Managing citizenship, security, and rights : regulating marriage migration in Europe and North America.
This book places family migration policies in the broader perspective of changing family norms. In doing so, it shows the added value of studying immigration law not as an isolated field, but in connection with other fields of law and policy. Taking the Netherlands as an example, it shows how family migration policies have evolved from a system premised on the male breadwinner-citizen’s right to domicile, to one granting and restricting freedom of movement according to individual merit.
This book examines immigration law from a gender perspective. It shows how immigration law situates gender conflicts outside the national order, projecting them onto non-western countries, exotic cultures, clandestine labour and criminal organizations.
The European Court on Human Rights (European Court) has recently brought out an important decision regarding the admission of children in the case of Sen v. the Netherlands. Depending on how one interprets this decision, it could mean a significant shift from earlier decisions that the European Court has taken on this issue.
In this chapter, I shall give a brief account of the normative changes that have taken place in the Netherlands in the course of the second half of the twentieth century. I shall relate these changes to developments that have taken place, during the same period, in the regulation of family migration to the Netherlands. Next, I shall explore how the family migration regime that has taken shape at the end of the twentieth century relates to an emerging context of globalisation as theorised by, among others, Sassen. Finally, I shall question if and to what extent the racist legacy of the Dutch colonial past does indeed reverberate in the present-day context.
While families all over the world enlist the help of family, friends, or paid day care for their children, the need to do so is especially strong for individual women (single or divorced) who work outside the home to earn a living. Women who migrate for work in another country, in search of better pay, may need to have children stay in the homes of others in the country of origin. That "good mothering" may take many forms was not initially recognized under Dutch immigration law. The approach in the Netherlands eventually brbought it into conflict with European human rights law and with the merging immigration law of the European Union (EU).
Immigration policies and policies regarding the integration of ethnic minorities into Dutch society have been on the Dutch political agenda for the past decades. Recently, however, these debates received a new impulse from the publication of a newspaper article by a prominent member of the Dutch Labor party, Paul Scheffer. In this chapter I wish to place recent developments in Dutch family reunification policies against the background of these current debates on immigration, integration, and traditional Dutch culture - and in particular, Dutch family norms.
Marriage migration is a controversial and problematic issue in the UK as elsewhere in Europe. This timely analysis is a comprehensive examination of the regulation of marriage migration into the UK.
This chapter investigates the circumstances in which a marriage involving a non- EEA migrant spouse is designated a sham marriage so that residence rights are refused. It analyses the problems of understanding and defining a sham marriage and argues that controls over sham marriages often regulate a much wider range of marriages than those entered for the sole purpose of obtaining residence rights.
This chapter analyses the family migration policies of the New Labour government of 1997-2010 in the context of its migration policy generally. It argues that policy was often the outcome of a conflicting set of pressures. Regulation of family migration often appeared to share the same characteristics as immigration policy as a whole: a veneer of coherence concealed efforts to satisfy a multiplicity of interests and forces. At the same time, while the government moved policy in the same direction as its European neighbours, comparatively speaking it showed some restraint.
This chapter analyses the evolution of regulation in the UK of transnational marriages since they first became a prominent issue in the 1960s. It employs recent understandings of the ‘border’ to argue that regulation initially coincided with the geographical border before being exported through the establishment of compulsory entrance clearance.
This paper considers the treatment of ‘marriages of convenience’ or ‘sham marriages’ in UK immigration law. Such measures inevitably involve a degree of moral and cultural gate-keeping as decision-makers are obliged to measure the alleged sham marriage against the template of a ‘genuine’ relationship. However, the paper argues that the function of such measures has often been to enhance the ability to exclude or remove unwanted immigrants.
At a time when issues concerning migration and the formation of diasporic communities have come to be critical for all European legal systems, this volume reflects, discusses and analyzes the questions raised by diasporas who have established themselves in Europe over more than fifty years of immigration and the challenges faced by legal systems in the light of continued migration.
Although gender offers valuable perspectives for understanding migration law, masculinity has received little attention. In family migration, men are generally regarded as economic agents and family as marginal to their lives, a view that is difficult to dislodge because it serves the purposes of governments anxious to reduce unwanted immigration. In British immigration law, measures have often explicitly or implicitly relied on such gender-based assumptions.
This article analyses key aspects of the regulation of entry and stay of spousal migrants in eea member states. It shows that there are differences of regulation, particularly between states in Eastern and Southern Europe and states in Northern and Western Europe but, in most cases, the amount of divergence is limited. The article connects this ‘family resemblance’ to a broad concept of Europeanisation. Even where there is no binding legal obligation, European legal norms and the practice in other European states largely circumscribe what is possible.