confusing press coverage with what people care about. The two are separate things. Hence, your "evidence" that press coverage amounts to what people care about is weak.

I didn't claim it was a bulletproof calculation. It was a decent approximation to show the relative importance generally speaking. I actually even gave a justification or why it wouldn't be that simple by specifying that migrant family separations have less impact than deaths. Regardless, they also certainly aren't responding to other matters proportionally as much. If you look at twitter posts regarding suicide and twitter posts regarding family migrant separation for example, you will see that migrant separation is much more popular currently.

I just don't see any justification why we should care about 3000 people when there are millions dying. THe millions dying should take priority.

Your calculation suffers not only from ultimately resting on subjective values -- that is you are arguing from "is" to "ought" -- but also for the reasons @9-10ths_Penguin laid out, which you failed to address in your "rebuttal" post. Merely declaring someone's post is a "straw man" does not make it one.

 

[stvdv]

14 jul 2018 stvdv 017 62

Deaths from car accidents are 1.3 million and deaths from suicide are 43,000 per year. So why do we care so much about some kids being separated? Its just a fallacious appeal to emotion-- "WON'T SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!! =-(". I really don't get it.

I care about migrant family separations compared to car accidents about 3000 / 1.3 million %.... At best that's .2%.
Where's the logic in me caring about family separations of migrants when so many die in car accidents, for example?
And let me also just mention that this has been happening for several decades, and nobody has cared or mentioned it at all. This is simply politicized nonsense.

I get it "that you don't get it", you made that obvious
1: You compare "accidental accidents" with "deliberately harmful separation" [harmony becomes useless harm]
2: Your point would ONLY make sense if you had said "Let these families stay together, it's just 0.2%. Focus on main issues". As you claimed "let's not focus on 0.2%....politicized nonsense"