CORRESPONDENCE
| Date | 01 November 1980 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1980.tb01618.x |
| Published date | 01 November 1980 |
CORRESPONDENCE
THE
EDITOR
Tm
MODERN
hw
REVIEW
The
New
Immigration Rules
Mr. Hartley is entitled to his views on the new rules as respects marriage,
but in the final two paragraphs of his note
((1980)
43
M.L.R.
440,
p.
444)
he
presents as fact, with scant evidence, what are no more than assertions. There
are many points to be made in reply.
1.
He
says that “would-be immigrants, especially from India, were thought
to be using marriage as
a
means of entry.”
He
continues: “This abuse
.
.
.”
Is
he recording what unnamed others think,
or
is he suggesting that the
thoughts are justified?
His
objectivity begins to look shaky.
2.
He suggests that the movement of males from the subcontinent for the
purpose of marriage reverses traditional patterns. However there is some
evidence that in India, grooms have moved to the bride’s home as a result of
the transfer of population from rural to urban areas. Women who had settled
in towns and cities married men from villages. Moreover men arriving in
the United Kingdom may establish their own homes
so
that the wife leaves
her parental abode. (See
S.
Shah-New
Society,
October
18,
1979).
3.
Mr.
Hartley says that in an arranged marriage only certain broad
criteria need be satisfied before the parties are willing to marry. This greatly
cversimplifies the position. First, the category of “social status” has to be
divided into caste, language and kinship. This imposes its own limitations on
choice. Secondly, British Asian males (a term to be preferred to the con-
tradiction of
‘‘
second generation immigrants
”)
continue to seek wives from
the subcontinent thus limiting the numbers available for marriage to women
settled in this country. A further point made is that no
“
genuine tie” initially
exists among the partners to an arranged marriage,
so
no hardship
is
done
by requiring a woman to forgo the chosen partner and select another from
amongst those settled here. However arranged marriages are normally based
on various social ties and are contracted after much negotiation and exchange
of information between the
two
families. Marriage
is
an arrangement as much
between two families as between the parties. Given the above limitations on
the way in which marriages can be arranged here, it is not surprising that
the choice of a male partner often involves a man being brought from the
subcontinent.
4.
If there is evidence of unwilling brides, this
does
not mean that the
man has sought to use mamage solely to gain entry. And it is not for the
British Government to engage in social engineering amongst an ethnic minority
group to force it into conformity with the majority. (On arranged marriages
generally see
R.
C. Ballard
‘‘
The Sikhs
”
in
Between
Two
Cultures: Migrants
and
Minorities in
Britain
(ed.
J.
L.
Watson,
1977).
5.
We are not experts in the anthropology of Asian families in Britain,
but we have at least tried
to
gather some evidence and reach conclusions on
that basis.
Mr.
Hartley
is
content with
two
references
to
newspaper articles
or
letters, yet ignores the substantial body of literature
on
race relations and
minority groups in
the
United Kingdom. He leaves as
a
tantalising liberal
finale the possibility of a reasonable end
to
be achieved by reasonable means,
but does not tell
us
how in practice this could be done. By applying the
new rules equally to men and women?-surely more discriminatory. By an
arranged marriage board?-a quango for taking agonising decisions about
individuals’ futures. By reverting to
the
1977
Rules on Marriages of Con-
venience? These were
a
tolerable solution to
the
problems of bogus arrange-
ments but now every arranged marriage is liable to attack. The would-be
743
To continue reading
Request your trial