Ambiguous Loss for Cambodian American Deportees and Their Families

Abstract

Through an Ambiguous Loss framework, this study examines how family members in the United States and in Cambodia process grief and cope with deportation and separation. The ongoing sense of loss can result in families feeling stuck, continually dealing with the ambiguity of whether their deported family member is in or out of the family. Individual and group interviews conducted with family members in the United States and in Cambodia revealed the following main themes: frozen grief- inability to move on, ambiguous loss compounded by unclear roles and boundaries, and sense of betrayal. This research examines life after deportation and seeks ways to improve the conditions for families. These findings recognize the painful irony that exist for families dealing with loss from deportation.

Keywords:

• Ambiguous loss
• deportation
• refugee
• resettlement
• genocide
• Asian American
• Southeast Asian
• immigration policy

Acknowledgement

We would like to thank all of the individuals and families that participated in this study. We also appreciate the helpful comments from the journal editors and anonymous reviewers.

Notes

1 This is a popular phrase used to describe this dark period of Cambodian history and is taken from 1984 film (Joffe, 1984) of the same name.

2 Until 1996, immigration judges could provide discretionary relief for lawful permanent residents convicted of serious crimes, particularly those who entered the US as refugees and had at least 7 years of US residency (Hing 2006).

3 The aggravated felonies category in US immigration has been broadened since the term became part of immigration law in 1988 (Hing, 2006).

4 There are specific protections against deportation for Cambodian immigrants and refugees who are naturalized United States citizens. However, many factors prevent individuals from naturalizing, including high application costs and in some cases, a previous criminal conviction.

5 The study was approved by our university’s Institutional Review Board (IRB). All IRB guidelines and protocols regarding human subject research were followed.