Course Project: Final Paper
Assignment: Should there be a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants
currently residing in the U.S.?
Week 1 Topic selection:
PHIL347
Course Project: Topic Selection
1. My argument will provide reasons related to the following question:
__Should there be a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants
currently residing in the U.S.?
_________________________
2. __YES____My argument will support this claim as true; my answer to the
question is “yes.
”
_
NO_____My argument will not support this claim and will oppose this
claim as false; my answer to the question is “No.”
3. Stated argumentatively, I think the three most important issues around this
topic are:
(1) _
Would providing a pathway to citizenship for undocumented
immigrants benefit the U.S. economy?__________________________
(2) _Does creating a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants
support basic human rights and moral
obligations?__________________________
(3) __Would offering a path to citizenship improve national security and
immigration enforcement.
_________________________
State the issues argumentatively–that means a question that could be
answered with a yes or no answer.
Examples of the three issues:
1. Will the costs of providing free healthcare to undocumented persons be
prohibitively high?
2. Do we have a moral obligation to provide healthcare to those who have
sought shelter within our borders?
3. Is the public health of the nation vulnerable to the health of
undocumented persons, specifically by those with communicable
diseases such as tuberculosis and by unvaccinated persons?
Week 5:
Topic Selection:
Should there be a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants currently residing in the U.S.?
Part 1: Thesis Statement
The United States should establish a fair and organized pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants living within its borders. This initiative would not only boost the national economy by formally integrating a crucial workforce but also reinforce essential human rights by providing legal recognition and protection to at-risk communities. Furthermore, it would strengthen national security by bringing millions of undocumented individuals into a system that promotes accountability, documentation, and legal participation. Critics claim that such a measure might reward illegal actions and prompt future unauthorized immigration. Nevertheless, a pathway to citizenship would not guarantee automatic amnesty; instead, it would create a legal process that encourages adherence to laws while enhancing border security. This comprehensive strategy effectively addresses practical, ethical, and security issues, presenting a solution that is both compassionate and strategically advantageous.
Part 2: Annotated Bibliography
1. Kisa, S., & Kisa, A. (2024). “No Papers, No Treatment”: a scoping review of challenges faced by undocumented immigrants in accessing emergency healthcare. International Journal for Equity in Health, 23(1), Article 184. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-024-02270-9
This scoping review highlights the systemic healthcare barriers that undocumented immigrants encounter in the U.S., such as their fear of deportation, challenges with insurance, and linguistic hurdles. The authors thoughtfully analyze peer-reviewed studies from various populations and conclude that legal status plays a crucial role in determining access to timely and quality care.
In this paper, I will utilize this source to demonstrate my argument that establishing a pathway to citizenship fundamentally promotes the protection and enhancement of human rights. The evidence presented indicates that when undocumented individuals attain legal status, there is a marked and significant improvement in their health outcomes. This correlation highlights the ethical dimension of my thesis, demonstrating that granting citizenship not only promotes personal well-being but also aligns with the broader principles of justice and equality that are essential in a humane society. Ensuring access to health care and social services upholds the dignity and rights of all, reinforcing the case for humane and just immigration policy.
2. Martinez, O., Wu, E., Sandfort, T., Dodge, B., Carballo-Dieguez, A., Pinto, R., Rhodes, S., Moya, E., & Chavez-Baray, S. (2015). Evaluating the Impact of Immigration Policies on Health Status Among Undocumented Immigrants: A Systematic Review. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 17(3), 947–970. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-013-9968-4
This systematic review provides an in-depth exploration of the multifaceted ways in which immigration policies impact the health of undocumented immigrants. It accurately highlights the associations between restrictive immigration policies and a range of negative health outcomes, including heightened stress levels, increased rates of depression, and overall poorer physical health. Furthermore, the authors contend that access to legal protections and stability can significantly enhance both mental and physical health for these individuals, suggesting that policy reform aimed at providing such protections may have critical implications for improving the health and well-being of undocumented populations.
Incorporating this source will strengthen my argument about the negative impacts of current immigration policies on undocumented communities. The evidence compellingly shows that legal pathways for undocumented individuals could help address health disparities and reduce systemic challenges from legal uncertainties. Overall, a more inclusive immigration approach enhances individual well-being and supports the broader goals of equity and justice for all immigrant populations.
3. Higuera, K., & Jiménez, T. R. (2023). Mechanism mapping: A qualitative study of how different forms of instability mediate the relationship between legal status and immigrant mental well-being. Social Science & Medicine (1982), 329, Article 116034. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116034
This article explores the experiences of undocumented individuals and those in the DACA program through personal interviews. It reveals the emotional struggles they face due to the uncertainty of their legal status, including the fear of deportation and challenges in planning for the future. The piece argues that this legal instability leads to ongoing emotional distress and mental health issues. By sharing these insights, the article calls for greater awareness and policy changes to help ease their psychological burdens.
In my research, I plan to utilize this source as a vital support for my assertion that legal recognition plays a significant role in enhancing the mental health of both individuals and communities. The interviews provided in this source offer valuable personal perspectives that not only support my argument but also add depth to the human aspect of my case for a pathway to citizenship. By highlighting these personal narratives, I aim to illustrate how legal recognition can positively impact mental well-being and foster a greater sense of belonging within the community, ultimately contributing to healthier and more cohesive social environments.
4. Potochnick, S., Mikkelsen, I., Gallo, L. C., Isasi, C. R., Gonzalez, F., & Perreira, K. M. (2024). Immigrant Parent Legal Status and Children’s Health in the Hispanic Community Health Study of Latino Youth (SOL Youth). Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 26(3), 461–473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10903-023-01573-3
This longitudinal study provides a valuable look into health disparities among children, particularly focusing on how their parents’ legal immigration status impacts their well-being. The findings reveal that children of undocumented parents face significantly higher risks of a variety of health-related challenges. These children are more likely to experience negative physical health conditions, heightened stress levels, and limited access to essential medical care and support services. This emphasizes the pressing need for tailored interventions and policy reforms that can address these inequities and improve health outcomes for these vulnerable groups.
In the context of this project, I will utilize this specific source to comprehensively illustrate the broader effects that undocumented status has on families as a whole. This evidence underpins my argument that creating pathways to citizenship serves not only to benefit individuals directly but also significantly enhances health and quality of life outcomes for future generations within those families. Therefore, it can be accurately stated that this proposed reform is fundamentally family-centered, prioritizing the well-being of entire households over isolated benefits.
5. Ommerborn, M. J., Ranker, L. R., Touw, S., Himmelstein, D. U., Himmelstein, J., & Woolhandler, S. (2022). Assessment of Immigrants’ Premium and Tax Payments for Health Care and the Costs of Their Care. JAMA Network Open, 5(11), e2241166–e2241166. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.41166
This insightful study draws on national survey data to explore the vital contributions of immigrants to our healthcare system. It highlights that immigrants, particularly those who are undocumented, contribute significantly more in taxes and premiums than they receive in benefits, resulting in a positive net surplus.
This source underpins my economic argument. The evidence shows how undocumented immigrants positively contribute to public systems instead of draining them. Creating a legal pathway boosts their economic contributions, helping them engage in society and enhancing community stability. Increased contributions lead to stronger public services and better infrastructure. Recognizing the positive role of undocumented immigrants is essential for effective economic policies that benefit everyone.
Week 6
Course Project: Argumentative Paper Checklist
To successfully complete this assignment, review this material:
· Textbook: Chapters 12 and 13.
· Week 6 Lesson
Introduction
This checklist should be the final step as you prepare to write your argumentative essay. You should have completed your research and thought about what you will write and how you will present it. This checklist will help you to organize your points and make sure you have good support for your argument, as well as an effective response to opposing arguments.
Instructions
This assignment is worth 30 points. To successfully complete this assignment, you must respond to the seven (7) bold-faced writing prompts.
Questions
1. What question am I answering?
Answer:
Should there be a fair and organized pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants currently residing in the United States?
2. What is my conclusion? (For example: defunding the police is not a good idea)
Answer:
Yes, the United States should establish a fair and organized pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants living within its borders.
3. What are my reasons? Very briefly, state your conclusion as “therefore” and your reasons as “because”.
· BECAUSE a pathway to citizenship would formally integrate undocumented immigrants into the economy, strengthening national productivity.
· BECAUSE it would uphold essential human rights by offering legal protection and stability to vulnerable communities.
· BECAUSE it would improve national security through documentation, accountability, and legal participation.
· THEREFORE, the United States should establish a fair and organized pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants.
4. Each of your reasons as
1) strongly relevant and supportive
2) relevant, but not strongly supportive
3) needs work
Reason One
A pathway to citizenship would formally integrate undocumented immigrants into the economy, strengthening national productivity. Rating 1: Strongly relevant and supportive
This reason is backed by economic studies showing that undocumented immigrants contribute more in taxes and labor than they receive in public benefits.
Reason Two
It would uphold essential human rights by offering legal protection and stability to vulnerable communities. Rating 1: Strongly relevant and supportive
This directly supports the ethical component of the thesis and is supported by evidence from healthcare and mental health research.
Reason Three
It would improve national security through documentation, accountability, and legal participation. Rating 1: Strongly relevant and supportive
This addresses the counterargument about public safety and demonstrates how legal pathways can enhance oversight and reduce fear-based disengagement.
Examine your because/therefore statement. Are the reasons you plan to develop supportive of your conclusion? Suppose one of your reasons is that defunding will cause police officers to be laid off – they will be out of work and may have trouble finding other jobs.
a. Defunding could certainly have such a result, but is it a good reason? If an institution is fundamentally flawed and considered harmful, then the fact that people won’t have jobs in that institution will not be convincing to opponents.
b. Your opponents – people who want to police defunded – aren’t going to care if people lost their jobs – your opponents want fewer police.
5. For each of your stated reasons, list the type of evidence you think you will need
Reason One
A pathway to citizenship would formally integrate undocumented immigrants into the economy, strengthening national productivity.
· Statistical evidence: tax contributions, employment data.
· Expert opinion: economists on immigration impact
· Textual evidence: peer-reviewed economic research which is supported by Ommerborn et al., 2022.
Reason Two
It would uphold essential human rights by offering legal protection and stability to vulnerable communities.
· Factual evidence: healthcare access and barriers.
· Expert opinion: health/medical scholars
· Textual evidence: from medical and public health journals which is supported by Kisa & Kisa, 2024; Martinez et al., 2023.
Reason Three
It would improve national security through documentation, accountability, and legal participation.
· Statistical evidence: crime rate comparisons
· Factual evidence: civic participation patterns
· Textual evidence: from criminology or policy journals as supported by the article from Light et al., 2020.
a. Supporting reason 1 – type of evidence needed
b. Supporting reason 2 – type of evidence needed
c. Supporting reason 3 – type of evidence needed
For each of your reasons, ask yourself if you have recent credible and authoritative evidence to support that argument. What kind of evidence will you need? Obviously, one type of evidence would be statistics on crime increases in cities that have defunded police. Here is a list of types of evidence:
· Factual evidence
· Expert opinion
· Statistical evidence
· Textual evidence from a source document, for example, studies, surveys, research papers
· Analogical evidence – comparisons to similar situations
6. What is the strongest opposing argument?
ANSWER
One of the key concerns people express is that offering a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants might encourage more unauthorized immigration. Some critics feel that this kind of policy could come across as rewarding those who entered or stayed in the country without proper authorization, which might motivate others to follow suit. This worry connects to broader discussions about border security and upholding the rule of law, making it a significant challenge for immigration reform.
For this part of the checklist, choose just one opposing argument: the one you believe may be the strongest opposing argument. For example, in an argument supporting defunding police, a strong opposing argument would be that when police departments’ budgets are cut, violence and civilian injuries increase.
7. How can you best respond to that argument in a way that will convince your audience to agree with your conclusion? Look at the following checklist of possible responses to opposing arguments (Graff & Birkenstein, 2009). Which one(s) will work best for your argument?
ANSWER:
I believe the best responses would be:
a. Though I concede that offering a path to citizenship may raise concerns about incentivizing future unauthorized immigration, I still insist that a well regulated legalization process, paired with stronger border enforcement, discourages unlawful entry while bringing millions into a system of accountability.
b. While it is true that legalizing undocumented immigrants could be seen as rewarding illegal actions, it does not necessarily follow that such a policy will lead to increased illegal immigration, especially when combined with strategic oversight, legal vetting, and border protections.
Instructions
Required Resources
Read/review the following resources for this activity:
· Textbook Publication Manual of the American Psychological AssociationAuthors: American Psychological AssociationPublisher: American Psychological Association (APA)Publication Date: 2019-10-01 Edition: 7th
· APA Reference: American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). American Psychological Association.
· Your WEEK 1, WEEK 5, WEEK 6, AND Argumentative Paper Checklist
Week 7 Assignment
This week, all the hard work you have done in researching your topic and issue will come to fruition in your argumentative paper. Address the requirements below to complete your paper:
- Follow the directions in the assigned textbook reading on how to write an argumentative essay on the issue you chose in Week 1.
- Write a 6 page argumentative essay on your chosen topic.
- Be sure your essay contains the following:
·
o An opening paragraph that states a clear thesis that is focused, plausible, and arguable and that gives direction and purpose to the paper
o A fair-minded, balanced, and objective development of the pros and cons of the issue in a well-organized sequence of ideas, free of mechanical errors
o Credible, reliable, and authoritative evidence in support of the points made
o A minimum of five authoritative sources that support your claim
o A strong conclusion that summarizes your views, reminds the audience of the issue and its importance, and shows in brief that you have successfully defended your thesis
- Once you feel you have got the final draft, try to put the paper aside, even for a few hours, and then read it again.
- Consider these questions when you review your paper:
·
o Did you address at least three aspects of the issue you chose?
o Does each aspect have relevant and authoritative evidence in support of your point?
o Have you included a view that is in opposition to your viewpoint, and have you answered that opposing view, pointing out its flaws in such a way as to refute it?
- Edit your paper
·
o Look for wordiness, repetition, vagueness, and ambiguity.
o Check the organization of the paper as a whole; make sure each paragraph maintains focus.
o After you are satisfied that the content of your paper is good, carefully proofread it and correct mechanical errors.
Writing Requirements
· Length: 6 pages (not including title page or references page)
· 1-inch margins
· Double spaced
· 12-point Times New Roman font
· Title page
· References page
Grading
This activity will be graded using the W7 Course Project Grading Rubric.
Outcomes
· CO 4: Evaluate arguments by applying standard tests.
· CO 5: Evaluate the role of cognitive bias and fallacies of relevance in critical reasoning and decision-making.
· CO 6: Apply principles of critical reasoning to political, educational, economic, and/or social issues.
· CO 7: Create a fallacy-free argument that incorporates principles of ethical decision-making.
Due Date
By 11:59 p.m. MT on Sunday
Rubric
Course Project: Final Paper Rubric
Course Project: Final Paper Rubric
Criteria
Ratings
Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeLength
5 ptsMeets length requirement, 4-6 pages
0 ptsDoes not meet length requirement
5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFocus and Organization – Clarity
40 ptsThe essay presents a thesis statement that is exceptionally clear, focused, and effectively guides the reader through the main argument. It succinctly encapsulates the essence of the essay’s position and sets a strong foundation for the subsequent discussion. The essay maintains focus throughout.
34 ptsThe thesis statement is clear and focused, providing a solid foundation for the essay’s argument. It effectively outlines the main points of discussion and guides the reader, though there may be minor room for improvement in terms of precision or depth. The essay maintains focus, with few instances of tangential discussion.
28 ptsThe thesis statement is clear, providing a foundation for the essay’s argument. It outlines the main points of discussion. The essay mostly maintains a focus on the throughout, with some instances of tangential discussion.
25 ptsThe thesis statement lacks clarity and focus, making it difficult for the reader to discern the main argument of the essay. It may be too broad or vague, failing to provide clear guidance for the subsequent discussion. The essay struggles to maintain focus.
0 ptsThe thesis statement is unclear, unfocused, or entirely absent, hindering the reader’s ability to understand the main argument of the essay. Its quality is severely lacking, resulting in a disjointed or confusing presentation of ideas. The essay lacks focus with significant digressions and off-topic discussions that obscure the central argument.
40 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReasoning
40 ptsThe essay demonstrates sophisticated reasoning, with well-developed arguments that anticipate and address counter arguments effectively. Logical reasoning and critical thinking skills are consistently applied throughout the essay
34 ptsThe essay presents sound reasoning, with clear arguments supported by relevant evidence. Counter arguments are addressed. Reasonable inferences support conclusions and there is evidence of good critical thinking skills
28 ptsThe essay provides reasonable arguments, but there may be gaps in logic or limited consideration of counterarguments. Reasoning is generally sound but may lack depth or complexity.
25 ptsThe essay lacks coherent reasoning, with weak or unsupported arguments. Counterarguments are either ignored or addressed inadequately, and logical fallacies may be present.
0 ptsThe essay demonstrates little to no logical reasoning. Arguments are unsupported or based on flawed reasoning, and counterarguments are neither acknowledged nor addressed effectively.
40 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQuality of Evidential Support
40 ptsThe essay provides a wealth of relevant and credible evidence to support each argument. Sources are recent, authoritative, and predominantly from scholarly works. Evidence is effectively integrated into the essay and critically analyzed to strengthen the argument. Throughout, contains factual and accurate, detailed, current information to provide strong support for the thesis statement and the topics addressed in the body.
34 ptsThe essay utilizes a variety of relevant evidence to support arguments. While sources are generally credible, there may be occasional lapses in recency or authority but sources are primarily scholarly. Evidence is mostly well-integrated into the essay.
28 ptsThe essay presents evidence to support arguments, but there may be instances of insufficient or tangentially related evidence. The integration of sources could be improved for greater effectiveness. Most sources are scholarly.
24 ptsThe essay lacks sufficient or appropriate evidence to support arguments. Sources may be unreliable or irrelevant, and there is little analysis of evidence provided. There are few or no scholarly sources.
0 ptsThe essay relies heavily on anecdotal evidence or fails to provide any substantive evidence to support arguments. Sources, if any, are poorly integrated or lack credibility.
40 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCoherence
40 ptsThe essay demonstrates exceptional coherence, with seamless transitions between ideas and paragraphs. Each paragraph contributes to the overall coherence of the argument, and the flow of the essay enhances readability and comprehension.
34 ptsThe essay maintains coherence, with clear connections between ideas and paragraphs. Transitions are generally smooth, though there may be occasional lapses that do not significantly detract from the overall coherence.
28 ptsThe essay exhibits some coherence, but there are noticeable disruptions in the flow of ideas. Transitions between paragraphs may be abrupt or unclear, impacting the overall coherence of the argument.
24 ptsThe essay lacks coherence, with disjointed or unrelated ideas presented throughout. Transitions between paragraphs are often absent or ineffective, hindering the reader’s understanding of the argument.
0 ptsThe essay is highly disjointed, with little to no coherence between ideas or paragraphs. Transitions are nonexistent or confusing, making it difficult for the reader to discern the argument’s progression.
40 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTone
15 ptsThe essay maintains a consistently appropriate academic tone throughout, using formal language and demonstrating a thorough understanding of the subject matter.
13 ptsThe essay generally maintains an appropriate academic tone, with occasional lapses in formality or language usage. Overall, the tone is respectful and scholarly.
9 ptsThe essay’s academic tone is somewhat inconsistent or inappropriate at times. Language may be overly casual or informal, detracting from the overall professionalism of the essay.
7 ptsThe essay’s academic tone is largely inappropriate, with frequent lapses in formality or professionalism. Language may be colloquial or overly subjective, undermining the credibility of the argument.
0 ptsThe essay’s academic tone is consistently inappropriate or absent. Language is highly informal or unprofessional, and the essay may contain slang, personal opinions, or other elements that are not conducive to scholarly discourse.
15 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMechanics: Punctuation, Spelling, and Capitalization
10 ptsVirtually free of punctuation, spelling, or capitalization errors.
8 ptsOccasional punctuation, spelling, or capitalization errors.
7 ptsMany punctuation, spelling, or capitalization errors. Interfere with meaning in some places.
6 ptsPunctuation, spelling, or capitalization errors that hinder communication.
0 ptsSevere punctuation, spelling and capitalization errors.
10 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA Format
10 ptsContains properly formatted APA requirements, all 5 criteria: a. Length: 4-6 pages; b. 1-inch margins ; c. Double spaced; d.12-point Times New Roman font; e.Title page.
8 ptsContains mostly properly formatted APA (3 of the 5 criteria): a. Length: 4-6 pages; b. 1-inch margins ; c. Double spaced; d.12-point Times New Roman font; e.Title page.
7 ptsContains some properly formatted APA (3 of the 5 criteria): a. Length: 4-6 pages; b. 1-inch margins ; c. Double spaced; d.12-point Times New Roman font; e.Title page.
6 ptsContains a few properly formatted APA (2 of the 5 criteria): a. Length: 4-6 pages; b. 1-inch margins ; c. Double spaced; d.12-point Times New Roman font; e.Title page.
0 ptsNo APA formatting
10 pts
Total Points: 200