This article explores and compares the legal fi-ameworks and regulatory practices of the use of DNA analysis for family reunification in Austria, Finland, and Germany. Based on a document analysis, we first provide an overview of the international legislation for family reunification and analyse the situation in the European Union. We show that the three countries have significantly different legislative practices in place to regulate parental testing in immigration contexts and to verify family relations. We oudihe the key societal and political implications that are associated with these country specific forms of legislation and regulatory practices and highlight the ambivalent role of DNA analysis in family reunification.
DNA profiling is used to verify the claimed parentage of immigrants who apply for family reunification in at least 20 industrialised countries. Finland was one of the pioneers in the adoption of the technology. While laboratory practices are relatively similar, there are considerable differences between countries in the ways DNA profiling is used in decision-making. In this article, DNA testing is studied in the context of the Finnish migration regime in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Analysis of policy documents and interviews with immigration experts demonstrate the entwining and modification of two policy rationales: securing human rights and combating fraud.
The right to family has been confirmed by myriad human rights covenants and it forms an acknowledged part of migration policies. Yet family reunification has become an increasingly contested issue, something reflected in a recent restrictive turn in migration policies throughout Europe. Policy reforms speak of a growing polarity between, on the one hand, adherence to the 'best interest of the child' and family life, and on the other, suspicion of fraud. This article examines these tensions via exploration of family reunification procedures in Finland, particularly applications sponsored by minors, thereby drawing attention to the notion of 'the anchor child'. Drawing on decisions by the Administrative Court of Helsinki as well as interviews with experts and the people concerned, the writers discuss how these polarities are managed in practice, centring their analysis on a quest for truth that deploys various methods, particularly DNA analysis and oral hearings. Ultimately the article highlights an intrinsic paradox in family reunification policies that incorporates the aspiration to produce facts amounting to 'immutable mobiles' (Latour, Bruno. 1986. 'Visualization and cognition: Thinking with the eyes and hands.' Knowledge and Society 6 (6): 1-40.) and the evident weight of contingent temporalities.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.