Introduction

Abstract

Family migration" and "integration" are intimately related concepts in policy discourses in Europe today. Assumptions about the relation between "family migration" and "integration" play a crucial role in shaping policies. This special issue aims to examine the axis between "family migration," "policy," and "integration," both from a policy perspective, and from the perspective of individuals engaged in family migration. In this introduction, we first discuss scholarly work on family migration policies in Europe, which analyzes how policies and discourses on family migration and integration participate in the politics of belonging. Second, we explore the fragmented and incomplete insights offered by existing research about the actual relation between family migration and migrant integration.

Engendering the fertility-migration nexus: The role of women's migratory patterns in the analysis of fertility after migration

“…Governments often provide legal immigration channels for close family members of immigrants, as family migration is generally considered an effective mechanism for integration (Forbes Martin 2004;Bonjour and Kraler 2014). Flows of migrants for the purposes of family reunion increased in western countries starting in the second half of the 1970s, when labor migration became increasingly constrained.…”

“…However, if they restrict themselves to the role of dependent and full-time caregiver in the destination country, they are at risk of isolation and of a low degree of integration (Bonjour and Kraler 2014;Choi, Cheung, and Cheung 2012;Gijsberts 2004). Indeed, some family migrants decide to participate in the labor market, taking on the dual role of family caregiver and paid worker.…”

“…They are less exposed to problems related to balancing the demands of work and family. Furthermore, studies have shown that family migrants tend to have higher levels of isolation stemming from self-segregation within their community (Smith 2011;Merali 2008;Bonjour and Kraler 2014) and low rates of participation in the job market (Read 2004;Morrison, Schiff, and Sjöblom 2008). These conditions may favor the higher levels of fertility among these migrants which were observed in this study.…”

A ‘civic turn’ in Scandinavian family migration policies? Comparing Denmark, Norway and Sweden

“…Family migration policies differ from other migration policies because they concern not only, in the words of Laura Block, “outsiders knocking at a state’s doors and requesting entry” but also the “moral claims of insiders,” people living within state borders who ask to be united with their families (Block, 2012, p. 37; cf. Bonjour & Kraler 2015, p. 1412). Family reunification policies therefore form part of national ‘membership conditionality structures’ (Baldi & Goodman, 2015), often linked to the further ‘gates’ of permanent residence or citizenship, since the legal status of the resident sponsor required for family entry, such as permanent residence or citizenship, is dependent on meeting requirements conditioning that status.…”

“…In Denmark, individuals with temporary asylum status must now wait three years for family reunification – a new restriction introduced in the wake of the European refugee crisis by the center-right government with support from most parties in Parliament – including both the populist Danish People’s Party and the Social Democrats. Widely condemned by jurists and NGOs as in possible breach of international law protecting the right to family life, this initiative is the last in a series of restrictions in this important, but less well researched area of immigration policy (Bonjour & Kraler, 2015; cf. Bailey & Boyle, 2004; Kofman, 2004).…”