Heli Askola

Tale of Two Citizenships? Citizenship, Migration and Care in the European Union

This paper examines the normative content of European Union citizenship with the aid of recent feminist research into gendered citizenship, care and migration. Feminist literature shows how long-standing feminist issues around care and domestic work are now made more prominent by the increasing formal employment of European women and the corresponding involvement of female migrant workers, often with precarious legal status, in performing childcare and domestic tasks in Europe. The literature on this phenomenon can be used to bring together two kinds of marginalisation built into Union citizenship – the explicit exclusion of those who are not Union citizens and the more implicit barriers that are based on a gendered division of labour. While optimistic analyses of Union citizenship assume its current limitations can be overcome, feminist research into gendered citizenship, care and migration actually shows they are part and parcel of how Union citizenship is currently conceived, making it difficult to change.

(No) Migrating for Family Care in Later Life: Senchishak v Finland, Older Parents and Family Reunification

This article discusses the implications of family reunification policies for naturalised citizens and their older parents (usually mothers) in light of the illuminating case Senchishak v Finland from the European Court of Human Rights. As migration by parents wishing to join their adult children is usually motivated at least in part by considerations of care in old age, policies in many European states, including Finland, put strict limits on family reunification on the assumption that such migrants constitute a future economic burden to ageing societies and their already stretched public services. This article argues, firstly, that current policies rely on generalisations that disregard the nature of parental ties and dependency in families as well as the complex care-giving triad involving families, markets and the state and, secondly, that these policies contain largely hidden yet significant costs for citizens of immigrant background, especially women, giving rise to questions over their equality as citizens.

Who will care for Grandma?: Older women, parent visas, and Australia's migration program

Abstract Despite its substantial size and significance, the operation of Australia’s regular migration program has attracted relatively little feminist legal interest. In the last 30 years the migration program has shifted towards prioritising working-age migrants with a high level of skills (deemed to be) in demand in Australia, but this emphasis on the immediate needs of the labour market has not been investigated in terms of its implications for diverse groups of women. The decline and (near-)abolition of so-called non-contributory parent visas in 2014 is a recent example that particularly affects older women wishing to migrate to join their children. The migration of parents, whether it is motivated by the provision of care for grandchildren or their own future care needs, raises questions about care, a key feminist issue. As the main burden of care has traditionally been placed on women, parent visas offer an important starting point for assessing the gender dimensions of the migration program. With the help of critical feminist perspectives on migration, ageing, as well as transnational families and care, this article starts to critique some of the gender inequalities embedded in Australia’s migrant selection process and its calculations which serve to exclude, among others, older women. After interrogating the problematic assumptions about and treatment of parent migration, the article suggests that the migration program raises difficult feminist questions about solidarity, transnational family life, and the maintenance of caregiving links across borders.

Wind from the North, don’t go forth? Gender equality and the rise of populist nationalism in Finland:

The article considers the future prospects of the struggle for gender equality in light of the growing appeal and electoral success of parties embracing populist nationalism and anti-immigration as their platform. Considering many such parties are known for viewing the promotion of gender equality as unnecessary or even harmful – except when they highlight immigration as a threat to female emancipation – it is important to explore what, if anything, the electoral success of populist-nationalist parties means for the direction of gender equality policies. The article examines this question in the Finnish context. Though the Finnish state’s commitment to gender equality is well-established, questions can be asked about the future prospects of gender equality policies in light of the electoral rise of the populist anti-immigration party Perussuomalaiset (or ‘True Finns’), especially since the party joined government in May 2015. The article scrutinises the recent record of PS in parliament and government, elucidating on the challenges that populist-nationalist parties create for gender equality in (allegedly) ‘women-friendly’ welfare states. The case study particularly focuses on gender equality in the context of balancing work and family and freedom from violence, discrimination and harassment. It raises questions that are of broader relevance to the future of gender equality in Europe, considering the Nordic states have been viewed as models for a gender egalitarian society and frontrunners in the promotion of gender equality within the EU.