Human Trafficking Victims and Their Children: Assessing Needs, Vulnerabilities, Strengths, and Survivorship

Given the increased awareness and attention to human trafficking, including the establishment of federal laws and policies, federally funded task forces that provide law enforcement responses, and specialized victim services, it is important to assess the impact of these procedures and services on survivors/victims of international human trafficking and their immigrant children. By federal definition, certified victims of international human trafficking are eligible for all services provided to refugees in this country, including reunification with their minor children. This research is based on a qualitative study conducted in Austin and Houston, Texas with human trafficking victims/survivors. The project’s goal was to gain an understanding of the needs of human trafficking survivors after their rescue, their overall integration into American life, and the subsequent needs of their immigrant children after reunification. The project objectives examined the factors that either promote or hinder self-sufficiency, the determination of social service needs, and policy and practice recommendations to strengthen survivors, their children and their families living both locally and abroad. For this project, nine (n = 9) in-depth interviews were conducted with adult foreign-born victims of human trafficking. Researchers gathered data using a semi-structured questionnaire that queried about factors that promote or hinder victims’ services and needs. Interviews were conducted in participants’ homes using bilingual research staff and/or trained interpreters, were digitally-recorded, and subsequently transcribed. Participation in this study was completely voluntary. Specific steps were taken to ensure that the participants’ identities were protected. Open coding of data was utilized and the data were subsequently organized or grouped into properties and later developed into contextual themes around the research questions. The findings are grounded with the use of direct quotes from participants. As a result of progressive U.S. policy, many victims of human trafficking are being reunited with their minor children. Immigrant children are one of the largest and fastest growing populations in the U.S. and for a variety of reasons are vulnerable to exploitation. Research also indicates that victims of trafficking are identified by traffickers because of their perceived “vulnerabilities” or lack of opportunities (Clark, 2003). Therefore, it is important that practices and policies are developed to address the unique needs of these families with an eye toward positive outcomes for parent and child safety and well-being. Social service providers are provided a toolkit that may be utilized before and during the reunification period.

Von der Bewegung her denken: Migration als soziale Bewegung im eigentlichen Wortsinne

Ein Grund der Krise der Migrationsforschung liegt daran, dass ihre vorherrschende Blickrichtung vom Staat aus auf Migration gerichtet ist. Während der Staat naturalisiert wird, erscheint Migration als die störende Bewegung. Exakt diese Kritik ist in der Losung „We didn’t cross the border, the border crossed us!“ des Immigrant Rights Movement aus den USA enthalten. Nur eine Umkehrung der Perspektive kann aus der Sackgasse führen, in welche Konzepte wie „Integration“ geführt haben, indem Fragen neu gestellt werden können: Was passiert, wenn Effekte von Staat und Staatlichkeit in die Bewegung der Migration eingeschrieben werden? Prototyp dieser Einschreibung ist die Grenze, die sich aber nicht auf deren geopolitische Manifestation beschränkt, sondern verschiedenste Grenzkontrollpraktiken (Datenbanken, Migrationsprogramme und -verträge zwischen Staaten, Rückübernahmeabkommen von abgewiesenen Asylsuchenden) umfasst, die oftmals deterritorialisiert und relokalisert sind. Ausgehend von der Kritik des Methodologischen Nationalismus skizziert der Beitrag, wie ein Ansatz der Migrationsforschung aussehen könnte, der von der Bewegung aus denkt, wie es etwa in der Idee der Autonomie der Migration angedacht ist. Am Beispiel des laufenden Projektes „How Does Border Occur?“, das unter anderem die sogenannt freiwilligen Rückkehrprogramme für tunesische Migrantinnen untersucht, stellt der Beitrag schliesslich zur Diskussion, wie ein solches Forschungsprogramm konkret aussehen könnte.

The Personal Foundations of Political Tolerance towards Immigrants

In this paper, we expand previous research on the psychological foundations of attitudes towards immigrants by evaluating the role of the Big Five personality traits with regard to the formation of political tolerance. Following the literature, we elaborate tolerance as a sequential concept of rejection and acceptance to uncover differentiating effects of personality on both immigrant-specific prejudices as well as on the assignment of the right to vote as a pivotal political privilege to this group. Using a representative sample of the Swiss population, with its distinctive history related to the immigration issue, our two-step Heckman selection models reveal that extroverts and people who score low in agreeableness exhibit negative attitudes towards immigrants. At the same time, only openness to experience is significantly connected to the likeliness of granting immigrants the right to vote.

Adaptation of career goals to self and opportunities in early adolescence

Development of career goals that are adapted to self and opportunities is a central component of adolescent career preparation. The present longitudinal study (conducted throughout the eighth grade with three assessment points) investigated how 330 Swiss adolescents simultaneously adapt career goals to interests, scholastic achievement and environmental opportunities. Results demonstrated that students increasingly adapt their goals to the environment. Mean adaptation to environment related positively to degree of adaption to interests and achievement. Increased adaptation to environment over time related to increased adaptation to achievement but to decreased adaptation to interests. Gender, attended school type and nationality moderated adaptation processes. Structurally disadvantaged students (girls, lower requirements school track, immigrant students) reported more conflict in aligning adaptation to environment with adaptation to interests.

Ethnically-based rejection sensitivity and academic achievement: The danger of retracting into one’s heritage culture

This study examined the relation between ethnically based rejection sensitivity and academic achievement in a sample of 936 immigrant students in Germany and Switzerland. The theory of race-based rejection sensitivity that originated in North America was extended to immigrant students in Europe. The rough political climate against immigrants in Europe makes it probable that immigrant youth face particular difficulties and are affected by ethnically based rejection sensitivity, at least as much as—or even more than—minority youth in the United States. Using a standardized literacy performance test and multilevel analyses, we found that ethnically based rejection sensitivity was negatively related to academic achievement for immigrant students. This relation was partially mediated by a strong contingency of the students' self-worth on the heritage culture, as well as by a low number of native German or Swiss majority-group friends. We interpret these processes as immigrant students' efforts to cope with ethnically based rejection sensitivity by retracting into their heritage culture and avoiding majority-group contact, which unfortunately, however, at the same time also results in lower academic achievement. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Catching Reality or Bowing Disciplines: How to Move the Study of Citizenship

In his contribution, Joppke justifies his selection of foundational scholars by linking each to what he sees as the three key facets of citizenship: status, rights and identity. Maarten Vink explicitly links his research agenda to the first, status, and outlines why it is so important. In identifying three facets of citizenship, Joppke acknowledges that some academics would include political participation, but he ultimately decides against it. But here we can, and should, broaden citizenship studies by bringing in insights from the behavioral politics tradition in domestic politics - when and why people engage in political acts - and from the social movements literature in sociology. I believe that the American debate on immigration reform, admittedly stalled, would not have advanced as far as it has without the social movement activism of DREAMers - unauthorized young people pushing for a path to citizenship - and the belief that Barack Obama won re-election in part because of the Latino vote. Importantly, one type of political activism demands formal citizenship, the other does not. As many contributors note, the “national models” approach has had a significant impact on citizenship studies. Whether one views such models through a cultural, institutional or historical lens, this tends to be a top-down, macro-level framework. What about immigrants’ agency? In Canada, although the ruling Conservative government is shifting citizenship discourse to a more traditional language - as Winter points out - it has not reduced immigration, ended dual citizenship, or eliminated multiculturalism, all goals of the Reform Party that the current prime minister once helped build. “Lock-in” effects (or policy feedback loops) based on high immigrant naturalization and the coming of age of a second-generation with citizenship also d emands study, in North America and elsewhere. Much of the research thus far suggests that political decisions over citizenship status and rights do not seem linked to immigrants’ political activism. State-centered decision-making may have characterized policy in the early post-World War II period in Europe (and East Asia?), but does it continue to hold today? Majority publics and immigrant-origin residents are increasingly politicized around citizenship and immigration. Does immigrant agency extend citizenship status, rights and identity to those born outside the polity? Is electoral power key, or is protest necessary? How is citizenship practiced, and contested, irrespective of formal status? These are important and understudied empirical questions, ones that demand theoretical creativity - across sub-fields and disciplines - in conceptualizing and understanding citizenship in contemporary times.

Switzerland - Really Europe's Heart of Darkness?

Immigration is a prominent and contested global topic of contemporary politics. Several recent popular votes targeting migration such as the minaret initiative, the automatic deportation initiative, and most recently the vote on “mass immigration”, evoke however the impression that Switzerland sets particularly harsh standards in migration policy. Based on historical evidence on Swiss migration policy making and comparative analyses on current cantonal integration policy outputs, I argue that - while far from being a new phenomenon - immigrant scepticism has become a more relevant factor of Swiss migration policy making than ever. Yet, immigration and immigrant scepticism do not only challenge direct democratic Switzerland, but all destination countries of immigration.

European mobility and local political incorporation: The case of British and Romanian residents in Spain

This paper analyses the impact of European mobility in the field of the political nomination of intra-EU migrants in local elections. The study contributes to the debates in the literature related to immigrant nomination and representation by showing how group resources and political opportunities in the country of residence interact with the political opportunities of the European citizenship regime. It argues that the symbolic and legal status of European identity, representation in the European Parliament and strong links between political institutions in the countries of destination and origin play a positive role in boosting immigrant political entrepreneurs’ visibility vis-à-vis host country political actors. In order to illustrate these findings, the paper provides a qualitative comparison of British and Romanian residents in Spain.

The Political Candidacy of EU Migrants in their European Countries of Residence. The Case of British and Romanians Standing in Spanish Local Elections

What explains the variation in how European citizens of diverse origins are politically incorporated in the member states of residence? This paper argues that immigrant groups’ status in the host society plays an important role in political party responses to immigrants’ political participation. Drawing on the case of Romanian and British candidacies in the Spanish local elections from 2011, the paper finds that the level of competition between parties is the key mechanism for incorporating candidates from a positively/neutrally perceived group. Instead, a greater level of ethnic diversity encourages the incorporation of candidates from the negatively perceived group. To demonstrate this, the paper uses an original data-set with the Romanian and British candidates in a large number of Spanish localities.

Human Capital and Interethnic Marriage Decisions

Despite a longstanding belief that education importantly affects the process of immigrant assimilation, little is known about the relative importance of different mechanisms linking these two processes. This paper explores this issue through an examination of the effects of human capital on one dimension of assimilation, immigrant intermarriage. I argue that there are three primary mechanisms through which human capital affects the probability of intermarriage. First, human capital may make immigrants better able to adapt to the native culture thereby making it easier to share a household with a native. Second, it may raise the likelihood that immigrants leave ethnic enclaves, thereby decreasing the opportunity to meet potential spouses of the same ethnicity. Finally, assortative matching on education in the marriage market suggests that immigrants may be willing to trade similarities in ethnicity for similarities in education when evaluating potential spouses. Using a simple spouse-search model, I first derive an identification strategy for differentiating the cultural adaptability effect from the assortative matching effect, and then I obtain empirical estimates of their relative importance while controlling for the enclave effect. Using U.S. Census data, I find that assortative matching on education is the most important avenue through which human capital affects the probability of intermarriage. Further support for the model is provided by deriving and testing some of its additional implications.

Cross-Nativity Marriages, Gender, and Human Capital Levels of Children

Because the demographic composition of todays immigrants to the US differs so much from those of natives, immigrants may be less likely to socially integrate into U.S. society, and specically less likely to marry natives. This paper explores the relationship between immigrants' marriage patterns and the academic outcomes of their children. Using 2000 Census data, it is found that while marital decisions of foreign born females do not affect their children's academic success, foreign born males that marry foreign born females are less likely to have children that are high school dropouts. These relationships remain after using various methods to control for the endogeneity of the intermarriage decision. Although we cannot disentangle whether the benefits of same-nativity marriages for foreign born males arise from a more efficient technology in human capital production within the household or from increased participation in ethnic networks, it does appear that immigrant males have better educated children when they marry immigrant females.

Na 1 Nachlass Max Horkheimer, 28 - Korrespondenzen mit u.a. Siegfried Kracauer (p. I 14, 115-368)

95 Briefe und Beilagen zwischen Siegfried Kracauer und Max Horkheimer, 1936-1949; 2 Briefe zwischen Else Staudinger vom American Committee for Refugee Scholars, Writers and Artists New York und Max Horkheimer, 10.07.1945, 24.07.1945; 2 Briefe zwischen Meyer Schapiro und Siegfried Kracauer 19.11.1937, 03.12.1937; 2 Briefe von Leo Löwenthal an Schapiro Meyer, 1940, 1941; 1 Brief und 1 Beilage von Max Horkheimer an A. Schütz, 02.08.1940; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Trude Krautheimer, 30.07.1940; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an das Hebrew Sheltering and Immigrant Aid New York, 10.06.1940; 2 Briefe ziwschen dem Department of State Washington und Max Horkheimer, 05.04.1939, 1939; 2 Briefe zwischen Betty Drury Max Horkheimer, 05.11.1938, 07.11.1938; 2 Briefe zwischen Margaret Krafft und Max Horkheimer, 1938, 1939; 1 Brief von Gertrud Kurth-Kieslinger an Max Horkheimer, 02.10.1939; 2 Briefe zwischen Werner Kraft und Max Horkheimer, 19.01.1940, 01.03.1940; 1 Brief und 1 Beilage von Friedrich Krause an Max Horkheimer, 05.01.1939; 2 Briefe zwischen Karl Krayl und Max Horkheimer, 201.10.1937, 25.11.1937; 11 Briefe zwischen Ernst Krenek und Max Horkheimer, 1937-1941; 1 Brief von S. Krezel an Max Horkheimer, 12.02.1936; 1 Brief von Charles I. Krieger an Max Horkheimer, 01.08.1940; 1 Brief von H. Kronstein an Max Horkheimer, 20.05.1935; 3 Briefe zwischen Germaine Krull und Max Horkheimer, 1934, 06.09.1937, 1937; 3 Briefe zwischen Lawrence S. Kubie Sekretär der American Psychoanalytic Association, New York und Max Horkheimer, 11.05.1938, 1938; 5 Briefe und Beilagen zwsichen Julius Kühl und Max Horkheimer, 18.10.1939-1940; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Herr Guggenheim, 20.02.1940; 1 Brief von Julius Kühl an die ESKA, 31.03.1945; 4 Briefe zwischen B. Kugelmann und Max Horkheimer, 1934, 1938, 1939; 1 Brief von Georg Kunzel an Max Horkheimer, 01.08.1930;

Na 1 Nachlass Max Horkheimer, 13 - Korrespondenzen u.a. mit Familie Eder (p. I 7, 1-223)

7 Briefe zwischen Edward Mead Earle, American Committee for International Studies, Princeton N. J. und Max Horkheimer, 1940-1941; 3 Briefe zwischen Margaret Ebert und Margot von Mendelssohn, 1941, 28.08.1941; 6 Briefe zwischen C. C. Eckhardt und Max Horkheimer, 1940; 5 Briefe zwischen Kay Eckstein und Max Horkheimer, 1940; 2 Briefe zwischen George Eckstein und Max Horkheimer, 16.05.1939, 35.05.1939; 1 Brief von F. K. Eden an Max Horkheimer, 02.04.1944; 33 Briefe zwischen Leopold Eder, Frieda Eder, Ruth Eder und Max Horkheimer, 1937-1940; 2 Briefe zwischen Dale Edwards und Max Horkheimer, 16.07.1940; 1 Brief von Hedwig Ehrlich an Max Horkheimer; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Albert Einstein, 20.02.1935; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an W. Eisemann, 02.11.1939; 1 Brief von Else Eisner an Max Horkheimer, 09.12.1935; 2 Briefe zwischen Edit Elbogen und Max Horkheimer, 24.03.1942, 26.03.1942; 1 Brief von Käte von Hirsch an Max Horkheimer, 03.08.1941; 2 Briefe von Emmy Elbogen an Margot von Mendelssohn, 1945; 2 Briefe zwischen Paul Elbogen und Max Horkheimer, 02.06.1944, 09.06.1944; 4 Briefe zwischen Norbert Elias und Max Horkheimer, 1934-1935; 1 Brief von Werner B. Ellinger an Max Horkheimer, 16.12.1937; 19 Briefe zwischen dem Emergency Committee in Aid of Displaced Foreign Scholars New York und Max Horkheimer, 1938-1944; 2 Briefe zwischen dem Emergency Rescue Committee New York und Max Horkheimer, 12.06.1941, 14.06.1941; 1 Brief von F.L. Neumann an Emhardt, 13.02.1939; 23 Briefe zwischen Alice Engel und Max Horkheimer, 1937-1941; 9 briefe zwischen Paul Doernberg, Sofie Doernberg und Max Horkheimer, 1940-1942; 3 Briefe zwischen der Hebrew Sheltering and Immigrant Aid Society New York und Max Horkheimer, 05.01.1942, 1942; 1 Brief von der Selfhelp of Emigres from Central Europe, New York an Max Horkheimer, 18.08.1941; 2 Briefe zwischen R. Weissmann und Max Horkheimer, 09.01.1941, 03.02.1941; 5 Briefe zwischen Ernst Engelberg und Max Horkheimer, 1939-1940, 07.06.1939; 1 Brief von Fritz Epstein an Max Horkheimer, 10.04.1937; 1 Brief von Erika Ermel an Max Horkheimer, 15.09.1948; 2 Briefe zwischen Max Ernst und Max Horkheimer, 23.01.1936; 4 Briefe zwischen Margot Esser und Max Horkheimer, 1935-1936; 16 Briefe zwischen Rene Etiemble und Max Horkheimer, 1936-1938; 4 Briefe zwischen L.M. Ettlinger und Max Horkheimer, 1937; 8 Briefe zwischen Walter Fabien und Max Horkheimer, 1937-1941; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Henry Pratt Fairchild, 25.03.1941; 2 Briefe zwischen Marvin Farber und Max Horkheimer, 14.03.1940, 17.05.1940; 4 Briefe zwischen Walter Farley udn Max Horkheimer, 1935, 01.10.1935; 8 Briefe zwischen Alexander Farquharson und Max Horkheimer, 1935-1939;

Na 1 Nachlass Max Horkheimer, 60 - Korrespondenzen u.a. mit der American Friends Service Committee (p. II 1, 226-453)

1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an die Commerzbank Stuttgart, 1947; 2 Briefe von Max Horkheimer an die United States Lines, 1946-1947; 4 Brief und Beilage von Max Horkheimer an das American Consulate General Stuttgart, 1940-1941, 1946; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an das Hebrew Sheltering and Immigrant Aid, 1946; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Lilly Straus, 1945; 2 Briefe von Max Horkheimer an Herbert S. Eskin, 1945; 3 Briefe von Max Horkheimer an State of New York, 1939-1941; 5 Briefe von Max Horkheimer an das American Friends Service Committee, 1940-1941; 2 Briefe von Max Horkheimer an Elisabeth Kunz, 1941;

Na 1 Nachlass Max Horkheimer, 568 - Korrespondenzen u.a. mit Margot von Mendelssohn (p. VI 28, 232-393)

133 Briefe zwischen Max Horkheimer und Margot von Mendelssohn; 2 Briefe zwischen Margot von Mendelssohn und Western Defense Command and Fourth Army (San Francisco), 1942; 1 Briefe an die Wartime Civil Control (San Francisco) von Margot von Mendelssohn, 1.12.1942; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an die Wartime Civil Control (San Francisco), [1942]; 3 Briefe an das Police Department (West Los Angeles) von Max Horkheimer, 1942; 1 Brief von Margot von Mendelssohn an L. M. Newberry, 03.09.1942; 1 Brief an L. M. Newberry von Max Horkheimer, 31.08.1942; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an U. S. Attorney (Los Angeles), 16.06.1942; 1 Brief von der Hebrew Sheltering and Immigrant Aid Society (New York) an Max Horkheimer, 29.10.1941; 1 Brief an das Department of State (Washington D. C.) von F. Pollock, 30.07.1941; 1 Brief von Leo Löwenthal an das Department of State (Washington D. C.), 28.07.1941;