Rethinking Intersectionality in Immigrant Mental Health Research Through Narrative, Reflexive, and Decolonial Frameworks

Introduction: Immigrant mental health research continues to rely heavily on Eurocentric biomedical frameworks that inadequately capture the complex social, historical, and political forces shaping immigrant wellbeing. These models often obscure how migration, racism, gendered expectations, and colonial legacies intersect to structure mental health vulnerabilities among diverse immigrant populations. Intersectionality theory offers a corrective, yet its application remains limited by conceptual and methodological challenges. Purpose: This paper critically examines the applicability of intersectionality in immigrant mental health research, using South Asian immigrants in Canada as an illustrative example. The aim is to evaluate both the strengths and limitations of intersectionality and propose ways to strengthen its use in population health research. Methodology: This is a conceptual and theoretical analysis grounded in Black feminist scholarship, critical public health literature, and decolonial epistemologies. An interpretive approach is applied to examine how intersectionality has been used in immigrant mental health research and where it requires expansion. Results: Findings demonstrate that intersectionality illuminates layered forms of oppression but is often hindered by theoretical overload, methodological ambiguity, essentialism, and Western centric epistemic boundaries. These constraints risk flattening diversity within immigrant groups and overlooking colonial histories that shape mental health outcomes. Conclusion: An expanded intersectional framework, integrating qualitative inquiry, reflexivity, and decolonial approaches can more effectively capture the lived realities of immigrants and support culturally responsive mental health research. Strengthening intersectionality in this way advances health equity and enriches global mental health scholarship