Babies in ICE Detention: A Call for Accountability

“A baby’s inability to name their suffering increases our responsibility to recognize it—and to challenge the conditions causing it.” —Mary Coughlin

A government that detains babies must answer for what happens to them.

We should demand those answers with the same urgency we would bring to any institution entrusted with children’s lives.

For decades, my work in trauma-informed developmental care has centered a fundamental truth: babies are people. They experience pain, distress, comfort, separation, and connection. They communicate through their bodies long before they can explain their experiences in words.

Their inability to testify does not diminish their humanity. It increases our responsibility.

That responsibility does not disappear at an immigration checkpoint.

What the records show

An analysis of ICE records by The Marshall Project found that more than 6,200 children were detained between President Trump’s return to office in January 2025 and March 11, 2026. More than 1,600 were held longer than the twenty-day benchmark established through court interpretation of the Flores settlement. A subsequent investigation identified at least 500 children aged three or younger detained during that period. These are dated counts, not current totals.

Behind those numbers are children whose parents describe profound distress.

Kaleth’s mother reported that her two-year-old stopped eating solid food during detention after being separated from his father. Attempts to make him eat brought vomiting. He became visibly gaunt.

Amir’s parents reported that their one-year-old became withdrawn during four months in detention and eventually stopped saying anything beyond “mom” and “dad.”

These are family accounts documented by journalists. ICE and the facility operator disputed allegations of inadequate conditions and care. Those denials make independent scrutiny essential.

A child’s body is communicating

In healthcare, we have too often mistaken a child’s inability to explain distress for an absence of meaningful experience.

A baby who becomes quiet may still be suffering. A toddler who stops eating requires assessment and care. A child who stops using familiar words deserves a response that takes that change seriously.

We cannot diagnose these children from a news report. We can recognize that their reported experiences demand urgent attention.

The American Academy of Pediatrics warns that even brief detention or family separation can cause psychological trauma and lasting mental-health problems. Prolonged adversity can excessively activate a child’s stress-response systems, especially when protective relationships cannot sufficiently buffer the experience. That is the risk described by toxic stress.

Infancy and toddlerhood are periods of extraordinary developmental sensitivity. Safety, responsive relationships, nourishment, sleep, and comfort help build the foundations for learning and health.

These are conditions every child deserves. Government policy must be accountable for disrupting them.

Trauma-informed care demands accountability

My work asks healthcare professionals to recognize personhood, attend to distress, protect relationships, and examine how power shapes another person’s experience.

Those commitments reach beyond the bedside.

They require us to ask what happens when a parent cannot comfort a frightened child, obtain appropriate food, secure medical attention, or explain when confinement will end.

They require us to scrutinize systems that place children in those circumstances.

A trauma-informed society must confront the conditions that generate trauma—and change them.

The courts have already intervened

In August 2026, a federal judge identified a history of noncompliance and current instances of noncompliance with the Flores settlement, appointing a special master and independent monitor covering Dilley and specified Border Patrol facilities. The court explicitly distinguished that intervention from a contempt sanction. Nevertheless, it represents judicial action to address failures in compliance with children’s protections.

Courts have also blocked DHS policies requiring lawmakers to give seven days’ notice before detention oversight visits. The legal dispute continues. Congress must exercise its oversight authority, and any obstruction must be documented and challenged.

We should demand concrete action from our representatives and senators: inspections, public findings, independent scrutiny of children’s care, and enforcement of applicable legal protections.

Healthcare organizations should bring their expertise and authority to this work. Clinicians can explain the developmental consequences, support affected families, and insist that policy take children’s needs seriously.

The public should expect evidence of improvement: children receiving appropriate care, families maintaining protective relationships, and unlawful conditions being remedied.

Turn concern into a demand.

Contact your U.S. representative and both senators. Ask them to conduct oversight visits to facilities holding children, publish their findings, document and challenge any obstruction, and demand compliance with children’s legal protections.

Make your request specific: “I am your constituent. I want to know what you are doing to protect children in immigration detention. Will you conduct an oversight visit, publicly report what you find, and pursue enforcement when legal protections are violated? Please respond with the actions you will take and when.”

Call the U.S. Capitol switchboard at 202-224-3121 and ask to be connected to their offices.

If you work in healthcare, education, or child development, ask your professional organization to speak publicly and take concrete action. Bring your knowledge of children’s needs into the policy conversation. Support organizations providing legal representation and care to affected families.

Share the documented reporting—with its sources and dates. Keep asking for answers after the headlines fade.

Children cannot wait for our outrage to become convenient. They need our concern to become action.

A baby does not have to earn humane treatment.

An immigration case cannot erase a child’s personhood. Our government exercises power in our name. We have a responsibility to confront the harm that power causes. I will not accept the detention of babies as an ordinary administrative fact. Their humanity obligates us to act.

Until dignity becomes policy,

Mary

Sources and Further Reading

1. Flagg, A., & Heffernan, S. (2026, April 6). ICE has detained 6,200+ kids in Trump’s second term, up 10x since Biden left office. The Marshall Project.
   Source for the total number of children detained and those held longer than twenty days.

2. The Marshall Project & MS NOW. (2026, June 9). 25 babies and toddlers are in ICE custody on an average day.
   Source for the count of at least 500 children aged three or younger and the reported experiences of Kaleth and Amir.

3. American Academy of Pediatrics. (n.d.). Seeking safe haven: Supporting immigrant children & families facing detention or separation. HealthyChildren.org.
   Explains the health and developmental risks associated with detention and family separation.

4. Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University. (n.d.). Toxic stress.
   Explains prolonged stress-response activation, its developmental consequences, and the protective role of supportive relationships.

5. U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. (2026, August 17). Order discharging order to show cause and appointing special master and independent monitor. Flores v. Blanche, No. 2:85-cv-04544-DMG-AGR, Document 1827.
   Documents findings of noncompliance and the appointment of independent oversight concerning Dilley and specified CBP facilities.

6. U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. (2026, May 8). Order denying motion for stay pending appeal. Neguse v. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, No. 26-5072.
   Leaves the district court’s protection against the challenged advance-notice policies in place while the appeal proceeds.

7. National Center for Youth Law. (n.d.). Flores v. Reno.
   Provides the settlement’s background and access to court orders and enforcement filings.