Scales of grievability: on moving children and the geopolitics of precariousness

Abstract

This article investigates legal performativities of grievability in contemporary child migration and argues for a scalar approach to analyse and understand the cultural politics underpinning current debates on the ‘moving’ child. I turn to two court cases in the Dutch context that involve alleged child trafficking in international adoption on the one hand and the threat of deportation in child asylum on the other. These two forms of child migration have rarely been investigated in tandem although both concern the transnational movement of children from the global South to the wealthy North. By focusing on the legal concept of ‘the right to family life’ and ‘the best interest of the child’ I point to the performativity of law and the ways in which cultural constructions of the child, childhood, kin and humanitarianism intervene in our work of justification. My contention is that placing these ‘different-but-same bodies’ within a scalar dimension – one that takes into account spatio-temporal conditions of grievability – enables us to understand modern investments in child-bodies and the complexities of justice in globalization.

Escalas de aflicción: sobre los niños en movimiento y la geopolítica de la precariedad

En este artículo se investiga la performatividad (performativities) de la aflicción (grievability) legal en la migración infantil contemporánea y aboga por un enfoque en escala para analizar y comprender las políticas culturales que sustentan los debates actuales sobre el niño ‘en movimiento’. El estudio apunta a dos casos judiciales en el contexto holandés que, por un lado, involucran la presunta trata de niños en adopción internacional y, por otro, la amenaza de la deportación en caso de estar el niño en asilo. Estas dos formas de migración infantil rara vez se han investigado conjuntamente, aunque ambas se refieren a la circulación transnacional de los niños desde el sur global hacia el norte rico. Al centrarse en el concepto legal del ‘derecho a la vida familiar’ y ‘el mejor interés para el niño’, se señala la performatividad de la ley y las formas en que las construcciones culturales del niño, la infancia, los familiares, y el humanitarismo intervienen en nuestro trabajo de justificación. Mi argumento es que la colocación de estos ‘diferentes-pero-iguales’ cuerpos dentro de una dimensión en escala—una que toma en cuenta las condiciones espacio-temporales de aflicción—permite entender las inversiones modernas en cuerpos de niños y las complejidades de la justicia en la globalización.

Echelles de grievabilité: migration d'enfants et géopolitiques de la précarité

Cet article explore les performativités légales de griévabilité en ce qui concerne la migration contemporaine de l'enfant et plaide pour une approche scalaire afin d'analyser et de comprendre les politiques culturelles à l'œuvre dans les débats actuels au sujet de l'enfant « migrant ». Je me réfère à deux procès dans le contexte néerlandais qui impliquent l'allégation de trafic d'enfant dans l'adoption internationale d'une part et la menace de déportation dans un asile pour enfant d'autre part. Ces deux formes de migration d'enfant ont rarement été explorées en tandem bien que toutes les deux aient un rapport avec le mouvement transnational des enfants de l'hémisphère sud vers le nord opulent. En mettant l'accent sur le concept légal « du droit à la vie de famille » et « de l'intérêt supérieur de l'enfant », j'indique que la performativité du droit et les différentes manières dont les constructions culturelles de l'enfant, l'enfance, la parenté et l'humanitarisme interviennent dans notre travail de justification. Mon affirmation est que placer ces « corps différents-mais-identiques » dans une dimension scalaire – laquelle prend en compte les conditions spatio-temporelles de grievabilité – nous permet de comprendre les engagements modernes dans les corps d'enfants et les complexités de la justice dans la mondialisation.

Keywords::

• child migration
• international adoption
• geographies of childhood
• cultural study of law
• grievability and precariousness

Keywords::

• migration d'enfants
• adoption internationale
• géographies de l'enfance
• étude culturelle du droit
• grievabilité et précarité

Palabras claves::

• migración infantile
• adopción internacional
• geografías de la infancia
• estudio cultural de la ley
• aflicción y precariedad

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to the members of the panel ‘Circulation of Bodies: Juxtaposing Migration and Adoption’ for a productive session at the 2012 meeting of the American Anthropological Association. I would also like to thank the Anthropology Department Seminars at the University of Sydney where I first presented this paper and where I received valuable commentary. Finally, I especially thank Jessaca Leinaweaver, Karen Dubinsky, Marc de Leeuw, Terry Woronov and the anonymous referees for their much valued critical comments on a previous version.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

^1. The issue of trafficking mostly concern practices coined as ‘child laundering’: the (illegal) buying of children and the bureaucratic processes through which they become legally adoptable in adoption has been raised (Leifsen, 2008; Smolin, 2006). Studies of the rights of trafficked children with respect to legal status and citizenship have been scarce (with the exception of Bhabha, 2004; O'Connell Davidson, 2011).

^2. See Butler (2004, p. xiv–xv) and Fassin (2007) for a discussion on the concept of ‘grievability.’

^3. The name ‘Rahul’ is a pseudonym given by the Dutch television program Netwerk which broadcasted the story about the court case in June 2010. See also Gandsman, 2009 for a similar case in Argentina.

^4. This special permit for unaccompanied minors (called AMV permit) has been abolished since June 1, 2013, which signals a significant turn in the policies regarding the treatment of child migrants.

^5. See also Empez Vidal (2012) who argues that this neglect has to be established for children to obtain a resident permit.

^6. This article states that: (1) Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence and that (2) There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

^7. Ironically, the reason that his ‘family life’ with his foster parents would be impeded was not allowed to be a ground for advocacy.

^8. This article states that: (1) In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration, and that (2) States Parties undertake to ensure the child such protection and care as is necessary for his or her well-being, taking into account the rights and duties of his or her parents, legal guardians, or other individuals legally responsible for him or her, and, to this end, shall take all appropriate legislative and administrative measures, and that (3) States Parties shall ensure that the institutions, services and facilities responsible for the care or protection of children shall conform with the standards established by competent authorities, particularly in the areas of safety, health, in the number and suitability of their staff, as well as competent supervision.

^9. See the so-called ‘Baby Donna’ case and the ‘Baby Jayden’ case in Hoksbergen (2011, pp. 445–448).

^10. This also mirrors the outcome of the highly profiled ‘baby Veronica’ case in the US, see ‘Justices Say Law Doesn't Require Child to Be Returned to Her Indian Father’, New York Times, 25 June 2013, Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/us/justices-order-return-of-indian-child-to-adoptive-parents.html?_r = 0

^11. It helps that he is still a child which – in a spatial sense – also means that he is usually accompanied by his parents. Once he's on his own, he might still have to prove his Dutchness as people wouldn't assume he is Dutch without knowing he is adopted or hearing him speak much like Mauro. But the performance is less expected once people obtain the knowledge that he is adopted.

^12. The news about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann from a hotel in Portugal in 2007 led to an enormous media frenzy both in and outside the UK. See Greer, Ferrell, and Jewkes (2008) for an account of the media events around Madeleine.

^13. The L'Arche de Zoé case is also a good illustration of an attempt to ‘rescue orphans’ from deprived places. In 2007, this charity group, which advocates for awareness about the conflict in Darfur and its effect on its children reached extensive media coverage with the arrest of their members accused of abducting 103 African children. See also Mezmur, 2008.

Additional information

Funding

This research was funded by the Australian Research Council for Early Career Researchers (DECRA, project number DE140100348) and an internal Seed Grant from the University of Western Sydney (20191.80816).