Troubled by Law: The Subjectivizing Effects of Danish Marriage Reunification Laws
| Author | Garbi Schmidt |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/imig.12132 |
| Published date | 01 June 2014 |
| Date | 01 June 2014 |
Troubled by Law: The Subjectivizing Effects
of Danish Marriage Reunification Laws
Garbi Schmidt*
ABSTRACT
Between 2002 and 2003, Denmark introduced further limitations on its already restrictive regu-
lations concerning family and marriage reunification. While several studies, both Danish and
international, have discussed the effects of these and other family reunification laws on indi-
vidual practice, we know very little about the their effects on people’s self-perceptions and
norms. Based on a qualitative data set, including a total of 89 interviews with young people of
immigrant background living in Denmark collected between 1999 and 2009, this article seeks
to provide answers to this and related questions. As a social technology, do the regulations
create changes in the practice field of the respondents which they gradually come to see as
natural and reasonable, or do they leave them in a troubling subject position (Staunæs, 2005)
based on a socially and legislatively regulated stigma?
INTRODUCTION
Between 2002 and 2003, Denmark introduced further limitations on its by then already restrictive
regulations concerning family and marriage reunification. Couples with one person living in
Denmark and the other outside Denmark both had to be 24 years of age in order to settle down
together in the country. Furthermore, the couple was expected to fulfill the requirements of the
so-called “attachment rule”, based on an assessment of variables such as how long the Danish party
had lived in Denmark, whether the couple had relatives in Denmark, Danish language proficiency,
attachment to the Danish labour market and educational system, and whether the Danish partner
had stayed in the country of the non-Danish partner for long periods of time prior to their marriage.
In addition, a new regulation known as “the expectation rule of forced marriage”was introduced,
including an a priori understanding of transnational marriages between first and second cousins as
forced marriages (see also Schmidt et al., 2009). One exception to the rule was a fulfillment of the
having a particular professional attachment to Denmark (Ministry of Integration, 2005a, 2005b).
Although the new regulations and government initiatives were presented as means to hinder
forced marriages, there was more to the story than the protection of the human rights of ethnic
minority youth. A brief from the Ministry of Integration, issued in 2002, restated the aim of pre-
venting forced marriages, but also presented the legislation as a means of limiting the immigration
of “non-Western immigrants”to Denmark. By limiting immigration, the argument went, the nation
state could concentrate on the integration of immigrants already living in Denmark (see Danish
Government, 2002). The legislation had a decisive effect on the number of people migrating to
Denmark through marriage reunification. In 2001, the year before the new regulations were intro-
duced, 6499 individuals were granted family reunification due to marriage (or cohabitation) with a
* Roskilde University, Denmark.
doi: 10.1111/imig.12132
©2013 The Author
International Migration ©2013 IOM
International Migration Vol. 52 (3) 2014
ISSN 0020-7985Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
To continue reading
Request your trial