migration as a family matter conference perspectives from ... · migration as a family matter...
TRANSCRIPT
Migration as a Family Matter Conference Perspectives from inside and outside of the Law Organised by: VU University Amsterdam’s Migration Law as a Family Matter Research group – Jill Alpes, Younous Arbaoui, Nadia Ismaïli, Thomas Spijkerboer and Johanne Søndergaard Final programme Venue: VU University Amsterdam, Main building (HG) and Bellevue Building (BV), De Boelelaan 1105, Amsterdam. Date: 30 March –31 March 2015 Anticipated total number of participants: 30-50 Format: Three/four 10-15-minute papers per session. The chairs, discussants and presenters in each session will have read each other’s papers. Each presentation is followed by 5-10 min of specific questions to the presenter. After all three presentations follows 15 minutes of comments by a discussant, leaving 30 minutes for general discussion. Facilities for power-point presentations are available.
Date Time Session A Presenter Paper Session B Presenter Paper
Monday 30 March 2015
9.30-10.00 Coffee and registration, outside Aurora room 10.00-12.30 Plenary presentations
of results of research project “Migration Law as a Family Matter” Chair: Thomas Spijkerboer Room: Aurora room, Main building, VU
Audrey Macklin Overview of project and introduction of subprojects - Jill Alpes - Younous
Arbaoui - Nadia Ismaïli - Johanne
Søndergaard
12.30-13.30 Lunch, Restaurant Niveau C 13.30-15.15 Session 1A. Families
and illegalization Chair: Franca van Hooren Discussant: Barak Kalir Room: HG-0G30
Carolina Sanchez Boe
Deportation as a family matter
Session 1B. Marriage Chair: Eleonore Kofman Discussant: Betty de Hart Room: HG-0G28
Helena Wray The ‘pure’ relationship, sham marriages and immigration control
Hélène Neveu Kringelbach
‘The paradox of parallel lives: immigration policy and transnational polygyny between Senegal and France’
Natasha Carver For her protection and benefit: the regulation of marriage-related migration to the UK
Ana Irene Rovetta Cortés
“You don't know where your home is”: impacts of migration laws on Argentinean families living in the Veneto and Galicia regions
Simone Marinai Recognition of same-sex marriages and free movement of families: updates from Italy
15.30-17.15 Session 2A. Facilitation and the border Chair: Carolina Sanchez Boe Discussant: Jill Alpes Room: HG-0G30
Daniel Toulson Migration brokerage in Football: A Review of the Literature,
Session 2B. Law, culture and power Chair: Younous Arbaoui Discussant: Susan Rutten Room: HG-0G28
Muki Gorar Human Rights, Multiculturalism and Honour Crimes
Gabriella Sanchez Securing a “good coyote”: the negotiation of extra-legal border-crossing services on the US/Mexico Border,
Iris Sportel Being left behind. Strategic use of migration law in transnational family conflicts
Victoria Stone-Cadena
Indigenous Migrant Families in Spain and the United States: Intersecting binds of Race. Language and Representation
Leen Stercks Gender dynamics in the relationships of migrants spouses: the impact of the income requirement and dependent residency in the Netherlands
17.30-18.30 Keynote speech Room: Aurora room, Main building
Virginie Guiraudon
When family law impacts on migrant trajectories. Rethinking the relationship between legal and sociological categories in migration studies
19.30 Conference dinner, location Restaurant As, Prinses Irenestraat 19, 1077 WT Amsterdam Tuesday 31 March 2015
8.30-9.00 Coffee, outside Aurora room 09.00-10.30 Keynote speech
Room: Aurora room, Main building
Alison Diduck Autonomy, Vulnerability and Family Justice
10.30-11.00 Coffee, outside Aurora room
11.00-12.45 Session 3A. Love at the consulate Chair: Jill Alpes Discussant: Marie-Benedicte Dembour Room: HG-0G10
Anne-Marie D’Aoest
Fractured citizenship and broken hearts: technologies of love and the management of sham marriages in the UK
Session 3B. Gender norms and family reunification Chair: Johanne Søndergaard Discussant: Saskia Bonjour Room: HG-0G08
Betty de Hart The Europeanization of love. Fraudulent Family Relationships in European migration law
Federica Infantino Bordering ‘Fake’ Marriages? The Everyday Practices of Control at the Consulates of Belgium, France and Italy in Casablanca
Wojciech Burek Gender discriminatory aspects of the EU Directive on Family Reunification (2003/86/EC)
Vic Satzewich ‘Real’ and ‘Fake’ Relationships: Canadian Visa Officers and Competing Normative Standards in the Construction of Spousal Relationships
Fulvia Staiano The Gendered Effects of Family Migration Law: testing contextual interpretation as a judicial remedy
12.45-13.30 Lunch, Restaurant Niveau C 13.30-15.15 Session 4A.
Scales of governance Chair: Marcelle Reneman Discussant: Pieter Boeles Room: BV-1H26
Sanna Elfving
Recent UK proposals on family migration and their incompatibility with EU law
Session 4B. Labour Chair: Hemme Battjes Discussant: Anja Eleveld Room: BV-0H54
Tesseltje de Lange
Family Migration as a Corporate Affair: EU Labour migration law & Corporate Dual Career Policies,
Session 4C. Children Chair: Younous Arbaoui Discussant: Mariëlle Bruning Room: BV-0H19
Heike Drotbohm
From marriage to adoption. A Cape Verdean reflection on kin categories, international travel and migration law
Jaana Palander, Tiina Vaittinen
Non-EU labour migrants’ right to “normal” family life in
Eleonore Kofman
Family Migration as an Economic Matter
Ioana Vrăbiescu
Roma migrant children in Spain:
& Lena Näre
Finland Between the politics of benevolence and the normalization of violence
Luljeta Caraoshi
Does the family matter? Analysis of the international and national legislation on family-related human rights
Michael Cowen
X-Family: Rhizomatic mutations and bio-political modalities within the South Asia/Abu Dhabi labour migration dispositive
Rita D’Alton-Harrison
Transformative Crossings: Protecting the Family Relationship Across Borders, a UK Perspective on International Surrogacy
Daphna Hacker
Legalized Families in the Era of Bordered Globalization
15.30-16.30 Plenary wrap-up session with discussion and closing remarks Chair: Thomas Spijkerboer Room: Aurora room, Main building
Valentina Mazzucato
Wrap-up and conclusions
16.30-18.00 Closing drinks, Restaurant Niveau C
Abstracts
Opening session abstracts
What risks do family members face when involuntarily returning to their countries of nationality? The case of criminalised emigration in Cameroon Jill Alpes, VU University Amsterdam
This paper explores - for the case of Cameroon - what happens in the short, but important interstice in which deportees, non-admissables, and other involuntarily returning nationals are no longer at the direct charge of European state agents, but not yet in the hands of their family members, friends and social networks. The paper comes to the topic of migration as a family matter from an external perspective. On the one hand, it unravels dynamics that drive the production of (legal) norms in an emigration country. It does so by analysing the emergence of the Cameroonian offence of “attempting to emigrate illegally,” as well as other transnational policy efforts designed to combat fraud. On the other hand, the paper explores the impact of such an offence for the care and vulnerability of people who fail to leave or involuntarily return to Cameroon. Non-admitted travellers can become subject to detention, criminal prosecution and imprisonment, while deportees and participants of voluntary return programmes can become subject to monetary extortions and threats of imprisonment. The paper illustrates how solidarity between family members in countries of origin serves as key protection from law enforcement that criminalises emigration. This solidarity often takes the form of monetary gifts to law enforcement agents.
The criminalisation of emigration is arguably a newly emerging trend in the governance of migration. The paper will explore the impact of this trend for the redistribution of care and social risks between individuals, families and states. The paper is based on observations from November 2013 – January 2014 with control agents at the international airport of Douala and Yaoundé, investigations at the prison of New Bell in Douala, a review of related case law at the Criminal Tribunal of First Instance in Bonapriso (Douala), police registers of the Border Police at the airport of Douala and interviews with participants of voluntary return programmes and three longitudinal life stories of involuntarily returned Cameroonians. The paper argues that the combat against fraud fuels the need for corruption on the part of family members of involuntarily returning people. Instead of receiving remittances, families in emigration countries are called upon to mobilise financial resources to liberate family members from police posts or prison complexes. This distribution of care obligations from migrants in immigration countries to families in emigration countries goes hand in hand with the externalisation of migration control and its respective shifts in responsibilities and creation of opportunities for state agents in both emi- and immigration countries.
Framing family relationships in Dutch refugee law (2004-2014)
Younous Arbaoui, VU University Amsterdam
This paper describes the overall argument of the study and outlines how each chapter contributes. The study addresses the protection of the family at two levels. On the one hand attention is paid to protecting family life, and, on the other hand, the study deals with ways in which individual family members might suffer from the dys-functionning of the family. The focus of the study is on two specific examples that are supposed to represent these two ‘opposite models’ of protection. The first concerns refugee-parents claiming family reunification with their left-behind children. The second regards women claiming asylum protection on the basis of a threatened or actual forced marriage. Instead of a comparison of ‘models’, the study unpacks in both cases the mechanisms within the frames through examining the ways in which both types of family relationships are represented in legal and policy debates in the Netherlands. In this context, the study pays attention to the voice dimension and explores to what extent and how did children and/or women succeed to be ‘heard’.
The Right to Family Life in the Strasbourg Case Law: Family and migration law cases compared
Nadia Ismaïli, VU University Amsterdam
This paper examines whether the difference in treatment by the Dutch authorities of national and multi-citizenship families, where it concerns the exercise of custody and access rights, is in line with obligations under Article 8 ECHR. For the protection of custody and access rights there is a sharp distinction in the Netherlands between a family in which all members have Dutch nationality and of multi-citizenship families. Concerning custody and access rights Dutch parents and children have strong rights. Custody rights must be protected regardless of the actual quality of the relationship between the parents. The same applies to access rights where the premise is that an access arrangement between children and both parents must, where reasonably possible, be realized. On the other hand, where multi-citizenship families are concerned there are many occasions on which the custody and/or access rights of the parents are breached. Custody and access are principles of civil law and when measures are taken in the context of migration law, they are not aimed at regulating custody and access. However, of many measures - for example the expulsion or non-admission of one of the family members – it can be said that in practice they have serious consequences for the exercise of parental rights. This paper will look at the obligations Article 8 ECHR imposes on states. It will examine which elements of family life can be distinguished in the case law of the ECtHR. Thereby, there is particular attention for the question whether or not the ECtHR also differentiates between family law and migration law cases.
Opinionated Family Migration Policies? Examining the influence of pro-immigrant/immigration attitudes and egalitarian gender role attitudes on family migration policies in Europe
Johanne Søndergaard, VU University Amsterdam
Despite the harmonizing efforts of the European Union (EU) member states, family reunification policies remain diverse across the Europe. This paper examines whether the lack of harmonization of policies stems from persistently divergent public opinion on immigration/immigrants and/or egalitarian gender role attitudes. Using data from the European Social Survey (2002-2012), the European Value Study (1990-2008) and the Migrant Integration Policy Index database (2007 and 2010), this study examines whether changes in policies in 27 European countries are influenced by these two types of public opinion that have previously been suggested to be at the root of changes to family migration policies. The study also looks at whether changes in public opinions are reinforced by changes in policies. The results of the structural equation modeling do not give any indication that differences in family migration policies across Europe are rooted in divergent public opinions about immigration or immigrants. Only opinions about sharing the caring roles in the family are found to significantly influence family migration policies. Support for more gender egalitarian care roles are found to be related to more restrictive family migration policies. This finding supports the hypothesis of previous studies, that as gender egalitarianism increases in countries, traditional gender role norms of dependency are projected on the migrant other, manifesting in the form of restrictive family migration policies, for example, in the form of an income requirement.
Session 1A Abstracts
Deportation as a Family Matter
Carolina Sanchez Boe, Aarhus University
This proposed paper analyzes the ways in which residents and citizens re-organize their lives around the changing legal situations of foreign-national family members who have lost their legal status and have been ordered deported as a consequence of a criminal sentence. The paper draws on a lengthy experience working as a paralegal immigration lawyer, as well as on comparative ethnographic research and biographical interviews carried out in the Paris and New York metropolitan areas. In many ways, the immigration laws of both countries share a common framework that include tensions between nativist calls for more enforcement against immigrants and criminals, on the one hand, and a national self-understandings based on the authority of the human rights’ regime, on the other. In both countries, the deportation laws and bureaucratic practices faced by foreign-nationals and their families constantly evolve according to the political agendas of the moment.
The comparative perspective, however, also brings to light how there are major differences between the possible responses – whether individual tactics and strategies or collective mobilizations – of the members of mixed-status families who face immigration enforcement and the criminal justice systems in these two states. The paper specifically addresses the potential political force that these situations can foster, and compares the ways in which they are articulated in different ways in two legal settings. While one should be aware of the traps of “methodological nationalism”, the comparative perspective shows how nation-state legislation and national bureaucracies and their relationship to and control of civil society groups are, arguably, still important for the shaping of expectations to deserving, “ethical” subjects (Rose 1999, 2007), and ultimately, that they contribute to shape the possibilities of political mobilizations and subjectivities of foreign-nationals who are caught in the entanglement between immigration enforcement and criminal justice of both countries.
‘The paradox of parallel lives: immigration policy and transnational polygyny between Senegal and France’
Hélène Neveu Kringelbach, University of Oxford
In France, there is widespread public suspicion that migrants from Africa and Asia misuse marriage to bypass immigration restrictions. West African men, in particular, are suspected of marrying European women while having a wife back home. Focusing on the case of Senegalese male migrants, in this paper I argue that transnational polygynous arrangements are simultaneously produced by tightening immigration laws in Europe, where entry is contingent on marriage to a European citizen or resident, and by the moral economy of kinship in Senegal, which requires that migrants remain
abroad long enough to support their families back home. In these instances of ‘transnational polygyny’, the migrant must navigate between parallel households, where it is often the case that only one part may know of the existence of the other. Such parallel arrangements generate different degrees of agency and entitlements on the part of spouses, extended kin, and the migrants themselves. In this process, wives back home become may no longer receive the attention they feel entitled to as first wives, whereas extended families are separated spatially but reinforced economically. This paper examines broader relations of care and love within transnational families between Senegal and France to shed light on the ways in which enduring kinship practices, gender, class-based aspirations, migration and recent immigration policies intersect to shape new family forms.
“You don't know where your home is”: impacts of migration laws on Argentinean families living in the Veneto and Galicia regions
Ana Irene Rovetta Cortés, Università di Padova
Argentinean family migration to European countries, like Spain and Italy, is conditioned by a number of norms and laws (at national, regional and local levels) that makes it different from other contemporary transoceanic flows and influences the ways in which the member of these families establish and maintain their (transnational) ties.
Argentina, Spain and Italy share a history of exchanges that have been frequently defined as a migratory system. This fact, together with the ethno-national character of the citizenship laws of both European countries: 1) has facilitated the access to dual citizenship for many migrant families and, 2) at a regional and local level, has conducted to initiatives of promotion of new migration flows, which have been read as a “return migration” by the policy makers who promoted those initiatives.
This paper aims to show how the members of some Argentinean families who live in two specific regions of Italy (Veneto) and Spain (Galicia) deal with the regional “return” policies and with the nationality and immigration laws in order to organize their family lives. From a qualitative perspective, an ethnographic work that includes 52 interviews with members of these families [parents (27) and children (-15- adults and children -10-)] has been developed to inquire about the perceptions that each member has about the migration experience; taking into account possible differences in terms of social positionings (as gender and generation).
Session 1B Abstracts
The ‘pure’ relationship, sham marriages and immigration control
Helena Wray, Middlesex University
The concept of a sham marriage in immigration law is highly problematic. Some marriages are entered “with the sole aim of circumventing the rules on entry and residence” . More commonly however, a relationship may be unusual or asymmetrical when viewed through the lens of conventional social norms but one or more of the elements associated with a ‘genuine’ marriage (sexual relations, cohabitation, financial support, affection) is present. These relationships have content but may be regarded suspiciously and subjected to additional scrutiny and even refusal. The aim, so far as possible, is to neutralise the immigration incentive to enter a marriage so that only relationships which are sufficiently ‘pure’ or ‘untainted’ give rise to immigration rights.
As a result, marriages which involve immigration controls are judged against the template of a ‘genuine’ marriage i.e. one where the parties are of the appropriate age, social status, ethnicity etc. and act out their marriage in socially approved ways and the immigration system engages in ‘moral gatekeeping’ (Wray 2006), protecting the cultural and moral core of the nation.
Such gatekeeping cannot be separated from its underlying immigration function; some marriages attract more attention than others i.e. those which involve ‘undesirable’ immigrants. In this respect, the ‘sham marriage’ is just one tool in a repertoire of control measures available to states and may be used in many different ways. It follows that the role that sham marriage controls play in a system of immigration control will be a function of the importance the state in question attaches to the control of spousal migration and of the availability of other tools with which to control unwanted migration. The result may be unexpected variations in regulatory systems. This paper will examine this hypothesis through an examination of controls in four countries: US, UK, Denmark and France.
For her Protection and Benefit: the Regulation of Marriage-related Migration to the UK
Natasha Carver, University of Bristol
This paper argues that a two-tier system has evolved dividing intra-UK/EU marriages from extra-UK/EU marriages. For the former, marriage is a contract between two individuals overseen by a facilitating state. For the latter, marriage has become more of a legal status defined and controlled by an intrusive and obstructive state. I argue that this divergence in legislating regulation is steeped in an ethnicised imagining of ‘Britishness’ whereby the more noticeably ‘other’ migrants (by skin colour or religion) are perceived as a threat to the national character. The conceptualisation of women as legally “disabled” citizens (1870 Naturalisation Act) for whom a state must act as responsible patriarch, is a fundamental part of this imagining of the nation. The paper therefore
examines the social (gendered and ethnicised) assumptions and political aims embedded within the legislation.
The paper views the current juncture on marriage migration to the UK through a historical lens, examining how policy-makers have used legal measures to limit spousal entry of particular ethnic groups, and to select for entry couples whose marriage conforms to an ideal-type of marriage. Although legislative change has been the one constant on the statute board with twenty acts relating to immigration since 1962, and seven in the last ten years alone, and despite the shifts in power between Conservative and Labour governments, historical analysis of the regulation of marriage-related migration to the UK shows more ideological continuity than change. I conclude that the state has radically adapted legal provisions to reflect the dramatic changes in social attitudes towards marriage with regard to its intra-UK marriage. However, in concert with these liberalising alterations, the same state has shown an increasingly patriarchal and conservative approach to marriage between British residents and non-patrials.
Recognition of same-sex marriages and free movement of families: updates from Italy
Simone Marinai, International and EU Law University of Pisa
Last 7 October the Italian Minister of Home Affairs adopted a Circular that reaffirmed the prohibition of recording foreign same-sex marriages in the national civil-status Registrar. The Circular answers to the breaches opened by a few Italian local administrations, supported by an isolated case law, towards the recognition of same-sex marriages. The paradox is that many municipalities challenged the ministerial prohibition and accepted requests of recording such marriages. Mainly, the applicants are Italian couples who went abroad only to celebrate the marriage. However, the case shall also be of “genuine” transnational couples, i.e. couples who lived and married in another country and then move to Italy seeking recognition of the status acquired abroad. The conduct of Italian authorities appears schizophrenic if compared with the recent opening signals towards the right to family reunification of same-sex couples launched by a few lower courts and confirmed by the Italian Ministry of Home Affairs. This latter doesn’t recognize the status of spouses of the members of same-sex couples who get married abroad, but gives relevance to the familiar status that is enough for reunification. Refusal to recognize the marriages hinders cross-border movements of families: one may wonder if the infringement of the stability of the matrimonial status could be considered contrary to the right of family life under Article 8 ECHR and, in case the marriage has been contracted by EU nationals, if it could be considered contrary to Article 21 TFEU. The paper discusses the dynamics between national, European and international levels, evaluating the interplay of rules on free movement of persons, conflict-of-laws, recognition of civil status records, and focusing on the consequences of the increasing “marriage shopping” towards countries
that allow same-sex unions and that could convince also more traditional countries to change their approach to family matters.
Session 2A Abstracts
Migration brokerage in Football: A Review of the Literature
D. Toulson, Catholic University in Washington, D.C
The locus of current research on the presence of young West African footballers in Europe concerns misguided attempts at state and football specific regulation, post---migration exploitation/victimization, and underdevelopment of African football infrastructure. Such research is often dependent upon neo---colonial narratives that emphasize systematic core---periphery exchanges and economic rationalities that situate footballers and their families as un---agentic and manipulable. This paper moves beyond the limits of such compartmentalized paradigms through emphasizing the conflated social network of family, friends, players and football migration brokers that motivate and sustain the processes of migration. Young West African footballers and their families have responded to the nexus of sporting professionalization, player’s market liberalization and the dissemination of European football culture in Africa by engaging with actors
who negotiate brokerage services into the spheres of European football. I discuss preliminary findings of my research that suggests that these services, while relying on legal migration mechanisms, are often unsuccessful at securing the coveted position as a professional footballer. Yet social pressure, stigmatization and shame – rather than trafficking and or exploitation—deters youth from returning home, opting instead for performing survival activities in Europe.
Securing a “good coyote”: the negotiation of extra-legal border-crossing services on the US/Mexico Border
Gabriella Sanchez , Catholic University, Washington DC/Monash University, Melbourne
The narratives involving the facilitation of extra-legal border crossings and migrations is often contained to two dominant angles: the services and the role of the “smuggler” as violent and exploitative on the one hand, and of journeys as involving naïve and pusillanimous travelers who blindly follow orders to put themselves at risk on the other. More recent approaches to extra-legal journeys have sought to shed light on the nature of the relationships between those who travel and the facilitators of their journeys and the exercise of agency, but empirical studies detailing these processes are still scant. This presentation, drawing from ethnographic data collected among Mexican immigrants who were successful in their efforts to cross the US/Mexico border with the assistance of smuggling facilitators or coyotes, explores the agreements regulating extra-legal border
crossing services. It maps the ways services are identified, evaluated, negotiated and eventually conducted by those seeking to enter the United States/or and their families. Data reflect the complexities of the process leading to the decision to hire a specific facilitator of border crossing services, whose actions, while taking place outside of the licit realm constitute in the eyes of travelers and their families legitimate border crossing alternatives, and which rather than being defined solely along the lines of risk are perceived as increasing the likelihood of undisrupted transits and successful journeys. Special emphasis is placed on the transits involving minor children.
Indigenous Migrant Families in Spain and the United States
Victoria Stone-Cadena, The Graduate Center, CUNY
Through a comparative analysis of immigration policies in Spain and the United States, this paper will examine how international legal practices and broader social contexts differentially impact rural indigenous migrant families and households in southern highland Ecuador, a region marked by migration to each country. Based on long-term ethnographic research in Ecuador and among Cañari migrants in the New York area, I take up the guiding question of how actors involved in migration and migration control mediate the tensions between individuals, families and states. In particular my work will focus on strategies of indigenous transnational migrant families, local municipalities, and migrant brokers.
Indigenous Cañaris have long employed diversified subsistence strategies, including short-term migration to urban areas and the coast, and households have adapted to these periods of absence. However, contemporary migration practices have impacted family dynamics in distinct ways. Even as indigenous migrant households and families benefit from remittances, many still contend with prolonged absence of migrant members and discrimination in national discourse, within the local municipality and even from indigenous community members. They are often cast as the harbingers of family and community disintegration. In the countries of destination, the marginalized position of indigenous and rural people largely gets reproduced through processes of segmented assimilation, where indigenous identity renders immigrants more vulnerable to increased vigilance and exploitation due to racial profiling, linguistic, and educational barriers. While family reunification programs legitimate certain family types, the more vulnerable position of indigenous migrants makes them less likely to be able to meet qualifiers for these programs. Within these multiple intersecting social binds, migrant families struggle to preserve themselves, to reunite, while also provide support for multiple generations. Through this comparative analysis, at the international, national and local level, I explore the instrumentality of mediation between migrant families, governing bodies, and entrepreneurial intermediaries.
Session 2B Abstracts
Human Rights, Multiculturalism and Honour Crimes
Muki Gorar, Middlesex University
Currently available written material on honour crimes mainly focuses on the issues of honour killing and forced marriage. The aim of this paper is to widen the understanding of what can constitute an honour crime by investigating a variety of discriminatory and oppressive conducts that can be potentially considered and classified as honour crimes. The UK government is acting slowly to introduce measures to tackle them efficiently. Tougher laws need to be passed and law definitely needs to be coupled with education.
Honour crimes mainly occur in Middle East and South Asia . However, these practices have now, with immigration, also spread to Europe. In the West there is a tendency to perceive honour crimes as a form of sexual violence under the concept of honour and it is legitimised through tools of patriarchal mechanism. This cannot be reconciled while the violence against women in western society is perceived as a crime. Goksel argues that ‘murders committed in minority communities in the West are broadly attributed to ‘culture’ rather than to the patriarchal element within the culture’ . For that specific reason western governments were slow to intervene in their protective capacity to protect honour related violence victims as they took a dominant multicultural approach and accepted the need for tolerance of different cultures within ethnic minority communities . Distinction between what amounts to a violation of women's human right and respect for cultural traditions needs be defined clearly.
Being left behind. Strategic use of migration law in transnational family conflicts
Iris Sportel, Radboud University Nijmegen/WODC
Migration law can play an important part in the everyday life of transnational families. Drawing on interviews with spouses divorced from Dutch-Moroccan and Dutch-Egyptian mixed and migrant marriages and additional interviews with legal professionals, NGOs, social workers and embassy personnel, I will demonstrate how migration law impacts marital power relations. Through a dependent residence permit, the very right to stay in the country of settlement is linked to the marriage with the partner already living there. Consequently, migration law can be a powerful tool in transnational family conflicts. In the paper, I discuss several ways in which migration law has been used in family conflicts. First of all, in cases of involuntary abandonment in the country of origin, troublesome spouses or adolescent children had their Dutch passports or residence papers taken away while visiting the country of origin, forcing them to stay behind while the rest of the family returned to the Netherlands. Secondly, in case of divorce, some Dutch parents managed to use the easier mobility of their Dutch nationality in deciding the residence of their children or to escape
maintenance obligations, for example by leaving the country, or by taking the children to another country. Lastly, some spouses have been involuntary returned to their country of origin after marital breakdown.
The influence of migration law in power relations in transnational families and the possibilities to use migration law as a resource in family conflicts are closely connected to gender, social class and, especially, nationality. In Dutch-Egyptian and Dutch-Moroccan marriages, Dutch nationality produces a position privileged over Egyptian and Moroccan nationality with regard to mobility and rights of residence, a situation which Castles has called hierarchical citizenship (Castles 2005: p. 690)
Gender dynamics in the relationships of migrant spouses: the impact of the income requirement and dependent residency in the Netherlands.
Leen Sterckx ,Netherlands Institute for Social Research
The migration of one of them, almost inevitably leads to fundamental changes in the power balance between the spouses of a transnational couple. Whatever the balance between them prior to migration was in terms of social status, income and gender, through migration the migrant spouses become dependent on their sponsors. Most sponsors anticipate at least some of their new responsibilities regarding their spouses, yet underestimate the impact and especially the duration thereof. Equally, the migrant spouses anticipate the difficulties of getting started in a new society, but underestimate the transformation from an independent, knowledgeable adult in their country of origin to a dependent newcomer. More often than not, this leads to tensions between the spouses, especially in the case of male migrants with female sponsors for whom the new division of power means an inversion of the traditional power balance between the sexes.
The unequal power division between the spouses of a migration marriage, is enhanced by the Dutch legal requirements for family migration, especially the income requirement stipulating that the sponsor has to have a sustainable income at 100% of the social minimum and that of dependent residency, which stipulates that the spouses should live together in one house for at least five years before the migrant spouse can apply for an independent residence permit. In this paper I argue that while the Dutch government legitimizes measures to regulate and restrict spousal migration with explicit reference to the protection of women (either as sponsors or as migrants) in migration marriages (f.i. Bonjour and de Hart 2013), the policy-enhanced dependency of migrant spouses and its impact on the gender dynamics within the couple, increase the risk of marital tensions escalating into abuse, violence and marital imprisonment and migrant spouses (of both sexes) becoming victims.
Session 3A Abstracts
Fractured citizenship and broken hearts: Technologies of love and the management of sham marriages in the United Kingdom
Anne-Marie D’Aoust, Université du Québec à Montréal
This paper investigates how marriage migration management practices in the United Kingdom mobilize what I call “technologies of love”, and enable a biopolitical regulation and creation of national and European populations and spaces. I argue that the couples involved in marriage migrations should be conceived, in themselves, as bordering sites. By detailing policing practices and enforcement visits procedures by officials, I illustrate how the risk assessments made of the spouses’ bodies, material artefact, and relations are getting assessed through technologies of love. This highlights how love becomes both a target and an object of governmental calculations in marriage migration management projects done in the name of security. Through technologies of love, the regulation of migrants’ relations and bodies in the name of security become enactments of specific spaces (“United Kingdom”, “Europe”, “non-EEA”) and reflect a specific juncture in the problem of statecraft central to governmentality. I first discuss how citizenship and its associated rights have become fractured, as different modes of regulation contribute in creating different spaces of belonging for spouses wishing to reunite. The specific challenges faced by non-mobile British citizen are then addressed, and the mobilization campaign Love Letters to the Home Office is used as a concrete example of the ways in which migrants and their allies reinstate technologies of love as the same time as they are being deployed against them.
Bordering ‘Fake’ Marriages? The Everyday Practices of Control at the Consulates of Belgium, France and Italy in Casablanca
Federica Infantino, Université Libre de Bruxelles (Cevipol), Sciences Po Paris (CEE)
Based on in-depth (10 months) fieldwork research at the consulates of Belgium, France, and Italy in Casablanca, this contribution focuses on those bureaucratic practices aimed at controlling marriages that involve the emigration of a spouse. Building on the street-level implementation perspective to study migration control, the paper focuses on the uses of discretion to enforce the right to marry and to family reunification at displaced borders – consulates abroad. The paper argues that French and Belgian bureaucratic action is aimed at stemming regular but undesired migration through the notion of ‘fake’ marriages. The Italian case shows that although this is the country that receives the largest number of family reunification visa applications, it is the less concerned with the struggle against family migration. The analysis points out that such an objective is achieved through discouragement and dissuasion, since this is a human rights domain. It identifies the instruments to filter out undesired migration most notably interviews to seek ‘proofs’ that a marriage is one of
‘convenience’. The paper also shows that although this is a domain of national legislations, some convergences from below happens, as a consequence of informal sharing of the know-how to detect ‘fake’ marriages. This paper contributes to the “Migration Law as a Family Matter” research agenda from an internal perspective that focuses on the day-to-day enforcement of migration law.
‘Real’ and ‘Fake’ Relationships: Canadian Visa Officers and Competing Normative Standards in the Construction of Spousal Relationships
Vic Satzewich, McMaster University
Family and spousal reunification constitutes a central priority in Canada’s overall immigration program. To migrate to Canada as a spouse or partner of a Canadian citizen or permanent resident, applicants must demonstrate to a visa officer that their relationship is genuine and that the primary purpose of the relationship is not immigration. By law, Canadian visa officers are required to assess relationships in light of both Canadian norms and the legal, cultural and religious norms of the country or region from which an applicant applies. The legal prescription to evaluate relationships in light of multiple normative frameworks is ultimately a discretionary process. In deciding to issue a visa, visa officers must invoke various competing understandings of normality in order to socially construct relationships as ‘real’ or ‘fake’. This paper examines how visa officers work up understandings of spousal relationships as ‘real’ or ‘fake’ based on the organizational culture and division of labour within visa offices, interactions with locally engaged program assistants who triage applications, and their micro-level interactions with applicants inside the interview booth. Data for this paper is derived from a project involving field research at eleven overseas Canadian visa offices between 2010 and 2012 and which involved interviews with 220 visa officers, locally engaged staff members and senior managers of visa offices, as well as observation of interviews conducted by visa officers with applicants.
Session 3B Abstracts
The Europeanization of love. Fraudulent Family Relationships in European migration law
Betty de Hart, University of Amsterdam, Radboud University Nijmegen
Family reunification is the predominant form of migration into the European Union. Although the European Union has laid down the right to family reunification in the Family Reunification Directive (2003/86) and the Union Citizens Directive (2004/38), the tension between this right, and the Member States’ concerns with preventing its misuse, as well as protecting their sovereignty in migration law, has resulted in a growing attention for and concern about fraudulent family relationships (especially fraudulent marriages and false declarations of parenthood). Both Directives allow checks of marriages of convenience, and the guidelines to these Directives give directions on how to go about these checks. The European Commission has developed a Handbook on Marriages of Convenience with the same aim.
Although at the European and national levels, the relevance of controlling fraudulent family relationships has been widely acknowledged, what constitutes a fraudulent family relationship, what the control practices should look like, as well as the effects of these practices are highly contested. This paper will look at these issues, in examining how European norms on family life, love and ‘genuine’ family relationships are being developed and transformed at the European level, how they are implemented in national contexts and institutional practices. What are the consequences for the tensions between fundamental rights (the right to family life, the right to marry and the right to private life) on the one hand and states interests in regulating migration on the other hand?
Gender discriminatory aspects of the EU Directive on Family Reunification (2003/86/EC)
Wojciech Burek, Jagiellonian Univeristy Cracow
The concept of family reunification is well established in contemporary migration laws (both on national and international level) and as such is directly connected to the main theme of the conference. In the context of the European Union, family reunification is regulated in a very detailed way in EU Directive 2003/86/EC on the right to family reunification, and in consequences, this Directive determines national regulations and practices on family reunification in most of EU member states (without Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom).
In my paper I will argue that despite of the fact that the provisions of the Directive are formulated in neutral language, from the gender point of view, the enforcement of these substantively neutral rules may bring along, in certain situations, discrimination with respect to gender or at least negative consequences predominantly (but not exclusively) for women in both possible situations; that is, when women are actors of migration or only bearers of the consequences of male migration. In my
paper first of all I will deal with some aspects of the personal scope of family reunification regulations in the Directive, but it will only relate to the issues of who can and who cannot join their family member (sponsor) in a foreign country (i.e. unmarried minor rule, excluded forms of marriages – polygamous and forced marriages and age limits). Some procedural aspects of family reunification will follow (waiting periods, end of relationship as the cause of cessation). With regard to some of the above-mentioned issues, doubts regarding indirect, or even direct, discrimination will be raised. Others will be presented in the context of affecting women more negatively than men.
The Gendered Effects of Family Migration Law: Testing Contextual Interpretation as a Judicial Remedy
Fulvia Staiano, European University Institute
At all normative levels, family migration law can disproportionally and negatively affect immigrant women’s rights in this field. In some cases, these gendered effects are related to the normative and judicial imposition of unviable family-related models (e.g., the “good mother”, the one-breadwinner family, or a rigid distinction between productive and reproductive work). In other cases, they are due to these norms’ overlooking of the specific needs and difficulties of immigrant women, within their families and in the broader context of their host countries’ social and normative framework.
To effectively expose and correct this gender bias, in this paper I propose an alternative view of immigrant women’s right to family life, as a cluster of rights and entitlements rather than as a mono-dimensional right. As a theoretical approach, this construction is better equipped to capture the complex experiences of immigrant women in the European legal space, and to shine a light on the gendered effects generated not by individual norms but by the interaction of norms that are traditionally assigned to separated legal domains (e.g., immigration law and criminal law). As a judicial strategy, this understanding is capable of prompting a consideration by domestic and supranational courts of immigrant women not as isolated individuals, but as individuals in context. Performed in a gender-sensitive manner, such a contextual judicial interpretation, understood as the consideration of immigrant women in the broader contexts of their families, their host societies and the normative frameworks applicable to them, has the potential to neutralize the gendered effects of certain family migration norms. To illustrate these points, I will discuss significant judicial examples offered by the European Court on Human Rights, the European Court of Justice as well as from domestic jurisdictions of countries with a particularly high incidence of immigrant women (Italy and Spain).
Session 4A Abstracts
Recent UK proposals on family migration and their incompatibility with EU law
Sanna Elfving, University of Bradford
This paper addresses the impact of EU law on cross-border families in situations where an EU citizen moves to another Member State in order to pursue an economic activity. Despite EU law on free movement under which it is possible for an EU citizen to work in another Member State and enjoy certain rights and benefits under EU law, which may be also applicable to their family members, irrespective of the nationality of the latter, the United Kingdom (UK) government is currently considering welfare restrictions for EU migrants and their family members. The recent government proposals include, inter alia, preventing migrant workers from accessing certain benefits for four years after in their entry into the UK as well as prohibiting the entry of non-EU family members, unless they conform with the restrictive income for UK citizens wishing to bring foreign family members to the UK and language requirements to foreign spouses and civil partners. This paper argues although the changes to the UK family migration policy were strongly opposed by non-governmental organisations they were swiftly implemented without formal consultation and without significant concessions. However, EU law does not currently support the UK’s proposed rules on EU migration. Even though many in the UK have hailed the recent decision by the Court of Justice of European Union (CJEU) in the case of Dano v Jobcenter Leipzig as a victory to curb unwanted EU immigration, the decision does nothing more than confirm the Court’s existing stance that the right to certain welfare benefits in the host country are only available to economically active EU migrants. The paper concludes that although the UK government is free set its own policy on non-EU migration, its recent proposals concerning family migration from EU countries breach EU free movement law and would therefore require the amendment of EU Treaties.
Non-EU labour migrants’rights to “normal” family life in Finland
Jaana Palander, Tiina Vaittinen & Lena Näre, University of Tampere and University of Helsinki
This paper examines the right to family reunification of lower-paid non-EU labour migrants within the European Union, with a focus on Finland. For EU nationals the right to normal family life means the right of families to live together. This right, however, seems not to belong to third country nationals living and working within the EU. Particularly on the level of national implementation of the EU law, obstacles remain in the access to the right of family reunification. Obstacles such as high income requirement and lack of knowledge undermine the fair treatment of third-country nationals. Drawing on an analysis of EU law and policy and ethnographic research with Filipino nurses and cleaners in Finland, this paper offers a close reading of how the right of family reunification is accessible (or not) in practice. We argue that the accessibility of rights depends on wider political-
juridical-economic realities that pure legal or political analysis can account for, and that rights remain an empty promise when they are not accessible. Combining the views of a legal theorist, a sociologist and a scholar of international political economy, the paper argues for a holistic analysis of migrants’ rights. Here, rights are examined not only from the perspectives of the law and its implementation, or merely in terms of the political processes that make the law, but also through the lived experiences of the labour migrants whose rights are at stake in the political economies of present day Europe. Only through a holistic perspective, we argue, it is possible to claim justice in an era of global mobility.
Does the family matter? Analysis of the international and national legislation on family-related human rights
Luljeta Caraoshi, University of Toronto
There is not a uniform approach on the status of the family vis a vis the State. Various scholarly works refer to it as a fundamental and natural unit, crucial to the existence of the state and society. Others argue that there is nothing universal and natural in the concept of the family; it is purely a legal concept, established by law/state. The institution of family has been also subject of intense criticism, in particular by Feminists and Marxists who (initially) aimed at its abolition, considering the family as an institution that ‘re-produces’ the dominance of bourgeois class, or as the school of injustice . The proposed article analyses how the predominant philosophical approaches on the institution of family informed, shaped, or accompanied the transformation of family-related laws in the national and international level. It examines the status and the level of protection awarded to the family from the international instruments and analyses whether the national legal regimes of western countries such as Canada, Germany, UK and USA comply with the international human rights standards.
The proposed research will be part of a larger project focused on the protection of family-related human rights of undocumented immigrants, namely on the protection of the family as a unit, the right to a family life and the right to marry, as envisaged by various international human rights instruments. To understand the challenges and provide recommendations for protection of the families and family related-rights of undocumented immigrants by destination countries , it is crucial to understand the role, status and protection awarded to the institution of family as such (regardless of the immigration status of its members) by the national and international legislation.
Legalized Families in the Era of Bordered Globalization
Daphna Hacker, Tel Aviv University
In my lecture, I will present the general theoretical framework that I have developed to discuss and to understand the interrelations between families, law, globalization and borders. I call this framework bordered globalization, and at its heart stands my claim that we live in an era in which globalization and borders are two extremely important forces that interrelate in ways that affect every aspect of our lives, including the familial dimension. By taking this view I depart both from those arguing that our world is a global village in which people, capital, and ideas move with little interruption from geo-political borders and social boundaries, as well as from those arguing that borders and boundaries are so significant that globalization should be perceived as a phenomenon affecting only the mobile elite or only specific areas of activity, such as commerce or communication technology. Furthermore, I offer a typology that adds cooperative and hybrid relations between globalization and borders, to the more acknowledged antagonistic ones, to highlight the complexity of the dynamics between these two important phenomena. Finally, I will present my understating of the role of law in the era of bordered globalization in shaping familial opportunities and challenges. I will argue for the need to move from the notion of Family Law, to the notion of Families' Laws, as there are many ways of practicing family life and many branches of law that shape, and are shaped, by these different ways, including immigration law, and private and public international law. As I will briefly demonstrate, these families' laws are constructed by, and contribute to, the interplay between borders and globalization in fascinating and dynamic ways.
Session 4B Abstracts
Family Migration as a Corporate Affair: EU Labour migration law & Corporate Dual Career Policies
Tesseltje de Lange, University of Amsterdam
This paper combines a study of the legal regulation of family members’ access to the labour markets in EU member states based on EU law such as the Blue Card Directive 2009/50/EU and the recent Intracorporate Transfer Directive 2014/66/EU, with a study of corporate human resource policies for migrating families. The recruited migrant worker is the one receiving all the attention in the migration process; family might join or follow later on. Some employers assist the trailing spouse with the practical aspects of finding a job. In human resource literature this assistance is referred to as “Dual Career Policies”, a corporate human resource policy providing not just the recruited migrant workers assistance, but also his or her spouse. This paper deals with these issues and how employers mediate tensions between the worker, his or her families and the state. It will answer questions such as how is the family members’ access to the receiving countries’ labour market facilitated in migration law, why is this done and what role do employers have in mediating this access? Even if migration law facilitates labour market access of a spouse, this doesn’t mean no legal or practical barriers remain. How and why and to what effect do employers deal with these other barriers? Likely they develop Dual Career Policies for economic reasons: if the trailing spouse isn’t facilitated in finding a suitable job, the family may choose to commute, split up, or call off migrating all together. All these outcomes have (financial) impact on the employer, but also impact on the state’s policy goals. This creates a drive for employers to make state regulation of labour market access and family migration of their labour migrants a corporate affair.
Family Migration as an Economic Matter
Eleonore Kofman, Middlesex University
Traditionally family migration was conceptualised as a form of migration derived from normative principles rather than economic criteria. In the past decade, however family migration in a number of Northern European states, and in particular Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway and the UK, has been subjected to more rigorous economic criteria and higher levels of financial resources, such as minimum income, thus demonstrating their economic independence and self responsibility. Such economic demands are likely to be harder to fulfil for sponsors with a weaker labour market position, such as young people, women, certain ethnic minorities, the less skilled, and in states such as the UK with pronounced regional inequalities, those living outside of the capital.
In addition to the disproportionate effect amongst the categories cited above, the restrictive criteria
as may result in complex outcomes arising from the intersection of social divisions and the life cycle. Thus amongst young people, it may be students who are not earning or take out a period of time before entering the labour market, who are hard hit even though they may have reasonable future economic prospects. Ethnic minorities, traditionally targeted by family migration policies, are not the only group affected by these measures; those from wealthy countries and most able to benefit from global mobility to travel, study and work, also face barriers, as evidence from the UK indicates . Women are also likely to be less able to sponsor spouses and children due to the substantial gender pay gap, their greater tendency to work part time and with non-standard contracts and their caring responsibilities.
The paper examines the evidence for the unequal impact of the imposition of an economic rationality on family migration and considers the strategies pursued by those affected by such regulations.
X-Family: Rhizomatic mutations and bio-political modalities within the South Asia/Abu Dhabi labour migration dispositif
Mike Cowen, University of Manchester
Research on South Asian low-income worker ‘migration’ to the Gulf has increased exponentially in recent years spurred on through mega international projects such as the Qatar’s hosting of the FIFA World Cup and the UAE’s Louvre and Guggenheim projects on Saadiyat Island. The international press, researchers, labour and union organisations, and activists in particular are using these events to bring about reforms to the infamous Kafala labour system. Nevertheless, the paradigms that most of these players adopt leaves them stuck in the familiarity of the human rights based or labour process conversations - resulting perhaps in uninspiring policy changes since 2006. One area that has not received much critical attention is that of the low-income migrant family. This paper’s primary aim is the problematisation of the family within the South Asian-Abu Dhabi labour migration dispositif - that is to say - exploring the variability of how is family discursively, materially and in practice deployed throughout the migration machine. To assist the search for alternative perspectives this paper draws upon various excursions from the French intellectual Michel Foucault (1926-1984) into the family, and brings this conceptual framing of family into contact with another concept from Deleuze and Guattari (1987) that of the rhizome.
Session 4C Abstracts
From marriage to adoption. A Cape Verdean reflection on kin categories, international travel and migration law
Heike Drotbohm, University of Freiburg
This paper reflects on the intersection between cross-border family networks on the one hand and family-based immigration policies on the other. Basing my account on anthropological fieldwork in Cape Verde, Portugal and Boston, I will concentrate on a conflict over the notion of ‘the child’s best interest’ in the context of an (aspired) family reunification. In this case study several actors, such as a Cape Verdean state institution for child and youth protection as well as the members of a creole transnational family, who live in different continents, are struggling with the question, how a certain child’s interest can be assured. It is my aim to show that the question of „what is a family“ is answered differently from different perspectives. This paper problematizes the fact that the eligibility to cross-border mobility is organized along certain kin categories, which can collide with the self-perception of migrants and their relatives. Both, the conflictive administrative decisions over the access to international mobility, which supposedly reflect several actors’ interests, as well as kin practices, which react to and are adapted according to these normative frameworks, will be put into the centre of this argument.
Roma migrant children in Spain: Between the politics of benevolence and the normalization of violence
Ioana Vrăbiescu, Centre for Romani Studies, National School of Political Science and Public Administration
This paper engages with the current debate on Roma migrant children and the political practices of child protection that affect immigrant Roma families. Taking Metropolitan Area of Barcelona (Spain) as a case-study, the paper discusses the separation of Roma children from their parents and the implementation of “voluntary return” programs for marginalized Roma families from Romania.
When social workers approach migrant Romani families, “the children disappear”, a clerk confessed. According to official data, a high percentage of Roma migrant children are taken into state custody under the gloss of child protection. The excessive zeal and “benevolent politics” toward the migrant Romani families are considered to be grounded on the best interest of the child. Intimidated parents, bureaucrats shielded by restrictive laws and police units (OAM, Mossos d’Esquadra) always suspecting trafficked or neglected Roma children, render an environment where state’s abuse is tolerated. Using child protection law, the policy implemented by regional administration responsible for minors’ wellbeing (DGAIA) becomes an instrument for the state’s agents to contain the poor, the
migrants, the Roma.
By putting above the rights of children, civil servants and social activists render the Romani migrants, and especially women, in a paradoxical situation of (im-)mobility. Without giving Roma families an alternative – work, housing, health or education access – the state is developing a pay-to-go scheme. Under this “voluntary return” program, the clerks are working with the families towards reunification with the children and a subsequent departure to their homeland.
The paper seeks to uncover, problematize and explain the relation between the individual-based “voluntary return” programs and the laws that protect children considered in risk situation. The focus, more specifically, lies within the allegedly humane logic and benevolent practices of state institutions and civil-society organizations that in fact reflect structural oppression and exclusionary practices against Roma as a group.
‘Transformative Crossings: Protecting the Family Relationship Across Borders, a UK Perspective on International Surrogacy.’ Rita D’Alton-Harrison, Royal Holloway, University of London
[email protected] Theis J, remarked in the case of A v P (Surrogacy: Parental Order: Death of Applicant) [2012] EWHC 1738 (Fam), [2012] 2 FLR 1451 that “the primary aim of s.54 of the HFEA 2008 is to allow an order to be made which has a transformative effect on the legal relationship between the child and the applicants”. S.54 of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 (“the HFEA”) allows those couples whose children are born as a result of a surrogacy arrangement to apply for a parental order. Such an order recognises their status as the legal parents. In the case of international surrogacy agreements the couple must first apply for immigration clearance for the child to enter the UK before a parental order application can be made under s.54. This paper will examine the extent to which the rise in international surrogacy and the subsequent migration of the resulting child in to the UK has had a transformative effect on s.54 of the HFEA 2008 through UK case law, in particular through the use of statutory interpretation, judicial discretion and consideration of international law. It will be argued that this transformation has been driven by a reverse legal paternalism that has its roots in ‘pro-familialism’ (policy that has a pro family outlook).2 This has lead to the relaxation or circumvention of s.54 to enable, inter alia, the retrospective authorisation of otherwise unreasonable payments to surrogacy agencies,3 the redefinition of the term ‘applicants’4 and the extension of the mandatory six month time period to make an application for a parental
1 A v P (Surrogacy: Parental Order: Death of Applicant) [2012] EWHC 1738 (Fam), [2012] 2 FLR 145, [24] 2 For further discussion see A Diduck and K O’Donovan, ‘Feminism and Families: Plus Ca Change? In A Diduck and K O’Donovan (eds), Feminist Perspectives on Family Law (Routledge-Cavendish, 2006), 2. 3 Re P-M (Parental Order: Payments to Surrogacy Agency) [2013] EWHC 2328 4 supra n.1
order.5 This transformative effect can also be seen in other jurisdictions such as France and Israel and will be explored further in the paper.
5 Re X (A Child) (Surrogacy: Time Limit) [2014] EWHC 3135 (fam)