What Happens to the Children Left Behind When a Parent is Taken by ICE?

>>> NOW, AN I.C.E.

SHOOTING IN NEW YORK BRINGS FRESH BACKLASH AND PROTEST ACROSS THE CITY, AND IT COMES AS A MAN WAS SHOT BY AN I.C.E.

AGENT LAST WEEK AS HIS 5-YEAR-OLD SON WATCHED IN THE CAR.

THE CASE PUTS A SPOTLIGHT ON HOW I.C.E.

ARRESTS IMPACT THE CHILDREN CAUGHT IN THE MIDDLE.

SOME 35,000 KIDS HAVE HAD BOTH PARENTS DETAINED ACCORDING TO THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION.

SO WHAT HAPPENS NEXT FOR THESE SEPARATED FAMILIES?

"THE ATLANTIC'S" CAITLIN DICKERSON JOINS US TO EXPLAIN.

>> WELCOME BACK TO THE PROGRAM.

YOU HAVE A RECENT PIECE IN "THE ATLANTIC" TITLED "THE BABIES LEFT BEHIND IN AMERICA" AND IT IS PART OF A STORY YOU HAVE BEEN COVERING NOW ACROSS TWO TRUMP ADMINISTRATIONS.

SINCE JANUARY 2025, THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTE IS ESTIMATED THAT THE NUMBER OF AFFECTED CHILDREN WITH AT LEAST ONE PARENTAL DETENTION IS MORE THAN 200,000, AND 71% OF THOSE ACCORDING TO THE ESTIMATE ARE U.S.

CITIZENS.

SO WHO ARE THESE CHILDREN THAT ARE BEING LEFT BEHIND NOW?

WHAT IS THE NEW FAMILY SEPARATION CRISIS IN THIS TRUMP ADMINISTRATION VERSUS THE ONE THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE COVERED AND WE ARE FAMILIAR WITH FROM THE LAST ONE?

>> THE CHILDREN WHO ARE BEING LEFT BEHIND NOW BECAUSE THEIR PARENTS HAVE BEEN DETAINED OR DEPORTED BY I.C.E.

ARE KIDS WHO YOUR VIEWERS KNOW WHO GO TO AMERICAN SCHOOLS, WHO ARE EMBEDDED IN COMMUNITIES, HAVE CHURCH COMMUNITIES THAT THEY'RE A PART OF, EXTENDED FAMILY NETWORKS BECAUSE THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE SEPARATIONS NOW AND THE FIRST TRUMP ADMINISTRATION IS BECAUSE THEY'RE PRIMARILY IMPACTING FAMILIES LIVING IN THE UNITED STATES FOR A LONG TIME.

WE KNOW A SIGNIFICANT PROPORTION OF CHILDREN IN THE U.S.

HAVE AT LEAST ONE PARENT BORN OUTSIDE OF THE UNITED STATES, AND THAT THIS TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ISN'T JUST GOING AFTER, YOU KNOW, IN A REALLY AGGRESSIVE WAY UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS, FULLY UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS BUT ALSO PEOPLE WHO ENTERED THE UNITED STATES, WERE IN THE PROCESS OF WORKING TOWARD A PERMANENT LEGAL IMMIGRATION STATUS.

SO PEOPLE WHO ENTERED UNDER PAROLE PROGRAMS OR WITH A TEMPORARY STATUS FOR EXAMPLE UNDER THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION, HAVE SPENT YEARS NOW TRYING TO GAIN PERMANENT STATUS, BUT DURING THAT TIME DEVELOPING THESE NETWORKS AND RELATIONSHIPS, BECOMING EMBEDDED IN AMERICAN COMMUNITIES, AND NOW THESE FAMILIES ARE BEING RIPPED APART.

SO IN 2017 AND 2018, THAT FIRST TRUMP ADMINISTRATION SEPARATED BETWEEN 5,000 AND 6,000 CHILDREN FROM THEIR PARENTS.

WE STILL DON'T HAVE A PRECISE DATA POINT BECAUSE THE RECORD KEEPING WAS SO POOR, AS YOU WILL RECALL, BUT NOW AS YOU POINTED OUT, YES, RESEARCHERS AT THE BROOKING INSTITUTION HAVE ESTIMATED THAT MORE THAN 205,000 CHILDREN HAVE LOST AT LEAST ONE PARENT TO I.C.E.

DETENTION OR DEPORTATION, AND THAT MORE THAN 35,000 CHILDREN HAVE LOST WHAT THEY CALLED ALL CO-RESIDENT PARENTS.

SO THAT KIDS WITH SINGLE PARENTS WHO ARE DETAINED OR DEPORTED AS WELL AS KIDS LIKE EBEN, THE CHILD IN MY STORY, A 2 YEAR OLD.

BOTH OF HIS PARENTS WERE DEPORTED BY I.C.E., AND SO HE AND SOME 35,000 OTHERS HAVE BEEN LEFT WITH NO GUARDIAN.

LASTLY, I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT ESTIMATE RAN UP UNTIL APRIL OF THIS YEAR, AND SO WE CAN ASSUME THE NUMBERS ARE EVEN HIGHER NOW BECAUSE I.C.E.

HAS CARRIED OUT RECORD-BREAKING NUMBERS OF ARRESTS SINCE THEN.

>> SO TELL ME A LITTLE BIT ABOUT EBER.

HIS PARENTS ARE DEPORTED BACK TO VENEZUELA.

WHAT IS THE STATUS?

WHERE IS HE NOW?

>> SO HE LIVES WITH HIS MOTHER'S FORMER CO-WORKER.

HER NAME IS ESTELLE IN HER HOUSE OUTSIDE MOBILE, ALABAMA.

HE LANDED IN HER HOME BECAUSE I.C.E.

FIRST DETAINED AND DEPORTED HIS FATHER LAST YEAR.

THEN TOWARD THE END OF THE YEAR, IN NOVEMBER DETAINED HIS MOTHER AS WELL, AND SO HIS PARENTS HAD COME TO THE UNITED STATES UNDER THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION, AND THEY HAD FRIENDS.

THEY HAD A COMMUNITY, BUT THEY DIDN'T HAVE A LOT OF OPTIONS.

THEY DIDN'T HAVE EXTENDED RELATIVES WHO COULD TAKE THE CHILDREN IN, AND SO THERE WAS REALLY THIS FRANTIC SCURRY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT TO DO WITH THE KIDS WHEN HIS MOTHER AND HIS FINAL REMAINING CARETAKER WAS TAKEN INTO CUSTODY.

INITIALLY A COUPLE OF FRIENDS OF HIS MOTHER'S WHO WERE UNDOCUMENTED TOOK EBEN AND THEN HIS ELDER BROTHER ISIAK, WHO IS 7 YEARS OLD, TOOK HIM IN BUT THEY WERE UNDOCUMENTED AND NOT IN POSITION TO GIVE THE CHILDREN STABILITY.

FOR EXAMPLE, EBEN, WHO HAS HEALTH ISSUES AND WAS ILL, THE WOMAN TAKING CARE OF HIM WAS UNDOCUMENTED AND SCARED TO TAKE HIM TO THE HOSPITAL BECAUSE SHE WAS AFRAID SHE WOULD BE DETAINED.

BASICALLY THERE WERE A BUNCH OF PHONE CALLS MADE TO TRY TO IDENTIFY SOMEBODY WHO WAS MORE STABLE AND ABLE TO TAKE HIM IN AND EVENTUALLY LED TO ESTELLA BECAUSE SHE WORKED WITH HIS MOM AND THESE OTHER UNDOCUMENTED FRIENDS AS I MENTIONED AND SHE WAS THE ONLY UNITED STATES CITIZEN THEY KNEW.

SHE AGREED INITIALLY TO TAKE BOTH BOYS IN.

SHE GOT HIS OLDER BROTHER BACK TO VENEZUELA, BUT EBEN'S SITUATION IS IMPLICATED BECAUSE HE IS A UNITED STATES CITIZEN SO HE CAN'T GO BACK TO VENEZUELA WHERE HIS PARENTS ARE BECAUSE HE DOESN'T HAVE A VISA, HE DOESN'T HAVE A PASSPORT AND HE CAN'T TRAVEL AS IS THE CASE WITH A MINOR CHILDREN WITHOUT A LEGAL GUARDIAN.

BECAUSE I.C.E.

DIDN'T ALLOW FOR HIS PARENTS TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS IN ADVANCE OF DEPORTING THEM TO EITHER TAKE THE CHILDREN WITH OR TO MAKE THESE KINDS OF DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE SO THAT EBEN COULD LEGALLY TRAVEL, HE IS NOW STUCK IN ESTELLA'S HOME AND HAS BEEN THERE FOR -- HE HAS BEEN THERE SINCE JANUARY.

OWE JUST TURNED 2 YEARS OLD AND IS COMING UP ON A FULL YEAR OF NOT HAVING SEEN HIS MOTHER.

>> SO WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF COSTS THAT ESTELLA IS INCURRING?

I MEAN FINANCIAL, EMOTIONAL, PSYCHOLOGICAL.

>> SO FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY GOT TO ESTELLA'S HOUSE, IT WAS LIKE HE CONSTANTLY WANTED TO BE HELD.

HE NEVER WANTED TO BE HELD.

HE IS STILL THAT WAY.

I SAW IT MYSELF.

HE IS VERY CLINGY.

HE CAN ONLY SLEEP IN THE CROOK OF HER ARM.

A CHILD THAT REALLY NEEDS TO BE EMBRACED BECAUSE HE HAS GONE THROUGH SO MUCH TUMULT AND SO MUCH SEPARATION FROM HIS PRIMARY ATTACHMENTS, AND THEN THERE'S A FINANCIAL COST.

SO ESTELLA HAS BEEN PAYING FOR CLOTHING, FOR FOOD, FOR TOYS, FOR EDUCATIONAL MATERIALS, AND HER HUSBAND, WHO IS A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR, IS NOT WORKING AS MUCH AS HE NORMALLY DOES BECAUSE OF THE RIPPLE EFFECTS OF THE I.C.E.

ARRESTS.

THERE ARE LOTS OF CONSTRUCTION WORKERS IN THE AREA WHO ARE SCARED TO LEAVE HOME BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO END UP IN THE SAME SITUATION.

SHE CAN'T WORK BECAUSE SHE HAS TO CARE FOR EBEN FULL TIME AND IT HAS BEEN THE FINANCIAL STRAIN ON THE FAMILY.

OF COURSE, EBEN'S PARENTS WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO HELP BUT THEY'RE BACK IN VENEZUELA WHICH HAS AN ECONOMY THAT HAS BEEN COMPLETELY DEVASTATED FOR YEARS NOW, REALLY STRUGGLING.

>> YOU KNOW, IN YOUR REPORTING YOU POINTED OUT THAT HIS MOM WAS ABIDING BY THE LEGAL PROCESS, THAT SHE HAD GONE TO HER I.C.E.

CHECK-INS, AND I WONDER IF THIS IS CREATING A DISINCENTIVE TO COMPLY WITH THE LAW AND THE LEGAL PROCESSES, ESPECIALLY FOR ASYLUM SEEKERS.

>> ABSOLUTELY.

THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT REALLY STUCK OUT TO ME IN MY REPORTING, AND, IN FACT, THERE'S ANOTHER FAMILY WHOSE STORY I THINK ILLUSTRATES THIS VERY CLEARLY.

A FATHER, I USE PSEUDONYMS TO IDENTIFY THEM BECAUSE THIS FAMILY IS FACING ACTIVE AND SERIOUS THREATS FROM MS13 SO I IDENTIFY THE MOTHER AS ED WAYNE WAYNE -- EDWIN AND MOTHER AS SARAH.

THEY'VE BEEN ON THE RUN FROM MS13 FOR YEARS NOW.

THEY TRIED TO HIDE WITHIN HONDURAS AND WHEN MS13 ULTIMATELY KILLED A CLOSE MEMBER OF THEIR FAMILY WHO THEY MISTOOK FOR SARAH THE FAMILY CAME TO THE UNITED STATES UNDER THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION, APPLIED FOR ASYLUM AND SPENT YEARS NOW METICULOUSLY FOLLOWING ALL OF THE GOVERNMENT'S REQUESTS SO THEY COULD GAIN LEGAL STATUS THAT REALLY THE SYSTEM WAS SORT OF SET UP TO HELP PEOPLE IN SITUATIONS LIKE THEIRS.

THEY'RE PREPARING FOR A FINAL IMMIGRATION HEARING THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO TAKE PLACE THIS JUNE, AND AT ONE OF THOSE I.C.E.

CHECK-INS THE FATHER, EDWIN, WAS DETAINED IN JANUARY WITHOUT ANY EXPLANATION, WITHOUT ANY ADVANCED NOTICE.

AND SO I SPENT SEVERAL MONTHS INTERVIEWING BOTH HIM AFTER I MET HIM IN HONDURAS WHEN I WAS REPORTING THERE AND THEN HIS WIFE WHO WAS IN THE SUBURBS OF DALLAS, NOW SOLE CAREGIVER FOR HER TWO CHILDREN, TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT SHE DO, AND SHE LIKE OTHERS I INTERVIEWED ULTIMATELY DECIDED SHE WASN'T GOING TO ATTEND HER I.C.E.

CHECK-INS ANYONE.

SHE WASN'T GOING TO KEEP WORKING TOWARD LEGAL ASYLUM STATUS.

SHE FELT TO GO HOME TO HONDURAS AND BRING HER CHILDREN TO HER COULD BE A DEATH SENTENCE FOR THEM.

ON THE OTHER HAND SHE THOUGHT CONTINUING TO ATTEND HER I.C.E.

CHECK-INS WHEN SHE FELT AT ONE OF THEM SHE WOULD INEVITABLY BE DETAINED AND LEAVE HER CHILDREN WITH NO CAREGIVER AT ALL, THOSE OPTIONS JUST WEREN'T FEASIBLE FOR HER, WEREN'T SOMETHING SHE COULD IMAGINE DOING.

SO SHE CHOSE THIS OTHER OPTION WHICH TO HER HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN UNTHINKABLE, WHICH WAS JUST TO GO UNDERGROUND AND REALLY BECOME THE KIND OF, QUOTE, UNQUOTE, LAW BREAKER WHO THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION CLAIMS THIS CAMPAIGN IS INTENDED TO CRACK DOWN ON.

>> HAS THERE BEEN A CHANGE IN POLICY WHERE WE NO LONGER CARE ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT SOMEBODY IS >> YES.

IN FACT, WHEN I REACHED OUT TO THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY TO ASK THEM TO COMMENT ON THIS STORY, THEY -- THEY SAID THAT TO ME VERY PLAINLY.

THAT HAVING A PENDING APPLICATION FOR LEGAL STATUS IS NOT CONSIDERED A SHIELD FROM DEPORTATION.

WHEREAS, PREVIOUSLY IT WAS, AND SO THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE SO MANY PEOPLE -- THERE ARE MORE THAN A MILLION PEOPLE WHO HAVE LOST SOME FORM OF STATUS UNDER THIS ADMINISTRATION BECAUSE OF ITS ELIMINATIONS OF TEMPORARY PROTECTED STATUS AND OF PAROLE PROGRAMS, ITS CHALLENGES TO ASYLUM.

SO THAT'S LOTS OF PEOPLE WHO ARE NOW VULNERABLE TO ARREST IF THEY REMAIN IN THE COUNTRY.

>> YOU ALSO WROTE ABOUT THE STORY OF ORLAND HERNANDEZ REYES, AND TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED TO HIM.

>> SO ORLAND HERNANDEZ REYES, HIS MOTHER WAS DETAINED IN A LOUISIANA DETENTION FACILITY.

IN FACT, THE SAME ONE WHERE EBEN'S MOTHER WAS DETAINED.

WHEN SHE AND HER SISTER WERE TAKEN INTO CUSTODY, THEY ARTICULATED THAT THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANYONE TO TAKE THEIR CHILDREN IN WHO WAS SAFE.

OLAN ENDED UP WITH HIS MOTHER'S SISTER'S EX-BOYFRIEND, A MAN KNOWN TO BE DANGEROUS BECAUSE HE WAS SIMPLY THE ONLY ADULT WHO WAS AROUND WHO COULD TAKE THE KIDS IN.

WHEN HIS MOM WENT INTO I.C.E.

CUSTODY, SHE ARTICULATED SHE SAYS TO I.C.E.

OFFICIALS REPEATEDLY THAT HE WAS NOT SAFE, THAT THERE WAS NO ONE ELSE TO TAKE CARE OF HIM.

SHE BEGGED TO BE REUNITED WITH HIM BEFORE BEING DEPORTED TO HER HOME COUNTRY, AND I.C.E.

DENIED THAT REQUEST.

SO THIS IS IMPORTANT.

SHE'S JUST ONE OF SEVERAL PARENTS IN MY STORY WHO AGREED TO BE DEPORTED.

THEY SAID, OKAY, I WILL LEAVE BUT PLEASE GIVE ME MY CHILD BACK FIRST AND I.C.E.

DID NOT HEED THAT REQUEST.

LATER WHAT HAPPENED WAS THAT ORLEEN DIED.

HIS BODY WAS FOUND WITH SIGNS OF PHYSICAL AND SEXUAL ABUSE AND THE MAN WHO WAS CARING FOR HIM HAS BEEN CHARGED WITH MURDER.

HE HAS PLED NOT GUILTY BUT IT IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING HIS MOTHER SEES AS ENTIRELY PREVENTABLE, AND SOMETHING THAT I.C.E.

COULD HAVE ADDRESSED BY, AGAIN, EITHER ALLOWING HER TO CONTINUE HER LEGAL IMMIGRATION PROCESS OR BY AT LEAST REUNITING THEM BEFORE THEY DEPORTED HER.

>> YOU KNOW, A WEEK AFTER ORLEEN'S DEATH I.C.E.

DIRECTOR TODD LIONS SAID THAT HIS MOTHER, QUOTE, CHOSE TO LEAVE HER SON HERE WITH A VIOLENT MURDERER WHO TOOK HIS LIFE.

WHAT DID SHE SAY TO THAT?

I MEAN DID SHE DOCUMENT HOW SHE PLEADED WITH THEM NOT TO LEAVE HER SON WITH THIS MAN?

>> SO I BELIEVE IN HER CASE THERE ARE RECORDS OF THE REQUEST SHE MADE TO BE REUNITED.

IN MY REPORTING WITH OFFICIALS ON BACKGROUND WITHIN THE GOVERNMENT, WHAT I LEARNED TO BE THE CASE IS THAT SOMETIMES WHEN PARENTS MAKE THESE REQUESTS TO BE REUNITED THERE ARE RECORDS THAT CAN BE FOUND.

SPECIFICALLY WHEN PARENTS USE AN INTERNAL TABLET SYSTEM THAT EXISTS AT LOTS OF DETENTION CENTERS WHERE THEY CAN CONTACT A DEPORTATION OFFICER DIRECTLY, BUT WHAT I ALSO FOUND IS THAT IN PLACES WHERE THE TABLETS DON'T EXIST, WHERE DETAINEES DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THEM AND WHERE THERE'S JUST SO MUCH PRESSURE TO CARRY OUT DEPORTATIONS AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE WITHOUT THE NECESSARY RECORD KEEPING AND CARE FOR THE WELL-BEING OF CHILDREN IS THAT THERE WERE CASES OF PARENTS WHO I MET IN MY REPORTING WHO WERE DEPORTED AND WHO SAY THEY INDICATED THAT THEY WERE PARENTS, WHO REQUESTED TO BE REUNITED, BUT I.C.E.

HAD NO RECORD WHEN I REACHED OUT SHOWING THAT THEY WERE THE PARENTS OF MINOR CHILDREN, THAT THESE REQUESTS HAD BEEN MADE.

AND SO I WROTE ABOUT A POLICY, THE PARENTAL INTEREST DIRECTIVE THAT I.C.E.

HAS HAD FOR MANY YEARS AND IT HAS EVOLVED SEVERAL TIMES, BUT IN ITS MOST RECENT ITERATION PRIOR TO THIS TRUMP ADMINISTRATION THIS POLICY REQUIRED I.C.E.

OFFICERS TO ASK EVERYONE WHO IS IN DETENTION IF THEY WERE THE PARENT OF A MINOR CHILD AND, IN FACT, TO ASK THEM DURING EVERY INTERACTION TO MAKE SURE CASES LIKE THIS COULDN'T SLIP THROUGH THE CRACKS.

FROM THERE IF A PARENT INDICATED THEY HAD CHILDREN, I.C.E.

OFFICIALS WERE EITHER SUPPOSED TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE FAMILY TO BE REUNITED PRIOR TO DEPORTATION OR OBTAIN A SWORN STATEMENT INDICATING WHO THE LEGAL GUARDIAN OF THOSE CHILDREN WOULD BE BEFORE DEPORTATION.

WHEN THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION REISSUED THAT POLICY IN 2025, IT ADDED A LOT OF CAVEATS, WAYS OF GETTING OUT OF THESE REQUIREMENTS.

SO NOW THE POLICY SAYS THINGS LIKE, DO THESE STEPS IF OPERATIONALLY FEASIBLE.

YOU KNOW, WHEN POSSIBLE.

AND SO I THINK THOSE ARE LOOPHOLES THAT ARE REALLY BEING TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT I.C.E.

OFFICERS HAVE BEEN TOLD THEY NEED TO CARRY OUT AS MANY ARRESTS AS POSSIBLE.

>> I.C.E.

ISSUES THIS SORT OF STATEMENT THAT SAYS, I.C.E.

DOES NOT SEPARATE FAMILIES.

PARENTS ARE ASKED IF THEY WANT TO BE REMOVED WITH THEIR CHILDREN OR I.C.E.

WILL PLACE THE CHILDREN WITH A SAFE PERSON THE PARENT DESIGNATES.

I MEAN IS THIS TRUE THAT PARENTS ARE ASKED IF THEY WANT TO BE DEPORTED WITH THEIR CHILDREN, AND THEN WHAT ARE THE HURDLES IF THEY SAY YES, AND HOW ARE THE STORIES THAT YOU ARE REPORTING HAPPENING IF WHAT I.C.E.

SAYS IS TRUE VERSUS WHAT THE PARENTS SAY IS TRUE?

>> SO MY REPORTING CONTRADICTS WHAT I.C.E.

SAYS IT IS DOING TO MAKE SURE THAT CHILDREN HAVE A SAFE PLACE TO GO BEFORE PARENTS ARE DEPORTED.

I HAVE FOUND THAT I.C.E.

STATEMENT TO BE TRUE IN SOME CASES.

I HAVE MET PARENTS WHO HAVE BEEN DEPORTED WHO ARE ASKED IN ADVANCE IF THEY WANTED TO BE DEPORTED WITH THEIR CHILDREN OR TO DESIGNATE A LEGAL CAREGIVER AND THEY WERE ALLOWED TO DO SO, BUT I HAVE ALSO FOUND MANY WHO WERE NOT GIVEN THAT OPPORTUNITY INCLUDING THOSE WHO BEGGED FOR IT.

>> SO WALK US THROUGH WHAT HAPPENS HERE.

I MEAN IF A PARENT IS DETAINED, WHO DECIDES WHAT HAPPENS TO THE CHILD?

>> SO IT IS A DIFFICULT QUESTION TO ANSWER BECAUSE THERE IS NO PROCESS.

A LOT OF TIMES I FOUND THAT I.C.E.

WOULD TAKE A PARENT INTO CUSTODY, A PARENT MIGHT SAY, "HEY, MY KID IS AT HOME, THEY DON'T HAVE ANYBODY TO TAKE CARE OF THEM," AND THE I.C.E.

OFFICIAL WOULD ESSENTIALLY SAY TO THE PARENT THAT THAT'S NOT MY PROBLEM.

SO THERE IS NO ORDER OF OPERATIONS THAT IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWS OTHER THAN THE DIRECTIVE THAT WE TALKED ABOUT, WHICH I.C.E.

SOMETIMES FOLLOWS AND SOMETIMES DOESN'T.

BUT EVEN WHEN AN OFFICIAL DOES GO AND TRY TO SAY, OKAY, I'M GOING TO REUNIFY, TRY TO WORK TOWARD REUNIFYING THIS FAMILY IN ADVANCE OF DEPORTATION OR ESTABLISH A CONFIRMED CAREGIVER, THERE'S NO MANUAL FOR HOW TO DO IT SO THERE'S LOTS OF INCONSISTENCY.

IN TERMS OF THE CHILD WHO IS LEFT BEHIND, AGAIN, VERY HAPHAZARD.

SO I HAVE LEARNED OF CHILDREN WHO ARE STAYING WITH FRIENDS OF THEIR PARENTS, WITH EXTENDED RELATIVES OF THEIR PARENTS.

IN SOME CASES LOCAL CHILD WELFARE AGENCIES ARE GETTING INVOLVED, BUT A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE WHO ARE INVOLVED IN THESE SITUATIONS ARE STAYING QUIET ABOUT THEM.

>> I CAN HEAR A VIEWER SAYING, LISTEN, THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION WAS ALSO FORCIBLY SEPARATING PARENTS.

I KNOW THAT CECELIA MUNOZ, PART OF THE ADMINISTRATION IN 2018, SAID THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION DID NOT DO THAT, WE DID NOT SEPARATE CHILDREN FROM THEIR PARENTS.

NOW HERE WE ARE A DECADE AND A HALF LATER FROM WHEN THESE POLICIES BEGAN.

WHAT IS CONCERNING TO YOU NOW ABOUT HOW THE POLICIES ARE BEING CARRIED OUT ON THE FRONT LINE?

>> I THINK WHEN YOU LOOK, AND YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

THERE WERE LARGE NUMBERS OF FAMILY SEPARATIONS THAT TOOK PLACE, PARTICULARLY IN THE EARLY YEARS OF THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION.

AFTER THAT AND AFTER THE PUBLIC BACKLASH FRANKLY, THESE GUARDRAILS WERE PUT INTO PLACE LIKE THAT PARENTAL INTEREST DIRECTIVE THAT WE TALKED ABOUT TO TRY TO MITIGATE THESE HARMS.

SO BY THE END OF THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION PARENTS OF MINOR CHILDREN COULD BE PUT ON ANKLE BRACELETS, THEY COULD BE PUT INTO PROGRAMS WHERE THEY WERE REQUIRED TO ATTEND I.C.E.

CHECK-INS, AND REQUIRED TO CONTINUE TO MAKE THEIR PRESENCE KNOWN TO THE GOVERNMENT BUT THEY WERE NOT BEING DEPORTED IN NEARLY AS SIGNIFICANT NUMBERS, AND REALLY ONLY IN EXTREME CIRCUMSTANCES BECAUSE THE ADMINISTRATION REACTED TO AND UNDERSTOOD THE HARM THAT KIDS EXPERIENCE AS A RESULT OF THESE DEPORTATIONS THAT NOW WE'RE GOING BACK IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION WITH YET ANOTHER ADMINISTRATION THAT IS NOT AS CONCERNED ABOUT THE WELFARE OF CHILDREN EVEN WHEN THEIR NUMBERS ARE MASSIVE AND THE HARM IS AS SIGNIFICANT AS WE KNOW THAT IT IS WHEN KIDS, IN PARTICULAR YOUNG KIDS ARE ALL OF A SUDDEN RIPPED FROM THEIR PRIMARY CAREGIVER.

>> CAITLIN DICKERSON, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR REPORTING.

>> THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME.