UNASSIGNED: Though a worldwide period of uncertainty (COVID-19) has \'ended\', there exists a legacy of maladaptive experiences among people with significant appearance concerns (SAC) that requires care and attention.
UNASSIGNED: Using Giddens\' concept of ontological security, we explored how people experienced their SAC before, during and \"since\" COVID-19. Qualitative surveys allowed us to capture diverse perspectives from individuals transnationally, analysed with deductive reflexive thematic analysis using ontological security as our theoretical foundation.
UNASSIGNED: Themes named \"More Mirror(ed) Time\" and \"Locked Out, Shut Down, and Shut Out\" gave a contextual grounding for the embodied experiences of this group through times of social restrictions, and the theme \"Redefining Relevance\" explored the continued legacy of COVID-19 - and continued global uncertainties such as economic hardship and warfare - that impact the wellbeing of people with SAC.
UNASSIGNED: People with SAC are still \'locked out\' from essential healthcare support as those providing healthcare are overworked, under-resourced and rely on efficient interactive methods such as tele-health that may be triggers for people with SAC. Care providers may consider expanding appearance concerns verbiage, look to involve trusted others in the care-seeking process, and utilize modalities beyond digital health to support people with SAC.

The recent geo-politicisation of return migration warrants deep consideration of the politics of return and reintegration. A focus on geopolitics prefigures the study of reintegration not just as circumstantial to the lives of migrants or the formal strategies of states but also as deeply embedded in the historical socio-cultural and political contexts where it takes place. In introducing a set of papers that explore these links from different angles and based on research from around the world, this article argues that return and reintegration constitute a qualitatively different process from immigration and integration in the receiving countries, first and foremost because the sending state-a key actor in the reintegration process-is in a position of geopolitical power marginality. Indeed, the strategies of all the stakeholders implicated in reintegration are closely linked to the geopolitics of migration governance. In these contexts, migrants\' intimate, as well as pragmatic, strategies of reintegration and re-migration are an expression, as well as a trigger, of multi-scale geopolitics. There is a distinct contrast between the emphasis on borders and securitisation in high-income countries and the informality and precarity of the way that migrants have to manage their ontological security in the process of return and reintegration. Reintegration should thus be understood as a process contingent upon different and, often, incongruous legal, political and socio-economic elements, as endorsed and employed by the different stakeholders involved.