Search

The COVID-19 health crisis has put to the test Latin America’s already precarious social protection systems. This paper comparatively examines what type of social protection has been provided, by whom, and to what extent migrant and refugee populations have been included in these programmes in seven countries of the region during the COVID-19 pandemic, between March and December 2020. We develop a typology of models of social protection highlighting the assemblages of actors, different modes of protection and the emerging migrants’ subjectification in Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, Peru, and Uruguay in relation to Non-Contributory Social Transfer (NCST) programmes and other actions undertaken by state and non-state actors. The analysis is based on 85 semi-structured interviews with representatives of national and local governments, International Organisations, Civil Society Organisations, and migrant-led organisations across 16 cities, and a systematic review of regulatory frameworks in the country-case studies. The proposed typology shows broad heterogeneity and complexity regarding different degrees of inclusion of migrant and refugee populations, particularly in pre-existing and new NCST programmes. These actions are furthering notions of migrant protection that are contingent and crisis-driven, imposing temporal limitations that often selectively exclude migrants based on legal status. It also brings to the fore the path-dependent nature of policies and practices of exclusion/inclusion in the region, which impact on migrants’ effective access to social and economic rights, while shaping the broader dynamics of migration governance in the region.

The number of local and systemic side effects reported with the use and abuse of topically applied corticosteroids in children increases every year.1-3 Among the main factors responsible are the availability of higher-potency corticosteroids in deeply penetrating vehicles, inadequate knowledge of their side effects, over-the-counter availability, and increased susceptibility of infants and small children to topically applied corticosteroids.4,5The following case report is a dramatic example of local and systemic side effects due to misprescription of a topically applied corticosteroid.Report of a Case.—The patient, aged 2 years and 4 months, was the normal product of an uncomplicated pregnancy and normal delivery. He had weighed 3,600 g at birth. At age 11 months, he had suffered an accidental second-degree burn, caused by boiling water, on the neck, pectoral area, and right upper arm. The burned areas had been treated with topical application of a cream containing a