1
INTRODUCTION
“I remember when crossing the border was not dangerous at all, I crossed the
border without any documents three different times without facing any problems. The
first two times I made line like everyone else and then when it was finally my turn the
officer asked me “are you a U.S. citizen?” I responded yes and there I was en el otro lado
[on the other side]. The third time it was a little harder so I crossed through the cerro
[mountain], and now I cannot find a way to cross into the U.S. without putting my life in
danger. Imagine that, I lived in the U.S. for 30 years and now I cannot get back to my
children. I have no idea what I am going to do, but one thing is for sure I am not staying
in Mexico – I am going back. I was born in Mexico but my life is not here, my life is en
el otro lado [on the other side]. Even if Trump doesn’t want me, I will get back to my
kids I want to be in the U.S. and no matter what I have to do or how long it takes I will
make it happen.”
-Anonymous, Shelter for Migrants, Tijuana, B.C. Mexico2017
The U.S.-Mexico border is estimated to be 1,954 miles (3,145 kilometers) long,
and it is divided by fences, signs, border patrol agents, and heavy surveillance (Figure 1).
The borderland between Mexico and the U.S. was established by the Treaty of Guadalupe
Hidalgo in 1848 and the Gadsden Purchase in 1853 (Cadaval, 2016). This geopolitical
border begins on the west coast of the North American Continent between the cities of
Tijuana (on the south side of the border in Mexico) and San Diego (on the north side of
the border in the U.S.). It continues across a vast region, cutting through several states on
both sides, to terminate near the Gulf of Mexico in the border towns of Brownsville
2
(U.S.) and Matamoros (Mexico). This geopolitical division goes through deserts,
mountains, rivers, and other geospatial regions. Importantly, some of the lands that mark
this border division are Native American land. Some of these regions are used as natural
barriers to prevent undocumented border crossers from entering the U.S.
Figure 1: Geopolitical border between the U.S. and Mexico. Gates, G. (2016, September 21). [Digital
image]. Retrieved from https://www.smithsonianmag.com/travel/myth-reason-mexican-border-180960357/
The terrains most commonly used for these purposes are the desert areas along the
border. For example, Figure 2 demonstrates one of the crossing terrains between
California and Baja California. This area is very mountainous and rocky, it reaches an
altitude of 1,210 feet, and it has one of the most dangerous roads in all of Mexico, along
with high winds and extreme climates. It is common to find cargo trucks and cars that
drive off the road in La Rumorosa mountains. Furthermore, another common route for
migrants is the Sonoran Desert, which starts in the southeast region of California and
Baja California, and it ends in Southern Arizona and Sonora. The Sonoran Desert is
known for its extreme climates, dangerous animals, and overall unforgiving environment
3
(De Leon, 2015). Even so, many migrants decide to cross through this region and thus the
Sonoran Desert has seen the largest number of border crosser deaths in the last two
decades (CBP, 2017). Nevertheless, every day undocumented individuals attempt to enter
the U.S. through its southern border.
Figure 2: La Rumorosa: crossing area for migrants. Tecate, Baja California, Mexico. March 27, 2018
Individuals migrate into the U.S. for various reasons, including to seek asylum
and shelter. This is done in order to escape violence, persecution, environmental factors,
and poverty, among other individual reasons later discussed in the thesis. People
migrating into the U.S. come from various parts of the globe, commonly but not limited
to: Central America, South America, Africa, Europe, and the Middle East. For many who
migrate through Mexico or are Mexican, their ultimate goal is to enter the U.S. in order to
find “El sueño Americano” [“the American Dream”]. The American Dream is a concept
4
that has been created around the social and cultural ideas that living in the U.S. provides
people with the opportunity to support their family while living comfortably by working
hard and earning their wages in U.S. dollars (Marroni, 2006). Thus, most individuals who
are migrating do so in order to escape forms of structural violence which they face in
their homelands and to find social, economic, and political stability based on the
American Dream.
The U.S. created a border force to decrease the number of undocumented border
crossers into the country. The border force implemented by the U.S. government is a
militarization effort primarily put in effect throughout all the southern border in which
different preventive measures are utilized to prevent unauthorize persons and materials
from entering the country (CBP, 2018). Furthermore, the militarization efforts by the
U.S. government further divides the neighboring countries. This division between
Mexico and the U.S. produces a geopolitical separation that divides people based on
nationality, meaning that people are labeled based on the geographical space where they
were born. Due to this division people are either a U.S. citizen or not, and each
citizenship grants different rights, privileges, and disadvantages. People who are born in
the U.S. have opportunities that allow them to live inside the U.S. and migrate to
different regions around the world, and also return to the U.S. with relative ease. On the
other hand, those who are born outside of the U.S., such as in Mexico, Central America,
and South America, face difficulties when trying to migrate, especially when they are
trying to migrate into the U.S. Due to the geopolitical border that divides Mexico and the
U.S., people who attempt to enter the U.S. without proper documentation often face
5
consequences that could range from rapid deportation to death. From 1998 to 2018, more
than 6,000 migrants are estimated to have lost their lives while trying to clandestinely
enter the U.S. through its southern border (CBP, 2017). Out of the 6,000 migrant remains
found, the majority have yet to be identified, which prevents them from being repatriated
to their land of origin and leaves families in the dark about the fate of their loved ones
(Illingworth, 2015). Some of the actors involved in the identification process are forensic
anthropologists working with medical examiners at local facilities such as Maricopa
County, Pima County, and at nonprofit agencies such as the Colibrí Center for human
rights.
Clandestine migration has been a taboo subject in the U.S. for decades now. The
status of undocumented or illegal migrants labels people as “criminals” or more
commonly “illegal aliens.” Because of the labels given to these individuals law
enforcement, in particular the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and police officers, have persecuted
undocumented migrants. During February 2017, ICE conducted raids throughout the
country arresting close to 700 undocumented immigrants or "criminal aliens" as they are
labeled (Hernández, Lowery, and Hauslohner, 2017). Immigrants in the U.S. are often
perceived as a disposable commodity that could be quickly forgotten and replaced (Vogt,
2013). Most U.S. policies created around migration do not incorporate the idea that
migrant lives are meaningful and therefore should be safeguarded from all harm; instead,
many of the policies being proposed and implemented negate their right to life. Thus,
there is a need for applied anthropology at the U.S.- Mexico border. The need to decrease
6
the number of deaths and assist in the identification and retrieval process of human
remains at the border is undeniable, and it is urgent. There is a need to understand the
roles of those who work with remains, especially those who work where human right
violations have occurred.
This thesis project revealed different questions pertaining to the relationship
between forensic anthropologists, medicolegal agents, and non-governmental
organizations and their roles with respect to migrant remains and their families. In order
to create a multidisciplinary and holistic approach that aids in solving the humanitarian
crisis present in the U.S.-Mexico border, it is important to acknowledge the various
factors and agents that influence migration and the death of migrants.
The following central questions arose while conducting this thesis:
1. How important is it for families and friends to learn about the whereabouts and
condition of their deceased loved ones?
2. What happens to the remains of individuals who are not identified?
3. What can forensic anthropologists, medicolegal offices, and other agencies do in
order to help and collaborate with the families of unidentified migrants who die
across the border region between the U.S. and Mexico?
These questions determined the objectives of this thesis, which were:
1. Understand the responsibilities of forensic anthropologists, medicolegal agents,
and others who interact with migrant remains.
2. Understand the rights of the dead, specifically looking at migrant deaths.
7
3. Understand the needs and wants of the families of undocumented migrants and
migrants who plan to enter the U.S. through a clandestine path.
This research project aimed to better understand the complex relationships among
the above actors and between these actors and the communities that they serve. This was
done with an eye towards best practices for approaching and working with families of
undocumented migrants during the identification process, while evaluating the rights of
the dead. This was accomplished through fieldwork (secondary data analysis, surveys,
interviews, and participant observation) in Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico, in Phoenix,
Arizona, and through online sources. The results shed light on the prospective approaches
to facilitating the interaction between forensic anthropologists, medicolegal agents, non-
profit organizations who work with migrants, and migrants.
8
BACKGROUND
The following is a literature review of the U.S.-Mexico border, clandestine
migration and the role that forensic anthropologists have undertaken to address this topic
in theory and practice. Clandestine migration, in this case, is the migration of individuals
who enter the U.S. through its southern border without legal documentation. The purpose
of this background section is to present the history of the U.S.-Mexico border and how
the evolution of it has impacted undocumented migration. Then, methods and practices
utilized by forensic anthropologists and medicolegal examiners will be outlined. Also,
this section reviews some theoretical models that have been used to understand
undocumented migration into the U.S. Lastly, the rights of the death and the rights of
families of the victims are observed. Overall, this literature review allows for a better
understanding of the context of this study and the body of academic literature to which it
contributes.
U.S.- Mexico Border History
The geopolitical separation of the U.S. and Mexico
The history of this border has been in constant change since the moment of its
establishment, but for this study, only the most substantial changes that have influenced
migration and undocumented border crossing are discussed. Since the establishment of
the southern U.S. border there have been numerous changes in the way in which both the
public and the government perceive clandestine migration. Because of this there have
been changes in the prevention methods that are utilized to decrease the number of
9
undocumented border crossers. With this evolution of the U.S.-Mexico border, there has
been an increase in the number of deaths occurring at the border between the U.S. and
Mexico (Jimenez, 2009). The increase in the number of deaths has turned into a
humanitarian crisis, which has in turn led to a call for action to lower the death toll at the
border.
Border militarization
The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) was established in 1924. Before
1924 and as early as 1904, the work was performed by a group formed by U.S. citizens,
some worked for law enforcement agencies; this group was not funded by the U.S.
government. Support from the U.S. government came when Congress authorized the
hiring of border patrol agents on May 28, 1924 (U.S. Customs and Border Protection,
CBP through the years, 2017). According to CBP (2017) records, there has been a
constant increase in the number of CBP agents, especially those working in the Southern
sector of the U.S. (Figure 3). The rise of CBP agents reflects the surge of border
protection efforts in the U.S.
10
Figure 3:United States, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, “Border Patrol Agent Nationwide Staffing by
Fiscal Year,” https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2017-
Dec/BP%20Staffing%20FY1992-FY2017.pdf.
The increase in border protection and stricter immigration laws have taken place
during different U.S. presidential administrations. Importantly, the U.S.-Mexico border
11
region has had a long and unrecorded history – only the last few decades are on record
and therefore only those years can be adequately observed and analyzed (Palafox, 2000).
Thus, the effects of militarization at the border on undocumented border crossers is
insufficient and still much research needs to take place, but the following is a review of
the known impacts that militarization tactics have had on the border and undocumented
migration.
Militarization tactics at the border surged under President Ronald Reagan (1981-
1989) and increased under the Clinton administration (1993-2001) (Palafox, 2000; and
De Leon, 2012). Before 1994, the number of migrant deaths was not officially deemed a
humanitarian crisis due to the low number of documented deaths at the border.
Undocumented border crossers were known to use entry points that lead to populated
areas in the U.S. The urban city of San Diego, CA was known to be an accessible entry
port into the U.S. for undocumented border crossers (Nevins, 2008) (Figure 4). During
the Clinton administration ‘Operation Gatekeeper’ was established in 1994 by the
Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) to deter and secure passageways into the
U.S. through urban areas, such as San Diego, redirecting undocumented migrants to more
dangerous and secluded regions (De Leon, 2012; Hinkes, 2008; Jardine, 1998; Nevins,
2008; and Palafoz, 2000). ‘Operation Gatekeeper’ served to increase the number of U.S.
border patrol agents, technology, and infrastructure by the Border Patrol (Jardine, 1998).
After the operation was established and put into effect, there has been no solid evidence
confirming that prevention through deterrence has decreased the overall number of
clandestine migrant flow (Hinkes, 2008). On the other hand, the Sonora and Chihuahua
12
deserts (Figure 5) have seen an increase in the number of deaths since the enactment of
Operation Gatekeeper (Blust, 2016). After the implementation of a militarized border,
there has been an observable increase in undocumented migrant deaths (Blust, 2016; and
Hinkes, 2008).
Figure 4: Young people sprint across the I-5 Freeway with their pant legs still wet after walking in the
nearby Tijuana River in this 1990 file photo. Reprinted from “With only one left, iconic yellow road sign
showing running immigrants now borders on the extinct,” by C. Carcamo, 2017, Los Angeles Times.
Copyright [2018] by the Los Angeles Times.
13
Figure 5: Highlights of the Sonoran and Chihuahuan Deserts. Gilmore, D., & Gilmore, L. (2013). Where is
the Desert [Digital image]. Retrieved from http://www.in-the-desert.com/desert.html
Regardless of the high death toll of undocumented crossers and the lack of proof
that militarization decreases the overall number of border crossers, there have been new
laws that aim to increase militarized security and deter undocumented migration. In 2006,
during the second Bush administration, the “Secure the Fence Act” (Public Law 109-367)
was established. This particular act was created to “establish operational control over the
international land and maritime border of the U.S.” (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration
Services, 2006). The ultimate goal of this act was to construct a physical fence in the
border area from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico. Furthermore, this law aims to
secure the border by preventing illegal activities at the border and preventing
undocumented persons from entering the U.S. (Figure 6). During Bush's second
presidential term (2005-2009), nearly 700 miles of border fencing was built between the
two countries, covering a large portion of the total 1954-mile stretch. The construction of
the border fence stopped while President Obama was in office (2009-2017), but the
militarization at the border continued through the years.
14
Figure 6: Sign demarcating the boundary of the U.S. [Digital image]. (2014). Retrieved from NCAA
In November 2016, Donald Trump was elected President of the U.S. New
executive orders came with the election of President Trump regarding border security and
immigration enforcement. The foundation of some of these executive orders come from
Trump’s negative discourse on migration and refugees in the U.S., a discourse which also
formed the foundation of much of his presidential campaign. This thesis later discusses
the effects that President Trump’s dialogue had on the public’s perspective on migration
and refugees. One of Trump’s infamous allegations against undocumented migration is
that Mexico “takes advantage of the United States by using illegal immigration to export
their crime and poverty” (Trump, 2016). Thus, during his presidential campaign, one of
his solutions to the influx of “crime and poverty” into the U.S. was to build a physical
wall between the U.S. and Mexico – this solution offered by Trump is part of the
15
continuation of the "Secure the Fence Act" established by the Bush's administration in
2006.
Once in office, the first executive orders by President Trump were on border
security. The executive order: Border Security and Immigration Enforcement
Improvement, was released on January 25, 2017. This executive order, written by
President Trump, asserts that those who enter the U.S. clandestinely are people who seek
to harm Americans through acts of terror or criminal conduct (The White House, 2017).
Thus, undocumented migrants pose a significant threat to national security and public
safety. Therefore, the executive order proposes the following to deter undocumented
migration and stop “crime and poverty” from entering the U.S. through the following: 1)
secure the southern border by constructing a physical wall; 2) termination of “catch and
release”, and the enforcement of appropriate and consistent use of the lawful authority
under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 3) to return migrants to their place of
origin; 4) additional border patrol agents (approximately 5,000 agents); 5) the end of the
abuse of parole and asylum provisions used to prevent the lawful removal of removable
aliens; 6) reports of statistical data on aliens apprehended at or near the southern border
using methods that are accessible to the public; and 7) facilitate the hiring of personnel to
implement the overall order (The White House, 2017). Some of the results of the
executive order were observed from January 22 to September 9, when records showed
that nearly 54,000 immigrants who resided in the U.S. were deported (Sacchetti, 2017)
(Figure 7).
Sacchetti (2017):
16
Although the Trump administration’s chief goal is to deport criminals, it is still
expelling significant numbers of people who never committed any crimes. From
January to Sept. 9, ICE deported a total of 142,818 immigrants from the border
and the U.S. interior, including 83,254 people who were criminals and 59,564
who were not.
Figure 7: Newspaper article fron The Washington Post of ICE officers arresting a migrant. Sacchetti, M.
(2017, October 7). Deportations from the interior of the United States are rising under Trump. The
Washington Post, Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/immigration/deportations-from-
the-interior-of-the-united-states-are-rising-under-trump/2017/10/07/44a14224-a912-11e7-b3aa-
c0e2e1d41e38_story.html?utm_term=.18a32c299408
17
Nevertheless, based on previous militarization movements at the border, it is
reasonable to assume that undocumented border crossings will not diminish and that the
number of undocumented border crosser deaths will not decrease anytime soon. As
pointed out by Spradley (2016), as a result of prevention through deterrence, migrant
deaths began to rise. According to statistics gathered by the Pima County Medical
Examiner’s office (PCOME) in Arizona, over a ten-year period between 1990 and 1999,
129 deaths were recorded at the Arizona-Sonora border, equating to approximately 13 per
year (Reineke, 2016). Over the next five years (2000-2004), 802 deaths were recorded in
the same area, equating to approximately 160 per year, which is an increase of over
1200% (Spradley, 2016; Reineke, 2016; also see Martinez et al. 2013). These numbers
continue to rise. Between 2000-2018, an average of 170 recovered bodies or remains are
recovered per year from the desert in Arizona and taken to PCOME (Reineke, 2016). The
increase in deaths along the U.S.-Mexico border has prompted different efforts to avoid
fatalities and identify those who have died in the region.
Deaths and apprehensions
The number of undocumented migrants who are apprehended while attempting to
enter the U.S. has decreased, while the number of deaths has been rising. While legal
forms of migration occur on an everyday basis, there is an unknown number of people
who try to cross into the U.S. through paths that are more secluded and thus more
dangerous. Even so, some of these individuals are successful and enter the U.S. In 2015
alone, the population of migrants in the U.S. both legal and illegal was estimated to be
18
around 43.3 million (Migration Policy Institute, 2017). Still many are apprehended in the
attempts to enter the U.S., according to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency
(2017), 303,916 individuals were apprehended at the U.S. southern border by CBP
officials between October 1, 2016, and September 30, 2017 (Figure 8). These individuals
were apprehended throughout the southern U.S. border, and they reflect all the entry
points between the U.S. and Mexico. Moreover, the numbers of apprehensions at the
southern border have diminished significantly. From 1996 to 2006, millions of migrant
apprehensions in the U.S. southern border took place, from 2007 to 2017 the number of
apprehensions has been diminishing by the thousands. During 2017, this fluctuation of
migrant apprehensions can be observed by a decrease of 104,954 (25.67%) apprehensions
compared to the previous year (2016) (Figure 8).
Big
Bend
(formerly
Marta)
002}
031
684]
Del
Rio
United
States
Border
Patrol
Southwest
Border
Sectors
Total
Illegal
Alien
Apprehensions
By
Fiscal
Year
(Oct.
1st
through
Sept. 30th)
El
Centro
El
Paso
Laredo
Rio
Grande San
Diego
Tucson
Valley
(formerty
McAllen)
Yuma
137,
19
20
Figure 8:“United States Border Patrol Southwest Border Sectors Total Illegal Alien Apprehensions By
Fiscal Year.” BP Southwest Border Sector Apps FY1960 - FY2017, 2017,
www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2017-Dec/BP%20Southwest%20Border%20Sector%20
Due to the high number of undocumented migrants who try to enter the U.S.
through its southern border, together with governmental operations such as prevention
through deterrence, thousands of individuals have been found dead (Jardine, 1998). The
majority of deaths have taken place in the Sonoran Desert in Arizona (CBP, 2017; De
Leon, 2012; Martinez et al., 2014; Spradley, 2016). The leading causes of death of border
crossers are hypothermia, dehydration, and injury, especially in Arizona (De Leon, 2012).
The U.S. border patrol has recorded at least 7,216 deaths between October 1, 1998, and
September 30, 2017, throughout all of the U.S. southern border (CBP, 2017) (Figure 9).
United
States
Border
Patrol
Southwest
Border
Sectors
Southwest
Border Deaths
By
Fiscal
Year
(Oct.
1st
through
Sept.
30th)
“Data
may
be
subject
to
change
based
on
new
discoveries
of
remains
and
possible
dates
of
death
as
determined
by a
medical
examiner
21
22
Figure 9:United States, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, “Southwest Border Deaths by fiscal year,”
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2017-
Dec/BP%20Southwest%20Border%20Sector%20Deaths%20FY1998%20-%20FY2017.pdf.
The actual number of people that have lost their lives while crossing the border is
unknown; this is because the number of deaths recorded is based on remains found on the
U.S. side of the border at the most prominent routes used by clandestine migrants
(Illingworth, 2015). Importantly, migrant remains found by civilians, non-governmental
organizations, other law enforcement outside of CBP, and any other agency or individual,
are not included and recorded by CBP statistics. Therefore, not all migrant deaths are
reflected through these statistics. Migrants found dead on the Mexican side of the border
are not recorded either in CBP statistics. Again, these factors indicate the complex
relationships between migrant deaths and statistical records available to the public. Also,
due to the hazardous terrain and vast desert regions, it can be presumed that there are
human remains that have not been found or are beyond recognition due to fast
decomposition, extreme weathering, and wildlife disturbances.
Theoretical Models Pertaining to Clandestine Migration
Clandestine migration has been the topic of numerous studies; of interest to the
present thesis are those that attempt to understand the consequences of clandestine
migration, specifically through consideration of migrant deaths and the forensic
anthropologists who work to identify remains. Grounded theory and structural violence
theory were the fundamental frameworks for this thesis. Grounded theory is fully
discussed in the methods section of this thesis. Grounded theory allowed this project to
develop, while structural violence theory served to elucidate the context of migration and
23
the current humanitarian crisis at the U.S.- Mexico border, allowing this thesis to also
observe the structural racism that appears through the discourse of undocumented
migration.
Structural violence theory
Structural violence theory aims to interpret the different forms of social structures
that harm and disadvantage an individual (Burtle, 2010). According to Paul Farmer
(2009), in the article “On Suffering and Structural Violence: A view from below”, due to
social forces an individual can suffer at a personal level which can manifest through
distress and even disease. Farmer (2009) was able to expand on the individual lives of
two people who find themselves in economic despair, political instability, negative social
forces, and poor health. The aforementioned external influencers, which are all forms of
indirect violence (Farmer, 2004), are factors that are often present in structural violence
faced by migrants found throughout the U.S. southern border (Jácome, 2008; Martínez et
al., 2014). The most common consequences of structural violence are violent acts against
an individual or a community, most commonly seen through events such as torture, rape,
and kidnappings. However, there are other forms of indirect violence such as poverty,
hunger, marginalization, and health threats (Farmer, 2009; Jácome, 2008), and these
events often go unnoticed, as is the case with undocumented border crossers that lose
their life while trying to enter the U.S.
Raymond Michalowski (2007), concludes that the deaths of undocumented
border crosser are often viewed as "1) the unfortunate consequences of individual
24
decisions to risk their lives on a hazardous journey, and 2) the appropriate punishment for
breaking U.S. immigration laws" (p.63). Michalowski’s study highlights the failure to
understand that the decisions to migrate are often the consequences of more significant
economic, political, and social forces that are all beyond the control and power of an
individual (Farmer, 2009). To address this, Michalowski focuses on the militarization of
the border and the impact that such political decisions have had on the lives of
undocumented migrants. These three broad categories present the suffering of migrants
caused by militarization: "1) death, injury, and illness, 2) exploitation by drug cartels,
human traffickers, and even law enforcement, and 3) the dehumanization of migrants in
the form of criminalization, vigilantism, and abuses to human dignity" (Michalowski,
2007, p. 64). These categories of migrant suffering are resultant from the damaging
impacts that social, political, and economic structures have on individuals at a personal
level. This particular study led to the conclusion that there has been no evidence that a
militarized border has deterred people from making the hazardous journey into the U.S.
However, there is substantial evidence that this militarization of the border exposes
undocumented migrants to some if not all of the previously mentioned injuries caused by
social, political, and economic structures (Michalowski, 2007).
In 1994, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was put into
effect, causing thousands of people to seek jobs in the U.S. as job opportunities and
financial security declined in Mexico (Zamora, 2014). NAFTA is a treaty in which
Canada, Mexico, and the U.S. are freed from tariff to qualifying agricultural and
manufactured products. This treaty was created under the idea that it would bring rapid
25
economic growth to Mexico and benefit both Canada and the U.S. Nevertheless, this did
not occur, Mexico’s income per capita increased at an annual average rate of 1.2 percent
while Mexican unemployment rose (Council on foreign relations, 2017). The Centre for
Economic Policy Research (CEPR) economist’s Mark Weisbrot estimates that two-
million small-scale Mexican farmers were put out of work due to NAFTA (Council on
foreign relations, 2017). NAFTA, in Mexico, along with a new wave of economic and
financial reform produced the worst financial crisis in the country’s history (Zamora,
2014). People were forced to migrate to find employment and create financial stability for
themselves (Zamora, 2014). Thus, a new pattern of migration was formed as a
consequence of structural violence created through political decisions made by multiple
governments.
In another study titled “Structural Violence and Migrant Deaths in Southern
Arizona: Data from the Pima County Office of the Medical Examiner”, Martinez et al.
(2014) reflect on the recent evidence that undocumented migration from Mexico has
decreased since 2007; however, note that migrant deaths remain significantly high
(Reineke, 2016). Martinez et al. (2014) also mention the increase of border enforcement,
which leads unauthorized migration flow into desolated areas which coincide with the
rise in the number of migrant remains investigated by PCOME. Undocumented border
crossers are trying to enter the U.S. without being detected. Thus, they walk through the
most isolated paths found throughout the southern border where they face hazardous
terrain and human-made barriers. Therefore, Martinez et al. (2014) argue that these tragic
occurrences at the U.S. Mexico border, notably Arizona, are preventable and are a
26
reflection of structural violence occurring in this area. Structural violence in this area is
the consequence of the previously mentioned governmental and political decisions that
have been implemented to deter undocumented migration flow into the U.S.
The impact that political, economic, and social movements have on the life of
individuals, in this case undocumented border crossers, can be observed through
structural violence theory as previously discussed. Structural violence has shaped the
outcome of undocumented border crossers throughout the U.S.-Mexico border. The
increase in border militarization has funneled undocumented border crossers into the
most hazardous terrains at the border. These political decisions to redirect border crossers
have had deathly consequences for these individuals. The previously mentioned, studies
reflect how structural violence is a major influence in the increase of deaths at the border.
Structural Racism
Based on the implications that undocumented migration has on the individual and
expanding from structural violence theory, it can be determined that individuals crossing
the border while undocumented experience structural racism. Structural racism as defined
by Krieger et al. (1993) is “the exploitive and oppressive social relationships that
simultaneously define racial/ethnic groups and cause a system of inequalities that become
embodied as racial/ethic health inequalities” (p.938). Migrants who attempt to enter the
U.S. clandestinely and even migrants who are already on the U.S. side of the border
experience forms of structural racism. Different forms of structural racism are embodied
27
through the militarization of the border, the way in which migrants are treated, and the
militarization of the towns and cities surrounding the border area.
The definition of structural racism provided by Krieger et al. (1993) explicitly
explains that those who are exploited and oppressed based on their racial/ethnic groups
are experiencing forms of structural racism. Undocumented migrants are classified by
law enforcement and others based on their appearance; which often reflects certain forms
of clothing, tattoos, bottles of water, and religious symbols (De Leon, 2012). It seems that
an undocumented migrant is not specifically classified by their place of origin but rather
the appearance. A migrant from Mexico and a migrant form Honduras is not easily
distinguished from sight; thus, all fall under the same category of undocumented migrant.
Further, this same definition states that health inequalities are results of the exposure of
structural racism (Krieger et al., 1993). In this thesis migrant deaths are observed as a
form of consequence due the structural forms of violence that individuals face at the
U.S.-Mexico border while attempting to enter the U.S.
Through the lens of structural racism, it can be noted that the health inequalities
and disparities that migrants face while attempting to cross the desert (e.g. dehydration,
starvation, heat exhaustion, etc.) are caused by both structural racism and structural
violence faced at the U.S.-Mexico border. The role of structural racism on the lives of
undocumented migrants who seek to enter through the U.S. southern border could be
expanded based on the article “Everyday violence, structural racism and mistreatment at
the U.S.-Mexico border” (Sabo, Shaw, Ingram, Teufel-Shone, Carvajal, de Zapien,
Rosales, Redondo, Garcia, and Rubio-Goldsmith, 2014) which states that traumatic
28
events could manifest as stress and therefore increase the “risk for debilitating mental and
physical conditions”. The effects of structural racism, in this case, could even be
extended to the families and loved ones of migrants who are waiting on news of the status
of the person engaging in the journey. Additionally, as stated in this thesis families often
do not reach out to law enforcement agencies or other organizations due to the fear of
reprisal based on their migration status (see results section). Sabo et al. (2014) states that
“fear of reprisal, criminalization, and lack of pathways for resistance to human rights
violations” are also detrimental to health. Thus, structural racism does not only affect the
migrant attempting to enter the U.S. through its southern border but it also affects the
families and loved ones of these individuals.
Recovering, Identifying, and Repatriating the Remains of the Deceased
The identification of migrant remains and the actors involved
At least 7,216 migrants have died throughout the U.S. southern border, according
to CBP records, from 1996 to 2017 (Figure 9). This number only reflects the number of
remains found on the U.S. side of the border by border patrol agents. Thus, there is an
unknown totality of how many migrants have perished while trying to enter the U.S. The
remains that are recovered throughout the U.S. southern border go into the medical
examiner’s office or coroner’s office closest to the place where it was found. Remains are
then examined by forensic anthropologists or medicolegal agents and depending on the
availability of resources and information, different procedures are undertaken by these
professionals. For most of these remains, identification is not possible due to the
29
decomposition of the remains and the unavailability of information on governmental
databases and missing persons reports. Thus, most of these remains are left unidentified
and stored, buried, or cremated as John Doe, Jane Doe, or unknown.
The roles of forensic anthropologists
Forensic anthropologists work in many arenas. Forensic anthropologists have
worked to stand against human rights violations in different regions around the world.
The role of the forensic anthropologist when assisting in human rights cases has been to
aid in the identification of individuals, recovery of remains, and to speak for victims.
Importantly, there is a difference between humanitarian efforts and medicolegal
responses. Humanitarian efforts conducted by forensic anthropologists are to serve the
needs of the living by handling the dead (Komar and Buikstra, 2008). Thus, humanitarian
aid conducted by forensic anthropologists focuses on the recovery and identification of
remains (Komar et al., 2008, p.249). On the other hand, medicolegal responses are the
different methods utilized by forensic anthropologists to recover and identify remains. In
other words, humanitarian aid is the aid given to individuals who have suffered human
right abuses while medicolegal responses are the methods employed in order to conduct
the humanitarian aid.
There are several well-known examples of forensic anthropologists working on
human rights cases, including in Chile and Bosnia. During the dictatorial government of
Augusto Pinochet, in 1973 in South American country of Chile, an event occurred in
which eleven citizens went missing after being detained by local police agents, all male
30
between the ages of seventeen and fifty-one years. Commingled remains were later found
with some soft tissue; after being analyzed by forensic anthropologists, it was determined
that less than fifteen people were in the grave (Garrido Varas and Intriago Leiva, 2011).
Thirty-three years later, in March 2006, the judicial order to exhume the remains was
given due to the renewed interest of family members to identify the victims (Garrido
Varas et al., 2011). The call for the exhumation and identification of remains, made by
the loved ones of the victims, required the presence of forensic anthropologists and
archeologists to conduct the correct protocols and proper analysis. The objective of the
exhumation was to identify the victims of this case through the use of "taphonomic
analysis, reconstruction of the previously conducted biological profiles, establishment of
association between anatomical units, trauma analysis to conclude the cause of death, and
DNA sampling for analysis" (Garrido Varas et al., 2011, p. 20). Garrido Varas et al.
(2011) concluded that the mass grave had been in use before and after the deposition of
the remains of interest; 15 skulls were present at the grave site, which meant that if the
grave included the initially-missing 11 people, that four more individuals were later
placed in the grave as well. Through the use of the previously mentioned standard
anthropological methodologies, forensic anthropologists and archaeologists identified
nine individuals that had gone missing in the 1973 event (Garrido Varas et al., 2011).
Due to this study, the truth of the event in 1973 in Chile finally emerged, which meant
that victims were finally recognized and mourned by their loved ones. The truth behind
their deaths was known, and the government could no longer deny the execution of the
victims (Garrido Varas et al., 2011).
31
In 2001, two-hundred and ninety-eight human remains were exhumed in Bosnia-
Herzegovina by forensic anthropologists. During 1992, in Northwestern Bosnia (on the
Balkan Peninsula in southeastern Europe) hundreds of individuals lost their life due to
“ethnic cleansing” events that were occurring in the area (Baraybar and Gasior, 2006).
This particular event led to investigations carried out by forensic anthropologists and
pathologists who worked together to document demographic profiles of skeletal remains
and reconstruct skeletal trauma of the victims (Baraybar et al., 2006). Forensic
anthropologists analyzed the remains and depending on the analysis, aided in the
determination of the manner and cause of death of the victims by collaborating with
pathologists and be able to prosecute war crimes (Baraybar et al., 2006). The forensic
evidence gathered was utilized to report "the case to the Office of the Prosecutor of the
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) against Radoslav
Brdjanin for chargers of genocide, crimes against humanity, grave breaches of the
Genova Convention and violations of the law and customs of war during ethnic cleansing
of Northwest Bosnia" (Baraybar et al., 2006, p.103). Without the use of forensic
anthropology and pathology, it would not have been possible to determine the traumatic
events that occurred to the individuals and in turn understand the human right violations
that occurred and allow for proper prosecution of war crimes.
The previously mentioned studies reflect human rights abuses in Chile and
Bosnia, respectively, through acts of war against humanity. Both of these cases show a
significant difference in the number of persons being affected by human right violations,
but they are still considered to be war crimes, and in particular show aspects of genocide.
32
In articles II and III of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of
Genocide (Appendix M), the crime of genocide is described through two elements: 1) the
mental element which includes “the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national,
ethnical, racial or religious group” and 2) the physical element which can contain
conspiracy to commit, incitement to commit, attempt to commit, complicity, and
successful acts of genocide (Baraybar et al., 2006). Through this definition of genocide,
and the intent of the U.S. government policies and laws to diminish clandestine migration
through the act of forcing individuals to more secluded and hazardous terrain were death
finds many. This could then be viewed as an act of war against humanity, specifically
migrants. Thus, based on the aid previously given by forensic anthropologists, it can be
concluded that their expertise in identification and recovery of remains can aid the
humanitarian crisis at the U.S. southern region.
More specifically with respect to the U.S. Mexico border, anthropologists have
been involved in the recovery, identification and repatriation of migrant remains.
Forensic anthropologists have worked in this area through medical examiner’s offices
(such as Pima and Maricopa counties, along with other medical examiner’s offices that
reside near the border region) and other nonprofit organizations such as the Colibrí
Center for Human Rights. These organizations work closely with migrant remains in the
attempt to identify individuals and repatriate them to their corresponding place of origin.
Since most known deaths occur at the Sonoran Desert (Figure 5, above), more
specifically at the border of Arizona, most of the organizations and forensic
anthropologists working in the identification of migrant remains work in this area. For
33
example, the Colibrí Center for Human Rights is a non-profit organization that is formed
by different persons with different expertise including forensic anthropologists. Robin
Reineke, the forensic anthologist and co-founder of this nonprofit, works in collaboration
with Pima County of the Medical Examiner’s Office as a mediator between the families
of the victims and other forensic anthropologists working at Pima to identify migrant
remains. The humanitarian work of forensic anthropologists at the U.S. southern border
has been expanding and growing along with the humanitarian crisis in this area.
Methods and practices utilized by medicolegal agents and forensic anthropologists
Two primary goals when dealing with the remains of individuals is to identify the
remains and to determine the cause and manner of dead and ultimately repatriate remains.
In the case of migrant deaths at the border, due to the high number of individuals that are
found dead and need identification, forensic anthropologists and other medicolegal actors
have worked to improve upon the identification methods utilized for cases at the border.
Depending on the decomposition status of remains forensic anthropologists and
medicolegal examiners will determine how to proceed with the investigation. If the
remains are not skeletonized, an autopsy will be carried out by a medicolegal examiner,
most likely a government-employed medical examiner with a medical doctorate. The
methods most commonly utilized by medicolegal examiners are full autopsies (most of
the remains are present), and partial autopsies (partial remains present); each of these
allows for an investigation to take place to understand the cause of death of an individual
and, ideally, to identify the person (Komar and Buikstra, 2008).
34
If remains are mostly or fully skeletonized, forensic anthropologists are often
brought in to investigate. Forensic anthropologists aim to construct biological profile of
an individual, including estimation of sex, age, stature, ancestry, individualizing features,
trauma, and pathologies, and they also analyze postmortem taphonomic processes to
estimate environment of decomposition and time since death. Forensic anthropologists
are not able to concretely determine cause or manner of death from skeletal remains, but
they can provide information that can aid in the former.
Biological profiles constructed from analysis of skeletal remains are considered
circumstantial evidence of identification, along with things like paperwork, ID cards,
tattoos, clothing, and jewelry. To obtain a legal positive identification, medicolegal
examiners can also utilize methods such as fingerprinting, DNA, forensic odontology,
radiologic identification, and alternative medical imaging (Komar and Buikstra, 2008;
Anderson 2008). Methods for identification that are commonly employed for border
cases include methods aimed to match individuals to databases (e.g., genetics, biological
profiles, tattoos), but also include methods aimed at narrowing the region of geographical
origin (e.g., material culture and stable isotope analysis). These methods are detailed
below.
35
Forensic genetic data and cultural approaches. The motivation behind the study
titled “Temporal Patterns of Mexican Migrant Genetic Ancestry” (Hughes, Algee-Hewitt,
Reineke, Clausing, and Anderson, 2017) came from the humanitarian crisis along the
U.S.-Mexico border. This particular study focuses on both biological and cultural
approaches to better determine the origins of migrants, particularly those who migrate
from Mexico (Hughes et al., 2017). Hughes et al. (2017) focus on the socially constructed
factors that influence migrant life and migrant deaths, which in turn further affect the
positive identification of migrants.
The biological components of Hughes et al. (2017) study focus on mitochondrial
DNA (mDNA) which is often utilized to resolve unidentified person cases that cannot be
identified by any other means (Anderson, 2008). Therefore, the Mexican government
funded a program known as Sistema de Identificación Restos y Localización de
Individuos [Identification System of Remains and Localization of Individuals] (SIRLI) in
2005 to find Mexican citizens across the border (Anderson, 2008). It is important to
assess migrant identification possibilities by understanding the cultural differences as
well as the biological ones. Most individuals migrating come from regions where they
face structural violence, thus for some (even with programs such as SIRLI), it becomes
very complicated to locate the missing. For example, many migrants do not possess any
forms of western healthcare (Hughes et al., 2017); thus, identification methods utilized in
U.S. populations, such as x-ray and dentition comparison, might not be applicable when
trying to identify migrant remains. It has also been noted that families of missing or
deceased migrants from more rural, indigenous communities, or/and southern states of
36
Mexico are more vulnerable and less likely to have access to government and non-
governmental organizations to be able to find and, or identify their loved ones (Hughes et
al., 2017; and Martinez et al., 2014). Therefore, one of the propositions of Hughes et al.
(2017) is to approach the identification of migrant remains through a bio-cultural
approach that includes collaboration between governmental and non-governmental
entities as well as the families and loved ones who are searching for a missing person.
Material culture. The analysis of material culture is commonly used in
archaeology, but the application of such analysis can also expand to more contemporary
issues. Through the study “Better be hot than caught: Excavating the conflicting roles of
migrant material”, De Leon (2012) provides an extensive explanation on the most
common items utilized by undocumented migrants crossing the U.S. Southern border.
Through the analysis of cultural materials, it becomes easier to identify the tools,
clothing, and any other equipment that identifies a migrant. Material culture is used in
order to facilitate the identification of undocumented migrants while alive or in death.
The items observed in this study as material cultures were mundane things such as
clothes, shoes, and water bottles (De Leon, 2012), that serve migrants to “deceit” border
patrol and secure their survival while crossing (De Leon, 2012). De Leon focused on the
routes most commonly traveled by migrants, from Nogales into Arizona. Most of these
artifacts could be easily confused as trash, but when viewed through an archaeological
and anthropological lens. These artifacts can demonstrate a very complex political and
global economic system and the influence that these have on the social process of migrant
37
crossings (De Leon, 2012) (Also see Singer and Massey, 1998). According to De Leon
(2012), "the materials mentioned are used to achieve a common goal by migrants, while
simultaneously the material culture acts on people’s bodies, shapes their behavior, and it
also classifies people by creating a social distinction" (p. 478). For example, migrants
often wear black clothing in the hopes of blending into the night, but the use of dark
clothing increases the possibility of heat exhaustion (De Leon, 2012).
The number one cause of death in the desert is hyperthermia caused by high
temperatures. Hyperthermia is the overheating of the body which causes vomiting,
nausea, cramps, muscle spasms, dehydration, and weakness; if left untreated
hyperthermia leads to death. Thus, the use of dark clothing is counterproductive for
migrants when exposed to desert environments. Dark colors absorb more heat and energy
when exposed to heat and the sun; the use of such items not only puts migrants at risk of
being easily recognized by law enforcement agents, but it also puts them at risk of
hyperthermia (De Leon, 2012). Because of all the previously mentioned reasons, material
cultures are examined by those who are trying to identify migrants from U.S. civilians,
and also the individual identification of undocumented persons.
38
Geographic origin by morphometrics. When trying to determine the identity of a
migrant, it is often necessary to determine the geographical origin of the person to narrow
the search. The geographic origin of a person is where the person is originally from,
where they were born and possibly raised. Knowing the geographic origin of an
individual could potentially narrow down the search for the immediate family members
through a comparison to missing person reports, which could provide more information
to positively identify a person. Thus, the use of different methods has to be applied in
order to positively assess the geographical origin of individuals.
Multiple studies have investigated the relationship between skeletal morphology
and geographic origin (e.g. Decker (2004); Gaudio (2017); and Kranioti (2018). The
term biodistance is used to determine the biological affinities of human groups on the
basis of overall similarities, in which metric and nonmetric skeletal traits are used as the
primary source (Reed, 2006). An example of use of these methods is Spradley (2016).
When assessing the geographic origin of a person and migration patterns Spradley (2016)
utilized biodistance techniques (using craniometric data) to understand the diversity of
migrants crossing the U.S.-Mexico border. Biodistance is the measurement of population
divergence based on polygenetic traits (traits that are controlled by multiple genes); these
traits are known to have environmental and genetic influences (Buikstra, Frankenberg,
and Konigsberg, 1990). Thus, biodistance permits for the reflection on the difference
between genetics and environments between populations from different regions.
Concurrently, craniometric data are gathered from skull measurements, which also aid in
the determination of sex, age estimation, racial affinity, and others.
39
Spradley utilized forensic reference groups in this study that were composed of
American black and white males and females and males from Guatemala.
Unintentionally, the reference groups used for comparison formed biases and therefore
affected the overall analysis of the data. Craniometric data were collected according to
standard methodologies found in Moore Jansen et al. (1994) and Howells (1973)
(Spradley, 2016, p. 235). Spradley (2016) reflected on the similarity between Arizona and
Texas migrants that were found dead. These data might allow us to understand some
aspects of the groups of people who are entering through the U.S. Southern border, but
unfortunately, they fail to accurately identify the geographical origin of a person
(Spradley, 2016). Groups were combined into a general Hispanic group; this broad group
erases cultural identity and nationality (Spradley, 2016). Spradley (2016) was able to
determine that there is a need for further research in order to narrow the classification of
persons and therefore provide a higher success rate of identified individuals based on
their place of origin.
Further, Spradley, Stull, and Hefner (2016) studied skeletal secular changes in
cranial and postcranial morphology on Mexican populations through different periods of
time. The author’s (2016) purpose was to observe if people with higher economic status
are currently attempting to cross the border into the U.S. and losing their lives in the
process. This study was motivated by recent demographic transitions that southern
Mexico is undergoing, “including a reduction in infant mortality, better nutrition, and an
increase in life expectancy” (Spradley et al., 2016, p. 16; also see Malina et al. 2008).
Spradley et al. (2016) separated Mexican individuals into two groups- recent and historic
40
Mexican individuals. A total of 84 variables were observed for both males and females
but only the variables that reflected significant differences or similarities between historic
and recent individuals were included in the results. The final results (Spradley et al.,
2016) suggested that historic and recent Mexican populations can be distinguished by
cranial and postcranial morphometric measurements.
Additionally, Spradley et al. (2016) addressed the fact that a person’s biological
development is influenced by various factors (e.g. socioeconomic status). Thus, a more
extensive understanding of the populations entering the U.S. is necessary to properly
assess the geographical origin of a person, and by extension identify individuals.
Spradley et al. (2016) revealed that morphometrics alone are not enough to determine the
birth origin of a person since there are possibilities of morphological differences between
individuals from the same geographical origin depending on influencers of development
(e.g. economy, nutrition, etc.). Furthermore, morphometrics alone cannot positively
identify individuals. The application of various complementary methods, such as
morphometrics and DNA, is more likely to aid in the identification of migrant remains
found throughout the U.S.-Mexico border.
41
Isotopes. Isotopic analysis is commonly utilized in archaeology to understand the
provenience of artifacts and understand diet, trade, and migration patterns among
cultures. Isotopes are different versions of an element- they vary in mass because they
vary in number of neutrons (Dawson, and Brooks, 2001). Stable isotopes are non-
radioactive isotopes; this means that the isotope does not break down into another isotope
of the same or a different element and therefore the ratios of these isotopes in death
reflect the ratios in life. This is useful because ratios of stable isotopes vary regionally,
and they incorporate themselves into any living body through food and liquids and reflect
the location of an individual at the time the tissue was fixed (Alkass, Saitoh, Buchholz,
Bernard, Holmlund, Senn, Spalding, and Druid, 2013). The analysis of stable isotopes is
now commonly applied to modern populations, including in forensic contexts.
Isoforensics is the use of isotope analysis for the identification of unknown individuals
(Juarez, 2011). For example, Juarez (2008) utilized stable isotopic analysis of strontium
(Sr) in order to determine the origins of deceased migrants originally from Mexico by
examining tooth enamel from 19 different individuals (Juarez, 2008). Juarez determined
that data collected from human tooth enamel could indeed reflect migration patterns and
identify the region of origin of an individual (Juarez, 2008). Strontium can be utilized to
identify the place of origin of a person since enamel formation terminates during
childhood when permanent teeth form, and unlike bone, teeth do not undergo significant
remodeling or diagenesis (Juarez, 2008). Thus, stable isotopic analysis of Sr on human
teeth, specifically in migrant remains, could potentially aid in identifying the place of
origin of individuals, therefore, allowing for better identification of remains.
42
Juarez later expanded this line of research through the study “Geolocation: A
pathway to identification for deceased undocumented border crossers” (2011). The
objective was to create an isotopic identification map utilizing teeth donated from people
with known Mexican origin. The use of this isotopic map would later be able to assist in
the identification of deceased unknown border crossers through the use of isotopic
comparison (Juarez, 2011). The isotopes analyzed were Strontium (Sr), Oxygen (O), and
Carbon (C); these isotopes were chosen because they are geographically distinct isotopes
(Juarez, 2011). In particular, as aforementioned, Sr is particularly useful because tooth
enamel incorporates Sr only during the early periods of enamel formation, which
terminates during childhood (Juarez, 2011). Juarez (2011) study collected 154 samples
from nine states and federal districts, representing an important start to this effort.
However, Mexico has an area of 1.964 million km², with a population of approximately
127.5 million. Therefore, in order to create a complete isotopic map of the states,
villages, federal districts, and cities of Mexico there needs to be a greater sample that
covers more than nine Mexican states. Even so, Juarez’s (2011) research demonstrates
that the comparison of isotopic ratios of unknow Mexican individuals with known
Mexican individuals have a success rate at 60% or above, except for Jalisco and Nayarit.
Thus, it can be concluded that with a more substantial isotopic map of Mexico, forensic
anthropologists will have a higher success rate when identifying unknown deceased
border crossers across the U.S. southern border.
When considering the usefulness of isotopic data, an important issue to consider
is the incorporation of packaged foods into different areas are result of non-local isotopic
43
signatures (Juarez, 2011; also see Cornelius, 2001). However, Juarez (2011) mentions
that Mexico is largely populated by poor rural communities that are still heavily
dependent on local markets for produce and protein sources (also see Taylor and Mora,
2005). Even though studies suggest that the majority of persons crossing the U.S.-Mexico
border are those from Mexican rural areas who consume locally grown produce and
protein (see Juarez, 2011), there is the possibility that a percentage of the population is
not fully accounted for if factors such as packaged foods and their influence on isotopic
ratios are not explored. Thus, Juarez’s (2011) study suggest that there is a need to expand
the knowledge of the isotopic map of Mexico and the influence that other factors, such as
packaged foods, have on the individual’s isotopic ratios.
The Rights of the Dead
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) outlines the rights of the
living at a universal level, but no outline clearly states “the rights of the dead.” In this
thesis, the rights of the dead are defined as the rights that an individual should have once
their life terminates. These rights range from the right of not being trafficked, dissected
without consent, or used sexually, and the right to being mourned adequately by loved
ones and family members, proper burial, and dignified handling of remains (Rosenblatt,
2010).
Different organizations have worked with experts from multiple scientific
disciplines to locate, gather, and record evidence about victims and return them to their
loved ones (Rosenblatt, 2010). Many atrocities have occurred around the globe calling for
44
forensic experts whose "knowledge on the field has surpassed the dialogue on ethical
standards and practices" (Rosenblatt, 2010, p. 923) when handling remains. Most
commonly, remains have been utilized to achieve an ethical or political goal that benefits
living persons, such as the end of the uncertainty for families of the missing, the
prosecution of war criminals, and political stability (Rosenblatt, 2010). Thus, the
handling of dead persons and the rights of the dead are rarely if ever discussed.
Importantly, when forensic teams enter a scene, it is because people have already been
deprived of their most fundamental human right, their right to live (Rosenblatt, 2010).
Thus, the rights of the dead need to be further discussed and outlined to better serve those
whose rights have been violated both while living and after death.
This form of human suffering rises concerns in the ethics behind the exhumation
and handling of remains. Rosenblatt (2010) exposes the following questions:
1. Do dead bodies stored into anonymous graves suffer “crimes against humanity”?
2. Are the rights of the dead of the same order and magnitude as the human rights
that were violated while they were living?
These questions can also transfer to the handling of undocumented migrant
remains found along the border, due to the violation of rights they face before and after
death. The first question exposes some of the issues that forensic teams working on
migrant remains face. A high number of migrant remains are unidentified, and therefore
many are buried under the name Jane Doe or John Doe, depending on the sex of the
person (if it can be determined). In other cases, the person is left in the medical
examiner's office if space permits, while in other cases the remains of individuals who are
45
unidentifiable are cremated. Thus, there is a need to assess the rights of the dead and
observe and determine the proper way to handle remains and each case. Because the
person can no longer defend themselves or speak up, the handling of dead bodies and
where they end up is influenced by many factors, including the economic and political
agendas that surround the place where the body is recovered. One example of the
violation of the rights of the dead is proposed by De Leon (2015) through the term
"necroviolence". "Necroviolence" refers to "violence performed and produced through
the specific treatment of corpses that is perceived to be offensive, sacrilegious, or
inhumane by the perpetrator, the victim (and his or her cultural group), or both" (De
Leon, 2015, p. 69). Thus, more significant ethical questions arise on how to handle
remains properly and to fully respect the rights of the dead.
Necropolitics
The remains or bodies of individuals are subjected to different processes
depending on the way in which the person died, where they were found, cultural, and
social beliefs, along with other influencers. To expand on the topic of necroviolence and
how this applies to remains found throughout the U.S.-Mexico border, the fundamentals
of necropolitics are explained. Necropolitics involve multiple modalities all of which
focus on the power “over the production and management of dead bodies” (Ferrandiz,
Robben, and Ashby, 2015, p.3). In the case of the U.S.-Mexico border the production of
bodies is caused by the various structural violent forces at the border, while the
management of dead bodies depends on the region where the remains are found and by
46
the entity that recovers the remains. Therefore, the authority that necropolitics stretches to
structural forces consolidate the outcomes of remains found throughout the U.S.-Mexico
border.
Furthermore, De Leon’s (2015) definition of necroviolence can be extended to the
way in which remains are treated once they are recovered and beyond. As explained by
Reineke (2016) remains can face constant disrespectful acts based on the way in which
they are buried. For example, in excavations at a Brooks County cemetery remains were
buried in plastic bags, milk crates, or in no body bag or coffin, and without proper
identification (Reineke, 2016; also see Collette, 2014). This example is a form of
necroviolence due to the negation of proper burial and disrespect towards the unidentified
migrant remains; and in extension the disrespect towards cultural and social beliefs and
the families of victims. Thus, necroviolence does not only reflect the further suffering
and violation of the rights of dead but also the rights of family members to properly
mourn and bury loved ones.
47
METHODS
This thesis examined the involvement of forensic anthropologists, medicolegal
agents, nonprofit organizations, and migrants. The main goal was to understand the
relationships between the previously mentioned actors in the retrieval, identification, and
repatriation of migrant remains. This thesis project took place at a shelter for migrants in
Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico, at a university in Phoenix, Arizona., and on the
internet. This project began in Tijuana during September 2017 and ended in the same
place in February, 2018.
This study followed protocols approved by the Institutional Review Board at
Humboldt State University (approval nos. 16-270 and 17-025). This project followed a
grounded theory approach, in which methods were developed as the project proceeded.
This approach allows a project that does not possess a hypothesis to develop without
complications; projects that use grounded theory form as data are gathered and analyzed
(Engward, 2013). The grounded theory approach in this project allows data to be
interpreted while minimizing biases and subjectivity, creating a more credible discourse
regarding deceased migrants and the actors involved in the recovery, identification, and
repatriation of migrant remains. This project attempted to maintain an objective
perspective throughout because of the current political turmoil on migration occurring in
the U.S. Furthermore, the use of grounded theory allowed this thesis to develop without a
self-constructed direction and hypothesis based on my personal experiences with
migration and some the systems and agencies that I have encountered. It is important to
acknowledge that bias and subjectivity is inherent and investigators cannot completely
48
eliminate it in this kind of work even if they aim to, thus the use of grounded theory
allowed for the elimination of a guided thesis project.
This study utilized both qualitative and quantitative methodology. Participant
observation was conducted at a shelter in Tijuana, Baja California Mexico and in a
university in Phoenix, Arizona, to create rapport with individuals to gather more reliable
data. Interviews were conducted with migrants, forensic anthropologists, medicolegal
agents, and non-profit organizations to understand the roles of each regarding
undocumented migration and the relationship between individuals and organizations.
Surveys were utilized to collect data on the involvement of forensic anthropologists in
unidentified migrant cases at the U.S.-Mexico border. Also, data were mined from an
existing dataset gathered by the social workers at the shelter in Tijuana in order to
understand migrant statistics within the shelter. These methods and study locations are
described in more detail in the following pages.
Actors Involved
Forensic anthropologists
Data were gathered from forensic anthropologists in order to understand their role
in the retrieval, identification, and repatriation of deceased migrants at the U.S. southern
border. In particular, to understand the relationships between forensic anthropologists and
the people and agencies they interact with when working on migrant cases, to better
understand how and if direct contact between migrant families and forensic
anthropologists is made in the process of identifying deceased border crossers. The
49
retrieval of data of forensic anthropologist’s perspectives on the stated matter was done
through the use of surveys and interviews.
Surveys were utilized to capture a better understanding of forensic anthropologists
and their roles with respect to the unidentified migrant remains found throughout the
U.S.-Mexico border. A total of twenty-eight invitations were sent to different forensic
anthropologists. Forensic anthropologists whom I contacted worked for or were affiliated
with universities and other educational or non-profit organizations that focus on issues of
migrant recovery, identification, and repatriation. More specifically, the survey was sent
to different persons that were found through the American Board of Forensic
Anthropologists, universities, and organizations such as the Colibrí Center for Human
Rights.
The surveys had ten questions, all of which allowed the person to choose yes, no,
or provide individual thought out responses (Appendix A). The website Survey Monkey
was utilized to conduct the survey which was sent via email to each individual. In total
there were 15 responses to the survey, but due to incomplete answers, only seven
responses were analyzed for this study. The goal of the survey was to create a connection
with forensic anthropologists and, therefore, allow the researcher to better understand
their perspectives and interpret their roles in the identification of migrant remains and
their interaction with the families of the deceased migrants.
In addition, interviews with forensic anthropologists and medicolegal agents were
conducted to understand their roles in the identification, repatriation, and handling of
deceased migrant remains at an individual level. The interviews conducted were semi-
50
formal; some questions were created prior to the conversation but the individual
interviews more likely than not answered more than the questions asked.
The interviews conducted were done via video chat or in person. In total, two
forensic anthropologists and one medicolegal agent were interviewed. One of the forensic
anthropologists was board-certified, and one forensic anthropologist is currently working
to acquire certification; both work very closely with migrant remains cases at the U.S.-
Mexico border. The medicolegal agent interviewed works in a leadership position dealing
with unidentified individuals in one of the counties in a border state. This individual also
works very closely with undocumented border crosser cases. All three of these
individuals work in order to identify and repatriate the remains of migrants. Each of these
people use different approaches and methods to be able to locate the missing, identify the
unidentifiable, and repatriate undocumented migrants. Thus, the interviews allowed this
thesis to observe different methods that are employed out on the field, and to better
understand the interaction between forensic scientists and the families of deceased
migrants.
Migrants
Data were gathered from migrants in order to understand why it is that migrants
engage in the journey to the U.S. clandestinely, and to understand their involvement and
perspective in the identification of deceased border crossers. The retrieval of data from
migrants was done through the use of interviews at a shelter that houses migrants in
Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico. The involvement of migrants in this project allows this
51
thesis project to create a humanitarian approach which voices up the opinion of persons
who have had their rights violated because of their immigration status.
Furthermore, the aim of interviewing migrants was to understand the reasons why
many embark on the clandestine journey to the northern Mexican border states and into
the U.S. The interviews conducted were only with migrants that remained at the shelter
for more than a day. The selection of migrants for an interview was solely based on my
ability to create rapport with the individual and communicate with them. Overall, 10
individuals were interviewed inside the shelter. All individuals were women who spoke
Spanish and originated from different Mexican states and other countries in Central
America. Therefore, all interviews were conducted in Spanish. There were some
individuals that I was not able to interview due to language barriers and time constraints.
Also, since this is a shelter for women and children I was not able to converse with men.
On the other hand, I decided not to interview any children since some of the children
were unaccompanied by parents and I did not want to trigger any unfortunate memories
that too often come with the process of migration.
The interviews conducted with migrants were informal interviews. Informal
interviews are interviews that allow the person to talk in a manner of conversation. There
were no pre-written or established questions, the goal was for the discussion to flow
organically. The interviews were gathered to create narratives and understand the
perspectives of migrants who try to enter the U.S. without proper documentation. Based
on the significance of the topic and private information that arose while conducting the
interviews, pseudonyms are used throughout this thesis. Every participant in this project
52
agreed to share their narratives and gave verbal or written consent for the information to
be shared through this thesis project. This information enables this project to use a more
humanistic approach to the humanitarian crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border. The consent
forms were presented in English and Spanish, depending on the preference of the person
being interviewed (Appendix G). I read the consent form out loud to the migrant being
interviewed in both languages before the interview began and each woman was asked if
they needed any further clarification or if they had any questions. If answered yes,
clarifications regarding the thesis were made.
The narratives gathered have been added to this thesis in order to understand the
needs of migrants, their families, and loved ones. Narratives have allowed this research to
reach a more humanitarian and holistic approach, which creates a more powerful
statement by adding human characteristics to qualitative and quantitative data.
Non-Profit Organizations
It was essential to make contact with nonprofit organizations that work closely
with clandestine migrant crossings in order to understand the different agencies that are
involved in the recovery, identification, and repatriation of migrant remains. Two non-
profit organizations were interviewed, of these organizations work out on the field in
different areas through the U.S. southern region to aid migrant crossers in distress and to
find the dead across the border. The interviews took place at the “missing in Arizona
day” event in a university in Phoenix, Arizona. The event happens once a year, and this
was the third year (2017) that this event took place. The purpose of the overall event is to
53
gather different law enforcement agencies, medicolegal offices, various government
organizations, and non-profit organizations to find individuals who went missing
throughout Arizona. During this event, any person who has lost a loved one is welcome
to come in and share any information that could facilitate the process of finding said
individual. Both organizations were present due to the high number of border crossers
that go missing in Arizona.
One of the organizations work through different routes that are utilized for
clandestine border crossings throughout the deserts of Arizona. Their primary duty is to
provide aid to migrants that find themselves in distress while trying to enter the U.S.
They offer medical assistance and water stations throughout the desert. Meanwhile,
Águilas del Desierto take calls from persons who have lost a loved one, as well as calls of
distress from migrants who become lost in different desert regions through Arizona and
southern areas of California. The primary duty of this organization is to find people in
trouble or to find the whereabouts of migrants who lost their lives while crossing. The
overall purpose is to retrieve migrants (alive or death) from the desert to inform the
family of the whereabouts of individuals and return the bodies to their families. Due to
the important work conducted by both organizations, it was of great importance to
understand their roles and duties to the migrants that clandestinely cross to the U.S.
The interviews with both of these organizations were informal. The interview
done with Águilas del Desierto was conducted in Spanish; interviewing in Spanish
allowed me to have better communication with the group of people involved in this
particular conversation. While the interview conducted with Humane Borders was done
54
in English. Overall, both of these interviews allowed me to address the work done by
nonprofit organizations and their duty to clandestine migrant crossers across the U.S.
Southern border.
Shelters
To gather data for this thesis, I engaged in participant observation at a shelter. The
shelter I chose for this project is a shelter for migrants that operates in Tijuana, B.C.
Mexico. Migrants who come through the doors of this shelter are women and children.
Some migrants are recent U.S. deportees, and others come from other Mexican states,
Africa, Haiti, South America, Central America, Spain and even U.S. citizens. The shelter
provides housing, food, medicine, legal help, psychological help, and clothes, among
other necessities.
The data collection period at the shelter began in September 2017 and ended in
December 2017. The volunteering period at this shelter started in September 2017 and
concluded in May 2018. Throughout the participant observation portion of this research, I
was traveling to Tijuana, Mexico from Monday to Friday, and sometimes Saturday. I
arrived at the shelter at approximately 9:00 a.m. and I would leave at about 6:00 p.m.
During my time there, I had different duties in the shelter and to the people that work,
volunteer, and live there.
Being a participant observer meant that it was my job to participate in the
different activities throughout the shelter. Those activities were cooking, cleaning,
hanging clothes for drying, picking up donations, receiving donations, serving food to
55
those who entered the shelter to eat during lunch, social work, and lastly interview. For
this thesis project, it is essential to understand that conducting interviews with migrants
was not always possible. This is not due to the lack of migrant presence but the lack of
time and privacy at the shelter. As a participant observer, it was essential to show the
women that I was there not only to gather interviews but to help in the different duties
throughout the shelter.
Furthermore, the shelter only has one rule to be able to allow a person to stay in it.
The rule is that the person needs to be considered a migrant (which means that they could
not have been in Tijuana for more than three months), or a repatriated individual
(automatic admission is given to deported individuals unless otherwise determined by the
nun or the social worker in charge). Also, migrants are provided shelter for 15 days,
unless their situation is determined different by the social worker in charge or if they
have business with the lawyer who works in the institution. The shelter has it on their
best interest to help those who come knocking on their doors.
This shelter also helps those with “situación de calle” [those who live in the
streets]. Approximately 80 people (women, men, and children) come into the gates to get
food prepared by “Lea”. “Lea” was once a migrant woman who now works at the same
shelter who once helped her, she prepares the meals for the women at the shelter and the
men who come to eat. As a participant observer, one of my main duties was to help “Lea”
prepare food, serve plates, attend those who came in to eat, and clean afterwards. Every
single day, the shelter serves food to the migrants staying inside, the volunteers, and
those who make line for lunch outside of the gates. Each meal is composed of beans, rice,
56
stew, salad, chile [hot sauce], juice, and sometimes desert (depending on the donations).
Importantly, the majority of people who came in during lunchtime (served at around 1:00
pm) are mostly men, who were once migrants or deportees. As a participant observer, I
was able to interact with these men and speak to some about the hardships of living in the
streets of Tijuana; “pero, pues ya que” [but what else can we do]. Being able to work
with the people at the shelter was a privilege, and I can genuinely say that I learned a lot
from them both professionally and personally.
As a participant observer at the shelter, I learned many things, including but not
limited to learning about the lives of migrants. For example, during my stay at the shelter
I learned to make food for 100 or more people, I learned how to make meals from
Guatemala, El Salvador, Haiti, and different Mexican states, and lastly, I learned that in
places like this rapport can only be accomplished by fully engaging in the same activities
as everyone else.
The collection of narratives in the shelter took longer and was more complicated
than expected. The gathering of data took longer because, first and foremost, I was there
to help wherever it was needed. Secondly, my decision to give people their space and
privacy did not allow me to gather as many interviews. Due to the participant
observation, I was able to build relationships with some of the migrants that stayed at the
shelter for extended periods of time. These were the migrants that provided me with more
detailed narratives of their migration experiences. As an anthropologist, and as a person, I
did not want to be intrusive and follow people around. All migrants have a story worth
telling and narrating, but not all of them were ready to or wanted to share or have their
57
stories used for research purposes. Others were only there for no more than a couple
hours. Also, for many the shelter was a place to rest and continue with their journey.
Because of this, I was only able to gather 10 narratives from migrants. The stories shared
their journey, their past, their reason for migrating, their hopes, and their families. Each
migrant interviewed shared their migration stories with me and gave me their written or
spoken consent (Appendix G) to share their stories. The use of these narratives allowed
me to compile enough data to analyze and create a discussion of migrants who try to
cross the border between the U.S. and Mexico.
In order to as fully as possible understand the complexity of the shelter, where
participant observation was conducted, the information gathered by the social workers in
the shelter was also analyzed. The data collected by the social workers were a
compilation of demographic information and interviews. The interviews were conducted
to migrant women who stayed at the shelter by the social workers present at the time the
migrant entered the shelter.
The demographic information used was entered in an excel sheet by different
social workers working at the shelter. I also ascribed some of this information; some of
my duties at the shelter included serving as a social worker and receive migrants
whenever there was no other social worker present. The excel sheet was created by a
person working in another shelter for migrants that focuses solely on migrant men in
Tijuana. This information was inputted from September 2017 until December 2017. The
demographics and other information are examples of the overall population of migrant
women and children that arrived at the shelter from January 2017 to December 2017. The
58
additional information that was present in the excel sheet allowed me to analyze the
different situations, such as criminal acts, that these women face while migrating.
Overall, the information gathered allowed me to understand the individual reasons for
migration and the stories behind the women at the shelter.
This shelter particularly recorded the information of every migrant woman and
child who sought refuge. It provided refuge to migrants who had been recently repatriated
(in this case recent means less than three months from the date of deportation to their stay
at the shelter), who were traveling to the U.S., or who were seeking to stay in Mexico.
The shelter defines migrants as those individuals who have been in Tijuana, B.C. Mexico
for no more than three months due to relocation from another area within Mexico or the
any other place in the world. The information provided by migrants was recorded through
three different mediums. First, a catalogue is used to record the name of the person, their
age, sex, religious preference, marital status, place of origin, reason for migrating, and
date of entrance to the shelter. Secondly, interviews (Appendix E) which expand on the
reasons as to why a person migrates are conducted by the social workers. All of this
information was safeguarded in a desktop computer in the social worker’s office at the
shelter. Lastly, a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet with further questions was also used; the
questions asked depended on the migrant’s status (deported or not deported). The
spreadsheet is further divided into months (January- December) and an annual count is
then created to understand the population of migrants at the shelter. This information was
saved in the desktop computer inside the shelter. For the purpose of this thesis and to
understand the complexities of the population within the shelter, the Microsoft Excel
59
sheet was analyzed from January 2017 to December 2017. During this time, a total of
1,275 individuals were given refuge and food, along with other individual needs of each
person.
60
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Potential Limitations and Biases of this Study
The following are the possible biases and limitation that could have arisen
throughout this thesis. First and foremost, the surveys conducted reflected each person’s
interpretation and understanding of questions and multiple-choice answers. The surveys
were distributed through a convenience sampling method. Forensic anthropologists
contacted were selected through The American Board of Forensic Anthropologists
contact list (Appendix C), newspaper articles, and research that presented forensic work
conducted at the U.S. southern border. Every response in the surveys was self-reported by
each individual, therefore there is no way to verify that everything reported is put in
practice by individuals.
Interviews utilized a more informal method; thus, each conversation took
different directions depending on the individual. Therefore, interviews only allowed me
to collect information based on individual experiences and responses. This particular
complication applies to the interviews done with forensic anthropologists, non-profit
organizations, and migrants. Due to the small number of forensic anthropologists
interviewed, there could be further limitations to the results of this thesis. The most
significant concern, in this case, is that the overall population of forensic anthropologists
working with migrant remains across the border could be underrepresented. Secondly, the
recruitment for the previously mentioned nonprofit organizations for this project took
place during the “missing in Arizona day”. Other organizations not present at the event
61
were only observed through their websites, blogs, and Facebook profiles. Also, nonprofit
organizations were contacted based on convenience. Lastly, migrants interviewed for this
project were all recruited inside the shelter, and as mentioned previously, this shelter only
houses women and children. Thus, only conversations with women who spoke Spanish or
English took place. Both of these matters could pose biases by underrepresenting the
experiences of men and of those who speak other languages, such as indigenous peoples
who only speak their native language.
Also, demographic information of the shelter could not entirely represent the real
population of migrants entering the U.S. clandestinely. The reason is that this information
was self-reported by migrants, and different individuals conducted the collection of this
data (social workers and myself). Responses were given based on the understanding of
the questions and the beliefs of the person being asked. Secondly, this information was
captured by at least five people (including myself), this information was captured from
January to December 2017. Lastly, there were times when the number of people arriving
at the shelter was more extensive than the capability to gather information by the
aforementioned staff. It can be concluded that some migrants who entered the shelter
failed to be recorded and thus are not reflected in the database. There is a possibility that
not all information is an accurate representation of the population of women and children
at the shelter.
Furthermore, my previous experiences with undocumented migration could have
potentially affected the orientation and results of this study. However, all attempts were
taken to remain an objective participant, observer, and researcher throughout the
62
collection and analysis of data. As previously mentioned, this is one of the main reasons
why grounded theory was utilized in the development of this thesis. The topic of “illegal”
migration has always been familiar to me. I grew up in Tijuana, B.C. Mexico. I come
from a family of hard-working migrants, both of my parents were born in Mexico and
migrated to the U.S. with their own stories about the hardships of migration. Some of my
own family members crossed the border through hazardous terrain. Due to the impact that
migration policies have had on my own family and growing up in a city full of deportees
and migrants, I feel that illegal or undocumented migration has impacted my life and the
life of those around me. However, as I previously mentioned I maintained the mind of an
objective researcher, participant, and observer, throughout the collection and analysis of
data, and the results shown here are aimed not to be skewed to reflect my personal
feelings towards the topic at hand.
Demographics
Forensic anthropologists
In total, I emailed 27 invitations through Survey Monkey to forensic
anthropologists, and one invitation to an individual who worked closely with migrant
remains at the U.S. southern border. Out of the 28, there were a total of 16 responses, out
of which seven were complete and served for the analysis of this study. Five of the
responders were forensic anthropologists, who worked in different state universities in
the U.S., human rights organizations, forensic science institutions, and medical
63
examiner’s offices. All of the respondents were employed in the U.S. at the time the
survey was taken.
One of the questions in the survey was “How often do you work with migrant
remains, per year?”, all seven respondents noted that they work with migrant remains
through the year. Only one individual in this survey responded that “it was unknown how
many of the individuals worked with were migrants” (Anonymous, Forensic
Anthropologists Survey, 2018) (Figure 10). This statement could suggest that this person
did not keep track of the migrant cases they worked per year. Also, the way in which this
question is presented in the survey could pose significant complications for the analysis
of the data. For example, persons could have interpreted the answer choices as
percentages rather than individual number of cases. Thus, this question could have been
better written and given more specific answer choices to avoid inconclusive answers from
the participants.
64
Figure 10: Forensic anthropologists survey: "How often do you work with migrant remains, per year?"(10-
20: 14.29%, 20+: 42.86%, Other: 57.14%)
The interviews that took place were with two forensic anthropologists and one
individual who works closely with the identification of unknown persons. The first
forensic anthropologist interviewed worked at a university and focuses on clandestine
migration at the U.S. Southern border. The second forensic anthropologist worked at a
medical examiner’s office with migrant remains, in one of the states neighboring Mexico.
Lastly, the final person worked with forensic anthropologists and a team of forensic
scientists at a medical examiner’s office that often comes in contact with migrant remains
found in hazardous terrain. This person worked on the cases where identifying a person
solely through forensic science is an impossibility, implementing a transdisciplinary
approach to identify individuals. All of these individuals contributed to the understanding
of forensic anthropological work and medicolegal involvement in the identification of
migrants found at the U.S. southern border
Migrants
From January 2017 to December 2017, a total of 1,275 individuals were given
refuge and food at the shelter I volunteered in Tijuana. This allowed me to keep track of
the number of people who were entering the shelter. For example, the influx of migrants
surged from May to September, but during November and December, the numbers were
significantly higher than throughout the rest of 2017 (Figure 11). The sex of individuals
65
was also documented (Figure 12), each individual reported their sex at the time of
entrance, parents or accompanying adults reported the sex of minors.
Figure 11: Migrant count at shelter by month (Jan.-Dec. 2017)
66
Figure 12: Migrants at shelter by sex; Males (N. 264), Females (N. 1010)
The population within the shelter self-reported their place of origin (birthplace).
Some of the people carried forms of identification with them while others did not. Since
all information gathered was self-reported by migrants, it is not clear if the reported place
of origin is correct or if every statement given by them is true. There could be a
possibility that due to fear of deportation (Non-Mexican citizens), issues with laws
enforcement, or organized crime, migrants could have provided false or misleading
information. Even before entering the U.S., migrants face persecution, discrimination,
and prejudice, among other affecting factors, which could prevent the person from being
honest about their true identity. Nevertheless, all self-reported information provided by
migrants is treated as correct and true, and it is used to represent the population within the
shelter.
67
One of the first questions asked to the women who enter the shelter is “where are
you originally from?” This question was asked to understand the population in the shelter
and why migration is happening and where is it coming from. The highest number of
migrants came from Mexico, followed by El Salvador, and Honduras (Figure 13)
throughout 2017. For example, during December, 349 migrants sought refuge at the
shelter counting both children and women. Most of which came from other states in
Mexico, more specifically 76.22%, followed by Salvador with 8.31%. Furthermore,
during this same month the state of Michoacán had the most significant number of
individuals who were migrating with 122 individuals (45.86%), followed by Guerrero
with 87 individuals (32.71%). Though this population is a representation of persons who
sought refuge at the shelter, there are other factors that come into question when
significant numbers are migrating from the same place of origin. For example, further
research can be done to understand why migrants from other states in Mexico are
migrating to Tijuana, B.C. more than others and the reasons behind the migration of
Salvadorans and Hondurans. This could be researched further to observe the migration
patterns from different countries into the U.S., through the city of Tijuana or the use of
this city as a sanctuary for migrants.
68
Figure 13: Migrant count by country of origin within the shelter (2017)
Furthermore, those individuals who came from Mexico were asked to report their
state of origin. Note that people who were from the U.S. and were born in Mexico were
also asked to report the state where they were born in. Thus, the count of migrants per
state within Mexico also include deported individuals who have been living in the U.S. or
were detained while trying to cross the border. Therefore, this count does not reflect the
totality of internally displaced individuals within Mexico. For this thesis, deported and
non-deported individuals will not be counted separately when observing state counts.
Though, this could be explored more extensively in order to understand Mexico’s internal
migration, specifically in the city of Tijuana and, in fact, it is necessary to recognize
Mexico’s internally displaced individuals.
69
After analyzing the number of migrants per state in Mexico, it was determined
that the state with the highest number of individuals relocating was in Jalisco with
14.91%, closely followed by Michoacán with 14.70% (Figure 14). The significant
number of individuals migrating through Mexico could be further observed and analyzed
in order to understand the impact that structural violence (directly or indirectly) has had
on individuals living there. For example, Jalisco has had a surge in violence due to the
narcos [drug cartels], more specifically Cartel Jalisco Nueva Generación [Jalisco new
generation cartel] (Woody, 2017). The impact that organized crime has had on internally
displaced individuals needs to be recognized and further explored to understand the
patterns of modern migration within Mexico.
70
Figure 14:Mexican states of origin of migrants at the shelter (Jan.-Dec. 2017)
To better understand the populations within the shelter, people were differentiated
from deported (or repatriated) vs. not deported. Once the person was in Mexico, they are
considered to have been repatriated (returned to their country of origin). Furthermore, the
difference between repatriation and deportation extends to the way in which the
individual is perceived. A repatriated person is merely returned to their country of origin,
while a person with a status of deportation is an “illegal” and therefore a criminal in the
country where the deportation took place. Thus, the use of terminology can decriminalize
or further criminalize an individual. The language or terminology used can affect the
understanding and perspective of individuals. When the person was asked if they had
been returned to their country of origin the social workers or myself would ask, “¿Fuiste
repatriada?” [Were you repatriated?]. In spite of the way in which the question was
asked, in the spreadsheet individuals were still labeled as deportado [deported] or no
deportado [non-deported]. In this sense, this could be further researched to understand
the existence of criminalizing language used for individuals without proper
documentation in the U.S., and how this language continues or deters once the individual
is returned to their country of origin.
Out of the 1,275 individuals reported throughout 2017, both women and children,
418 (32.89%) were deported while 853 (67.11%) were non-deported (Figure 15). After
determining deported or non-deported status of individuals, repatriation documentation
was collected from those deported. This was for record keeping for the shelter and the
state of Baja California. This documentation had the personal information of each
71
individual. The following personal information was gathered by the shelter: name, date of
birth, place of origin, and a record number. While observing this data, it came to my
attention that minors who were repatriated to Mexico had this documentation as well,
which means that this is on their permanent record. This means that these children could
potentially face further repercussions based on their parent’s decisions to attempt to cross
the border while undocumented or live in the U.S. without proper documentation. Thus,
this topic needs to be discussed further and observed. It is essential to understand the
effects that deportations have on underage individuals, especially when decisions to cross
while undocumented were not their own.
Figure 15:Migrants at the shelter by deportation status; Deported (32.9%), Nondeported (67.1%)
72
Subsequently, migrants were asked to determine the reason why they were
migrating. This question was asked by the social workers or nuns attending to the
migrants at their time of entrance into the shelter. This information was then entered into
the book where all migrant data was recorded, and later added to the Excel spreadsheet.
The reasons for migration varied, but a significant number of migrants reported that they
were migrating seeking asylum, more specifically 441 (50.40%) individuals in this
population were searching for asylum (Figure 16).
Figure 16: Reasons for migrant migration within the shelter (January- December 2017)
According to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (2018), “people
come to the U.S. seeking protection because they have suffered persecution or fear that
they will suffer persecution due to: race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular
73
group, or/and political opinion.” This particular count does not state the specific reasons
why migrants were seeking asylum, or if this asylum was sought in the U.S. or Mexico.
Thus, further research should be performed to understand the difference between those
individuals searching for asylum in the U.S. or Mexico, and how and why their decision
was made. Knowing this information could deepen the understanding of specific forms of
structural violence, both direct and indirect, that migrants are exposed to.
Certain individuals discussed with me the reasons behind seeking asylum and
migration, but I did not specifically search for individuals looking for asylum. Therefore,
the case studies shared in this project might not be representative of the overall
population of asylum seekers at this shelter. It can be assumed that many individuals did
not openly talk about their intentions of crossing the border into the U.S. based on the
criminalization of undocumented border crossing and the stigmatization that follows.
Furthermore, many of these individuals are under spoken contracts with what is known as
a coyote [professional border guide], who often threatens their customers [pollos or
pollitos]. The relationship between coyotes and border crossers will be briefly seen later
in this thesis.
The Crossing Experience
One of the central components of this study was to understand the experience
lived by migrants who were trying to migrate to the U.S. Ten migrants were interviewed
to understand the reason why they were migrating and their journey into the U.S. They
were asked about their crossing experiences and those who accompanied them in the
74
attempt. As it was previously mentioned, not many interviews with migrants were
conducted because of the limited opportunities within the shelter to engage in private
conversation. All of the interviews were held inside the shelter, only with migrants who
stayed at the shelter for more than one day and with whom I was able to establish rapport.
All migrants interviewed were Hispanic, Spanish speakers, and from Latin America.
Thus, all interviews were in Spanish. Importantly a migrant’s place of origin was not
asked before conducting the interview, the key factors before being interviewed were: 1)
if the person had attempted to cross the border or 2) if they were going to attempt
crossing. Place of origin was not asked prior to the interview because it was irrelevant to
the overall purpose of the interviews, which was to understand the reasons for migration
and the journey to the U.S.
La pareja [The couple]
I met her at the shelter, the first time I saw her she was crying sitting next to a tree
inside the shelter. I looked away and went inside. I was instructed to interview her
because she had just arrived, and no other social workers were there at the time. I brought
her into the office to speak to her and learn more about her situation and why she was in
the shelter. I told her “Siéntate, y cuéntame ¿Qué haces aquí que pasa?” [sit and talk to
me, what are you doing here what happened?]. That’s when I learned that at just 23 years
old, she was a widow and a survivor.
“Iliana” came to the border from the inner states of Mexico with her husband (35
years old). They were migrating for work. They wanted to cross the border into the U.S.
75
to find better jobs and have a better life. They, like many others, found a coyote to guide
them through the border. Including the coyote, it was a group of eight individuals who
began their journey between the cities of Tijuana and Tecate. They prepared for their
journey; they carried gallons of water, canned food, and her husband’s medicine. He had
hypertension, he made sure to take his medication before the journey began, and
everything seemed fine. Six hours into the walk, the guide turned to them and offered all
“Vitaminas energizantes” [energizing vitamins]. This would allow them to continue
walking without getting tired or falling ill, according to the guide.
She remembers taking the pills and firmly believes her husband took them as
well, but she was not sure “Es que todo pasó muy rápido” [“everything happened so
fast”] (“Iliana”, 2017). Thirteen hours passed, she turned back to look at her husband
because he had fallen on his knees “¿Estas bien?” [“Are you okay?”], she asked. He
said yes, but she looked at him carefully and noticed that something was wrong he looked
pale, he began to hallucinate, and vomit. The group stopped and stayed for a while, but
when she decided that it was time to call for help the group left her and her husband
alone. The rest of the group did not want to get caught and continued with their journey.
“Te van a buscar como perros” [they’re going to search for you like dogs], said the
guide, and they left. She left her husband to climb a hill to get cellphone reception and
call for help. She did not know who to call, so she called her sister in law and told her
what was happening. The sister in law could do nothing to help them and told her to call
the emergency number. Iliana called 911; they asked her many questions, questions she
76
could not answer because she had no idea where she was at, all she knew was that they
began their journey after the last caseta [tollbooth] between Tijuana and Tecate.
Iliana and her husband soon heard and saw a helicopter, but the helicopter never
spotted them. She then received a call, and she was told that the search for them was
going to come to a halt because there were too many clouds to keep searching. An hour
after the call her husband died. She doesn’t remember much after that, only that she
stayed with the body and then continued walking. Hours later, she was found by border
patrol agents and taken in the helicopter. She had walked five kilometers from where her
husband was found. Once in the helicopter, she saw that hills surrounded them “Era una
infinidad de cerros, yo no lo pude ayudar no pude hacer nada por mi esposo ¿sabes lo
que es eso? El ya no esta” [“the hills were infinite, I couldn’t help him, I couldn’t do
anything. Do you know what that’s like? He is no longer here”] (“Iliana”, 2017).
According to the death investigation of her husband’s death a stroke killed him,
he (the body) was then repatriated to their state of origin in Mexico. When he died, she
spent all night alone with his body before she began to walk again. Though her husband’s
body was repatriated to be properly buried, she was detained at a detention center. She
was detained for three months and one week. She was not allowed to attend her
husband’s funeral and attend everything that comes along with death. This was because
the group of people that they were traveling with were caught shortly after she was found.
They were all detained because they were witnesses to a crime, their statements were
used to prosecute the guide and charge him with murder and human smuggling. “El
coyote era un niño él no se merece eso, no fue su culpa nadie sabía qué era lo que iba a
77
pasar. Yo no quería decir nada en contra de él” [“The guide was a kid he does not
deserve that; it was not his fault nobody knew what was going to happen. I didn’t want to
say anything against him”] (“Iliana”, 2017). She returned to her parent’s house after
staying at the shelter for a couple of weeks. She left her hometown as a migrant and
returned as a widow who was not given the opportunity to be present at her husband’s
funeral to adequately bury and mourn him.
This particular case study is evidence of the complexity of problems that occur at
the U.S. Southern border. In particular, the consequences that immigration and law
enforcement policies have on the individual. In this case study, “Iliana” knew that her
husband died, he died in her arms, but she was denied the right to bury and mourn him
properly. He was denied the right to be properly mourned by loved ones. According to
Reineke (2016), “when a death is traumatic, the collective experience of trauma does not
end with the arrival of the body, but often continues long after burial” (p.111). In this
case, the traumatic experience of the death, being denied being present at the burial, and
being incarcerated adds to the traumatic experience of this individual. Furthermore, a
niño [child], according to the interviewee, was being charged with murder, for human
smuggling, and for putting the lives of others at risk. According to Nevins (2008), guides
are criminalized and blamed for putting the life of people at risk. This does not mean that
the guide should not be reprimanded for their behavior but blaming individuals for a
complex and significant issue does nothing to solve the humanitarian crisis at the U.S.
southern border. As Iliana states, she did not blame this person for her husband’s death.
This leaves us to question why governmental policies and laws choose to blame these
78
coyotes for the loss of border crossers when a more prominent and complex issue is at
hand.
La Mamá [The mom]
I met “Norma” at the shelter. She is an older woman who was always helping out
in the kitchen. She didn’t talk much but she was kind and generous to others. We worked
together inside the shelter helping with the cooking and the cleaning. Even though she
was older, she was always lending a hand to help. She had mentioned to me that she
wanted to apply for asylum in the U.S. One day she went up to me and asked me if I was
going to return to the U.S. that day “¿vas a cruzar?” [“are you going to cross?”], when I
responded yes she asked me if I could take her to the pedwest, to turn herself in. Pedwest
is one of the pedestrian entry points in San Ysidro, also known as “El Chaparral”. I
asked her if she was sure of her decision and if so I would gladly drive her, later that day
we got in my car and drove. The shelter is approximately ten minutes away from San
Ysidro, CA. Before dropping her off I took her to a panaderia [bakery] to get some food
before she was put in la hielera [the fridge]. The hielera is a cold room where migrants
are usually kept for two nights and three days before being deported or sent to a detention
center in the U.S. Migrants are told that they need to be placed in this hielera because
they have bichos [bugs], that could harm others. While we were in la panaderia “Norma”
shared her story with me.
A mother, a wife, a Guatemalan, and asylum seeker are the most straightforward
ways that I can use to describe “Norma”. “Norma” was born in Guatemala, then migrated
79
to the U.S. and lived a simple life in this country taking care of children with special
needs. One day she got a call from her husband, who lived in Guatemala who told her
“Pase lo que pase, quédate en Estados Unidos nunca te vayas a regresar” [No matter
what happens, stay in the U.S. never return]. A couple of weeks later she received
another call, where she learned that her husband and her stepson were murdered by gang
members because they did not pay their monthly quota. “No paragón piso, no les
alcanzaba y los mataron” [“They didn’t pay the quote, they didn’t have enough, so they
killed them”]. She had no intentions of returning, she called her other son and told them
that he, his wife, and child should come to the U.S. to get away from all that violence and
persecution. Her son, his wife, and child moved to Mexico. Once he had enough money,
he left his wife and child in Mexico to cross the border with the hopes to later bring both
of them to the U.S. He came with a group of nine individuals, including himself, through
the desert of Sonora. The day before the journey he called his mother and told her that he
was about to cross, that was the last time they spoke.
“Norma” waited and waited. She did not know who to call or what to do to find
her son. The only person that she kept constant contact with was her daughter in law and
grandson. Desperate, she returned to Mexico with her daughter in law to look for her son.
With no results, she returned to Guatemala. In Guatemala, she struggled to find answers,
months later she finally found out what had happened. Her son was alive, but he was
detained in Mexico, imprisoned under a six-year sentence for working for a cartel. Once
he was in prison, she was finally able to talk to him and find out what had happened.
80
On his journey into the U.S., her son was walking with a group of eight other
men. While they were walking through the desert, they were stopped by a group of
people. They were told to get on their knees and hold their hands behind their head. They
were detained by cartel members, who beat them and forced them to decide between life
and death. One by one they were asked if they would work for the cartel and do whatever
they were asked to do. According to her son, they all said no to this proposition. In return,
cartel members used coercion to force them into doing their bidding. One by one they
were asked again, the first person who was asked answered no to working for them. He
was decapitated in front of the others. Out of the nine men, only two survived and were
forced to work for the cartel. One of the survivors was her son. He and the other man
were forced to work and complete different tasks (the tasks will not be discussed here).
He was later caught by Mexican officials and imprisoned for six years. “Al menos está
vivo, y su hijo va a poder tener un papá” [“at least he is alive, and his son is going to
have a father”] (“Norma”, 2017).
“Norma” was still in Guatemala, and during her time there she began to work
selling food to sustain herself. Unfortunately, because of gang activity, she was asked to
pay a monthly quota to the gangs just like her husband. When she could not pay she was
told to leave or she would be killed. She left Guatemala with nothing but what she was
wearing. She arrived at Tijuana, after weeks of traveling, to the shelter and stayed there
for two months. With nowhere else to go, she decided to seek asylum in the U.S. She has
been in a detention center for more than six months with no clear understanding of when
she will be getting out. “Es muy difícil estar aquí dentro, nos tratan como criminales.
81
Pero qué hace uno, yo no tengo a dónde más ir en mi país me quieren matar. Ya no
queda nada más que esperar” [“It is tough to be in here, they treat us like criminals. But
what can one do? I don’t have anywhere else to go. They want to murder me in my
country. There’s nothing for me to do but wait”] (“Norma”, 2018).
People who seek asylum in the U.S. have to enter through one of its entry points,
and state that they cannot return to their place of origin because they fear for their life
because they are persecuted. Many of the individuals who sought refuge at the shelter
were on their way to ask for asylum in either the U.S. or Mexico (Figure 16). Throughout
my time in the shelter, I learned that there is a misconception of the realities of what it
means to ask for asylum in the U.S. and the process of it. For example, many individuals
asked for asylum at different U.S. entry points and were denied their right to apply by
border officials. Others applied for asylum but gave up their right because they could not
bear to be inside a detention center. Two of the individuals I interviewed, including
“Norma”, were given bail but could not afford it. “Norma” currently has a bail of
$10,000, an amount that she cannot provide. Another misconception that many asylum
seekers have is the belief that one cannot apply for asylum if one does not have any
children. Many of the people that I spoke to in the shelter mentioned that they were not
going to seek asylum in the U.S. because they did not have any children, and because of
this they were going to be denied. All of this allows me as a researcher to observe that
there is a need for education on the topic of asylum and refuge in the U.S. Further
research on migrants understanding of asylum could allow us to understand if there is a
82
correlation between clandestine border crossing and the understanding of asylum or
refuge, in the minds of migrants.
Moreover, through this case study, the despair of not knowing the whereabouts of
a loved one can be observed. Despite the possibility of risking her own life, “Norma”
returned to Mexico and, later, Guatemala to find what had happened to her son. As she
mentioned, she did not know who to call, and she, too, was facing the probability of
being deported because of her immigration status in the U.S. Thus, leaving was the better
option for her. Again, the lack of information to migrants and their families exposes them
to further forms of human rights violations.
Non-profit organizations such as The Colibrí Center for Human Rights is a place
where families and loved ones of migrants can contact to make missing person reports
without fearing persecution from law enforcement agencies. The issue here is that even
though this organization and others are available to migrants and their families, many do
not know that these programs exist or what the program’s agendas are. For example, the
shelter where I was collecting data for my research was not aware of this organization
and the shelter often directs people to other organizations such as Águilas de Desierto or
Ángeles del Desierto who also take missing person reports with a focus on searching for
individuals. Organizations such as this one do not have access to a software like Colibrí
and therefore cannot compare reports given to them of the bodies or remains that have
already been found by other agencies. A better form of advertisement, for the lack of a
better word, should be implemented to inform migrants of the resources available to
them.
83
Forensic Anthropologists
As mentioned, two forensic anthropologists and one medicolegal agent were
interviewed for this thesis. Both forensic anthropologists interviewed and the medicolegal
agent work in the states neighboring the U.S.-Mexico border. The reason why these
interviews were conducted was to understand the different roles of those handling the
remains and bodies of migrants throughout the U.S. Southern border. Through the
interviews, various aspects of the handling of unidentified migrant remain cases surged,
as well as the relationship between forensic anthropologists and the families of
migrants.
What is missing?
During the interviews, one question was repeatedly asked to each individual
“What do you think about the relationship between families of migrants who die at the
border and of those working to identify these individuals?” Two of the three individuals
mentioned that the relationship between families of victims, and forensic anthropologists
and medicolegal facilities were distant, and in some cases impossible to establish. Thus,
all three individuals noted that they often turned to the Colibrí Center to have them serve
as mediators to be able to interact with the families of victims. The following are some of
the reasons mentioned by two of the interviewees: mistrust of family and loved ones and
language barriers.
Mistrust from families and loved ones of victims are influenced by various
factors, according to the interviewees. This mistrust from family members as mentioned
84
by one of the interviewees and Reineke (2016), comes from the previous mistreatment of
migrants by law enforcement agencies and political agendas. As mentioned, the history of
the border in and the militarization of it has proven that migrants have been neglected and
mistreated from the moment they attempt to enter the U.S. and forward. As stated,
“Trump asserts that those who enter the U.S. clandestinely are people who seek to harm
Americans through acts of terror or criminal conduct, and in turn, these individuals pose a
significant threat to national security and public safety” (The White House, 2017). This
statement reinforces the fear of persecution and criminalization that migrants face making
it difficult for them to seek help from law enforcement officials and extending this fear to
forensic anthropologists, who in cases like this often work alongside government
agencies. As another interviewee, the medicolegal agent, mentioned, “the families of
these individuals, too often do not understand how the system works and the difference of
criminal prosecution and missing persons reports” (Anonymous, 2017). The same person
who mentioned this also noted that this is particularly common in Arizona. “One of the
reasons why migrants, their families, and their loved ones, are more suspicious of law
enforcement here in Arizona is due to former sheriff Joseph Arpaio, especially now that
he was pardoned by Trump” (Anonymous, 2017) (Appendix I). As mentioned, the
current political discourse on undocumented migration has obscured and neglected the
rights of migrants by removing their humanity.
During 2015, a lawsuit against the state of Texas was filed by undocumented
parents of U.S. citizens. In Texas, children were being denied their right to receive birth
85
certificates if their parents were undocumented. This is not only a violation of human
rights, but a violation of the U.S. Constitution.
Amendment XIV:
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the
jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they
reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges
or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any
person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any
person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
This is yet another case where migrants have had their right negated, and this
violation is extended to their offspring. This should be further explored to understand the
effects that these children have had by being neglected by the state and country where
they were born. As Kaufman (2015) mentioned children could not be enrolled in school,
given medical healthcare, and other rights that were legally theirs. This further
demonstrates the reason why many individuals do not feel safe when speaking to law
enforcement individuals and need organizations outside of law enforcement, such as
Colibrí Center for Human Rights that meet their necessities as migrants, but more
importantly as humans.
Additionally, proper communication and understanding between migrants, their
families, and their loved ones need to be implemented with forensic anthropologists,
medicolegal offices, and non-profit organizations that work in the issue of deaths and
missing persons at the border. The interviewees mentioned that the Colibrí Center served
86
as their source of communication between families of the missing and themselves.
Another of the reasons why the interviewees indicated that the Colibrí Center was critical
in the identification of individuals, was due to the language barrier between migrant
families and those who work to solve the cases of the missing and the unidentified
migrants.
Language barriers can interfere with the communication between persons.
Throughout the interviews with all three participants it was noted that language
differences often conflicted with the interaction with the families of the missing. In two
of the cases, the interviewees mentioned that whenever they had to speak to the families,
they could not do it alone if the family did not speak English. The Colibrí Center serves,
again, as a mediator between forensic anthropologists and medicolegal agents. The
medicolegal agent interviewed noted that the medical examiner’s office only had two
individuals who spoke Spanish and only one of them could read it and write it. When it
was necessary, they used these individuals to communicate with families.
Though interpreters and translators can serve as excellent forms of
communication mediums between individuals that speak different languages much can
still be lost in translation. First, there are words, sayings, and slang that cannot be
translated from one language to another. For example, throughout my time at the shelter
in Tijuana, I had to act as a translator for English speakers that came into the shelter.
Only I and two other social workers spoke English. If one of us was not present at the
time of arrival of an only English speaker, it was challenging for others to interact with
them successfully. On various occasions, I had to translate for the social workers, the
87
nuns, and other migrants. While doing this, I noticed that sometimes I could only
summarize what people would say. On various occasions, it was impossible to translate
verbatim, and this could be assumed to be a regular occurrence for other translations,
such as the cases when translating for families of undocumented border crossers. It is also
important to note that not all undocumented border crossers are Spanish speakers. During
my time at the shelter, I encountered several individuals that spoke Mixtec, Zapotec,
among other indigenous languages. Thus, it is necessary to have individuals who can
speak more than just English to have better communication with the families of the
victims and, when necessary, translators who can speak native languages and others.
What can be done?
The important part of any research project is not only to inform but also to
collaborate to the topic one is researching. Throughout this thesis, the forensic
anthropologists interviewed shared some of their projects and their collaboration for the
identification of migrant remains throughout the U.S. Southern border. The first
anthropologist interviewed mentioned that they were working on a software that allowed
for law enforcement agencies and other individuals to access the location of remains from
any device through the use of geographic information system mapping (GIS). This would
allow them to add any information that was gathered by investigators in a database which
could be accessed by others. This software could potentially facilitate the sharing of
information from one law enforcement agency to another and between other non-profit
organizations. It would also allow individuals to pinpoint the geographical location of
88
remains along with material culture found within a certain radius of the remains. The
project in itself seems to have a lot of potential.
There is also a need to collaborate and inform non-profit organizations, all law
enforcement agencies, and even civilians who walk through migrant trails at the border.
During this research project, I was able to speak to two different non-profit organizations
that work closely with migrant remains. One of the organizations, Humane Borders work
to provide humanitarian help for undocumented border crossers. More specifically their
“primary mission is to save desperate people from a horrible death by dehydration and
exposure and to create a just and humane environment in the borderlands” (Humane
Borders, 2018) (Appendix J). Their work focuses on the Sonoran Desert. Through an
interview with one of their volunteers, it was mentioned that during their walks through
the desert they often found items that belonged to undocumented border crossers. It was
mentioned that whenever they found items they always picked them up (whenever there
were no bodies in sight), and they either threw them away or kept them for their
collection (Anonymous volunteer, 2017). Furthermore, it was mentioned by this person
how items left behind by migrants were also part of the littering problem in the desert.
They see their efforts as a way to clean the desert and protect the environment. Though
their efforts are greatly appreciated and in no way is this organization being blamed or
singled out, it was observed that the movement of material culture could interfere with
the identification of individuals. As De Leon (2012) previously mentioned “there is a
historical, political, and global economic forces” (p.478) in the material culture utilized
by migrants. This can be further extended to the individual. As Reineke (2014)
89
mentioned “items that people are carrying are key” (torn apart) to the positive
identification of persons.
Since the U.S. southern border often has individuals who aid in diminishing
migrant deaths, there is a need to incorporate nonprofit organizations to collaborate with
family members of the deceased, forensic anthropologists, and possibly with law
enforcement agencies. Their collaboration in this sense could be done by having access to
this software and inputting the data and location of material culture found throughout the
border. This, partnership could allow us to better understand the relationship between
items found and remains. Furthermore, it might even be useful to enable this software to
civilians who travel through different areas throughout the U.S. southern border. For
example, as I was walking towards the border between Tijuana and San Diego (Figure
17), I encountered water bottles and two different pairs of shoes. Though it is possible
that these items might not be the property of migrants, it is also a possibility that they
could be material culture used by migrants, and therefore are an essential factor in
understanding migration between Mexico and the U.S. and items that characterize
migrants.
90
Figure 17: Border fence between San Diego and Tijuana. March 2018.
Moreover, this organization (Humane Borders) has created a map where red dots
reflect the deaths of migrants, along with water stations throughout the Sonoran Desert
(Figure 18). The map in their website is very interactive (Appendix J), one can search for
individual cases through case number, the location where remains were found, the name
of the person (if identified), and gender. Humane Borders has focused on Arizona’s
southern border, where more undocumented migrant deaths have occurred. Two things
can be added to a map like this one. First, is to use their information and add it to the GIS
project created by the forensic anthropologist previously mentioned. This would allow for
a more accurate record of migrant remains, and material culture can also be input from
91
now on. Secondly, a map like this one should be extended to all border areas between the
U.S. and Mexico. This would allow for a better understanding of migrant paths
throughout all the border and the deaths that have occurred throughout the years.
Figure 18:1999-2011 Recorded Migrant Deaths by Humane Borders, Retrieved
fromhttps://humaneborders.org/migrant-death-mapping/
Decomposition at the Desert
There is a need for additional research on the decomposition process of human
remains at the border. The environment and ecology of the desert is unique with its
extreme weather and species of animals. There is a need to understand the decomposition
process under extreme weathering and animal predation. By observing animal predation
in the desert, forensic anthropologists and medicolegal agents could better understand the
effects that animal predation has on the dispersal of remains. This could potentially aid in
92
future searches of remains and material culture. Through a study conducted by Jason De
Leon (2012), the process of decomposition and environmental influencers was shortly
observed. The research conducted utilized pig remains that were dressed in typical attire
used by border crossers and were left outside to see the process of animal predation and
decomposition. This process was done three times, and each time the results varied. Thus,
I firmly believe that there is a need to further explore the decomposition in the desert
through the use of “body farms.” Such research facilities have been created through
different university campuses across the U.S. to understand the effects that different
scenarios have on human remains, but this has not yet been implemented in desert areas.
Again, due to the unique weather and animal predation of the desert it is essential to
understand the effect that these might have on human remains.
Águilas del Desierto
Although the organizations previously mentioned do tremendous work at the U.S.
southern border to save lives, find the missing, and identify remains, other smaller
organizations also work in the effort against this humanitarian crisis. One of these
organizations is Águilas del Desierto. They communicate with families of migrants in
search of the missing (Appendix K). I was able to interview two of the founders of this
organization and a volunteer. The interviews conducted were done in Spanish and I was
able to learn about the work that this organization does in the efforts against the current
humanitarian crisis at the border. This organization focuses on the search for
93
undocumented border crossers (dead or alive) at the southern borders of Arizona and
California.
Águilas del Desierto receives calls from family members and loved ones of
individuals that were migrating to the U.S. During many of these calls, family members
often give very vague information to the organization. Thus, many of the searches are
done solely on statements of “La última vez que escuche de mi hermano fue cuando iba
entrar por el desierto” [“the last time I heard from my brother was when he was going to
enter the desert”] (Anonymous, 2017). This organization does various searches for
undocumented border crossers knowing that they might not find anything or find
someone different than the person they were looking for. This organization is made of a
group of volunteers, many of which have family members of their own that have gone
through this path. One of the founders of the organization shared their story with me.
This person told me that the reason why this organization was created was because they
were once searching for their brother and cousin in the Sonoran Desert. After months of
searching for these two family members, they finally found them in the desert. The
bodies were almost entirely skeletonized when they were found. This person knows
firsthand what it feels to have a loved one missing and has therefore made it their duty to
walk through the desert of Sonora with a group of volunteers to look for survivors or for
those who lost their lives in the process of crossing.
Throughout my conversations with these individuals, I learned that most of the
calls they receive are from families of migrants who either reside in the U.S. without any
documentation or are outside of the U.S. It is their belief that the loved ones of the
94
missing migrants often contact them because they are not affiliated with law enforcement
agencies and because they were once in the same place these people are today, searching
for answers (Anonymous, 2017). Thus, there is a need for collaboration between
organizations, especially those like Águilas del Desierto who continuously interact with
families of victims to search for individuals lost throughout the border and the Colibrí
Center who have a database filled with missing person reports. There is a need for better
communication between all organizations and persons, including forensic anthropologists
and migrant families, to better serve the death at the border. When they find individuals,
they post pictures through their Facebook profile, of either the person found or their
belongings (Figure 19). This is done so that if somebody recognizes the items or the
person, they can reach out to them for identification purposes and also to bring awareness
to the public. This brings us back to the importance of material culture for identification
and the work done by smaller organizations such as this one. When families of migrant
are afraid to reach out to law enforcement agencies, it is more probable that they will
reach out for help through organizations like this one.
95
Figure 19: Human Skull of a migrant found by Aguilas del Desierto in the Sonoran Desert, retrieved from
Facebook, 2017.
Furthermore, this organization found 22 migrant remains through the desert of
Sonora. They mentioned that whenever they found remains their job was to call the
nearest coroner’s office to have experts retrieve the remains and further examine them.
They mentioned that every single person that they found was not included in the number
of deaths reported by border patrol officials. Consequently, the statistics shared by CBP
are only an estimate of the number of deaths but the real number is higher than what has
been given to the public. This was also noted through the Missing Migrant Project
conducted through the International Organization for Migration (IOM-OMI). 400
individuals were found death throughout the U.S.-Mexico border (IOM-OMI, 2018)
96
(Figure 20), compared to CBP (2018) records that recorded only 294 deaths (Figure 9). It
can be concluded that the exact number of migrant deaths at the border is unknown.
Meaning, that there is a need for collaboration between law enforcement officials, non-
profit organizations, forensic anthropologists, and migrants to truly understand the
humanitarian crisis at the border and exhibit proper statistics of the number of
undocumented migrant deaths and how to best assist this crisis.
Figure 20: Missing Migrant Project conducted through the International Organization for Migration
(IOM-OMI) deaths throughout the U.S.-Mexico border.
97
CONCLUSION
The Gap Between Individuals and Organizations
Ultimately, this research project exposes some of the gaps between forensic
anthropologists, non-profit organizations, migrants, and the families of victims. The aim
here is not to pinpoint or blame any of the organizations or individuals mentioned, but
rather to create a discourse that allows for the understanding of this complex
humanitarian crisis at the U.S. southern border. As mentioned, thousands of individuals
have died while trying to enter the U.S. through its southern border and many are yet to
be found, identified, and repatriated. Thus, this project aims to see and understand the gap
between critical actors involved in the identification, retrieval, and repatriation process of
migrant remains and the factors that affect the probabilities of this happening.
Furthermore, this project urges individuals to undertake a transdisciplinary approach to
successfully identify, retrieve, and repatriate migrant remains. Through the studies and
the evidence provided through the gathering of data, it is concluded that there is a need to
use biological, cultural, archaeological, and linguistic methods; as well as other methods
beyond the discipline of anthropology such as social work to interact with families of
victims and properly serve and protect the rights of the dead.
98
Contributions
The use of Multiple Disciplines and Organizations
This thesis integrates the discourse of the multiple actors that are involved in the
process of identifying, finding, and repatriating migrant remains. Previous research has
surveyed the relationship between forensic anthropologists and families of victims
(Reineke, 2016), however this research also incorporates the work done by smaller non-
profit organizations. Such organizations are crucial in the location of undocumented
border crosser remains, and in their assistance can be utilized for the identification and
retrieval of persons with the collaboration of the families of the victims. Furthermore, this
thesis considers a multidisciplinary approach that integrates cultural and biological
anthropology methods to identify undocumented border crossers. The data gathered and
analyzed for this thesis project allowed me to observe the state of the collaboration
between organizations and individuals who have a similar agenda in respects to
undocumented border crossers.
Throughout this thesis project it was noted that law enforcement agencies, non-
profit organizations, and educational institutions do not always interact effectively.
Therefore, there is a lack of open dialogue between all organizations and individuals
involved in the discourse of undocumented migration at the U.S.-Mexico border.
Through the acknowledgement of this closed dialogue between all involved, it can be
concluded that there is a need for a proposition that creates a solution. In particular, I
noted a large disconnect between organizations and individuals based on the mistrust
99
towards law enforcement agencies. Therefore, it might be worthwhile to start a dialogue
between all non-profit organizations, educational institutions, and actors involved in the
retrieval, identification, or repatriation of migrant remains, prior to the inclusion of law
enforcement agencies. This could be achieved through the development of internet-based
systems that can be assessed by multiple agents including forensic anthropologists, non-
profit organizations, and institutional organizations. This system in theory should allow
individuals to input data on different cases, geolocation of where remains or material
culture are found, maps, and the ability to contact the person imputing the data for more
collaboration if necessary.
Furthermore, the collaboration between individuals and organizations through the
use of an internet-based system would promote the use of multidisciplinary approaches
and the collaboration between multiple disciplines. In order to successfully approach such
a complex issue that is influenced by various factors (e.g. structural violence, structural
racism, etc.) and agencies (e.g. U.S. government agencies), multidisciplinary approaches
need to be taken. Therefore, it can be concluded that the high number of undocumented
border crosser deaths, identifications, and repatriations, cannot be resolved through the
use of one single solution and therefore a greater collaboration between all actors
mentioned needs to be taken.
Genocide at the U.S.-Mexico Border
This thesis project focuses on the different aspects of undocumented migration at
the U.S.-Mexico border through different perspectives, methods, and theoretical
100
approaches. Additionally, this thesis focuses on the abuses to humanity and more
specifically to human rights violations through the use of militarization tactics at the
U.S.-Mexico border. Through the analysis and observations made of the data gathered, I
would suggest that the current humanitarian crisis at the border is an act of war against
humanity, more specifically against undocumented migrant populations. The
militarization of the U.S.-Mexico border created by the U.S. government focuses on
policies and laws that knowingly and actively deter successful undocumented migrant
crossings by funneling individuals into secluded and hazardous terrain, causing the deaths
of thousands. These policies and laws are specifically targeting migrants and as defined
through articles II and III of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of
Genocide (Appendix M) (See Background section) the U.S. is responsible for the
genocide of migrants at the U.S. Southern border for specifically targeting this group and
intentionally putting their lives at risk.
What else can be done?
This thesis focuses on the migrant population in Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico,
specifically woman and children. Throughout this thesis gender roles were indirectly
pointed out but were not discussed. The migrant population with whom I worked with
were all women, and their roles as women and the effects that their gender has on their
migration experience needs to be further explored. Due to time constraints it was not
possible to specifically explore the roles of women in this setting. Additionally, the
experiences of women could also aid in the understanding of migration myths that rule
101
the decision of migrants, for example the idea that only women with children can acquire
asylum status in the U.S. If a complete understanding of migration myths is gathered a
discourse of this could be developed and thus deter such myths that influence the
decisions of many. To fully understand migration and all the complex relationships that
tie to it, it is important to understand the stories of migrants and their decisions.
Therefore, ethnographic work is crucial when creating propositions and solutions for the
significant number of migrant deaths.
On another note, while interviewing with Águilas del Desierto, one of the
interviewees of this organization expressed that there is a need to record the path that
migrants undertake not only by outlining it on a map but by physically walking it and
documenting the process of it (Anonymous, 2017). Based on the results of the
observations made throughout this thesis, by unraveling the migrations events through a
recording could potentially bring to light the experiences of migrants and their journeys
to the public, migrants who have not yet engaged on the journey, and all the actors and
agencies involved in the different aspects of undocumented migration. Also, this could be
utilized to understand the unique environment of the desert and the paths taken by
migrants. There is much to learn about the desert and its extreme weathering and
environmental patterns; such as the effects that it can have on human bodies and human
remains through the decomposition process and different forms of predation. In
conclusion, there is much research on the humanitarian crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border
that needs to be undertaken to understand the complexity of the issue thoroughly to create
plausible solutions.
