Show Summary Details

Page of

Printed from Encyclopedia of Social Work. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 28 June 2022

Latinas and Latinos Overviewfree

Latinas and Latinos Overviewfree

  • Rocío CalvoRocío CalvoBoston College
  •  and Victor FiguereoVictor FiguereoUniversity of Pittsburgh


The United States is in the midst of a profound ethnic and racial demographic transformation. Latinx are a main driver of this transformation, having led the American population growth for the last few decades, and contributed to our nation’s economy and culture for generations. Unfortunately, the significance of Latinx’s contributions are not always recognized. Many still experience barriers for advancement associated with inadequate access to health, education, employment and discrimination. We use a variety of sociodemographic indicators to argue how entrenched systems of inequity impact the lived experiences of different Latinx communities and prevent them from contributing to the future of our nation. We conclude with a set of recommendations for policy, practice, research, and education.


  • Populations and Practice Settings
  • Race, Ethnicity, and Culture
  • Social Justice and Human Rights
  • Social Work Profession

Updated in this version

Content and references updated for the Encyclopedia of Macro Social Work.


The term Hispanic was created by the 1975 Ad Hoc Committee on Racial and Ethnic Definitions (Flores-Hughes, 2006) and adopted by the U.S. government with the passage of the 1976 Public Law 94-311 (Rumbaut, 2011). The law defines Hispanics as Americans of Spanish origin or descent, stating that “more than twelve million Americans identify themselves as being of Spanish-speaking background and trace their origin or descent from Mexico, Puerto Rico, Cuba, Central and South America, and other Spanish-speaking countries” (Rumbaut, 2009, p. 8). The U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) introduced the term Hispanic for the first time in the 1980 census. Resistance to the label because of its ties to Spanish colonization led to the adoption of the term Latino, which the OMB introduced for the first time in the 2000 census (U.S. Census Bureau, 2020a). Latino also drew criticism because it erases the indigenous and Black heritage of people from Latin America and is not gender inclusive. Awareness about gender inequities and violence experienced by LGBTQ+ Latinxs fueled the use of a new gender-inclusive term, Latinx, particularly among public figures and academic institutions. This new construct is criticized for being elitist. Research shows that only a quarter of all Latinxs have heard the term, and about 3% use it for self-identification (Noe-Bustamante, Mora, & Lopez, 2020). We use the term Latinx in this article to be inclusive of all identities and lived experiences of this population.

Latinx identity is complex, fluid, and context-specific (Rodríguez, 2000). There is no consensus on a unique pan-ethnic identifier that captures the experiences of people from over 20 different countries with a variety of cultures, values, languages, socioeconomic circumstances, education, race, generations in the U.S., and immigration stories. When asked for self-identification preference, a nationally representative survey found that about half of Latinxs used the terms Hispanic and Latino interchangeably. A third of the sample used country of origin as their preferred identifier. The rest of participants preferred the term American to describe themselves (Lopez et al., 2020).

Sociodemographic Overview of U.S. Latinxs

Over 18% of the U.S. population, or 60 million individuals, are Latinxs (Krogstad, 2020). Latinxs are the largest racially minoritized group in the United States. If current growth rates continue, one in three Americans will be of Latinx descent by 2060 (Vespa et al., 2020). Latinxs are young, with a median age of 29 (Noe-Bustamante & Flores, 2019). Only 7% of Latinxs are 65 or older, although this segment of the population is projected to double, from 16%–28%, in the next few decades (Mather et al., 2015; Olshansky, 2015). A common misconception is that most Latinxs are recent immigrants. The reality is that only a third of Latinxs were born outside the United States and almost 80% are U.S. citizens (Krogstad & Noe-Bustamante, 2021). Something that people do not realize is that a large proportion of Latinxs of Mexican descent never migrated to the United States. They became Americans in 1884 when the United States seized over half of Mexico’s territory after the Mexican-American war (Rumbaut, 2011). Moreover, Latinxs have been present in the U.S. territory longer than any other ethnoracial group, with the exception of Native American and indigenous groups (Rumbaut, 2006).

According to recent population estimates from the American Community Survey, U.S. Latinxs can trace their heritage to over 20 nations, although most have Mexican roots (61.5%; see Table 1). Almost 20% have ancestors from the Spanish-speaking Caribbean (Puerto Rico, Cuba, Dominican Republic). People with Central American roots (e.g., El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras) comprise around 10% of current U.S. Latinxs, whereas people from South America (e.g., Colombia, Ecuador, Peru) comprise about 7% of the Latinx population.

Table 1. U.S. Latinxs by Heritage



Total U.S. Latinx Pop.









Puerto Rican









Central American


















Costa Rican



Other Central Am.



South American






























Other South Am.






All other Spanish/Hispanic/Latino



Source: ACS 1-Year Estimates-Public Use Microdata Sample 2019.

Geographic Distribution

A large concentration of U.S. Latinxs, about half, live in traditional states along the U.S.–Mexico border, including Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas. Two of these border states, California and Texas, account for the largest growth of Latinx populations since 2010, 1.5 million and 2 million, respectively (Krogstad, 2020). In Texas alone projections estimate that Latinxs will become the largest racial group by 2022 (Ura & Ahmed, 2018). This demographic transformation implies that the ethnoracial makeup of the United States will be more reflective of the U.S.–Mexico Border in the coming decades. The Latinx population is growing not only in traditional destinations like the border states but also in new destinations. Since 2010, the greatest increase of the Latinx population has been in new destination states, such as South Dakota (66% increase) and North Dakota, (129% increase), and over a million Latinxs now living in Georgia, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina (Noe-Bustamante, Lopez, & Krogstad, 2020). The geographic distribution of heritage groups (e.g., Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban) also varies regionally (Noe-Bustamante & Flores, 2019). Mexicans and Cubans tend to concentrate in the Western and Southern regions. Puerto Ricans and Dominicans tend to live in the Northeastern region, in states such as New York and Massachusetts. Central Americans (e.g., Salvadorans, Guatemalans, Hondurans) are not bound by U.S. region and mostly reside on both coasts of the United States, in New York and California along with Texas and Florida. With the exception of Peruvians and Venezuelans, South Americans (e.g., Colombians, Ecuadorians) are found mostly living in New York, New Jersey, and Florida. Finally, Spaniards tend to live in California, Texas, and New Mexico.

Socioeconomic Status

Latinxs comprised almost 18% of the U.S. workforce in 2018 and are projected to surpass 21% of the workforce by 2028 (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2019). Although Latinxs participate in the labor force more often than other ethnoracial groups, they earn less income and have higher poverty rates than non-Latinx Whites (Creamer, 2020). The global coronavirus pandemic exacerbated labor inequities, and Latinxs experienced job loss rates of almost 20%, whereas non-Latinx Whites experienced rates of about 12% ( Krogstad et al., 2020).

Limited access to quality education helps explain why Latinxs are overrepresented among youth who do not finish high school and do not pursue higher education (Merolla, 2018). Only 18% of U.S. Latinxs held a bachelor’s degree in 2019 compared with 26% of non-Latinx Blacks, 40% of non-Latinx Whites, and 58% of non-Latinx Asians (U.S. Census Bureau, 2020a). The factors associated with negative educational achievement are complex, but considerable research has shown that Latinx children experience bias, discrimination, and unequal treatment in schools stemming from immigration status, speaking Spanish, skin color, and phenotypical characteristics (Coker et al., 2009). The educational experience of Latinx children is also impacted by caregivers’ experiences of discrimination, unequal access to employment and housing, and a ubiquitous anti-immigrant sentiment in the United States (Fisher et al., 2000). As a result, Latinx children experience chronic stressors that diminish their ability to learn (Hill & Torres, 2010; Perreira et al., 2010).

Generational Diversity

The U.S. Census Bureau defines first-generation immigrants as foreign-born individuals, second-generation immigrants as U.S.-born individuals with at least one foreign-born parent, and third-and-higher–generation immigrants as individuals with U.S.-born parents. Table 2 shows various characteristics of each generation. Foreign-born, or first-generation Latinxs, are older than Latinxs born in the United States (the second-generation and beyond). The 2018 National Survey of Latinos (NSL) showed that most first-generation Latinxs were between the ages of 30 and 48 (48%) and had a larger proportion of older adults than other generations. This generation is also more Spanish-dominant than the rest, with 56% of people speaking little or no English. Just under half of first-generation Latinx do not have a high school diploma, which may help explain why despite a relatively high employment rate (62%) more than 30% of families earn less than $20,000 annually.

The second generation, or U.S.-born Latinxs with immigrant parents, is young, with most falling between the ages of 18 and 29. Most are bilingual (56%) and employed (67%), with a large proportion earning an annual family income between $50,000 and $74,000 (NSL, 2018). Higher income relative to first-generation Latinxs may stem from better English proficiency and access to education. Almost 60% of second-generation Latinxs have some college education. While second-generation Latinxs fare socioeconomically better, they experience more discrimination than their first-generation counterparts. Over a third of second-generation Latinxs report experiences of discrimination (NSL, 2018).

The third generation and higher, or U.S.-born Latinxs born to U.S.-born Latinxs, are characterized by assimilation to American culture. Relative to other generations, they are the least likely to identify as Hispanic/Latino and the most likely to identify as American (Lopez et al., 2017). English is the dominant language of this group, and, while their socioeconomic profile is similar to the second generation (the children of immigrants), they report less discrimination (16%; NSL, 2018).

Table 2. Characteristics of Latinx Adults by Generational Status

Total (%)

1st generation (%)

2nd generation (%)

3rd generation or higher (%)

















65 and up































100k and up






< High school





High school





Some college and more











































Source: 2018 National Survey of Latinos.

Racial Diversity Among Latinxs

One of the more overlooked aspects of Latinx identity is race, specifically racial identity. When asked about racial self-identification in the 2010 census, over half of Latinxs chose “White,” 3% chose “Black or African American,” and almost 40% chose “some other race.” Latinxs from the Spanish-speaking Caribbean, such as Dominicans and Puerto Ricans, identified as Black and Afro-Latinx more often than Latinxs with other roots. This is due to their African ancestry stemming from the transatlantic slave trade and colonialism heritage (Torres-Saillant, 2010). Around a quarter of respondents to the 2014 National Survey of Latinos identified as Afro-Latino, Afro-Caribbean, or Afro-“other country of origin” (Lopez & Gonzales-Barrera, 2016).

Latinxs may choose “some other race” because their racial identification is misaligned with the OMB’s classification system. In the census, Hispanic/Latino is not a racial category; it is an ethnic category. People are asked to self-identify as Hispanic or Latino (ethnic identification) and then choose a racial identification (White, Black, Asian). Latinxs’ who self-identify with “some other race” in the census may identify race with country of origin (e.g., “I am Dominican”) or with a variety of racial terms not included in the census (e.g., “Negra/o,” “Morena/o,” “Trigueña/o,” “India/o,” “Mestizo,” “Blanca/o,” “Guero,” “Mulato,” “Prieto”; Roth, 2012).

Systemic Barriers to Opportunities for Advancement

Latinxs experience discrimination and racism at the policy, geographic, and interpersonal levels. Systemic discrimination excludes Latinxs from access to means of advancement such as education, employment, quality housing, and health and mental healthcare.

Anti-Immigrant Policies

Anti-immigrant and immigration enforcement laws, policies, and provisions make accessing resources illegal or significantly difficult for undocumented Latinxs and for Latinxs in mixed-status families. Members of mixed-status families have a variety of immigration statuses (i.e., citizens, permanent residents, undocumented, temporary protective status; Zimmermann, 2001). Latinx avoid service use for fear of revealing their own immigration status or the status of family members that may lead to detainment and deportation (Ayon, 2013). Studies examining the effects of immigration enforcement on Latinxs have found that they are associated with lack of access to healthcare (Philbin et al., 2018), a higher risk of mental health problems (Becerra et al., 2020), and barriers to the job market and education (Becerra, 2016).

An example of these policies at the federal level are the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act. These pieces of legislation prevented Latinx immigrants from accessing federal programs during the first five years in the country and banned undocumented Latinxs from any kind of federal assistance (Rodriguez et al., 2019). More recently, the 2018 Public Charge rule expanded the criteria to deny permanent residency, or green cards, based on people’s past or potential use of public benefits (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, 2021).

State-level omnibus immigration policies, such as Arizona’s SB 1070, Georgia’s HB 87, and Alabama’s HB 56, made it a crime for immigrants not to carry proof of legal status in the country and allowed law enforcement to determine the citizenship status of any detained individual (Morse et al., 2012). The impact of these policies on Latinxs’ well-being is well documented. They have been associated with more apprehensions, arrests, and deportations of undocumented immigrants (Gramlich, 2020). They have also had a chilling effect on the use of public benefits, regardless of individuals’ immigration status, which became particularly troublesome during the COVID-19 pandemic, the impact of which was especially acute among the most vulnerable segments of the population—children and older adults. A recent study showed that in 2019 one in five adults in immigrant families with children, or 20% of all immigrant families, avoided public benefits such as supplemental nutrition, children’s health insurance, and subsidized housing for fear of being considered a public charge (Haley et al., 2020). Latinx youth, for instance, are disproportionally represented among the no-show rates and cancellation of healthcare visits (Cholera et al., 2021). Anti-immigrant policies also deteriorate the mental health of immigrant families (Perreira & Pedroza, 2019), regardless of immigration status. Ayón (2020) found high stress levels of immigrant parents in Arizona stemming from the potential impact of anti-immigrant policies on their children. There is also evidence that Latinxs in states with more restrictive policies have higher rates of poor mental health than counterparts in more welcoming states (Hatzenbuehler et al., 2017). Other evidence shows that knowing someone who was deported has negative impact on one’s mental health (Vargas et al., 2019).

Geographical Barriers

Latinxs’ geographic location affects their ability to access opportunities. There is evidence that Latinx families are at risk of exposure to environmental hazards. A study comparing exposure to pesticides in urban and rural communities found higher amounts of pesticides in Latinx children, regardless of geographical location (Arcury et al., 2021). Unlike established destinations, which have ethnic enclaves and ethnoracial-concordant services, new destinations lack these key assets for accessing resources. Established research shows that ethnic enclaves, barrio neighborhoods with high concentrations of Latinxs, have community-run institutions and established networks of support that are essential for service navigation (Eschbach et al., 2004). By contrast, studies have shown that new destinations lack community-led services. Lack of transportation services, language-discordant providers, and cultural misunderstandings concerning Latinx’s values are the most common barriers that Latinxs face in accessing services in new destinations (Edward & Biddle, 2016; Jacquez et al., 2016; Luque et al., 2018). Nathenson et al. (2016) found that Latinxs with limited English proficiency in new destinations had more difficulty securing appointments with providers than counterparts in established destinations. Other research has shown that new destinations have fewer providers that understand the nuances of Latinx culture, which exacerbates the risk of experiencing discrimination among Latinx clients (Flippen & Parrado, 2015). Innovative research on spatial variation concerning access to healthcare found that Latinxs had greater access to community health centers in established neighborhoods than in new destinations (Parker, 2021).

Such systemic barriers to accessing healthcare services exacerbate health disparities, although there is variation based on immigration status. Studies show that U.S.-born Latinxs have higher rates of alcohol and tobacco use, positioning them at a greater risk to develop chronic health conditions than their immigrant counterparts, including diabetes, obesity, hypertension, and cirrhosis (Daviglus et al., 2012; Kaplan et al., 2014; Ogden et al., 2015). This counterintuitive pattern, in which Latinx immigrants have better health outcomes than their U.S.-born peers despite lower socioeconomic status and worse access to healthcare, is known as the Hispanic Health Paradox (Acevedo-Garcia et al., 2010; Cook et al., 2009; Dominguez et al., 2015; Singh et al., 2013; Velasco-Mondragon et al., 2016). Culture and acculturation hypotheses have been used to explain this epidemiological pattern (Calzada et al., 2020). Some scholars argue that Latinx cultural values, such as religiosity and familism, are protective against acculturative stress and the adoption of unhealthy behaviors, including poor diet and substance abuse, that place Latinxs at greater risks of distress, anxiety, and depression (Buckingham & Suarez-Pedraza, 2019; Calzada et al., 2013). While cultural values may be a protective factor in Latinx health outcomes, researchers caution against a myopic use of cultural explanations (Viruell-Fuentes et al., 2012; Williams & Mohammed, 2013) because it may lead to ethnoracial stereotyping and overlook the impact that structural factors, such as systemic racism and discrimination, may have on Latinxs’ well-being and access to opportunities.


Systemic bias and discrimination against Latinxs is based on immigration status, English proficiency, race, and ethnicity (Cheng et al., 2018; Keller et al., 2010). The prevalent anti-immigrant rhetoric, fueled by the pretext of protecting America, has used immigration policies to criminalize Latinxs as a threat to the nation (Armenta, 2017; Stumpf, 2006). Lack of English proficiency is also used to discriminate against Latinxs. Despite evidence that bilingualism is beneficial for Latinxs children (Han, 2010), English-only policies have been the norm in the United States since the 1970s (Wiley & Wright, 2004). Skin color discrimination, or colorism, also contributes to discrimination against Latinxs in the United States (Hunter, 2013). Due to the legacy of colonialism, Latinxs whose skin tones and phenotypic characteristics indicate Black or indigenous heritage experience more discrimination and inequities concerning access to opportunities of advancement than their counterparts with White ancestors (Alvarez, 2019; Chavez Dueñas et al., 2014). Discrimination against Latinxs in the United States is pervasive. A recent nationally representative survey found that over a third of Latinx adults reported experiencing discrimination when applying to jobs, when being considered for promotions and equal pay, and when trying to rent or purchase a home (Findling et al., 2019). Additionally, at least one in five Latinxs report experiences of discrimination when dealing with the healthcare system, when applying and attending college, and when dealing with the police and the courts. At the interpersonal level, over a third of Latinxs experienced racial slurs and offensive comments about their ethnicity (National Public Radio et al., 2020). Studies show that Black Latinxs experience lower income, higher poverty, lower homeownership, more arrests by police, greater hypertension, and poor self-rated health relative to their White peers (Cuevas et al., 2016; Kizer, 2017; LaVeist-Ramos et al., 2012; White, 2015). Additionally, a recent study among Mexican, Cuban, Puerto Rican, and Dominican adults found that Black Latinxs are more likely to experience higher levels of psychological distress than their White counterparts while controlling for socioeconomic factors, immigrant status, age, sex, marital status, and U.S. region (Figuereo & Calvo, 2021). Other research has shown that experiencing discrimination increases mistrust in services providers and the risk of negative health outcomes and decreases satisfaction with care (López-Cevallos & Harvey, 2016; Mays et al., 2017). Additionally, discrimination compromises the therapeutical relationship, leading to lack of adherence to medication and treatment as well as lower healthcare service use (Galvan et al., 2017; Keller et al., 2010). From an intersectional minority stress perspective (Schmitz et al., 2020), the impact of discrimination on Latinxs is compounded for those who have additional oppressed identities. The oppressive structures of White supremacy, cissexism, and heterosexism interact to create stressful lived experiences that impact the healthcare equity of women and LGBTQ+ Latinxs (Abreu et al., 2020; Adames et al., 2018; Rosenthal & Lobel, 2020).

Recommendations to the Profession

In the United States, the intersection of anti-immigration policies and discrimination are social determinants of health (SDOH) that limit access to opportunities for advancement (e.g., health coverage, housing, food security, higher education), including improvement and protection of one’s health (Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, 2016). Researchers have found that social determinants of health for racially minoritized groups, such as Latinxs, are shaped by structural factors, such as racism (Viruell-Fuentes et al., 2012; Williams & Mohammed, 2013). Given that the ethical principles and standards of social work are aligned with the SDOH perspective (Rine, 2016), the profession should emphasize addressing structural forms of systemic oppression, including antiracist actions, by engaging in organizational, programmatic, community, and policy approaches (Netting, 2013) in practice, research, and educational activities.


Anti-immigrant policies are a form of structural racism (Viruell-Fuentes et al., 2012). Evidence shows that anti-immigrant policies and anti-Latinxs sentiments increase feelings of discrimination and fear and are correlated with psychological distress, regardless of immigration status (Perrira & Pedroza, 2019). Just as racism negatively impacts health, mental health, access to healthcare, educational, and employment opportunities (Viruell-Fuentes et al., 2012; Williams & Mohammed, 2013), there is growing evidence that immigration enforcement policies exacerbate Latinx health disparities (Philbin et al., 2018) and worsen health-related conditions (Castañeda & Melo, 2014; Hatzenbuehler et al., 2017; White et al., 2014). These policies place Latinxs at higher risk of experiencing poverty and multiple obstacles to living wages, education, employment and healthcare (Hardy et al., 2012; Morey, 2018; Philbin et al., 2018; Rhodes et al., 2015; Toomey et al., 2014; Vargas et al., 2017).

Social work must engage in policy making to challenge criminalizing and dehumanizing policies that render Latinxs invisible and dispensable. Given the heterogeneity of the Latinx community and that racism does not act alone but intersects with sexism, cissexism, and homophobia, the intersectionality perspective can be used to analyze the impact of immigration policies in the community (Kline & Castañeda, 2020). There is evidence that raids by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement result in greater maternal health risks for Latinas, such as low birth rates (Novak et al., 2017). When sexual and gender minority status intersects with immigration status, existing challenges, including homelessness, substance misuse, mental health disorders, suicide, and discrimination, are exacerbated by economic instability and barriers to accessing healthcare (Martinez et al., 2015; Rhodes et al., 2015, 2020). Moreover, colorism and anti-Black racism position Afro-Latinx and Latinxs with darker skin color at higher risk to be racially profiled, targeted for immigration offenses, and to be involved with the criminal system (Figuereo, 2020; Gonzalez-Barrera, 2019).


Social work practice operates in healthcare facilities, including hospitals and community health centers. One of the ways structural racism manifests is the lack of representation of Black and Indigenous people of color (BIPOC) in decision-making positions. For instance, 2016 estimates showed that fewer than 10% of master’s-level social workers in healthcare settings are Latinxs (Salsberg et al., 2017). The disproportionate ratio between Latinx bilingual and bicultural social workers and the size of the Latinx communities that the profession serve jeopardizes quality of care. Diversifying the profession, particularly hiring and promoting Latinx social workers, should be a strategic priority for social work.

Additionally, culturally adapted and responsive interventions must be accompanied by structural interventions from an intersectional approach. The profession should critically analyze its practice to uncover oppressive organizational policies that maintain a White supremacist culture and make it difficult for Latinx social workers to provide quality care to the Latinx community (e.g., policies and procedures that prioritize quantity, financial outcomes, and urgency over quality of care). We also recommend the integration and application of recently developed intersectional frameworks of addressing racism within diverse Latinx communities, such as the Healing Ethno and Racial Trauma (HEART) Framework (Chavez-Dueñas et al., 2019).


Researchers have tried to understand Latinx health and mental health disparities through a cultural lens, focusing on acculturation to explain immigrant health advantages and U.S. Latinx health disadvantages. Focusing solely on culture can lead to an essentialization and homogenization of Latinxs, defining them by specific cultural beliefs and thus risking the perpetuation of racial and ethnic stereotypes (e.g., Hunt et al., 2004). Scholars such as Viruell-Fuentes et al. (2012) call on researchers to go beyond cultural explanations (e.g., familism, acculturation) of immigrant health outcomes to examine structural factors. Research should take structural factors into account, such as Latinx racialization and anti-Black racial ideologies, when examining Latinx outcomes, including health and mental health disparities (LeBrón & Viruell-Fuentes, 2020).


To better prepare social work students to work with Latinxs, educational programs and curricula must include more Latinx-focused content and increase the number of Latinx social work practitioners and faculty (Calvo et al., 2018). Rosales and colleagues (2018) conducted a content analysis of the courses, concentrations, certificate programs, and mission statements of 262 Council on Social Work Education (CSWE)–accredited master’s programs in 2017. They found that only 10% of programs had a course that included “Latino,” “Hispanic,” or a Latinx nationality group in the title, and only 5% offered a certificate or concentration centered on working with Latinx populations. Latinx-focused content must demystify the assumption of Latinx homogeneity and integrate an intersectionality framework to prepare students to work with Latinxs. It is imperative that social work education programs engage in critical analyses of their curriculums and integrate critical race theory and antiracist frameworks.

A shortage of Latinx social work faculty may explain the lack of Latinx-focused content in the social work education curriculum. According to 2019 statistics on social work education, Latinxs made up 17% of students in bachelor’s programs, 15.5% in master’s programs, and 11.6% at the doctoral level (CSWE, 2020). The insufficient number of Latinxs students translates into a lack of Latinx faculty members. In 2019, only 6.8% of U.S. social work faculty identified as Latinx; the same percentage as in 2016. The proportion of Latinx faculty is almost 10 times lower than the proportion of White faculty members (61.1%; CSWE, 2020). Social work education programs must intentionally work toward hiring Latinx instructors and professors.


  • Abreu, R. L., Gonzalez, K. A., Mosley, D. V., Pulice-Farrow, L., Adam, A., & Duberli, F. (2020). “They feel empowered to discriminate against las chicas”: Latina transgender women’s experiences navigating the healthcare system. International Journal of Transgender Health, 1–16.
  • Acevedo-Garcia, D., Bates, L. M., Osypuk, T. L., & McArdle, N. (2010). The effect of immigrant generation and duration on self-rated health among US adults 2003–2007. Social Science and Medicine, 71(6), 1161–1172.
  • Adames, H. Y., Chavez-Dueñas, N. Y., Sharma, S., & La Roche, M. J. (2018). Intersectionality in psychotherapy: The experiences of an AfroLatinx queer immigrant. Psychotherapy, 55(1), 73–79.
  • Alvarez, F. (2019). Mestizo, Negro, Blanco: What does it mean? Racism and colorism’s effects in the Latinx community. Culminating Projects in Social Responsibility, 18.
  • Arcury, T. A., Chen, H., Quandt, S. A., Talton, J. W., Anderson, K. A., Scott, R. P., Jensen, A., & Laurienti, P. J. (2021). Pesticide exposure among Latinx children: Comparison of children in rural, farmworker and urban, non-farmworker communities. The Science of the Total Environment, 763, 144233.
  • Armenta, A. (2017). Racializing crimmigration: Structural racism, colorblindness, and the institutional production of immigrant criminality. Sociology of race and ethnicity, 3(1), 82-95.
  • Ayón, C. (2020). State-level immigration policy context and health: How are Latinx immigrant parents faring? Social Work Research, 44(2), 110–122.
  • Ayón, C., & Becerra, D. (2013). Mexican immigrant families under siege: The impact of anti-immigrant policies, discrimination, and the economic crisis. Advances in Social Work, 14(1), 206–228.
  • Becerra, D. (2016). Anti-immigration policies and fear of deportation: A human rights issue. Journal of Human Rights and Social Work, 1(3), 109–119.
  • Becerra, D., Hernandez, G., Porchas, F., Castillo, J., Nguyen, V., & Perez González, R. (2020). Immigration policies and mental health: Examining the relationship between immigration enforcement and depression, anxiety, and stress among Latino immigrants. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Diversity in Social Work, 29(1–3), 43–59.
  • Bjorklund, P., Jr. (2018). Undocumented students in higher education: A review of the literature, 2001 to 2016. Review of Educational Research, 88(5), 631–670.
  • Buckingham, S. L., & Suarez-Pedraza, M. C. (2019). “It has cost me a lot to adapt to here”: The divergence of real acculturation from ideal acculturation impacts Latinx immigrants’ psychosocial wellbeing. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 89(4), 406.
  • Bustamante, A. V., Fang, H., Garza, J., Carter-Pokras, O., Wallace, S. P., Rizzo, J. A., & Ortega, A. N. (2012). Variations in healthcare access and utilization among Mexican immigrants: The role of documentation status. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 14(1), 146–155.
  • Calvo, R., Ortiz, L., Villa, P., & Baek, K. (2018). A call for action: Latinxs in social work education. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 38(3), 263–276.
  • Calzada, E. J., Gulbas, L. E., Hausmann-Stabile, C., Kim, S. Y., & Cardoso, J. B. (2020). Mental health issues within Latinx populations: Evaluating the state of the field. In New and emerging issues in Latinx health (pp. 45–62). Springer.
  • Calzada, E. J., Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., & Yoshikawa, H. (2013). Familismo in Mexican and Dominican families from low-income, urban communities. Journal of Family Issues, 34(12), 1696–1724.
  • Castañeda, H., & Melo, M. A. (2014). Health care access for Latino mixed-status families: Barriers, strategies, and implications for reform. American Behavioral Scientist, 58(14), 1891-1909.
  • Chavez-Dueñas, N., Adames, H., & Organista, K. (2014). Skin-color prejudice and withingroup racial discrimination: Historical and current impact on Latino/a populations. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 36(1), 3–26.
  • Chavez-Dueñas, N. Y., Adames, H. Y., Perez-Chavez, J. G., & Salas, S. P. (2019). Healing ethno-racial trauma in Latinx immigrant communities: Cultivating hope, resistance, and action. American Psychologist, 74(1), 49–62.
  • Cheng, H. L., Lopez, A., Rislin, J. L., Kim, H. Y., Turner, J., Terhorst-Miller, H., . . . Cha, C. H. (2018). Latino/Hispanic community adults’ healthcare experience in a New Mexico borderland region. Journal of Health Disparities Research and Practice, 11(4), 5.
  • Cholera, R., Ranapurwala, S. I., Linton, J., Shmuel, S., Miller-Fitzwater, A., Best, D. L., . . . & Flower, K. B. (2021). Health care use among Latinx children after 2017 executive actions on immigration. Pediatrics, 147(2).
  • Cook, B., Alegría, M., Lin, J. Y., & Guo, J. (2009). Pathways and correlates connecting Latinos’ mental health with exposure to the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 99(12), 2247–2254.
  • Coker, T. R., Elliott, M. N., Kanouse, D. E., Grunbaum, J. O., Schwebel, D. C., et al. (2009). Perceived racial/ethnic discrimination among fifth-grade students and its association with mental health. American Journal of Public Health, 99, 878–884.
  • Council on Social Work Education. (2020). 2019 statistics on social work education in the United States.
  • Cuevas, A. G., Dawson, B. A., & Williams, D. R. (2016). Race and skin color in Latino health: An analytic review. American Journal of Public Health, 106(12), 2131–2136.
  • Daviglus, M. L., Talavera, G. A., Avilés-Santa, M. L., Allison, M., Cai, J., Criqui, M. H., . . . Stamler, J. (2012). Prevalence of major cardiovascular risk factors and cardiovascular diseases among Hispanic/Latino individuals of diverse backgrounds in the United States. JAMA, 308(17), 1775–1784.
  • Dominguez, K., Penman-Aguilar, A., Chang, M. H., Moonesinghe, R., Castellanos, T., Rodriguez-Lainz, A., & Schieber, R. (2015). Vital signs: Leading causes of death, prevalence of diseases and risk factors, and use of health services among Hispanics in the United States—2009–2013. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 64(17), 469.
  • Edward, J., & Biddle, D. J. (2016). Using geographic information systems (GIS) to examine barriers to healthcare access for Hispanic and Latino immigrants in the US South. Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities, 4(2), 297–307.
  • Ennis, S. R., Ríos-Vargas, M., & Albert, N. G. (2011). The Hispanic population: 2010. U.S Census Bureau.
  • Eschbach, O., Patel, M., & Goodwin, J. S. (2004). Neighborhood context and mortality among older Mexican Americans: Is there a Barrio advantage? American Journal of Public Health, 94, 1807–1812.
  • Figuereo, V. J. (2020). Racial choice pathways to distress: The racialization of Latinx mental health [Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Boston College, Graduate School of Social Work].
  • Figuereo, V., & Calvo, R. (2021). Racialization and psychological distress among U.S. Latinxs. Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities.
  • Findling, M. G., Bleich, S. N., Casey, L. S., Blendon, R. J., Benson, J. M., Sayde, J. M., & Miller, C. (2019). Discrimination in the United States: Experiences of Latinos. Health Services Research, 54, 1409–1418.
  • Fisher, C. B., Wallace, S. A., & Fenton, R. E. (2000). Discrimination distress during adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 29, 679–695.
  • Flippen, C. A., & Parrado, E. A. (2015). Perceived discrimination among Latino Immigrants in new destinations: The case of Durham, North Carolina. Sociological Perspectives, 58(4), 666–685.
  • Flores-Hughes, G. (2006). The origin of the term “Hispanic.” Harvard Journal of Hispanic Policy, 18, 81–84.
  • Galvan, F. H., Bogart, L. M., Klein, D. J., Wagner, G. J., & Chen, Y. T. (2017). Medical mistrust as a key mediator in the association between perceived discrimination and adherence to antiretroviral therapy among HIV-positive Latino men. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 40(5), 784–793.
  • Golash-Boza, T., & Darity, W., Jr. (2008). Latino racial choices: The effects of skin colour and discrimination on Latinos’ and Latinas’ racial self-identifications. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 31(5), 899–934.
  • Guzman, E. D., Woods-Giscombe, C. L., & Beeber, L. S. (2015). Barriers and facilitators of Hispanic older adult mental health service utilization in the USA. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 36(1), 11–20.
  • Haley, J. M., Kenney, G. M., Bernstein, H., & Gonzalez, D. (2020). One in five adults in immigrant families with children reported chilling effects on public benefit receipt in 2019. Washington, DC: Urban Institute.
  • Han, W. (2010). Bilingualism and socioemotional well-being. Children and Youth Services Review, 32, 720–731.
  • Hardy, L. J., Getrich, C. M., Quezada, J. C., Guay, A., Michalowski, R. J., & Henley, E. (2012). A call for further research on the impact of state-level immigration policies on public health. American Journal of Public Health, 102(7), 1250–1253.
  • Hatzenbuehler, M. L., Prins, S. J., Flake, M., Philbin, M., Frazer, M. S., Hagen, D., & Hirsch, J. (2017). Immigration policies and mental health morbidity among Latinos: A state-level analysis. Social Science and Medicine, 174, 169–178.
  • Hill, N. E., & Torres, K. (2010). Negotiating the American dream: The paradox of aspirations and achievement among Latino students and engagement between their families and schools. Journal of Social Issues, 66(1), 95–112.
  • Hunt, L. M., Schneider, S., & Comer, B. (2004). Should “acculturation” be a variable in health research? A critical review of research on US Hispanics. Social Science and Medicine, 59(5), 973–986.
  • Hunter, M. (2013). Race, gender, and the politics of skin tone. Routledge.
  • Jacquez, F., Vaughn, L., Zhen-Duan, J., & Graham, C. (2016). Health care use and barriers to care among Latino immigrants in a new migration area. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, 27(4), 1761–1778.
  • Kaplan, R. C., Bangdiwala, S. I., Barnhart, J. M., Castañeda, S. F., Gellman, M. D., Lee, D. J., . . . Giachello, A. L. (2014). Smoking among US Hispanic/Latino adults: The Hispanic community health study/study of Latinos. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 46(5), 496–506.
  • Keller, S. C., Silberberg, M., Hartmann, K. E., & Michener, J. L. (2010). Perceived discrimination and use of health care services in a North Carolina population of Latino immigrants. Hispanic Health Care International, 8(1), 4–13.
  • Kizer, J. (2017). Skin color stratification and the family: Sibling differences and the consequences for inequality [Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California at Irvine].
  • Kline, N., & Castañeda, H. (2020). Immigration enforcement policies and Latinx health: State of knowledge. New and Emerging Issues in Latinx Health, 253–269.
  • Krogstad, J. M., & Noe-Bustamante, L. (2021). Key facts about U.S. Latinos for Hispanic Heritage Month.
  • LaVeist-Ramos, T. A., Galarraga, J., Thorpe, R. J., Bell, C. N., & Austin, C. J. (2012). Are Black Hispanics Black or Hispanic? Exploring disparities at the intersection of race and ethnicity. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 66(7).
  • LeBrón, A. M., & Viruell-Fuentes, E. A. (2020). Racial/ethnic discrimination, intersectionality, and Latina/o health. In New and emerging issues in Latinx health (pp. 295–320). Springer.
  • López, G., & Gonzalez-Barrera, A. (2016). Afro-Latino: A deeply rooted identity among US Hispanics. Pew Research Center.
  • Lopez, M. H., Gonzalez-Barrera, A., & López, G. (2017). Hispanic identity fades across generations as immigrant connections fall away. Pew Research Center
  • Lopez, M. H., Krogstad, J. M., & Passel, J. (2020). Who is Hispanic? Pew Research Center.
  • López-Cevallos, D. F., & Harvey, S. M. (2016). Foreign-born Latinos living in rural areas are more likely to experience health care discrimination: Results from Proyecto de Salud para Latinos. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 18(4), 928–934.
  • Luque, J. S., Soulen, G., Davila, C. B., & Cartmell, K. (2018). Access to health care for uninsured Latina immigrants in South Carolina. BMC Health Services Research, 18(1), 1–12.
  • Martinez, O., Wu, E., Sandfort, T., Dodge, B., Carballo-Dieguez, A., Pinto, R., . . . Chavez-Baray, S. (2015). Evaluating the impact of immigration policies on health status among undocumented immigrants: A systematic review. Journal of Immigrant and Minority Health, 17(3), 947–970.
  • Mather, M., Jacobsen, L. A., & Pollard, K. M. (2015). Population bulletin. Population Reference Bureau, 70(2).
  • Mays, V. M., Jones, A., Delany-Brumsey, A., Coles, C., & Cochran, S. D. (2017). Perceived discrimination in healthcare and mental health/substance abuse treatment among blacks, Latinos, and whites. Medical Care, 55(2), 173.
  • Merolla, D. M. (2018). Completing the educational career: High school graduation, four-year college enrollment, and bachelor’s degree completion among Black, Hispanic, and White students. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 4(2), 281297.
  • Moreno, O., & Cardemil, E. (2018). The role of religious attendance on mental health among Mexican populations: A contribution toward the discussion of the immigrant health paradox. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 88(1), 10.
  • Morey, B. N. (2018). Mechanisms by which anti-immigrant stigma exacerbates racial/ethnic health disparities. American Journal of Public Health, 108(4), 460–463.
  • Morse, A., Carter, A., Lawrence, M., & Segreto, J. (2012, August 27). State omnibus immigration legislation and legal challenges. National Conference of State Legislatures, Immigrant Policy Project.
  • Nathenson, R. A., Saloner, B., Richards, M. R., & Rhodes, K. V. (2016). Spanish‐speaking immigrants’ access to safety net providers and translation services across traditional and emerging US destinations. Milbank Quarterly, 94(4), 768–799.
  • National Public Radio, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, & the T. H. Chan School of Public Health. (2020). Discrimination in America: Experiences and views of Latinos.
  • Netting, F. E. (2013). Macro social work practice. In Encyclopedia of social work.
  • Noe-Bustamante, L., & Flores, A. (2019). Facts on Latinos in the US. Pew Research Center.
  • Noe-Bustamante, L., Flores, A., & Shah, S. (2019a). Facts on Hispanics of Dominican origin in the United States, 2017. Pew Research Center.
  • Noe-Bustamante, L., Flores, A., & Shah, S. (2019b). Facts on Hispanics of Puerto Rican origin in the United States, 2017. Pew Research Center.
  • Noe-Bustamante, L., Lopez, M. H., & Krogstad, J. M. (2020). US Hispanic population surpassed 60 million in 2019, but growth has slowed. Pew Research Center.
  • Noe-Bustamante, L., Mora, L., & Lopez, M. H. (2020). About one-in-four US Hispanics have heard of Latinx, but just 3% use it. Pew Research Center.
  • Novak, N. L., Geronimus, A. T., & Martinez-Cardoso, A. M. (2017). Change in birth outcomes among infants born to Latina mothers after a major immigration raid. International Journal of Epidemiology, 46(3), 839–849.
  • Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. (2016). Healthy people 2020. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
  • Ogden, C. L., Carroll, M. D., Fryar, C. D., & Flegal, K. M. (2015). Prevalence of obesity among adults and youth: United States, 2011–2014 (Data Brief No. 219). National Center for Health Statistics.
  • Olshansky, S. J. (2015). The demographic transformation of America. Daedalus, 144(2), 13–19.
  • Perreira, K. M., Fuligni, A., & Potochnick, S. (2010). Fitting in: The roles of social acceptance and discrimination in shaping the academic motivations of Latino youth in the U.S. Southeast. Journal of Social Issues, 66(1), 131–153.
  • Perreira, K. M., & Pedroza, J. M. (2019). Policies of exclusion: Implications for the health of immigrants and their children. Annual Review of Public Health, 40, 147–166.
  • Pew Research Center. 2018 National Survey of Latinos. 2018.
  • Philbin, M. M., Flake, M., Hatzenbuehler, M. L., & Hirsch, J. S. (2018). State-level immigration and immigrant-focused policies as drivers of Latino health disparities in the United States. Social Science and Medicine, 199, 29–38.
  • Rhodes, S. D., Alonzo, J., Mann-Jackson, L., Song, E. Y., Tanner, A. E., Garcia, M., . . . Reboussin, B. A. (2020). A peer navigation intervention to prevent HIV among mixed immigrant status Latinx GBMSM and transgender women in the United States: Outcomes, perspectives and implications for PrEP uptake. Health Education Research, 35(3), 165–178.
  • Rhodes, S. D., Mann, L., Simán, F. M., Song, E., Alonzo, J., Downs, M., . . . Hall, M. A. (2015). The impact of local immigration enforcement policies on the health of immigrant Hispanics/Latinos in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 105(2), 329–337.
  • Rine, C. M. (2016). Social determinants of health: Grand challenges in social work’s future. Health and Social Work, 41(3), 143–145.
  • Rodríguez, C. E. (2000). Changing race: Latinos, the census and the history of ethnicity (Vol. 41). New York University Press.
  • Rodríguez-Díaz, C. E. (2020). Health is political: Advocacy and mobilization for Latinx health. In New and emerging issues in Latinx health (pp. 349–361). Springer.
  • Rodriguez, N., Paredes, C. L., & Hagan, J. M. (2019). Immigration Enforcement, Older Latino Immigrants, and Implications for Health. In Contextualizing Health and Aging in the Americas (pp. 111-135). Springer, Cham.
  • Rosales, R., Figuereo, V., Woo, B., Perez-Aponte, J., & Cano, M. (2018). Preparing to work with Latinos: Latino-focused content in social work master’s degree programs. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 38(3), 251–262.
  • Rosenthal, L., & Lobel, M. (2020). Gendered racism and the sexual and reproductive health of Black and Latina women. Ethnicity and Health, 25(3), 367–392.
  • Roth, W. (2012). Race migrations: Latinos and the cultural transformation of race. Stanford University Press.
  • Rumbaut, R. G. (2006). The making of a people. In M. Tienda, & F. Mitchel (Eds.), Hispanics and the future of America (pp. 16–65). National Academies Press.
  • Rumbaut, R. G. (2009). Pigments of our imagination: On the racialization and racial identities of “Hispanics” and “Latinos.” In J. A. Cobas, J. Duany, & J. R. Feangin (Eds.), How the US racializes Latinos: White hegemony and its consequences (pp. 15–36). Paradigm.
  • Salas, L. M., Ayón, C., & Gurrola, M. (2013). Estamos traumados: The effect of anti‐immigrant sentiment and policies on the mental health of Mexican immigrant families. Journal of Community Psychology, 41(8), 1005–1020.
  • Salsberg, E., Quigley, L., Mehfoud, N., Acquaviva, K. D., Wyche, K., & Silwa, S. (2017). Profile of the social work workforce.
  • Schmitz, R. M., Robinson, B. A., Tabler, J., Welch, B., & Rafaqut, S. (2020). LGBTQ+ Latino/a young people’s interpretations of stigma and mental health: An intersectional minority stress perspective. Society and Mental Health, 10(2), 163–179.
  • Singh, G. K., Rodriguez-Lainz, A., & Kogan, M. D. (2013). Immigrant health inequalities in the United States: Use of eight major national data systems. Scientific World Journal.
  • Straut-Eppsteiner, H. (2020). Documenting through service provider accounts harm caused by the Department of Homeland Security’s public charge rule. National Immigration Law Center.
  • Stumpf, J. (2006). The the crimmigration crisis: Immigrants, crime, and sovereign power. Am. UL Rev., 56, 367.
  • Telles, E. (2018). Latinos, race, and the US census. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 677(1), 153–164.
  • Toomey, R. B., Umaña-Taylor, A. J., Williams, D. R., Harvey-Mendoza, E., Jahromi, L. B., & Updegraff, K. A. (2014). Impact of Arizona’s SB 1070 immigration law on utilization of health care and public assistance among Mexican-origin adolescent mothers and their mother figures. American Journal of Public Health, 104(Suppl. 1), S28–S34.
  • Torres-Saillant, S. (2010). Introduction to Dominican blackness (Working Paper). CUNY Dominican Studies Institute.
  • Ura, A., & Ahmed, N. (2018, June 21). Hispanic Texans on pace to become largest population group in state by 2022. Texas Tribune.
  • U.S. Census Bureau. (2020a). About Hispanic origin.
  • U.S. Census Bureau. (2020b). U.S. Census Bureau releases new educational attainment data [Press release].
  • U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. (2021). Final rule on public charge rule of inadmissibility.
  • Vargas, E. D., Juárez, M., Sanchez, G. R., & Livaudais, M. (2019). Latinos’ connections to immigrants: How knowing a deportee impacts Latino health. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 45(15), 2971-2988.
  • Vargas, E. D., Sanchez, G. R., & Juárez, M. D. (2017). The impact of punitive immigrant laws on the health of Latina/o populations. Politics and Policy, 45(3), 312–337.
  • Velasco-Mondragon, E., Jimenez, A., Palladino-Davis, A. G., Davis, D., & Escamilla-Cejudo, J. A. (2016). Hispanic health in the USA: A scoping review of the literature. Public Health Reviews, 37(1), 1–27.
  • Vespa, J., Armstrong, D. M., & Medina, L. (2020). Demographic turning points for the United States: Population projections for 2020 to 2060. U.S. Census Bureau.
  • Viruell-Fuentes, E. A., Miranda, P. Y., & Abdulrahim, S. (2012). More than culture: Structural racism, intersectionality theory, and immigrant health. Social Science and Medicine, 75(12), 2099–2106.
  • White, K., Yeager, V. A., Menachemi, N., & Scarinci, I. C. (2014). Impact of Alabama’s immigration law on access to health care among Latina immigrants and children: Implications for national reform. American Journal of Public Health, 104(3), 397–405.
  • White, K. M. (2015). The salience of skin tone: Effects on the exercise of police enforcement authority. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 38(6), 993–1010.
  • Wiley, T. G., & Wright, W. E. (2004). Against the undertow: Language-minority education policy and politics in the “Age of Accountability.” Educational Policy, 18, 142–168.
  • Williams, D. R., & Mohammed, S. A. (2013). Racism and health I: Pathways and scientific evidence. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(8), 1152–1173.
  • Zimmermann, M. F. W. (2001). All Under One Roof: Mixed-Status Families in an Era of Reform. International.