DOCSLIB.ORG

Leaving Detention?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Leaving Detention? LEAVING DETENTION? A study on the influence of immigration detention on migrants’ decision-making processes regarding return. November 2011 Researcher Mieke Kox Return: not necessarily a step backward 1 IOM is committed to the principle that humane and orderly migration benefits migrants and society. As an intergovernmental body, IOM acts with its partners in the international community to assist in meeting the operational challenges of migration; advance understanding of migration issues; and uphold the human dignity and well-being of migrants. This research report is published within the framework of the project ‘Assisted Voluntary Return from Detention (AVRD) II’. The project was financed by the European Return Fund and the Dutch Ministry of Justice. Publisher: International Organization for Migration Mission in the Netherlands P.O. Box 10796 2501 HT The Hague The Netherlands Tel: +31 70 31 81 500 Fax: +31 70 33 85 454 E-mail: [email protected] Internet: www.iom-nederland.nl Copyright © 2011 International Organization for Migration (IOM) All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmit- ted in any form by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without prior written permission of the publisher. Opinions expressed in this work are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of IOM or cofunders. 2 PREFACE Immigration detention in the Netherlands is routinely criticised but it is still used because the Dutch government considers it an indispensible tool for the effectuation of its return policy. Through immigration detention the Dutch government tries to realize a migrant’s return to the country of origin or another country in which his (re)admission is guaranteed. Migrants in immigration detention have the opportunity to return from immigration detention to their countries of origin with assistance of the International Organization of Migration (IOM). Since 2007 IOM runs projects within immigration detention. IOM staff has been allocated in the detention centres for immigration detention to provide information and assistance to migrants to enable them to take a well informed decision on whether to return voluntarily to their countries of origin. The role of IOM in immigration detention has been criticised as well. It has been doubted whether migrants in immigration detention are sufficiently able to make voluntary and well informed decisions considering the time constraints and limited options of the migrants in detention. IOM has been well aware of these circumstances but nevertheless decided not to exclude these migrants in immigration detention from their services and support. IOM has included a study on the influence of immigration detention on the intention of migrants to leave within its project Assisted Voluntary Return from Detention (AVRD). This study makes it possible to contribute to knowledge development about the return of irregular migrants from immigration detention. The results are hopefully not just relevant for IOM but also for other stakeholders in immigration detention. I am grateful that I was given the opportunity to prepare this interesting study on the influence of immigration detention on the willingness of migrants in detention to return. Of course I could not have done this on my own. Therefore I like to take the opportunity to thank everyone who supported me in undertaking this study. First of all, I want to thank the migrants who were willing to be interviewed during their stay in immigration detention. They gave me the opportunity to map their decision-making processes regarding return and to determine the influence of immigration detention on their intention to leave. Needless to say, this study would not have been possible without the cooperation of these migrants. I cannot thank them by name, since their anonymity has been guaranteed, but I hope these well-deserved words of thanks will do. Interviewing these migrants would have been impossible without the permission of the Custodial Institutions Agency to conduct this study in the Dutch detention centres in Rotterdam, Zaandam and Zeist. Therefore, I want to thank the Custodial Institutions Agency and in particular the Directorate for Special Detention Facilities for enabling us to work on location and providing me with all the information requested; and their staff at the detention centres for their cooperation during the interviews. In addition, IOM’s Project Officers deserve a word of thanks: Eric van den Boom, Claver Ndikumana, Ard Venhuizen and Euphrem Yamuremye informed and explained the aim of the interviews to the migrants and asked them if they wanted to cooperate on this study. It took a lot of time to find a sufficient number of respondents and to fill in an inquiry form together with the migrant. It was not a rewarding task, since almost half of migrants approached were unwilling to cooperate. However, IOM’s Project Officers found a sufficient number of detained migrants who were willing to be interviewed. The interviewers cooperating in this study also deserve thanks. Zia Gulam, Solomon Desta, Karel van Driel, Daniël Hardenbol, Sanja Heric, Arjen Leerkes, Anke Lenaers, Claver Ndikumana, Hafsah Warraich, Euphrem Yamuremye and Pauline Yick conducted two or more 3 interviews and sent me their reports. I could not have conducted so many interviews on my own. Furthermore, the Immigration and Naturalisation Service deserves a word of thanks for the information they provided and their kind cooperation: this agency gave my colleague Barbara van Spaandonk and me the opportunity to consult the personal files of the respondents to obtain additional information. Therefore, I want to thank Barbara as well for her help while obtaining this information. I would also like to show my appreciation to the Repatriation and Departure Service, which provided additional information on the effects of immigration detention and the repatriation process, answered my questions on these topics and provided information on the legal status of the respondents. This created an opportunity to present the effects of immigration detention in recent years and to draw conclusions regarding the respondents’ intentions to leave and their possibilities for return. I am also grateful that Joost van der Aalst, Anne Marie Hollander, Anton van Kalmthout, Arjen Leerkes, Marian Lenshoek, Joris van Wijk and Adri Zagers were willing to read and comment on the research outline and report. Their constructive comments helped me greatly during this study. Finally, Anne Marie deserves a special word of thanks. She hired me to conduct this study, guided me through the study, gave me a lot of advice, and made sure I could focus on the research without being distracted by other tasks. So, Anne Marie, many thanks. The results of the study are presented in this research report. I hope these will contribute to the discourse on the Dutch migrant return policy. 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface 3 List of tables 8 1. To leave or not to leave 9 1.1 Difficulties realizing the return of irregular migrants 9 1.2 A study on the influence of immigration detention on migrant intention to return 11 1.3 Research questions 11 1.4 Methodology 12 1.5 Constraints 15 1.6 Reading guide 16 2. Migrants’ return from immigration detention 17 2.1 Migrants’ decision-making processes regarding voluntary return 17 2.1.1 Factors in the decision-making process regarding voluntary return 18 2.1.1.1 Push factors 19 2.1.1.2 Pull factors 20 2.1.1.3 Stay factors 21 2.1.1.4 Deter factors 22 2.1.1.5 Mingling factors in individual decision-making processes 24 2.1.1.6 The role of the risk of being arrested, detained and repatriated 25 in migrants’ decision-making processes 2.2 Immigration detention as a means to realize return from the Netherlands 26 2.2.1 Immigration detention under Dutch law 26 2.2.2 Immigration detention in practice 27 2.2.2.1 The detention population 27 2.2.2.2 Detention centres 31 2.2.2.3 Regime 32 2.2.2.4 Alternatives to immigration detention 33 2.3 Possibilities for return for irregular migrants in immigration detention 33 2.3.1 Factors influencing possibilities for return of migrants in immigration detention 33 2.3.1.1 Personal factors 34 2.3.1.2 Factors related to the treatment of migrants in immigration detention 35 2.3.1.3 Factors related to the country of origin 36 2.3.1.4 Factors related to the repatriation process 36 2.4 Recommendations to increase the effectiveness of immigration detention 37 2.5 Developments regarding the possibilities for return of migrants from immigration 38 detention 2.6 The influence of governmental policies on the decision-making processes 40 2.7 To conclude 41 3. Coming to the Netherlands, ending up in immigration detention 43 3.1 Respondents’ characteristics 43 3.1.1 Respondents’ legal status 44 3.1.2 Respondents’ stay in immigration detention 45 3.1.3 Respondents’ (irregular) stay in the Netherlands 46 3.1.4 Consequences for the representativeness of the research group 48 5 3.2 Leaving the country of origin, coming to the Netherlands 48 3.2.1 Motives for leaving the country of origin 48 3.2.2 The situation in the country of origin 50 3.2.3 Reasons for coming to the Netherlands 51 3.3 Staying (irregularly) in the Netherlands 52 3.4 Ending up in immigration detention 55 3.4.1 The detention conditions 55 3.4.2 Justification 57 3.4.3 Well-being 58 3.5 To conclude 59 4. The influence of immigration detention on migrants’ intentions to leave 61 4.1 Thoughts on leaving the country prior to immigration detention 61 4.2 Thoughts on leaving the country during immigration detention 62 4.3 The influence of immigration detention on decision-making processes 63 4.4 Decision-making processes regarding leaving the Netherlands 65 4.4.1.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The European Elections
    DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR INTERNAL POLICIES POLICY DEPARTMENT C: CITIZENS' RIGHTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS THE EUROPEAN ELECTIONS: EU LEGISLATION, NATIONAL PROVISIONS AND CIVIC PARTICIPATION STUDY Abstract This study describes both the European framework and national provisions on electoral procedures in the Member States of the European Union, including recent developments such as the creation of European Political Parties and the reform of the Electoral Act of 1976. For each country the most important legal provisions, the electoral system and some outcomes of past elections - such as participation of citizens from other Member States - are presented. The document also provides information sources for further study of national regulations. March 2009 PE 410.672 EN 2 This document was requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Constitutional Affairs AUTHOR and RESPONSIBLE ADMINISTRATOR Mr Wilhelm Lehmann Policy Department C - Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs European Parliament B-1047 Brussels E-mail: [email protected] LINGUISTIC VERSIONS Original: EN ABOUT THE EDITOR To contact the Policy Department or to subscribe to its newsletter please write to: poldep-1 [email protected] Manuscript completed in February 2009. Brussels, © European Parliament, 2009. This document is available on the Internet at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/studies2 DISCLAIMER The opinions expressed in this document are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official position of the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation for non-commercial purposes are authorized, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice and sent a copy. 3 CONTENTS I.0 Introduction...................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Chronological Overview of the 2009/2010 H1N1 Influenza Pandemic and the Response of the Centre for Infectious Disease Control RIVM
    Chronological overview of the 2009/2010 H1N1 influenza pandemic and the response of the Centre for Infectious Disease Control RIVM RIVM Report 215011006/2011 M.L. Stein | J.A. van Vliet | A. Timen National Insitute for Public Health and the Environment P.O. Box 1 | 3720 BA Bilthoven www.rivm.com Chronological overview of the 2009/2010 H1N1 influenza pandemic and the response of the Centre for Infectious Disease Control RIVM RIVM Report 215011006/2011 RIVM Report 215011006 Colophon © RIVM 2011 Parts of this publication may be reproduced, provided acknowledgement is given to the 'National Institute for Public Health and the Environment', along with the title and year of publication. M.L. Stein J.A. van Vliet A. Timen Contact: Mart Stein LCI, Centre for Infectious Disease Control, RIVM [email protected] This research was conducted as commissioned by the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport (VWS) within the framework of the project ‘Evaluating the policy approach to the 2009 H1N1 pandemic’. Page 2 of 152 RIVM Report 215011006 Abstract Chronological overview of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic and the response of the Centre for Infectious Disease Control RIVM. The outbreak of the 2009/2010 H1N1 pandemic was a unique test case for infectious disease control in the Netherlands. During the pandemic numerous control measures were implemented at both national and international levels. Events unfolded in rapid succession and were mostly complex in nature, due not only to the actual transmission of the virus in the Netherlands but also to the reactions and responses of international authorities, findings of scientists and the reactions of the public at large.
    [Show full text]
  • RIVM Briefrapport 320126001 the Intake of Pbdes from Food: Dietary
    Letter report 320126001/2010 C.W. Noorlander | J.D. te Biesebeek | S.P.J. van Leeuwen | M.J. Zeilmaker Intake of PFOS and PFOA from food and drinking water in The Netherlands Intake of PFOS and PFOA from food and drinking water in The Netherlands Autors: dr. C.W. Noorlander (RIVM/SIR) ing. J.D. te Biesebeek (RIVM/SIR) dr. S.P.J. van Leeuwen (VU/IVM) dr. M.J. Zeilmaker (RIVM/SIR) Date: July 2010 Reviewed by: dr. B.G.H. Bokkers (RIVM/SIR) dr. M.I. Bakker (RIVM/SIR) VWA Question: 9.1.31 Determine the dietary exposure to perfluorinated compounds in The Netherlands (based on monitoring results anno 2009) Commissioned by: dr. M.J.B. Mengelers (VWA) Project: V/320126 Perfluorinated compounds in food Letter report: 320126001 1 Summary This study presents intake calculations from food and drinking water of the perfluorinated contaminants PFOS and PFOA. The intake was determined by the ‘total diet method’: a combination of a food consumption survey, concentration measurements in pooled samples of specific food categories and drinking water, and statistic modelling. The concentrations of PerFluorinated Compounds (PFCs) in food were analyzed in pooled samples of foodstuffs randomly purchased in several Dutch retail store chains with nation-wide covering. As concentrations in drinking water in The Netherlands are missing indicative values (7 pg/g for PFOS and 9 pg/g for PFOA) as reported by EFSA (2008) were used in the intake calculations. In food six out of fourteen analysed PFCs (PFHpA, PFOA, PFNA, PFDA, PFHxS and PFOS) could be detected in the majority of the food categories.
    [Show full text]
  • Organisation of the Education System in the Netherlands 2008/09
    Organisation of the education system in the Netherlands 2008/09 NL European Commission EURYBASE THE NETHERLANDS 1. Political, social and economic background and trends ......................................... 11 1.1. Historical overview........................................................................................................................................ 11 1.2. Main executive and legislative bodies................................................................................................... 14 1.3. Religions............................................................................................................................................................ 15 1.4. Languages........................................................................................................................................................ 15 1.5. Population........................................................................................................................................................ 16 1.6. Economy........................................................................................................................................................... 16 1.7. Statistics ............................................................................................................................................................ 17 1.7.1. Demographic statistics........................................................................................................................................17 1.7.2. Working
    [Show full text]
  • Annual European Report on the Free Movement of Workers in Europe in 2009-2010
    Annual European Report on the Free Movement of Workers in Europe in 2009-2010 December 2010 Rapporteurs: Prof. Kees Groenendijk Prof. Elspeth Guild Dr. Ryszard Cholewinski Dr. Helen Oosterom-Staples Dr. Paul Minderhoud Annual European Report: Free Movement of Workers in Europe 2009-2010 Network of experts The European network on free movement of workers within the European Union coordinated by the University of Nijmegen's under the European Commission's supervision: keeps track of legislation on free movement of workers and how it is applied; monitors how national courts interpret EU laws; raises awareness of the importance of free movement of workers as a fundamental right. December 2010 2 Annual European Report: Free Movement of Workers in Europe 2009-2010 Table of contents Executive Summary ..........................................................................................................5 General Introduction.........................................................................................................7 1. Economic crisis....................................................................................................................... 7 2. Free movement law and national immigration law ........................................................ 7 3. Workers in marginal positions............................................................................................... 8 4. Language requirements and recognition of diploma and qualifications................... 8 5. Positive developments ........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Animals in Our Midst: the Challenges of Co-Existing with Animals in the Anthropocene the International Library of Environmental, Agricultural and Food Ethics
    The International Library of Environmental, Agricultural and Food Ethics 33 Bernice Bovenkerk Jozef Keulartz Editors Animals in Our Midst: The Challenges of Co-existing with Animals in the Anthropocene The International Library of Environmental, Agricultural and Food Ethics Volume 33 Series Editors Michiel Korthals, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands Paul B. Thompson, Michigan State University, East Lansing, USA The ethics of food and agriculture is confronted with enormous challenges. Scien- tific developments in the food sciences promise to be dramatic; the concept of life sciences, that comprises the integral connection between the biological sciences, the medical sciences and the agricultural sciences, got a broad start with the genetic revo- lution. In the mean time, society, i.e., consumers, producers, farmers, policymakers, etc, raised lots of intriguing questions about the implications and presuppositions of this revolution, taking into account not only scientific developments, but societal as well. If so many things with respect to food and our food diet will change, will our food still be safe? Will it be produced under animal friendly conditions of husbandry and what will our definition of animal welfare be under these conditions? Will food production be sustainable and environmentally healthy? Will production consider the interest of the worst off and the small farmers? How will globalisation and liber- alization of markets influence local and regional food production and consumption patterns? How will all these developments influence the rural areas and what values and policies are ethically sound? All these questions raise fundamental and broad ethical issues and require enor- mous ethical theorizing to be approached fruitfully.
    [Show full text]
  • Emnannual Policy Report 2009
    Annual Policy Report 2009 produced by the European Migration Network August 2010 The purpose of EMN Annual Policy Reports is to provide an overview into the most significant political and legislative (including EU) developments, as well as public debates, in the area of asylum and migration, with the focus on third-country nationals rather than EU nationals. The report was also used in the elaboration of the Commission‘s Tracking Method Report on the implementation of the European Pact on Immigration and Asylum. This EMN Synthesis Report summarises the main findings of National Reports produced by twenty-four of the EMN National Contact Points (EMN NCPs) from Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom. The EMN Synthesis Report, as well as the twenty-four National Reports upon which the synthesis is based, may be downloaded from http://emn.sarenet.es/Downloads/prepareShowFiles.do;?directoryID=125. Several of the National Reports are also available in the Member States‘ national language, as well as in English. EMN Synthesis Report – Annual Policy Report 2009 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Methodology followed ........................................................................................ 8 2. GENERAL STRUCTURE OF POLITICAL AND LEGAL
    [Show full text]
  • Dietary Intake of PFOS and PFOA in the Netherlands
    Dietary intake of PFOS and PFOA in The Netherlands Autors: dr. C.W. Noorlander (RIVM/SIR) ing. J.D. te Biesebeek (RIVM/SIR) dr. S.P.J. van Leeuwen (VU/IVM) dr. M.J. Zeilmaker (RIVM/SIR) Date: May 2010 Reviewed by: dr. B.G.H. Bokkers (RIVM/SIR) dr. M.I. Bakker (RIVM/SIR) VWA Question: 9.1.31 Determine the dietary exposure to perfluorinated compounds in The Netherlands (based on monitoring results anno 2009) Commissioned by: dr. M.J.B. Mengelers (VWA) Project: V/320126 Perfluorinated compounds in food Report number: 320126001 1 Summary This study presents dietary intake calculations of PFOS and PFOA as determined by the ‘total diet method’, which is a combination of a food consumption survey, concentration measurements in pooled samples of specific food categories, and statistic modelling. The concentrations of perfluorinated compounds were analyzed in pooled samples of foodstuffs randomly purchased in various locations in The Netherlands. As concentrations in drinking water in The Netherlands are missing indicative values as reported by EFSA (2008) were used in the intake calculations. Only PFHpA, PFOA, PFNA, PFDA, PFHxS and PFOS could be detected in the majority of the food categories. As Tolerable Daily Intakes (TDIs) are only available for PFOS and PFOA the intake calculations were confined to these compounds. Drinking water appeared the most important source of intake for PFOS and PFOA, accounting for 33% and 55% of the intake, respectively. Other contributors of PFOA intake were vegetables/fruit and flour. Milk, beef and lean fish were contributors of PFOS intake. The median life-long intake for PFOS is 0.3 ng/kg bw/day and for PFOA 0.2 ng/kg bw/day.
    [Show full text]
  • International Migration Report 2011
    E c o n o m i c & S o c i a l A f f a i r s International Migration Report 2011 United Nations This page is intentionally left blank December 2012 Department of Economic and Social Affairs Population Division International Migration Report 2011 United Nations This page is intentionally left blank DESA The Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat is a vital interface between global policies in the economic, social and environmental spheres and national action. The Department works in three main interlinked areas: (i) it compiles, generates and analyses a wide range of economic, social and environmental data and information on which States Members of the United Nations draw to review common problems and take stock of policy options; (ii) it facilitates the negotiations of Member States in many intergovernmental bodies on joint courses of action to address ongoing or emerging global challenges; and (iii) it advises interested Governments on the ways and means of translating policy frameworks developed in United Nations conferences and summits into programmes at the country level and, through technical assistance, helps build national capacities. Note The designations employed in this report and the material presented in it do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Symbols of United Nations documents are composed of capital letters combined with figures. This publication has been issued without formal editing.
    [Show full text]
  • International M&A and Joint Ventures
    International M&A and Joint Ventures MATTIA COLONNELLI DE GASPERIS,* STEVEN DE SCHRIJVER,* RANDALL A. HANSON,** SAUL FEILBOGEN, VANESA BALDA, JEROEN MUES, WALTER STUBER, ADRIANA MARIA GODEL STUBER, SEAN P. O'NEILL, MARK, NEIGHBOR, ME GECHLIK, HARTMUT KRAUSE, LENNAERT POSCH, NANCY A. MATOS, STEPHEN J. NELSON, MALMA MAHMOOD, AND MARK GREENE This article reviews developments during 2009 in international mergers and acquisi- tions (M&As) and joint ventures in Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Germany, India, Italy, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Because of space limitations this year, this article could not include nineteen other jurisdictions for which the committee prepared reports: Australia, Austria, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Denmark, the European Union, Greece, Israel, Luxembourg, New Zealand, Portugal, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine, and Vietnam. Reports for those countries are available on the committee's website.I * Partner, Colonnelli de Gasperis, Milan, Italy, served as committee editor and authored the section on Italy. * Partner, Lorenz, Brussels, Belgium, served as committee editor and co-authored the section on Belgium. ** Member, Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, PLLC, Greensboro, North Carolina, also served as committee editor. The three committee editors wish to acknowledge the editorial assistance of Katherine H. Woodcock, an associate at Lorenz. 1. For the full article, seehttp://meetings.abanet.org/webupload/commupload/IC120000/newsletterpubs/ M&AYIR2009-masterdraftv7.pdf. The full article includes the following jurisdictions: 1) Australia, by Ezekiel Solomon and Andrew Finch of Allens Arthur Robinson; 2) Austria, by Paul Luiki, Maria Thier- richter, and Patrick Maydell of Fellner Wratzfeld & Partner Rechtsanwllte GmbH; 3) Chile, by Francisco Ugarte and Macarena Vargas of Carey y Cia.
    [Show full text]
  • The Citizens of Europe and the European Union in the Current Crisis
    The Citizens of Europe and the European Union in the Current Crisis Daniel DEBOMY Policy 47 Paper Policy The Citizens of Europe 47 and the European Union paper in the Current Crisis Daniel Debomy Daniel DEBOMY Daniel Debomy is the founder and managing director of the opinion research institute Optem. For 25 years, together with his network of partners across Europe, he has carried out numerous qualitative studies on behalf of the European Commission and other organisations, aiming to understand the citizens’ perceptions, attitudes and expectations vis-a-vis the European Union and EU policies, in the 27 Member States and beyond. He also lectures on EU related issues at several schools and universities. THE CITIZENS OF EUROPE AND THE EUROPEAN UNION IN THE CURRENT CRISIS Notre Europe Notre Europe is an independent think tank devoted to European integration. Under the guidance of Jacques Delors, who created Notre Europe in 1996, the association aims to “think a united Europe.” Our ambition is to contribute to the current public debate by producing analyses and pertinent policy proposals that strive for a closer union of the peoples of Europe. We are equally devoted to promoting the active engagement of citizens and civil society in the process of community construction and the creation of a European public space. In this vein, the staff of Notre Europe directs research projects; produces and disseminates analyses in the form of short notes, studies, and articles; and organises public debates and seminars. Its analyses and proposals are concentrated around four themes: • Visions of Europe: The community method, the enlargement and deepening of the EU and the European project as a whole are a work in THE CITIZENS OF EUROPE AND THE EUROPEAN UNION IN THE CURRENT CRISIS constant progress.
    [Show full text]
  • UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA, IRVINE the Construction of the Success Frame by Second-Generation Chinese Parents
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE The Construction of the Success Frame by Second-Generation Chinese Parents; a Cross-National Comparison DISSERTATION Submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Sociology by Krista Regina Noam-Zuidervaart Thesis Committee: Professor Frank D. Bean, Chair Professor Jennifer Lee, Chair Associate professor Susan K. Brown Associate professor Ann Hironaka 2014 Chapter 4 © 2014 Krista R. Noam, adapted from publication in New Diversities (16) 1: 41-55 All other materials © 2014 Krista Regina Noam-Zuidervaart TABLE ON CONTENTS Page LIST OF FIGURES IV LIST OF TABLES V ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS VI CURRICULUM VITAE VIII CHAPTER 1 GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1.1 Introduction 1 1.2 Terminology 6 1.3 Focus of this dissertation: second-generation Chinese 7 1.4 Theoretical framework 11 1.5 Methods 21 1.6 Findings 29 1.7 Overview of the chapters 30 CHAPTER 2 UNITED STATES VS. NETHERLANDS 2.1 The stage: two countries 34 2.2 Chinese immigration history and current communities 49 2.3 Comparing the second-generation Chinese in the United States and the Netherlands 55 CHAPTER 3 QUASI-EXPERIMENTS IN CROSS-NATIONAL IMMIGRATION RESEARCH 3.1 Introduction 60 3.2 Background of the experimental designs 61 3.3 Cross-national immigration research 63 3.4 Cross-national research and quasi-experimental designs 65 3.5 Conclusion 72 CHAPTER 4 HOW NATIONAL CONTEXT INFLUENCES THE CHILDREARING PRACTICES OF SECOND-GENERATION CHINESE ‘TIGER’ PARENTS 4.1 Introduction 74 4.2 Theoretical background: Childrearing
    [Show full text]