Not Every Family: Selective Reunification in Contemporary US Immigration Laws

2010 ◽  
Vol 78 (1) ◽  
pp. 100-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Cecilia Hwang ◽  
Rhacel Salazar Parreñas

AbstractThis article questions the notion that family reunification is the cornerstone of US immigration policies and points to the violation of the right to family reunification in US law. It specifically looks at the forcible separation of legal residents from their families, including foreign domestic workers in the Labor Certification Program; US-born children with undocumented relatives, including parents and siblings; and guest workers. We argue that the growing influence of nationalist politics and big businesses trumps the interests of the family in US immigration policies, resulting in the prolonged and forcible separation of working-class and poor migrant families.

2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 24-39
Author(s):  
Nabila El-Ahmed ◽  
Nadia Abu-Zahra

This article argues that Israel substituted the Palestinian refugees' internationally recognized right of return with a family reunification program during its maneuvering over admission at the United Nations following the creation of the state in May 1948. Israel was granted UN membership in 1949 on the understanding that it would have to comply with legal international requirements to ensure the return of a substantial number of the 750,000 Palestinians dispossessed in the process of establishing the Zionist state, as well as citizenship there as a successor state. However, once the coveted UN membership had been obtained, and armistice agreements signed with neighboring countries, Israel parlayed this commitment into the much vaguer family reunification program, which it proceeded to apply with Kafkaesque absurdity over the next fifty years. As a result, Palestinians made refugees first in 1948, and later in 1967, continue to be deprived of their legally recognized right to return to their homes and their homeland, and the family reunification program remains the unfulfilled promise of the early years of Israeli statehood.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leona Carmelita Pagunuran Canay

Since the 1900s, Canada has heavily relied on foreign domestic workers. This program has evolved over the years into what is currently known as the Live-in Caregiver Program (LCP). It is rooted in our colonial history and has reproduced power imbalances between employers and caregivers. Challenging dominance is a difficult task given that immigration policies perpetuate inequalities through the denial of social, economic and political rights to caregivers. I selected this topic based on my experiences as a live-in caregiver with this program. This study uses anti-colonialism and feminist thought to examine the experiences of three former LCP workers. Through narrative interviewing, the findings indicate that the live-in requirement of the LCP has contributed to the abuse, exploitation and marginalization of these caregivers. The study concludes with a discussion of the ways in which the structure of the program can be modified to prevent further exploitation and human rights violations.


Politik ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Bøegh-Lervang ◽  
Laura Madum

The European Union (EU) has from its very beginning had the objective to grant its workers a right to free movement across the European borders. A secondary effect has since then been the right to bring the family along. As the Union has evolved, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has functioned as the primary generator of rights when it comes to securing the union citizens’ right to family reunification. On the other hand, the Danish legislators have been tightening the domestic rules regarding family reunification for numerous years. In other words, there has been a clear discrepancy between EU law and domestic law on the family reunification area for a long time.The article analyzes this discrepancy while trying to gain an insight into the EU’s effect on Danish family reunification policies. 


2008 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 344-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy B. Bierbach

Read carefully: A Community national leaves his or her home state (the ‘first country’) to work in a host member state (the ‘second country’). While in the second country, he or she exercises the right to family reunification with a spouse, partner or dependent who is not a national of any EU or EEA member state (a ‘third-country’ national). When the Community national returns to the first country together with the family member, what determines the family member's right of residence in the first country? Community law – in which case the Community national would continue to enjoy the right of family reunification as before? Or the national immigration law of the first country, which could potentially dictate more restrictive conditions for family reunification?


1999 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 43
Author(s):  
Mary Romero ◽  
Abigail B. Bakan ◽  
Daiva Stasiulis

1989 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 856-888 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guillermina Jasso ◽  
Mark R. Rosenzweig

This article reviews the evidence pertaining to the extent to which U.S. immigrants actually make use of the family reunification entitlements of United States immigration laws, examining the two available studies which are based on probability samples of immigrant entry cohorts. It then provides new estimates of the characteristics of the U.S. citizen sponsors of immigrant spouses and parents. The first study examined, the 1986 Jasso-Rosenzweig study of the FY 1971 immigrant cohort, suggests that the multiplier — the total number of immigrants brought in by one original immigrant — is far less than its potential size but is not trivial. The 1988 General Accounting Office (GAO) report based on the FY 1985 immigrant cohort indicates that 1) the propensity to sponsor new immigrants is substantially higher for immigrants than for native born citizens and that 2) immigrant sponsors of new immigrants tend to petition as soon as they are able to do so according to the law. With respect to the characteristics of sponsors, analysis of the information in the GAO report indicates that 80 percent of the persons who immigrated in FY 1985 as the spouses of U.S. citizens were sponsored by native born U.S. citizens. In contrast, native born U.S. citizens sponsored only five percent of the parent immigrants. Additional findings on the country of origin and sex of the sponsored immigrants are presented.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leona Carmelita Pagunuran Canay

Since the 1900s, Canada has heavily relied on foreign domestic workers. This program has evolved over the years into what is currently known as the Live-in Caregiver Program (LCP). It is rooted in our colonial history and has reproduced power imbalances between employers and caregivers. Challenging dominance is a difficult task given that immigration policies perpetuate inequalities through the denial of social, economic and political rights to caregivers. I selected this topic based on my experiences as a live-in caregiver with this program. This study uses anti-colonialism and feminist thought to examine the experiences of three former LCP workers. Through narrative interviewing, the findings indicate that the live-in requirement of the LCP has contributed to the abuse, exploitation and marginalization of these caregivers. The study concludes with a discussion of the ways in which the structure of the program can be modified to prevent further exploitation and human rights violations.


2007 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-33
Author(s):  
Amparo González-Ferrer

This article examines the process of family reunification among original guest-workers in Germany. Contrary to conventional accounts, the findings indicate that the bulk of family reunification occurred for the most part before the halt on recruitment was imposed in the mid-seventies. Using data from the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP), I find that approximately half of wives who joined their husbands in Germany migrated in the same year as their husbands. In fact, it does not seem that the ban on labor recruitment had an accelerating effect on the reunification process, as it is generally assumed. According to the obtained results, the reform of the children’s allowances in 1975 had a clearer and stronger impact in explaining the family migration decisions of original guest-workers in Germany. On the other hand, variables related to the macroeconomic conditions at the origin and destination countries, the size of the household, the age of the children, and the labor market characteristics of the mother are important to account for differences in the time that elapsed until male immigrants had their families reunified abroad. Zusammenfassung In diesem Beitrag wird der Prozess der Familienzusammenführung bei den ursprünglichen Gastarbeitern in Deutschland untersucht. Im Gegensatz zur gängigen Darstellung legen meine Erkenntnisse nahe, dass die Mehrzahl der Familienzusammenführungen schon vor dem Anwerbestopp Mitte der 1970er Jahre stattfand. Unter Verwendung von Daten des Sozio-oekonomischen Panels (SOEP) stellte ich fest, dass ungefähr die Hälfte der Ehefrauen, die ihren Männern nach Deutschland folgten, im gleichen Jahr wie ihre Männer auswanderten. Tatsächlich scheint es nicht so zu sein, dass – wie gemeinhin angenommen – der Anwerbestopp einen beschleunigenden Effekt auf die Familienzusammenführung hatte. Nach den vorliegenden Ergebnissen hatte die Kindergeldreform im Jahre 1975 einen eindeutigeren und stärkeren Einfluss auf die Erklärung der Entscheidungen der ursprünglichen Gastarbeiter in Deutschland hinsichtlich der Familienzusammenführungen. Anderseits sind aber auch andere Variablen, die sich auf die makro-ökonomischen Bedingungen in den Herkunftsländern und im Aufnahmeland, die Haushaltsgröße, das Alter der Kinder sowie die Arbeitsmarktcharakteristika der Mütter beziehen, für die Erklärung der unterschiedlichen Zeiträume, die vergingen, ehe die männlichen Einwanderer ihre Familien im Ausland wieder zusammenführten, bedeutsam.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document