Click the star to add/remove an item to/from your individual schedule.
You need to be logged in to avail of this functionality.
Log in
- Convenors:
-
Paweł Lewicki
(University of Pittsburgh)
Karolina Follis (Lancaster University)
Send message to Convenors
- Chair:
-
Iris Sportel
(Radboud University Nijmegen)
- Format:
- Panel
- Location:
- Peter Froggatt Centre (PFC), 03/017
- Sessions:
- Thursday 28 July, -
Time zone: Europe/London
Short Abstract:
This panel seeks anthropological contributions to research on migrant and refugee health care and access welfare protection at and within the increasingly securitized borders of the European Union
Long Abstract:
Migration both within the European Union (EU) and into the EU often challenges the normal functioning of state social welfare and health care provisions. While inside of the EU border controls diminish and people move predominantly from the East to the West, there is a growing tendency to tighten and securitize border control on the outer EU borders and establish more complex bordering mechanisms within the EU. This renders the access to rights for EU citizens and to EU territory for people on the move from third countries more difficult. Nevertheless, over the past three decades European societies have become more diverse. Hand in hand with new systems of border and migration control come new developments in the recognition of rights and access to different forms of support, such as health care. In this panel we explore the intersections of border, health and welfare systems in order to delineate power mechanisms that enable the differentiation between those deemed worthy of support by the state, and those left in gray zones without access to protection of their health and welfare by the state. A recently completed Wellcome Trust-funded interdisciplinary project Doctors within Borders has initiated the process of mapping research in this area. With this panel we seek to invite anthropological contributions on health, welfare and movement across borders in conditions of border securitization.
Accepted papers:
Session 1 Thursday 28 July, 2022, -Paper short abstract:
With a special focus on the situation of the so called EU2 migrants from Rumania and Bulgaria, this paper contribution looks at the interplay of humanitarian health care and state control mechanisms in the city of Frankfurt am Main.
Paper long abstract:
[draft] There is a comparably broad and networked humanitarian health care landscape in Frankfurt am Main available for precarized persons without health insurance or without access to the health care system. With a special focus on the situation of the so called EU2 migrants from Rumania and Bulgaria, this paper contribution looks at the interplay of humanitarian health care and state control mechanisms at an urban scale. Based on 16 interviews with medical personnel, social workers and administrative officers in Frankfurt am Main, Germany, I aim to analyze the de-/bordering effects of diverging beliefs which become apparent in their accounts and approaches. These beliefs, existing in and even within different NGOs and humanitarian medical offices, like the alignment to administrative and workfare logics, the objective of long-term formalization of the right for healthcare, and the avoidance of grey zones on the one hand, and the preferences for unbureaucratical direct care and the deliberate creation of grey zones on the other hand, profoundly shape the situation and trajectory of the patient|migrant.
Paper short abstract:
Through an ethnographic lens, this chapter exposes and debates the inherent racism that tints the welfare system in Spain, which contributes to foster the legal and social exclusion and welfare dependency of asylum seekers, even through allegedly ‘integrative’ policies, such as asylum reception.
Paper long abstract:
Despite most states defining boundaries to welfare along the lines of citizenship, the extension of at least some of this protection to migrants has rarely been challenged and is considered to be a basic feature of any welfare state. In spite of this, immigration has long been placed at the centre of exclusionary debates on welfare. Xenophobic approaches to social protection have contended that the welfare state is put at risk by higher numbers of immigrants, who have been construed as a ‘burden’, rather than as contributors. These discourses rely on hierarchical classifications of humans and citizens to establish a basic distinction between the ‘deserving’ and the ‘underserving’ across gendered, racialised and class lines. This is ultimately reflected in the reduction of the welfare services for migrants across Europe, reinforced by the penetration of extreme right discourses into mainstream politics, processes of criminalisation of migration, and the commodification of migrant workers. Grounded on an ethnographic study of the asylum reception system in Spain, this chapter exposes and debates the inherent racism that tints the welfare system in Spain, which contributes to foster the legal and social exclusion and welfare dependency of asylum seekers, even through allegedly ‘integrative’ policies, such as the asylum reception programme.
Paper short abstract:
This paper discusses an interplay of biopolitical and necropolitical dynamics in legal grey zones stipulated by EU regime that enables freedom of movement within the EU (Schengen regime and EU citizenship) but does not assure EU wide access to health care and social welfare systems.
Paper long abstract:
In this paper I discuss the interplay of biopolitical and necropolitical dynamics in legal grey zones stipulated by EU regime. EU enables freedom of movement but does not assure EU wide access to health care and social welfare – particularly not for vulnerable population, such as HIV positive migrants from Poland and the Baltic States in Berlin. Neither the EU nor the member-states seem to be willing to address needs of such populations in systematic way, it is often local authorities that are challenged with vulnerable EU migrants. Needs of these migrants are met indirectly, not through systemic policy solutions, but through development of policies based on “problems” of vulnerable people: resilience policies that reflect the principle of public health to protect the majority of the society from health treats through prevention and through humanitarian care for vulnerable populations. In order to depict the situation of these EU migrants, I will involve in discussions on resilience policy in security and urban governance policies that tackles issues and problems of people I studied - those who are not deemed as an enemy or the Other, but someone vulnerable that are potentially a threat to the healthy part of the society. Concepts from resilience policies enable to bring into the light the logic of exclusion in bureaucratic, normal operation of the state, and producing so called death worlds. Simultaneously, they enable to grasp the issues of populations that are not covered by life-fostering biopolitics and that cannot be beneficiaries of these policies.
Paper short abstract:
This paper will analyse conflicts and tensions between Dutch child protection and migration authorities in dealing with children and families without valid legal residence. How do these different state actors get into conflict and how do they decide which children are deserving of protection?
Paper long abstract:
In 2018, the intended deportation of two Armenian children who had been in the Netherlands for over a decade but never managed to gain legal residence led to wide-spread protests in the Netherlands. The children were supposed to be deported to Armenia, but their mother -who had been deported earlier- seemed neither able nor willing to take care of them due to mental health issues. The situation led to conflicts between different state actors when migration authorities and child protection authorities disagreed on what should happen to the children: granting them a residence permit so they could stay in their foster family in the Netherlands, or deporting them to Armenia.
The case of these Armenian children escalated existing tensions between child protection and migration authorities in dealing with children and families without valid legal residence. In this paper, we will analyse where and how these tensions arise and how the state actors involved decide on which children and families are deserving of protection. The paper will focus on situations when migration authorities and child protection authorities get into conflict, for example when families with a Dutch child protection order are forced to return to their country of origin, or when transnational family members of unaccompanied minor refugees are suspected of being abusive. The paper is based on interviews with child protection and migration authorities, judges, and lawyers as well as an analysis of case law.
Paper short abstract:
This paper will examine the negotiation of boundaries in the home between the au pairs and their host families. These include boundaries in the context of space, time, sociocultural practices, and behaviours.
Paper long abstract:
This paper will focus on the positionality of the au pair’s designated private space in relation to the entire house. I argue that it is difficult to identify boundaries in the home until a boundary is breached for both au pairs and their host family. An unfolding of spatial and personal boundaries becomes evident through rupture. How these ruptures are resolved are key to continuing a successful working relationship.
How are boundaries negotiated and who can set them? For some host families it is through a detailed written contact and written guidelines for au pairs to follow , or it is expressed verbally through subtle or non-subtle indications regarding their positionality in the home; for others it is through the material objects placed in the au pairs bedrooms which mark a separation or difference from other rooms and can be an indication that their presence in other spaces in the home is not welcomed Some host families may not intend on upsetting the au pair, they may do it as a gesture of respect for the au pair’s private time. For the au pair it can feel like they have received the “hint” that they are not welcome to participate in family activities nor the freedom to use the family kitchen or tv. Au pairs, on the other hand, have less ability to set boundaries within the home. They may resort to leaving the home to ensure they get ‘time off’ from family responsibilities. For some host families and au pairs, the concept of boundaries is not easily defined, or the acknowledgment of their own boundaries are not understood until they have been breached. The ability to negotiate these ruptures by re-drawing a boundary is key to a successful working relationship.