‘We became British aliens’: Kindertransport refugees narrating the discovery of their parents’ fates

Abstract

View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 1 View citing articles 'We became British aliens': Kindertransport refugees narrating the discovery of their parents' fates

“All emigrants are up to the physical, mental, and moral standards required”: A tale of two child rescue schemes

“…The image of the Kindertransport that has survived in British public memory (i.e. the notion that the Jewish child refugees were welcomed) is selective and flawed, and instead it could be argued that the Kindertransport was marked by marginalization, refused entry, and exclusion, with few exceptions (Kushner & Knox, 2012; McDonald, 2018). In essence, both the Kindertransport and British Home Child initiatives were permeated by paternalistic, classist and discriminatory attitudes.…”

“…In essence, both the Kindertransport and British Home Child initiatives were permeated by paternalistic, classist and discriminatory attitudes. Moreover, in both schemes the ‘rescued' migrant child was generally seen as synonymous with “less worthy,” and children perceived as in poor health or mentally deficient were excluded (Sims‐Schouten et al, 2019; Weindling, 2020; Kushner & Knox, 2012; McDonald, 2018).…”

“…The current section provides an overview of the Canadian BHS and Kindertransport, both in terms of commonalities and differences. Presented as “child rescue schemes,” the realities of the children's experiences often diverged from the idealized ways in which welfare organizations presented life in the “promised land,” including the dependence on child labor to cover the costs of emigration (Craig‐Norton, 2014; McDonald, 2018; Soares, 2016). The latter was true for both the BHS and Kindertransport scheme.…”

“…Similar to the BHS, the Kindertransport scheme was permeated by paternalistic, classist, and discriminatory attitudes. For example, the expectation of domestic help from teenage girls reflected societal attitudes about refugees, status, and gender, and labor was treated as a fair recompense for rescue—the natural lot of charity cases who had been rescued by the good graces of British people (Craig‐Norton, 2014; McDonald, 2018). Moreover, domestic work and nursing were effectively the only routes to a British visa for Jewish young women and twice as many Jewish refugees arrived in Britain via this route than through the Kindertransport.…”

“…As with the BHS, there is evidence that the Jewish migrant child was often seen as synonymous with the “less worthy,” and children perceived as in poor health or mentally deficient were excluded (Weindling, 2020; Kushner & Knox, 2012; McDonald, 2018). Kushner and Knox (2012) argue that the image of the Kindertransport that has survived in British public memory (i.e., the notion that the Jewish child refugees were welcomed) is selective and flawed, and instead the Kindertransport was marked by marginalization, refused entry, and exclusion (see also McDonald, 2018). Indeed, as with the children included in the BHS, it would be wrong to imply that all Kindertransport children experienced growing empowerment and successfully negotiated the transition from dependence to autonomy.…”