Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Contested Meaning of Care in Migration Law

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Family Life in an Age of Migration and Mobility

Part of the book series: Migration, Diasporas and Citizenship ((MDC))

Abstract

This chapter discusses the changing role that care work performed in private homes has played, and continues to play, in migration law in the Netherlands and at the European Union (EU) level. It does this by reviewing case law of the European Court of Justice (CJEU) and of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) against the background of the Dutch case. After discussing an essay by Wendy Brown on the role of the state in currently changing gender orders, the chapter ends by questioning to what degree the tensions, contradictions and confusion regarding the value and nature of care work performed in the home, manifest in migration law, might open space for a feminist response to increasing state control over women’s lives.

This chapter was previously published as an article in Ragions pratica, No. 41, December 2013, pp. 451–470. All the necessary permissions have been received for reprint here.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    This applies to both legally and illegally resident women, but in different ways.

  2. 2.

    ILO Domestic Workers Convention, 2011, n. 189.

  3. 3.

    Kamerstukken II 23684, n. 2, 1993/94.

  4. 4.

    Kamerstukken II 32175, n. 1, 2009/10.

  5. 5.

    Kamerstukken II 32175, n. 21, 2011/12.

  6. 6.

    CJEU, C-109/01, Secretary State for the Home Department v Akrich, 23 September 2003. See also Chalmers 2010: 470.

  7. 7.

    EU Citizens Directive 2004/38/EC, Art. 3 (1) (emphasis included).

  8. 8.

    CJEU, C-127/08, Metock v Minister for Equality, Justice and Law Reform, July 25 2008, par. 60 and 83. See also Chalmers 2010: 470–1; Currie 2012.

  9. 9.

    CJEU, C-291/05, Minister voor Vreemdelingenzaken en Integratie v Eind, 11 December 2007.

  10. 10.

    CJEU, C-60/00, Mary Carpenter v SSHD, 11 July 2002. See also Toner 2003.

  11. 11.

    CJEU, C-413/99, Baumbast and R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, 17 September 2002.

  12. 12.

    CJEU, C-480/08, Teixeira v London Borough of Lambeth, 23 February 2010.

  13. 13.

    CJEU, C-200/02, Zhu and Chen v Secretary of State for the Home Department 19 October 2004. See also Hofstotter 2005.

  14. 14.

    CJEU, C-34/09, Zambrano v Office national de l’emploi, 8 March 2011.

  15. 15.

    CJEU, C-256/11, Murat Dereci and Others v Bundesministerium für Inneres, 15 November 2011; see also Shuibhne 2012.

  16. 16.

    CJEU, C-59/85, State of Netherlands v Ann Florence Reed, 17 April 1986.

  17. 17.

    CJEU, C-40/11, Yoshikazu Iida v Stadt Ulm, 12 November 2012.

  18. 18.

    The first of these cases concerned irregular migrants working as domestic workers for their extended family. The second concerned a mentally handicapped Dutchman coerced into doing household chores, among other things, for a neighbour who had abused his friendship. The third concerned a woman forced, by her ex-partner, into smuggling cocaine.

  19. 19.

    ECtHR, Siliadin v France, n. 73316/01, 27 July 2005.

  20. 20.

    Ibidem par. 44.

  21. 21.

    ECtHR, Osman v Denmark, n. 38058/09, 14 September 2011.

  22. 22.

    Ibidem par. 64.

  23. 23.

    Compare the ECJ’s judgement in the Carpenter case (C-60/00), in which article 8 of the European Charter of Human Rights (the right to respect for family life) plays a key role, with the later judgements in the Chen case (C-200/02) and Baumbast case (C-413/99), for example, in which no such reference is made to this article. See also Hofstotter 2005.

  24. 24.

    Concerning domestic workers in regularization programs, see: http://fra.europa.eu/fraWebsite/attachments/FRA-report-domestic-workers-2011_EN.pdf, 187.

  25. 25.

    CJEU, C-294/06, Payir, Akyuz and Ozturk v Secretary of State, 24 January 2008.

  26. 26.

    European Commission, C(2013) 778, Recommendation. Investing in children: breaking the cycle of disadvantage.

  27. 27.

    Ibidem par. 5 preambule.

  28. 28.

    Ibidem 9

  29. 29.

    Ibidem: 8–9.

  30. 30.

    Ibidem: 6.

  31. 31.

    Eerste Kamer 2010/2011, n. 32051 A.

References

  • Barea, M., & Cesana, C. (2003). La Protection Sociale en Europe. Maastricht: Institute Européen d’Administration Publique.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berlin, I. (1995). Liberty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, W. (1995). States of injury: Power and freedom in late modernity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, W. (2000). Suffering rights as paradoxes. Constellations, 7, 230–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busby, N. (2011). A right to care? Unpaid work in European employment law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bussemaker, J. (1993). Betwiste Zelfstandigheid. Individualisering, Sekse en Verzorgingsstaat. Amsterdam: SUA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chalmers, D., Davies, G., & Monti, G. (2010). European Union law (Second Edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costello, C. (2009). Metock: Free movement and ‘normal family life’ in the union. Common Market Law Review, 46, 587–662.

    Google Scholar 

  • Currie, S. (2012). Accelerated justice or a step too far? Residence rights of non-EU family members and the court’s ruling in Metock. European Law Review, 37, 176–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dettmeijer-Vermeulen, C., Boot-Matthijssen, M., De Jonge van Ellemeet, H., Koster, D. A. C., & Smit, M. (2007). Mensenhandel. Vijfde rapportage van de nationaal rapporteur. The Hague: Office of the Dutch rapporteur on human trafficking (BNRM).

    Google Scholar 

  • Eleveld, A. (2012). A critical perspective on the reform of Dutch social security law. The case of the life course arrangement. PhD Thesis, University of Leiden.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ettinger, B. (2006). The matrixial borderspace. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franke, K. M. (2001). Taking care. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 76, 1541–1555.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, N. (2009). Feminism, capitalism and the cunning of history. New Left Review, 56, 97–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fudge, J., & Owens, R. (2006). Precarious work, women and the new economy: The challenge to legal norms. In J. Fudge & R. Owens (Eds.), Precarious work, women and the new economy: The challenge to legal norms. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallotti, M. (2009). The gender dimension of domestic work in Western Europe. Geneva: International Labour Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilliom, J. (2001). Overseers of the poor. Surveillance, resistance and the limits of privacy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glendon, M. A. (1989). The transformation of family law: State, law and family in the United States and Western Europe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grillo, R. (Ed.). (2008). The family in question: Immigrant and ethnic minorities in multicultural Europe. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilbrink, E. (2010). Het middelenvereiste in EU-rechtelijk perspectief. Journaal Vreemdelingenrecht, 2, 13–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hochschild, A. R. (2012). The outsourced self. Intimate life in market times. New York: Metropolitan Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstotter, B. (2005). A cascade of rights, or who shall care for little Catherine? Some reflections on the Chen case. European Law Review, 30, 548–558.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holtrust, N. (1993). Aan moeders knie. De juridische afstammingsrelatie tussen moeder en kind. PhD Thesis, University of Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kittay, E. F. (2001). A feminist public ethic of care meets the new communitarian family policy. Ethics, 111, 523–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knegt, R. (Ed.). (2008). The employment contract as an exclusionary device. An analysis on the basis of 25 years of developments in The Netherlands. Antwerp: Intersentia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kooy, G. (1975). Seksualiteit, huwelijk en gezin in Nederland. Deventer: Van Loghum Slaterus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraamwinkel, M. (2002). The imagined European Community: Are housewives European citizens? In J. Conaghan, R. M. Fischl, & K. Klare (Eds.), Labour law in an era of globalization. Transformative practices and possibilities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraler, A., Kofman, E., Kohli, M., & Schmoll, C. (Eds.). (2011). Gender, generations and the family in international migration. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kriek, F., Schreijenber, A., Van Waveren, R. C., & Schilder, E. A. (2011). Mogelijkheden voor dwang (en drang) bij voorschoolse educatie [Advice to the Dutch Ministry of Education]. Amsterdam: Regioplan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, R. (2007). The limits of bodily integrity. Abortion, adultery and rape legislation in comparative perspective. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulder, L. (1994). Hollandse nieuwe. Migrantenrecht, 8, 157–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nissen, E. (2013). The legal position of minor EU citizens who wish to exercise their right to family life in their country of nationality. Journaal Vreemdelingenrecht, 12, 67–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. (1999). Sex and social justice. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oosterom-Staples, H. (2012). To what extent has reverse discrimination been reversed? European Journal of Migration and Law, 14, 151–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulze, H., & Tyrell, H. (2002). What happened to the European family in the 1980s? The polarization between the family and other forms of private life. In F. Kaufmann, A. Kuijsten, H. Schulze, & K. P. Strohmeier (Eds.), Family life and family policies in Europe (Volume 2). Problems and issues in comparative perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • SER (Sociaal Economische Raad). (2010). Zzp’ers in beeld: Een integrale visie op zelfstandigen zonder personeel, Advice nr.201/04. The Hague: SER.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shuibhne, N. (2012). Case law: (Some of) the kids are all right. Common Market Law Review, 49, 349–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Supiot, A. (2000). Beyond employment. Changes at work and the future of employment law in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tinnemans, W. (1994). Een Gouden Armband: Een Geschiedenis van Mediterrane Immigranten in Nederland (1945–1994). Utrecht: Nederlands Centrum Buitenlanders.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomei, M. (2011). Decent work for domestic workers: Reflections on recent approaches to tackle informality. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law, 23, 185–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toner, H. (2003). Comments on Mary Carpenter v. Secretary of State, 11 July 2002 (Case C-60/00). European Journal of Migration and Law, 5, 163–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tronto, J. C. (1993). Moral boundaries: A political argument for an ethics of care. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tryfonidou, A. (2009). Family reunification rights of (migrant) union citizens: Towards a more liberal approach. European Law Journal, 15, 634–653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Walsum, S. (2008). The family and the nation. Dutch family migration policies in the context of changing family norms. Newcastle Upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Walsum, S. (2009). Against all odds. How single and divorced migrant mothers were eventually able to claim their right to respect for family life. European Journal of Migration and Law, 11, 295–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Walsum, S. (2012). Intimate strangers (inaugural lecture). Amsterdam: VU University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verwey-Jonker Instituut. (2003). Bronnenstudie Integratiebeleid. Deelrapport 1: Het integratiebeleid 1970 tot 2002 op hoofdlijnen. Utrecht: Verwey-Jonker Instituut.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, VU University Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Sarah van Walsum

Authors
  1. Sarah van Walsum
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociological Studies, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom

    Majella Kilkey

  2. Department of Gender Studies, University of Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Hessen, Germany

    Ewa Palenga-Möllenbeck

Copyright information

© 2016 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

van Walsum, S. (2016). The Contested Meaning of Care in Migration Law. In: Kilkey, M., Palenga-Möllenbeck, E. (eds) Family Life in an Age of Migration and Mobility. Migration, Diasporas and Citizenship. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-52099-9_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-52099-9_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-137-52097-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-137-52099-9

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation