K.M. Parvez Geopsychiatry 3 (2026) 100091 “We are alive because of aid, but we are not living with respect.” (Female refugee, age 29) where individuals are unable to anchor their identity within stable po­ litical or social categories. The findings also reveal that this condition has significant intergenerational implications, as participants expressed uncertainty about the identity and future of their children, who are growing up without formal recognition or clear pathways to citizenship. This suggests that statelessness functions as a long-term structural con­ dition that reproduces exclusion across generations and the geopolitical tensions in Southeast Asia (Fig. 3). From a policy standpoint, these findings highlight the limitations of humanitarian responses that do not address the root condition of statelessness. While aid can mitigate im­ mediate suffering, it cannot resolve the psychological and social con­ sequences of exclusion. Durable solutions must therefore prioritize legal recognition, whether through citizenship restoration, safe repatriation, or alternative forms of protection that provide meaningful rights and status. Without addressing statelessness, the Rohingya crisis will remain fundamentally unresolved, as the core condition driving both displace­ ment and psychological distress persists. These accounts highlight the distinction between biological survival and meaningful existence, suggesting that humanitarian provision alone is insufficient to ensure well-being. The restriction of mobility plays a central role in this dynamic, limiting access to employment, education, and social interaction, thereby reinforcing both economic dependency and psychological confinement. The camps thus function as controlled environments where stability is prioritized over autonomy, and where governance practices inadvertently reproduce the vulnerabilities they seek to address. Analytically, this condition can be understood as a feedback loop in which dependency is both produced and justified by governance struc­ tures. Limited access to livelihoods and education constrains individual capability, increasing reliance on aid, which in turn reinforces the need for continued control and regulation. This creates a self-sustaining sys­ tem in which refugees are maintained in a state of managed vulnera­ bility, unable to transition toward self-reliance or integration. Participants also highlighted the temporal dimension of this condition, expressing concern about the long-term consequences of prolonged inactivity, particularly among youth who face limited opportunities for skill development and future planning. This results in what can be described as a “frozen life trajectory,” where individuals are unable to progress socially, economically, or psychologically. From a policy perspective, these findings underscore the need to move beyond containment-based models of humanitarian governance toward ap­ proaches that prioritize capability-building and autonomy. This includes expanding access to education, vocational training, and regulated employment opportunities, as well as rethinking mobility restrictions that limit social and economic participation. Without such shifts, hu­ manitarian systems risk institutionalizing dependency and undermining long-term resilience, thereby transforming temporary protection into permanent marginalization. 4.4. Gendered vulnerability, protection gaps, and layered insecurity The findings demonstrate that gender plays a critical role in shaping the experience of displacement, producing distinct and intensified forms of vulnerability for women within the Rohingya refugee population. Female participants consistently reported concerns related to safety, restricted mobility, and limited access to resources, reflecting broader patterns of gender-based inequality within humanitarian settings [20, 28]. These vulnerabilities are not isolated but are embedded within the structural conditions of camp governance, socio-cultural norms, and economic dependency. One participant described the constraints on mobility: “We cannot move freely. Even going outside feels unsafe for us.” (Female refugee, age 27) Another participant highlighted the intersection of dependency and insecurity: 4.3. Statelessness, identity fragmentation, and existential non-belonging “We depend on others for everything, and that makes us more vulnerable.” (Female refugee, age 34) The analysis reveals that statelessness is not merely a legal condition but a deeply embedded experiential reality that shapes identity, dignity, and perceptions of existence among Rohingya refugees. Participants consistently described themselves as existing outside recognized politi­ cal and social frameworks, reflecting a profound sense of exclusion that extends beyond formal citizenship status. This aligns with theoretical perspectives that conceptualize statelessness as a form of structural and symbolic violence, where individuals are denied not only rights but also recognition and legitimacy within the global order ([4]; Song, 2025). One participant expressed this condition in stark terms: These accounts illustrate how gendered experiences of displacement are shaped by overlapping structural factors that limit agency and in­ crease exposure to risk. Restricted mobility reduces access to services, social networks, and economic opportunities, while dependency on external assistance creates conditions where exploitation and vulnera­ bility are more likely to occur. This produces what can be analytically described as “layered insecurity,” where multiple forms of vulnerability intersect and reinforce one another. From a geopsychiatric perspective, gendered vulnerability also has distinct psychological implications. Women often carry the dual burden of managing their own trauma while supporting family members, which intensifies emotional stress and contributes to chronic fatigue and anx­ iety [20,28]. Participants described feelings of fear, isolation, and re­ sponsibility, indicating that mental health outcomes are closely linked to gender roles and expectations within the camp environment. The find­ ings also reveal significant gaps in protection mechanisms, with par­ ticipants reporting inconsistencies in access to safe spaces, limited responsiveness of services, and ongoing concerns about personal secu­ rity. This suggests that existing protection frameworks, while present, are insufficiently adapted to the complex realities of gendered vulner­ ability. From a policy perspective, these findings underscore the need for gender-responsive approaches that are integrated across all aspects of humanitarian governance. This includes enhancing safety measures, expanding access to gender-sensitive mental health services, and creating opportunities for women's participation in decision-making processes. Without addressing the structural roots of gendered vulner­ ability, humanitarian interventions risk reproducing existing in­ equalities and failing to provide adequate protection for one of the most “We are not accepted anywhere. In Myanmar we are not citizens, and here we are not from this country.” (Male refugee, age 45) Another participant articulated the psychological consequences of this exclusion: “Without a country, we feel like we do not exist. We are people, but we have no place.” (Female refugee, age 32) These narratives indicate that statelessness is internalized as a form of existential non-belonging, where individuals experience themselves as socially and politically invisible. The absence of legal recognition translates into a lack of social validation, affecting self-perception, dignity, and emotional well-being. Participants frequently associated statelessness with feelings of worthlessness and erasure, suggesting that exclusion operates not only at the institutional level but also at the level of identity formation. From an analytical perspective, statelessness disrupts the continuity of identity by removing the foundational structures through which in­ dividuals define belonging and citizenship. This leads to fragmentation, 6