JHR 425 -CROSS BORDER FAMILIES; LEGAL AND SOCIAL CHALLENGES

P a g e | 1

CROSS-BORDER FAMILIES: LEGAL AND SOCIAL CHALLENGES

1. INTRODUCTION TO CROSS-BORDER FAMILIES

Global families, which are family members living in different country as a result of migration,

work, separation or for any reason face a number of legal and social challenges. As a prerequisite

to moving further into this topic it is relevant to clarify what a cross-border family is which

means any kind of the members of the household, including the first or remote, living in different

countries separated by national borders and comprise separated couples, parents who are

detached from their offspring, international adoption and split family generation.

Issues that are central and most hotly debated in cross border families include immigration

laws, child custody, cross border divorce and pension or alimony claims. For instance, there are

two people who validly married and after some years they may want to annul the marriage but

one of the spouses is an immigrant of another country then there must be a bilateral relationship

in the two countries as to where the case will be tried, how the assets is to be split or if there are

children which need to be provided for or not. Apart from legal implications, these families face

what has been described as ‘social legality’ issues, that is, cultural imprints and imperatives

regarding the relationship between male and female, and between the young and the elderly. In

as much as we are to look at it from a cultural point of view, a Mexican wife, might be subjected

to social embarrassment if, for instance, she gets a job in another country and leaves the husband

at home with the children.

While there are also some social problems which appears – language barriers, lack of physical

or sentimental contact, families are being separated where one parent is forced to leave, therefore

hindering child development and growth, and additional stress which involves money, health and

P a g e | 2

overall care, all from a distance. Such problems are even particularly so if the countries in

question are less developed economically or technologically. To comprehend the emotions of

families torn by borders one needs humanistic approach.

Cross-border families are related to fields like migration and transnationalism, power and

gender dynamics, injustices in the social arena, families in crisis. By the end of this course, the

students shall be able to appreciate and monitor the changes that these families experience from

the angle of social sciences and law. It will encompass macro level policy issues as well as the

micro level issues in relation to relationships and psychological states whenever family systems

breach national boundaries. Therefore, one must not fail to acknowledge that people in cross-

border relationships experience more of social and legal challenges in continuance of

relationship across borders.

a) Definition and types of cross-border families

Transnational families or cross-border families are families in which some of its members reside

in various nation states, this movement of the members to other nation states is brought by

employments, education and other aspects. Transnational families are closely related to

immigrant families except that they predominantly involve the movement of individual family

members to different countries, whereas immigrant families refer to movement of entire family

units from one country to another on a permanent basis. These families face legal and social

issues due to their living in different geographical areas around the global world. Broadly, cross-

border families can be categorized into two main types, immigrant families, as well as the

transnational families both of which face similar challenges and have their share of feeling the

heat of such geographical transformations. Immigrant families refer to those individuals who

have resolved to live in a country of which they are not original residents due to a different

P a g e | 3

language and culture. In general, one of the partners initiates the action with the goal of the other

partner and children moving subsequently under the legal option to family reunification. These

families lose a lot of years together since it takes some time for the immigration processes to be

over. Nomadic families are in the sense that one or some members of the family transfer from

one country to another for employment or education with the intention of returning to the initial

country or proceeding to another country resulting into features of mobile flexible families.

For instance, the so often encountered cross-border families are the astronaut families, the

parachute kids, the de facto deportee families as well as the binational couples. Astronaut

families refer to East Asian corporate families where the wife and the children remain in the

home country for schooling while the husband commutes between the two countries for work.

This puts a lot of pressure on the family unit, thus, the progress of the civil rights modifies the

traditional family roles. Parachute kids is the term used to describe children below the age of 18

who travel for educational purposes in overseas countries as per their Asian parents’ request.

Such children as these are a social and psychological risk with no control over their actions from

their parents. De facto deportee families include the children who are born in the US but are

separated from their undocumented parents when the parents are detained or deported. This fear

is long term because the consequences of a family break up are not fully known and are expected

to occur at some near unspecified time in the future. Forced return means any process that makes

a person go back to his country unwillingly, particularly because of the absence of legal

residency status in another country. They count on each other and at the same they are divided by

immigration policies borders.

International families have legal problems, cultural differences, children custody, identification

and incorporation problems unlike married families in the same country. However, the

P a g e | 4

transnational relational context is not only a context of subordination and oppression, it’s also a

way of building mobility, bi-culturalism, resources and networks. As the world is becoming

globalized, governments should turn their attention to the issue of transnational families and their

connections between states, cultures and new forms and models of the family.

b) Historical context and global trends

It was great historical events and global processes of the last decades that led to the appearance

of families in which some of their members have different nationalities or the status of residence

in different countries. In other words, the enhancement of transport and communication

technology, higher rates of labor migration, higher rates of forced migration and more open

countries imply more likelihoods to build transnational relationships. For example, the

enhancement of globalization of financial systems and job markets in the 1990s and 2000s

enabled a sharp rise of temporary and permanent labor migrants who would come across their

spouses online. Similarly, pursuing the themes of wars and violence leading to record refugee

movements in the 2010s, families were separated in the process of fleeing violence.

Legal attention has also been given to families across borders by means of government policies.

Schengen area which has given the people of the member countries the freedom to move from

one country to the other has had many bi-national couples since the formation of the European

union. The general family reunification has also been liberalized in many countries throughout

the world due to political pressure for the protection of families of the immigrants. Socially,

cheap flights are often employed to connect these families or social networks to help update on

the relatives who may be distant. However, cross-border couples are faced with different

problems in the area of visa, citizenship and assimilation which are placed over conventional

couple problems despite, legal recognition and connections through technology. Thus, future can

P a g e | 5

be expected that in the context of the globalization that is going deeper within the next decades,

the number of the cross-border families and support for them will stay high although there are

many social and legal barriers. An understanding of how globalization has advanced over the

years will be valuable background knowledge when discussing the micro-level of those in cross-

border families in reference to the national policies in force.

c) Key challenges and considerations

One of the most acute problems faced by cross-border families is linked with questions of legal

and official marriage migration. It is not easy to get visa and interpret citizenship laws of two

different countries, let alone when the laws get changed every now and then. They also impose

considerable monetary costs in view of visa application and formalities. Cultural aspects also

produce considerable challenges to these families, the migrating spouse or family member finds

a new culture, customs, language and mode of living in the new country of residence that might

differ considerably from their native country. Economic stability may be difficult to achieve in

the beginning to depend on the educational level of the migrating partner and opportunities to

find a job in the receiving state.

Furthermore, basic health care and other social service must also be given comparable attention

because of the uncertain legal position of some marriage migrant women. The rights of the

people without PR may be limited or denied altogether, or they encounter difficulties in

obtaining the services they require in the receiving country, thereby raising their vulnerability

levels. Above all, when there are families with little kids, questions of care, education for such

kids and child benefits should be equally open for discussion in both the countries within the

cross-border association. Furthermore, couples matched visa rejection or refusal and ‘locked in’

P a g e | 6

migrants who cannot return home for lack of documents represent the affective costs of legal

vulnerability.

Different from legal requirements, culture and gender roles as will be discussed under the cross-

cultural marriage experience prevents couple from compromising cultural set standards so far as

child rearing and other family responsibilities are concerned. Recent change of status of marriage

and of parenthood brings future custody issues into question and new questions regarding the

living arrangements of the child. It is therefore about these factors that make legal instruments,

policies and counselling services that aim at addressing the needs as well as the susceptibilities

that come with cross border families. Similarly, more studies and comparisons of these families’

human rights and their narratives also helps in improving social appreciation and compassion.

d) Interdisciplinary approach to studying cross-border families

As a relatively young sub-discipline, family transnationalism as practical and theoretical concept

conceptualizes cross border families as social formations and as individuals. In an attempt to

answer to the research questions and address challenges faced by cross-border families, varying

methods are applied encompassing sociology, demography, law, anthropology and psychology.

Marriage migration and relationships are examined by sociologists when researchers pay

attention to the purposes of migration and in particular, the patriarchal relations that govern the

relationships of transnational couples who experience the effects of different social and cultural

standards. Demographic analysis entails coming up with profiles on issues to do with

international marriage and the way policy environments and systems in the origin and destination

countries either encourage or discourage people. Members of the legal faculty scrutinize

contentious legal questions of custody, migration status, inheritance and other outcomes for

P a g e | 7

spouses and children with dual nationality. The anthropological expertise embraces the data of

acculturation and identity negotiations and processes and cultural transmission.

The integration of cross-disciplinary also allows scholars to understand how macro-social

factors such as immigration policies and cultural attitudes toward ethnic endogamy interact with

the micro-level factors such as relationship dynamics and parents’ choices providing facilities for

the analysis of emotional, social, economic and legal factors in relation to a product at different

stages of its life cycle. Thus, sociolegal studies can consider how family reunification laws

impact conjugal relations during time periods of reunion. Social network analysis maps depict

the existing setups of backup systems that transnational families use to solve distinct challenges.

Sociological theories together with psychological theories from the fields of gender and ethnic

differences and clinical psychology inform on issues to do with gender roles and characteristics

involved in caregiving as well as the processes of integration and perceived integration.

With reference to the findings highlighted, it can be posited that cross-border families’

experience dynamism and are turned on or off by the social factors governing around them and at

the same time participate in shaping those factors. This is to mean that research must steal

concepts, methods and insights from other disciplines to capture these complexities. Such cross-

cutting debates help in understanding intersectionality, different family structure, and the need of

the affected persons such as the migrant spouses. Recent integrationist frameworks can help in

the generation of culturally sensitive policies and services for cross-border couples in cultural,

legal and emotional transformations.

P a g e | 8

e) Ethical considerations in research and practice

Here are some of the ethical dilemmas that one should think through when conducting research

on cross border families or even providing services to cross border families. Due to the study’s

dependence on personal or sensitive information of transnational families, questions of

confidentiality and or privilege will be of utmost importance. This is due to recognition of

people’s rights and freedoms which presupposes the availability of their consent, masking of the

data, observance of clear procedures to ensure protection of the data as data compromising might

be unhealthy for the participants if the particulars of their immigration status or their relational

status are revealed. In administering or undertaking the study, there is the issue of culturally

appropriate practice and the absence of ethnocentrism. It is in the researchers and providers’ best

interest to appreciate the root culture of the people they are serving so they do not ignore or

disrespect a patient because of personal cultural prejudices. They have to care for dynamics of

power within the cross-sectional families, for example the citizen and the non-citizens

classification.

When taken in this context, this means that more can be ‘done to’ cross-border families if further

research is not done in an empowering manner. Any study should be conducted professionally,

taking and providing legal and/or social services as required and requires one to screen out

conflict of interest and warn the general public of the general risks posed by these services. One

other form of limited privacy has to do with the shielding of information regarding one’s

immigration status. Practitioners need to know prejudice that they might have towards ethnicity,

nationality or language, religion or family structure. This makes it a necessity for any

professional to be in a position to review himself critically so as to engage any client with the

understanding that the client is an individual with his own state of affairs. It is, therefore,

P a g e | 9

necessary to stick to these ethics to ensure that responsible study and practice on such a

stigmatized sensitive population is conducted.

f) Case studies: diverse cross-border family experiences

Family now transverses borders are now common in the society this is because of advanced

technologies, transport means and globalization. These families encounter legal and social

problems which other monocultural and mono-national families have no opportunity to

encounter. The narratives of daily experiences of a cross-border family depicted in the case

studies represent the spectrum of the types of modern families – the best and the worst. For

example, a case may be a Chinese woman married to an American man living in China together

with their children of both Chinese and American nationality. As far as personal satisfaction is

concerned, parents who are married interculturally are likely to gain satisfaction from their

marriage, but conflict may arise in terms of child rearing and division of labor. The wife may

find himself unable to bend with the new order and rules in social relation where if family moves

to America, he means America. The dual-nationality children may also have identity crisis since

the children do not fully identify with either of the nationality. Yet another area of research could

examine the case of a same sex couple from Europe, with adopted African children, to explore

the legal issues of parental rights and adoption, child custody and immigration under the

provisions of the laws of several countries. More so, we see transracial and trans cultural

adoptions whereby parents are languishing in ways on how best to retain the cultural identity of

the child as well as how to integrate the child to the new family and country. Therefore, after

considering various actual life cross-border family scenarios, general conclusions as regards the

legal and cultural context as well as the challenges are drawn, which consists of the legal

wriggling, cultural bias, acculturation issues and identity issues. In the future particular policy

P a g e | 10

developments aimed to promote the consolidation of the international family law that could be

accompanied with relatively more support provided to the cross-border families in the

community may be helpful to address some of the problems highlighted in these cases. With the

globalization being on a steady increase, there is need for more studies to be conducted and more

understanding of the real-life experiences of cross-national families based on case studies.

2. LEGAL FRAMEWORKS FOR CROSS-BORDER FAMILIES

International families, where the members of a family are in different countries legally and

socially experience challenges in the course of addressing their legal issues because of the

interconnection of the laws and regulations of the countries involved as well as the different

cultures. One major legal concern is that of the conflict of laws, where two or more jurisdictions

have competing sovereignty claims over the same families. For instance, couples that have

married across borders may face problems arising from the different legal systems of the

respective countries in terms of marriage, divorce, and child custody. Each spouse may have

different national laws that may accept the marriage while the other does not, raising confusion

about rights and roles. Custody battles are also challenging when the parents reside in different

countries with different child custody laws and family courts. Such matters as child abduction,

which involves one parent kidnapping the child without permission from the other parent and

moving internationally, make it possible to distinguish the discrepancies between countries.

International estate planning is also hampered by diverse and sometimes inconsistent national

inheritance and tax laws. Whose country laws govern the division of assets in case of death of a

family member that was from another country. How can assets be transferred without involving

cross border complications? The tax implications of cross-border property transfers can thus

defeat estate planning objectives if not managed effectively. Pensions and even government

P a g e | 11

healthcare become an issue when families are divided by the border of two nations. Legal advice

in such matters of the overlap of different legal systems for a professional is crucial but often out

of reach for many families in distress across borders.

The laws on migration also significantly influence families that have transnational borders, either

facilitating or constraining the capability of the family members to move and reside in the same

country and include various visa programs, different requirements for naturalization and

flexibility in policies that are not friendly. Family reunification policies seek to enable migration

through the provision of preferential treatment to certain relations, but the stringently defined

‘family’ in many countries discriminates against other non-conventional cross-border relations.

For instance, the parent of a South East Asian woman who migrated to another country to work

as a domestic help, his or her parent may not be regarded as ‘immediate family’ in the country

where the worker is employed. Maintaining positive and productive family life under such legal

circumstances remains a significant concern. Finally, cross-border families encounter very

different cultural perceptions and legal frameworks that define families in all spheres – marriage,

divorce, child-rearing, inheritance, migration and much more. Some precautions need to be taken

both in the social perception of their circumstances and in the legal regulation of their activities

to make possible a dear dream of family without borders.

a) International family law conventions

Families living with one family member under the sharia and another under the civil law have

cases where the conflict arises in deciding or enforcing the laws to follow when resolving a

dispute. Several Hague Conventions have been made under the auspices of the Hague

Conference for private international law to provide mutually acceptable private international law

rules to the jurisdictions of the participants. The conventional tools that improve cross border

P a g e | 12

family legal affairs include; Convention of 25th October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of Child

Abduction, The Hague 1996 Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable law, Recognition,

Enforcement and Cooperation in respect of Parental Child Abduction, the 2007 Child Support

Convention and the Marriage and Divorce Conventions. There are clear provisions in the Child

Abduction Convention on the prompt return of the child who has been internationally abducted

by a parent. It has helped in some extent in ordering jurisdictional rules by deterring parental

abduction forum shopping and allowing the assessment of custody based on the country of

habitual residence of the child. It has been signed by over one hundred sovereign states so far.

This has been done through the recognition, protection and care of parents and children through

international conventions particularly the Child Protection convention of the year 1996. It has at

present 30 contracting parties States. This is done because the Child Support Convention also

applies side-by-side with the UN Recovery of Maintenance Abroad Convention that deals with

foreign maintenance claims as the former provides the rules on administrative cooperation and

standardizes the rules on the applicable law concerning international child support and other

forms of family maintenance where one parent lives in another country to the children. Due to

international maintenance, the Convention, which came into force thirty months after the

ratification of the EU, the USA, and more than thirty countries on six continents in 2022, helps

improve the legal certainty and effectiveness of many family members. These Conventions are

also supported by the Regional EU Regulations in the operation of the transnational family law

relationship among the EU countries. Thus, the contemporary and large Hague conventions and

instruments form the base for cooperation in the sphere of judicial and administrational practice

in rather frequent cross-border issues related to the family law.

P a g e | 13

b) Jurisdiction and applicable law in family matters

It is often difficult to decide which country has the jurisdiction in a cross – border family dispute

and which law should be possibly used. If both partners are of different nationality, then if a time

comes that the couple would have to separate or alternatively one of them would need custody of

the child, the court has to determine under what laws the process will be proceeding. The Hague

Conference on Private International Law has offered same. The Brussels II Regulation lays down

the European procedural provisions on jurisdiction and recognition in the event of divorce, legal

separation and marriage annulment, so that illogical decisions do not arise. As to jurisdiction for

proceedings about the marriage; that is to be where they commonly reside. The usual law that

applies to parental responsibility depends on jurisdiction of habitual residence of the child. The

question of which state’s authorities are competent on matters of parental responsibility and

protective measures concerning the child in international cases is also covered by the 1996

Hague Convention. Particular emphasis should be made of the fact that the rules vary depending

on the fact whether or not the parent has the rights of custody or both the parents have the rights

of custody. Nevertheless, there are some questions related to such states which did not sign and

did not ratify these Conventions. Continuing the discussion, one can note that, further

advancement in the cooperation with the foreign courts would help the courts themselves, would

give legal standpoint to the families and would not let situations where no authority take

responsibility. The Commission adopted a proposal for the alteration of the Brussels II

Regulation in 2021 with the objective of increasing the cooperation and trust and the making the

decisions to circulate improved across the EU. However, insofar as concerns of conflict of laws

have been concerned there are still some fundamental questions that arise in connection to

legislation dealing with registration of divorce, division of property or child support agreements.

Efforts to harmonize conflict-of-laws family rules in the EU can be described as partly

P a g e | 14

successful. Hence, cross-border judicial cooperation remains essential for the continuity of and

legal certainty for the mobile families of the twenty-first century with links across borders.

c) Recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments

Another modern problem of cross-border families is the problem of comity and recognition of

the decisions made in different legal systems with reference to family law. It is not a surprise if,

for example, when a couple is separating or has to make certain decisions about child custody or

support, they may have been in two or more countries while they were together. Hence the laws

relating to divorce, the financial obligation of the husband and wife, child support and rendition

and enforcement of foreign judgments may vary from one nation to another. Co-operative legal

systems such as the European Union or those that are signatory to the Hague Conventions can

still differ on what is precisely required and how from one country to the other. Through cross

border marriages, the individuals may find themselves facing complicated lawyers and legal

proceedings in trying to implement divorce, spousal maintenance or child custody orders where

the ex-spouse is from another country. The enforcing state or the foreign judgment is bound by

the jurisdictions, procedural laws as well as the substantive laws of the contracting states and the

principles of natural justice and public policy. Maintenance of records of finances can also be an

issue in different countries and as can also result in problems in ascertaining compliance with

support obligations. As this writing notes, there is a rising trend in legislation aimed at

standardizing and improving the practice of international family law, but there are gaps that put

the members of the family at the mercy of abuse if the former spouse has the intention to do evil

or if property has been transferred across borders. The research in social science suggests that the

parents in transnational relationships are prone to bear cross-country child access restraints and

challenges in executing child maintenance than those in the similar-country cases. The

P a g e | 15

intersubjective aspects of cross-border family law include social facts of multiple extended kin

and immigration insecurity, citizenship that accords legal capacity and power distinctively in

contentiousness after divorce. Thus, the management of several legal systems rises not only dual

but rather multifaceted soci0-legal concerns for the formation of coordinated rights and

obligations regarding transnational families who are constantly on the move across borders.

d) Conflict of laws in cross-border family disputes

Transnational families and cross border families conflicts and resolutions are shrouded in

complexity and many legal issues arise when there are issues of family nature, and these issues

cross national boundaries. One big problem is deciding which country’s laws are going to take

priority. Such factors as the place of marriage, the place of current residence, and nationality of

the family members may be mentioned as the fact that they have different legal systems. This

conflict of laws complicates the situation and legal relationships in so far as legal claims and

legal duties are concerned. For instance, where a man from a particular country and a woman

from another country mutually decide to dissolve their marriage, matters such as property and

assets and liabilities, and child support arise. In some countries, property distribution is done in

compliance with community property whereas in other countries it is under the equitable system.

Child custody laws also vary – and by the process of arriving at a decision as well by the

standard to be adopted. Matrimonial conflicts involving children are already complicated by such

transfers, but cross-border ones make it even worse. There is even a bit of certainty under Hague

convention but still faces problems of ratification and interpretation. Similarly, as to recognition

of faith-based divorce or customary law, some countries do and others do not. This leads to a

situation where one of the partners in a given couple is legally married while in the other country

they are not. Whether or not there is a standard for determining who gets property when there is a

P a g e | 16

cross-border death may also not exist. Try, for instance, imagine attempting to establish legal

parenthood when surrogacy or sperm donation takes place across the borders. Family laws are

also touched by citizenship and immigration laws. As such, when the laws themselves are merely

deforming and may conflict with each other at times, it becomes almost excruciatingly difficult

for cross-border families to deal with it. This leads to a parallel legal process which is costly and

has a prognosis that is not so sure. It is one country to give legal permission for such conduct

within its territory, but the neighboring country few miles away disapproves of it. hence cross

border families end up experiencing legal vulnerability in the relationship that puts pressure on

the existence of children. Better precedents could be present where there is more homogeneity in

the family laws of the different countries.

e) Regional agreements and their impact

Cross-border families are also particularly responsive to some regional pacts, which govern the

right of individuals to move from one country to another. European Union freedom of movement

example is that one can work; study; get married and even raise a family since spouse can be

from another EU country. This aids in establishing cross-border families in within the area of

operation of the EU. However, immigration laws have not been eliminated yet and marriages can

be divided on income or language, if one of the partners is a non-EU citizen. There also are other

biological families such as cross border families from the United States and Mexico but those

people do not have legal channels to indulge in. The US over time has choke point immigration

from Mexico by placing quotas on Visa. It is a legal wall of the separation of one Mexican parent

from his or her family, a person who could not immigrate legally. The border may seek

separation from a parent but due to its limited legal capacity children are found abandoned and

stranded. Such policies lead to social problems for split cross-border families as well as across

P a g e | 17

generations. On the other hand, the Trans- Tasman Travel Arrangement between Australia and

New Zealand where people are at liberty to move from one country to the other for work as well

as to visit their relatives. The above legal provisions rather encourage and do not hinder the

maintenance of cross border families in that regard, bilateral treaties deeply shape legal

possibilities for cross-neighborly families’ togetherness – as communication, parenthood and

language acquisition, sense of self and family functioning. Further studies are called for to

uncover these kinds of effects and thus enhance the policy that will address the upsurge in

different cross-national families across the globe. What is needed here are legal actions that

should be human rights and empathy based rather than punitive and exclusionary ones which

negatively affect families only for the purpose of achieving the objective of making sure that

families are kept together across borders.

f) Gaps and inconsistencies in legal protection

Attempts have been made to align laws but they remain a shield of cracks and disparities in the

approach of addressing cross border families from the legal frontier. A simple sphere of interest

is the contradiction between state interests and polices with mainly counter objectives of

preservation of family in the territory of the state and immigration control. Some countries have

realized that relatives are important hence they encourage what is known as family reunification

and marriage migration but this is undertaken with measures that prescribe the conditions to be

met. For instance, there may be restrictions of finance, residency that may allow a non-national

spouse to enter the country as a couple. Long processes of application also contribute to the fact

that partners are often located physically away from each other for quite some time.

However, the laws vary with regard to the definition to partnership, parenthood, and families

across the countries, and hence, it cannot be expected that the laws will be similarly

P a g e | 18

standardized. Based on the information cross-border families including binational couples,

transnational adoption and multi- generational families do not fit into legal frameworks that does

not capture social realities. Gaps are visible when it goes to other types of assisted reproductive

technologies such as international surrogacy, which have gone a little further than the policy in

term of citizenship and parentage for children born through ART in foreign countries.

Besides, anything to do with jurisdiction on child custody, maintenance and even divorce poses

some form of risks to the parents and the children. However, there are other cross/intra state

instruments in child abduction such as the Hague Convention but not all nations participate and

with respect to enforcement these problems are prevalent. Families having different legal

systems of jurisdiction get complicated and expensive methods that make fair access to time-

bound solutions of emergent welfare issues concerning dependents.

The legal mismatch between the country of origin, destination and transit adds to the problems

faced by the families that migrate. This is further threatened by the growth of the neo-

protectionist sentiments, which have seen deterioration of protective measures on family

reunification. As rightly stressed by Professor Kraler to have strong rights it is necessary to

consider “the realities of people’s family lives within their migration processes and the

transnational spaces that are encountered by cross-border families daily”.

3. IMMIGRATION LAWS AND FAMILY REUNIFICATION

The common current laws on immigration in the various countries around the world have a lot of

barriers to the integration of families across the borders. These legal restrictions not only deprive

many families of the chance to live together but they also encounter serious social problems for

those families which have been separated geographically between two different countries. For

P a g e | 19

instance, there are seven plus years of wait of one family based green card categories in the

United States due to per country visa cap. This means that many families remain estranged for

years and, in many a case, decades while one or both of the couple apply for LPR status in

another country. Also, the income thresholds for sponsorship of family members are hemorrhoid

worst for the low and the qualified American citizens and immigrants who would wish to bring

their families from over-hemorrhoid the world. Laws like these one are counterproductive

regarding the preservation of families’ unity and the integration of cross-border families in the

societies where some of them reside. There are also high social costs which are incurred by the

families concerned, and also the society in which they belong to. The health and social needs of

children who are away from parents due to immigration include; traumatization that results from

either separation or failure in coping with new conditions in school and other areas of life in the

new societies. In relation to family, the relationships demand to be sustained, and because of

separation from spouses, mental illnesses occur. There is also reduction in productivity from the

family members who are unable to fully focus and produce. Therefore, the existing immigration

policies of the countries which successfully restrict the opportunities for the members of a family

reunion do not reflect a realistically globalized trend of forming a new type of transnational

families. Another strategy is the adjustment of family-based immigration laws that will reduce

their waiting time and the increase the sponsor income that may assist so many cross-border

couples and families. It will also assist the families of immigrants to assimilate into the society

and every member to be able to traverse schools, work places and neighborhoods as should be.

This would indeed be economically and socially beneficial to the family members involved, to

the society and the nation at large. Were the legal policies that cut across the family unity formed

P a g e | 20

carefully and with a compassionate understanding, then many of the problem that cross-border

families face today would not be a concern.

a) Family-based immigration policies

Family reunification has been one of the most common policies of immigration as long as the

sponsoring country’s citizens or legal permanent residents can sponsor certain close relatives for

immigration and such policies are intended to reunite families and pay attention to the social role

and network families have. However, the immigration of family reunification includes legal

procedures and conditions which may pose different barriers and long waiting for time. Persons

who immigrate through the USA family preferences, particularly those being sponsored by a US

citizen or a lawful permanent resident have numerical restrictions. For instance, for the family

preference category, applicants, including unmarried adult children of lawful permanent

residents, will have to wait till November 2022 with approximately 10 years and over waiting

time. Relative sponsorship may even take much longer time, more so for relatives of new

immigrants who have to go for naturalization before they can sponsor other relatives.

Besides backlogs, the family-based immigration also has restrictive definition of ‘family’ which

is quite selective and more often than not tends to lean towards the nuclear family only. In the

case of immigration and legal frameworks there is no direct analogy to family ties and the type

of accommodation that transnational families might have. For example, the current policies of

the United States provide care only to spouses, children below 18 years, disabled or orphaned, or

those who have illnesses that are terminal. Its idea of ‘family’ is restrictive, which is why it may

take years for some very close relatives to reunite after they have crossed the border into another

country providing a standard model on marriage and divorce that does not address the Third

World values on families. Ideas imported from the respective states about families have not

P a g e | 21

adapted to the new reality of financial, virtual, periodic transnational families. If there are more

of accepting definitions of a family according to the legal systems the families could reunite in

less time.

The amendment of the policy concerning the family reunification is a process that is founded on

the desire to balance the goals like the reunion of families, integration, or the interests of the

country. Where the governments proceed with the entry of more families on allowance, they will

be pressured to provide settlement services to families while numeration of family visas in a

restrictive way encourages illegitimate migration. For the first time varieties of priorities do not

allow to reach consensus over the proposed changes in the immigration systems. However,

keeping families for several years apart incurs monumental social and emotional costs on the

families across the generations. Family reunification helps to improve the immigrants’

integration in the society and also improves the welfare of society. As it should be equally

efficient to extend the legal meaning of the term family as well as to harmonize the official

procedures.

b) Spousal and partner visas

It is surprising that majority of the countries around the world have sections in their immigration

policies that allows spouses and partners of citizens and permanent residents to immigrate using

spousal or partner visas. For these visas the conditions vary from one country to the other but the

principal aim is for the section to establish that the relationship is real. These laws pose several

legal difficulties to cross border couples, which does not only question the couples’ resolve but

also the compass and decent of immigration laws.

P a g e | 22

That is, apart from having to provide a marriage certificate to prove that the couple lives

together, applicants for the spousal visa may have to undergo an examination, or prove their

proficiency in a foreign language, and meet a minimum income level. The attention received can

be offending: too intimacy invasive, or shamelessly invasive in terms of culture, work, space to

live, or psychological health where separation is painful for jobs, homes, or mental health. There

could be other difficulties for same-sex couples here – till 2001 same-sex partners could not get

visas at all and were offered a choice between exclusion or misinformation. Some of the

countries have no legal provision that would enable same sex partners to be joined.

Whether this is the case depends on the country, there could be additional restrictions after

obtaining the visa, for instance, in the ‘United States of America’, an individual is allowed only

two-year conditional period. It only gets granted to the immigrant after further proof nearer the

end that they are still indeed in a genuine partnership. These laws have been described by critics

as a relic of the past or as based on the misconceptions to prevent ‘fake’ and ‘green card’

weddings. There are some people believe that when it comes to distinguishing genuine couple

there is need for immigration systems to be very cautious while on the other side there could be

rather comprehensive and cultural pertinent assessment standards.

As a result, spousal visas cement stereotyped conceptions of the ‘proper’ relationship that ought

to be acknowledged authorized beneath the principles of household reunification. As

globalization deepens the cultural diversity within the nation, the policy makers are often under

pressure to update an augment these laws to, on one side, safeguard the international couple and,

on the other side, to curb the marriage of convenience. Researchers and activists as well as

immigrants that suffered due to the limitation of reunion insist on increasing the chances of

family reunion respecting differences and practicing traditional vindicators, ethical and social

P a g e | 23

norms. Nevertheless, aggressive push for more widespread improvement remains difficult

though remains necessary to enhance the ability of contemporary multiple forms of families.

c) Child reunification processes

The effect of detention and deportation on immigrant families is that when the parents get

arrested or deported, the kids who are American citizens or have green cards are literally

displaced a lot. At other times, child welfare departments are contacted for help where there is no

other family or child care provider and children end up in foster care. Family reunification in

such cases is a legal and social service concern that involves the reunited of families that has

been separated across the national borders. The first procedures entail the process of assessing

the parent and the children as to their suitability for the procedure and also planning for

transportation for the reunions. Likelihood of reunification or that it is not suitable is also a basis

for suits for termination of parental rights.

If kids are in foster care fifteen of the last twenty-two months, ASFA dictates that the states

must file for termination of parental rights. However, if the parents were separated with the

children through detention or deportation, the immigrant parents may be afforded more time to

reunify. But immigrant parents do not go to case related hearings, assessment and treatment that

are prescribed by an agency or a court of child welfare. In other words, it is almost impossible to

go through all these bureaucratic procedures if one is outside the United States, not to mention if

parents do not have immigration rights, or if their entry to the United States is forbidden.

Besides, the reintegration plan shall be done in compliance with the laws of both countries. For

example, if the parents desire their children to return to be with grandparents or other family

members in home country US courts and agencies will undertake home study with the intention

P a g e | 24

of evaluating whether the home where the children are expected to live is safe for children and

whether the potential grandparents or whoever is expected to take care of the children has what it

takes to take care of children safely. Nonetheless, most of the Latin American consulates for the

most part bar adoption or grants of custody to US citizens from undocumented migrant parents.

Thus, it is for this reason that legally acceptable reunification solutions are still hard to come by

for many cross-border families in the United States and their nations of origin, largely because

the two countries’ governments are not coordinating. Therefore, the search for ethical and

sustainable solutions means absorbing and mediating several interest groups such as parents,

children and the state on an international level.

d) Challenges in proving family relationships

As a general rule, candidates who apply for refugee status on the grounds of family reunification

encounter problems in establishing the family link to the immigration department. These legal

requirements could be difficult for the applicants to demonstrate since they are compelled to

prove that they are nationals with relevant connections, still, there are no ID from the country of

origin. For example, partners in a common law may be required to undergo a more rigors testing

than even legally wed people to prove the legitimacy of their association. There are occasions

when one is able to obtain such documents and being even be difficult to obtain a certified copy

from the relevant organs in the foreign country. The officials may not understand what is written

in records in a different language, bearing different named, format and seals from other

countries. Translation can also trigger some issues if not done properly with certificates. There is

also documentation which from social and cultural points of view explain the legitimacy of the

family. Certain practices within a relationship that is okay within the source culture fails to

integrate with the standard family units of the host nations. Supporters of the immigrants give

P a g e | 25

scenarios that showed that the authorities turned them down due to the structure of the family

which did not match the conventional ‘white’ nuclear family. As there are other superior forms of

extended family relations conferring privilege and status abroad, they might not always be

acknowledged. Thus, family reunification frameworks represent rather selective ideas about the

family opposed to the situations in diverse communities. Imposing restrictions regarding who

might marry presciently erects shields against cultural demands of obligation and belonging

inherent in non-European cultures. The issue of fraud also has added another fold to the question

of verification; there are cases applicants are alleged to have concocting information knowing

very well that they are applying different cultural reasoning. Unfortunately, all these measures

are aimed at strengthening a notion that immigrant families are somehow suspicious by default.

However, as it will be shown, although the existing policies support the concept of social

inclusion of migrant families the practice that has been formed in relation to the evidentiary rules

does not enhance but rather erodes the existing relations. For one, a scholar observes that failure

to engage with diverse families contributes to the overlooking of the “physical, emotional and

psychological displacement which remains one of the most unseen consequences of the

immigration law”.

e) Impact of immigration status on family rights

The immigration status is one of the most significant factors which define the possibility of an

individual to assert the family rights and reunite with families. For example, ‘illegal persons’ or

‘alien workers’ suffer from the most drastic curtailment of opportunities to establish a family life

outside their own countries or rebuild the family in the country of their residence. Such families

will always be vulnerable to arrest and deportation, therefore, long and sometimes permanent

separation of couples and children who are otherwise legal residents of the United States. If

P a g e | 26

parents themselves are gathering papers, they can be denied benefits and services and at worse,

deported. Children equally are exposed to poor access of health care and education because they

are considered illegitimate due to unlawful presence of the parents. Regulations for

naturalization affect the eligibility of people who arrived in the country unlawfully to gain lawful

status through marriage or having children. On the same note, the undocumented immigrants

they do not have many ways of moving to other countries and visiting their kin without putting

their lives in danger in the country of adoption. All the above barriers display in what manner the

shoestring rights make family stability and functioning fragile for the undocumented. As much as

LPRs have some privileges, they also have some problems in the ability to sponsor relatives in

oversea and passing citizenship to children born in other countries. The legal restrictions outlined

in the paper show just how much immigration controls intrude into private parties of

families. Besides, they also control the chances of intimacy, marriage and procreation within

families at risk of separation or deportation. The sham distinction which exists under

immigration law to provide unequal treatment predicated on nationality and mode of entry

violates the basic human function of family. Because enforcement of immigration is expanding

more rapidly than legal pathways through immigration or naturalization, restrictive border

measures will in the not-too-distant future bar cross-border families or communities for good.

f) Comparative analysis of family reunification policies

Forced marriage and culture in regard to family reunion is quite varying from one country to

another because some nations are somewhat liberal than the others in case of the policy on

family reunion. It is helpful to compare these two systems in order to see how each community is

affected on issues to do with immigrating families running across the borders. For Instance,

Canada has relatively liberal rules for family reunification that pertain the permanent residents

P a g e | 27

and the citizens of the country in so much as the sponsors can afford an income to provide shelter

for the family. This goes contrary to the financial, language and integration tests of other family

members as laid down in the UK as well as other European countries. In the spectrum of

development, Australia also moves towards the occupational migration with lesser stringencies

of family reunion in past few decades. But more than a third of Australia’s annual immigration

program is the family stream visas. In a way, it is like the policies that offer provisions for the

economically active persons while at the same time making sure that low skill migrants and

refugees cannot be joined by their families. Within regions it is also found to be diverse – EU

allows the freedom of movement within the member countries but it might also restrict in terms

of visa for the family members of the EU citizen. While some of the countries in America like

United States will only permit family migration in cases of security concerns, some of the

countries in America like Brazil and Argentina permit family migration. In different

circumstances, one can identify conflict of interest between the need to integrate a family into the

society, the need to protect a country’s interest and the need to show compassions to a family that

is affected by border policies. Controversies continue over who should be considered a ‘family’

eligible for legal migration, or the employment or education requirement and other preconditions

they are other sociopolitical hurdles they are other fasting measures that only worsen the

situation for transnational families. changing this or that perspective comparative evaluations

underscore that the laws of migration can reunite families or, conversely, can separate them.

4. CROSS-BORDER MARRIAGE AND PARTNERSHIPS

Given the current trend and integration of all countries of the world through globalization, inter-

country marriages and relations are on the increase. The major challenge emanates from the

aspect that these relationships are between people of different cultures and hence operate under

P a g e | 28

different legal systems as well as different immigration policies. Two people from different

countries who are either married or in a live in relationship constitute a cross-border family that

brings questions of recognition of the marriage or partnership, immigration status, citizenship as

well as rights of both the parents and children in the family. For example, if a Canadian citizen

who has health care, tax, insurance and pension rights in Canada, decides to marry an American

citizen, there are decisions to be made where they will live and, under whose jurisdiction one

person has all those rights over the other. Or if one partner has no papers at all or only a

temporary green card the couple has to make decisions about having a long and tiresome

procedures which are extremely expensive and, in many cases, do not guarantee a successful

result.

In addition to legal constraints, the families which such couples come from bear cultural and

social differences that may not have been very pronounced when the couple was still just a

couple but sufficiently profound to keep them from starting the family life in one country. Some

differences may become potential sources of conflict as concerns the gender roles, family

responsibilities, religious beliefs, child care, etc. Another implication of language barriers is the

social isolation of the foreign spouse. If the couple moves according to the citizenship of one

partner, the other has to struggle to adapt to the new culture /community. They many a times are

lonely and do not have nearby social support and mostly rely on their partners and internet

sources for social emotional needs. These are social stressors, which, depending on the

stability/legitimacy of such marriages to immigration, can readily migrate to the legal realm. As a

result, in order to overcome legal issues, the couples are compelled to include actions addressing

cultural issues as well. It is however crucial to argue that for such cross-border families’ to be

P a g e | 29

sustained and accommodated as they become more prevalent in today’s world, legal and social

acceptance by the different territorial jurisdictions is mandatory.

a) Legal recognition of international marriages

Recognition of two partners with different nationalities has legal problems. Cross-border couples

may have to attend all sorts of legal formalities and procedural requirements in the initial stage

only to be able to marry and yet the marriage itself may not be openly legally acknowledged

across a border and across legal systems. Subjects which are the most straightforward in the

simpler systems of civil legal systems, including citizenship, possession, the right to vote or to be

taxed, marriage and divorce, and child custody would raise a lot of issues if viewed through the

lens of frequently different national laws. For instance, while in the country in which the

marriage ceremony was conducted may have endorsed the marriage, the countries of origin of

the two partners may have different rules regarding the viability of the partnership. This can raise

problems if the couple will ever need, years later, to officially sanctify or dissolve the marriage

back in their home country. Disputes can also be where the marriage has reached its eventual

collapse but the couple is still from different countries with different laws on divorce. Therefore,

if legal systems are not integrated across the borders, it may be perfectly unpredictable for the

cross-border partners to enjoy some of the most basic rights and shields as a result of marriage

from one system. Another level of complexity thickens the quest for universal recognition of

binational marriage is the national immigration laws which in some instances allows for the legal

residency status of binational marriage partners after marriage to be more restricted. Therefore,

the legal developments arising from the jurisdictional splits underline the fact that legal

frameworks are still anchored on the assumption that most couples will be binational.

Technology has however eased the tough part of keeping a cross international couple love or

P a g e | 30

marriage going for a lifetime, but this means of being an international marriage entails

unaddressed issues by sociopolitical disparities in the international legal framework. The broadly

described conception of liberality of love in reference to the transnational marriage is contrary to

segregated acknowledgement of transnational marriages encouraging) the need for enhanced

international cooperation to ensure that the rights of the transnational couples are accorded due

recognition.

b) Same-sex partnerships across borders

We need to understand is that marriages between two people of two different countries or two

people in a different country have been quite common for the past many years now as have been

same sex marriages and partnerships. But legal and social difficulties are significantly different

in each of them. Minors who manage to enter into a valid marriage accorded legitimacy in one

country may be denied the same in another country. For example, legally conducted same-sex

marriages, in Netherlands or Canada are unlawful for the partner in case the other is from

Poland, a country that does not recognize same-sex marriages. As such, while one partner would

be from a country where homosexuality is criminal, it becomes impossible for the couple to

cohabit even where same sex marriage is legalized.

As of now most nations do not have a transparent process of immigration for gay partners to say

nothing of individuals from nations where the partnership is not even recognized. While Spain

and Ireland have recently legalized the immigration and naturalization for partnership for same

sex couples, there are many other countries where same sex partners have no legal possibilities to

stay together at all especially if one of the partners needs asylum for persecution on the ground

of sexual orientation or gender identity. It is in such cases that such couples are separated mostly

P a g e | 31

by deportation of the partner who has been denied an allow to stay within the country hence does

not and cannot be together with the other partner.

It is also relevant to point out the fact that the acknowledgement of the parentage and the

custody also significantly differ between the countries in case of the transnational same sex

couples and their Children. As for the concepts of a parent and that parent’s rights, surrogacy

defines them as complex as well. When it comes to adoption too, concern vary, while some child

welfare system may frown at the idea of placing a child in the care of gay parents from another

culture. That all results in the social problems yes, and the feeling of insecurity. Some same-sex

couples admit to having to live in the closet so as not to suffer from harassment or physical

attacks assuming their relationship. There have been efforts to push for ‘partnership’ and

‘marriage’ rights across borders with some countries showing minimal progress in legalizing

same-gender marriages while others are fully against it especially those with religion against it.

Last but not least, the creation of a safe family life in different countries stays an issue in

relationships between representatives of the same sex; Regarding the legislation of specific states

of the country, family members have no guarantees of the rights of a relative.

c) Cultural and religious aspects of cross-border unions

An interaction between individuals from two different countries as well as the marriages between

individuals of two different countries present diverse social and legal concerns. Family culture

can be used to explain why couples quarrel on issues to do with child care, house hold chores,

marriage roles and almost everything as goes out in marriage. For instance, if one of the partners

transformed into a different religion after marriage, there might be issues on religion in the

family. Other matters that lead to quarrels are on issues to do with where the other members of

the extended family should live with the couple or whether they all should live together or not,

P a g e | 32

bill payments and any other aspect concerning finances. The legal complexities are added –

immigration laws may require that debt be incurred when applying for a visa and cross-border

divorce also raises questions of whether certain property or visitation rights are in one or the

other country.

Besides, there are possibilities of cultural differences when it comes to roles of male and

female, conduct of a couple, relations between a couple and their parents’ and other concerns.

For instance, an Indian wife may expect compliance to more submissiveness than an American

husband is willing to provide; this is a difference. The other issue is social isolation because

couples from different religious or racial backgrounds may be rejected by religious or racial

groups that encourage ‘closed-end’ marriages. This is due to the fact that through immigration

and transnational labor migration there has been consequent rise in blending of eastern and

western cultures through marriage and other related growth in cross-border marriages.

As globalization and immigration have made families contemporary intercontinental, the legal

and social factors that define the difficulty elaborate on the problems facing today’s partners.

Multiethnic relationships, as the article can demonstrate, are both positive in terms of diversity

and social integration, as well as problematic in terms of providing certain conflict types that a

couple has to resolve. Last but not the least, it is cultural sensitivity, communication and

compromise minimizes the stresses. Administrations of justice and lawmakers attempt to address

cross-national family diversity too by making legal shifts like the international child abduction

laws or the divorce jurisdiction provisions. Because of such tendencies as globalization and

relatively high mobility they become essential for contemporary and future borderless families.

P a g e | 33

d) Prenuptial agreements in international context

These are agreements that are made prior the union through marriage; such agreements are

frequently recorded in cross-border marriages and relatively recent relationships. With the

globalization of the world and more and more people travelling and migrating from one country

to the other, cross-cultural relationships have become more popular. However, where citizens of

different jurisdictions are involved matters arising from family laws arise as to how the property

will be divided in case of a breakdown of the marriage or partnership. One can consult a lawyer

and establish what little law will come into force in marriage and how assets are going to be split

in case there is a pre-marital contract though the recognition of pre-marital contract varies from

country to country. For example, some of the countries that acknowledge premarital contracts

include the following; the contract should meet certain requirements as follow; the parties should

reveal their financial situation and ensure that the less affluent will not be left with the

insufficient amount of money. While some prenuptial provisions can be totally cancelled, other

prenuptial provisions may be partially recognized by other countries as valid provisions which

can be enforced selectively. Prenuptial agreement: when two people, defectors from one legal

system and culture, get into a union in another system and culture, they get a legally binding

document. Beside reaching the financial matters, such prenuptial agreements in the international

context may also include the matter of child custody upon marriage or mention the country of

law which shall apply in the process of annulling the marriage. That is why, as seen in such

trends as globalization of movement of people and increase in rates of binational couples, it will

be increasingly important for couples intending to get married across borders to differentiate

legal responsibilities and rights with the help of contracts, for example, prenuptial ones.

P a g e | 34

e) Marriage fraud and sham marriages

The marriage fraud and marriage scams are not just such a legal and social issue in the relations

between the international partners. Such fake marriages are not entered into for the purpose of

entering into a life partnership with the spouse but with immigration advantages and standing for

whatever person in mind. This is actually a very terrible exploitation and erosion of the

institution of marriage as well as the key tenet of family reunion with regard to immigration.

Some of them are, for example, the difference between ‘sham’ or ‘fraudulent marriage’ and ‘real’

one, cases of marriage fraud detection, the ways to enforce the laws without discrimination, and

what penalty should be applied in case of violation of the law. In fact, in many cases even

legislation is vague and this makes it very difficult, in practice, to draw clear lines. The main

challenges of research that tries to identify the legitimacy of partners’ relationships and their

motives include invasion of privacy and stereotyping. Very high levels of enforcement might

avert great pressure on binational couples or discourage those unions between immigrants and

natives. The principle of equal punishment is not satisfactory in cases of a power struggle

through which the stronger party takes advantage of vulnerable immigrants from the other party.

Required, therefore, are subtle policy measures that do not regard one as ill and simultaneously

acknowledge the other’s approaches to relationships as equally valid. Ways that therefore need to

be promoted to allow for integrated families and communities are therefore those reforms that

allow a case-by-case discretion by informed judges and/or magistrates. Measures include the

training of those involved in suspect marriage, accreditation of the suspect marriage ‘fixers’,

effective communication between domestic and foreign agencies, progressive penalties ranging

from the allowing of easier status of bona fide international relationships for offenders. It would

be unfair to prevent marriage fraud for a simple reason: it is somewhat more difficult than

preventing people-smuggling and trafficking in human beings because border guards are obliged

P a g e | 35

to take into consideration not only enforcement values but also family unity and integration of

immigrants into society. The partnerships enable that nations of Europe can engage with other

nations yet the same there are threats which require to protected from being exploited. As for the

family law and policy, they will have to evolve in a way that will continue to protect the sanctity

of marriage on the one hand and champion required reforms concerning multicultural families on

the other.

f) Case studies: navigating cross-cultural relationships

It is essential to identify some of the issues that bring confusion in cross border relationships due

to cultural differences. In order to provide a clearer understanding of the problems, let us

consider a case of John, an American citizen and Maria, a Mexican citizen. John and Maria first

became acquainted when John was traveling in Mexico. They were from different cultures and

they found love in their hearts and decided to wed. Maria came to the US to live with John and

sometimes felt homesick and did not know how to live in America. She was an only child from a

Mexican family, while John had no idea how much she struggled with adjusting to such a huge

change.

Furthermore, Maria had problems with language and could not find a job without legal work

permit in USA. When financial pressures emerged, Maria wished to go to Mexico to visit her

parents while John could not take enough time off from his work. They quarreled often as Maria

accused John of not caring about her struggles. Cultural differences in gender roles were also

identified whereby Maria’s traditional cultural beliefs differed with John’s in that she believed in

gender roles where the man was responsible for providing for the family and the woman being

responsible for house chores and decision making in the family. Since Maria could not have

close extended family nearby which she used to have in Mexico, she was overwhelmed when it

P a g e | 36

came to managing on her own. If John doesn’t invest more efforts to learn about Maria’s cultural

background and her problems adapting to the new country, the cross-border marriage will remain

challenging.

Through examining the difficulties that John and Maria experienced, it can be concluded that

cross-border couples have different concerns with regards to family relationships and dynamics,

language proficiency, job opportunities, roles and expectations, and so on. Such problems occur

quite often and, therefore, result in such consequences as isolation, confusion, arguments, and

other problems that do not allow cultural competence to be developed without cooperation and

mutual understanding between partners. It is crucial to offer case studies to discuss these issues

and equip cross-cultural couples with knowledge and tools to build a healthy relationship.

5. INTERNATIONAL DIVORCE AND SEPARATION

It is important to understand that the process of divorce and separation across the borders has its

own legal as well as social implications. In instances where married couples are of different

nationalities, it becomes very challenging to determine jurisdiction and the applicable law when

the marriage is dissolved by divorce or legal separation; recognition of foreign divorce orders

and orders for financial relief are also issues that arise. On the social side, aspects such as child

access and relocation as well as organizing co-parenting across borders create significant

pressure on families.

In legal terms, acquiring jurisdiction where the divorce is to take place can be quite challenging

if the parties are from different countries. This is where the “forum of the petitioner” rule has its

drawbacks as well as the “last marital domicile” rule if one of the spouses moves. There are also

questions of choice of law as to which country’s divorce law applies and whether those laws

P a g e | 37

offend public order. It for example may be challenging to enforce financial orders internationally

as can be the case with the recognition of foreign divorce orders for purposes of adjudging

marriage. Legal matters such as child support, alimony/spousal support, and division of marital

property are some of the areas that entail legal intricacies. The Hague Child Support Convention

offers some legal actions, but many countries are not signatories to it. Legal specialists

frequently required increasing overhead significantly.

Legally, deciding on child custody, visitation rights and applications for a change of residence

when the parents are in two different countries have legal and social implications. It is important

to know that rules are not the same throughout the world. Socio-cultural differences also play a

role in outcomes particularly where some religious laws hold the jurisdiction of one country but

not the other. Cross border co-parenting and visitations involving issues such as transport,

language, currency etc. also posed a lot of pressure on binational families in process of

separation / divorce. Related support networks may also be primarily largely unconnected across

borders that can even further isolate the spouses and children struggling with great life changes

and often without local community knowledge or support.

In the modern world where globalization is rife, more and more couples are seeking divorces and

separations internationally. Nevertheless, legal voids and social barriers still remain to be crucial

issues for cross-border families in addressing the dissolution of legal/romantic partnerships.

Appropriate handling of multifaceted private international family law cases in addition to the

enhancement of social protection that is fit-for-purpose for binational families could assist in

preventing unneeded legal, fiscal and psychological distress in the future.

P a g e | 38

a) Jurisdiction in cross-border divorce cases

Another key concern is the question of proper jurisdiction in cases of legal separation and

divorce involving cross-border families. Many of the issues that international couples have to

solve in order to dissolve their marriage are not problems that domestic-only partners have to

deal with. Several factors assist in defining which country’s or state’s courts have the rightful

jurisdiction to dissolve the legal union. Some of the critical factors that judiciary and legal

practitioners look at in determining the correct forum for litigation include the domicile and

nationalities of the couple, the location of marital properties such as land, any premarital or post-

marital jurisdictional agreements, and conflict of laws. Divorce laws and processes are markedly

different across countries. For instance, some countries allow divorces to be processed with a lot

of ease, while others totally prohibit divorces or only allow legal separations. It is necessary to

find out whether an official legal divorce is possible for each partner and what the possibilities

and restrictions of getting the official divorce documents are in each country. Other legal issues

include child custody, spousal and child support, and distribution of marital assets that are in

different jurisdictions. If possible, the couples who are connected to two or more countries

should try to enforce an agreement on which court system will have jurisdiction in case of

intended legal separation or divorce. The consulting attorneys in all jurisdictions in question

concerning jurisdictional issues and conflict of law rules before marriage dissolution is initiated

can help to avoid related problems regarding appropriate jurisdiction in legally intricate cross

border family dissolution circumstances. Despite this there is normally general rigidity in the

rules governing international jurisdictional issues but here there is some flexibility and

consideration of the circumstances of the case. Cross border family law arbitration then offers an

option to formal court jurisdiction in the relevant divorce circumstances.

P a g e | 39

b) Property division in international divorces

The issues of marital properties distribution arise in case of divorce between couples from

different countries. Customs and legal systems governing ownership of property are not the same

in all legal systems. Such factors include the location of particular property and assets, the

citizenship as well as the residency of both partners, the terms of prenuptial and postnuptial

agreements, and the principles of equity. Some of the problems include characterization of

property whereby some assets are regarded as being community property, separate property of a

particular spouse or joint property. There are certain rules like “lex situs” and “lex causae”,

which are contradictory. For instance in the real estate, the property is usually subjected to the

state law of its jurisdiction. Nevertheless, division of property mostly depends on domicile at the

time of acquisition among other things and the contribution of each partner. Another issue is that

of assets which include; professional degrees, patents, and copyrights, pensions, business

interests all of which are not easy to value. Cross border enforcement, for instance, is also not

without its difficulties. There is quite a bit of variability as to how receptive the courts can be to

the application of foreign law on assets located in their jurisdiction. Yet such judgments may still

be conflicting between different legal systems in the case of the same property. Mediation plays a

role in reducing cross-border property disputes. To fully achieve their goals, parties have interest

in cooperating voluntarily, as legal battles across countries with dissimilar laws can prove costly

and uncertain. Legal pluralism also comes into play where mediators assist in finding solutions

that will benefit both spouses of the marriage without infringing the provisions of the law.

However, gender inequality, power dynamics between the partners, and no bilateral consensus on

the governing legal regimes remain thorns that hinder a fair, enforceable division of property

upon international breakdown of the marriage. More defined principles of private international

law and international conventions are required regarding the distribution of marital property for

P a g e | 40

higher increasing rates of binational unions dissolving through divorce or death. In sum, the

richness of the legal systems hinders straight-forward choice-of-law solutions. However, settling

property issues in international divorce entails a complex assessment of the viability of

premarital agreements, the nature and location of particular properties, international courtesy,

and the overall conditions concerning the citizenship and residency of both parties, as well as the

overall best-interests of each party in the marital property subject to distribution.

c) Spousal support across borders

Where a couple has close connections with several countries and they decide to legally dissolve

their marriage through either annulment or divorce, the issue of maintenance for the spouse

becomes challenging. While divorce within a country has only one set of laws, one cultural

standard, one type of currency and one standard of living, it is difficult to set standard rules and

regulations for international dissolutions of marriage on spousal support. For example, Canada

and the United States have different approaches for calculating support: Canada employs spinal

maintenance which takes into account period of relationship and standard of living; some states

in United States employ formulas that factor income disparity. In bi-national couples, it becomes

challenging to assess factors such as income and expenses when a couple decides to dissolve

their marriage. They have to choose, whose country law applies or they try to have a 50/50 split

which quite often is not easy at all. The very diligent payers are not spared from challenges that

involve getting the funds to the former spouse in another country through things like transaction

charges, charges for exchange of currency among other things, and in some cases, the banks

reject.

More challenges come along with married couples who decide to stay in different countries after

the divorce. They might be stripped of the ability to legally reside in their country of choice or be

P a g e | 41

faced with unbearable living expenses when access to a former partner’s wealth is denied. On the

same note, foreign spouses can choose to escape the divorce jurisdiction in order to avoid

making payments. There are enforcement mechanisms for the spousal support orders provided

under the international treaties; however, moving through different bureaucracies within different

societies requires significant amount of understanding, capital and time. In simple terms, when

the spouses are of low income, it becomes almost impossible to recover the delinquent global

payers. Some states in cases of bi-national separation call for deportation or extradition of the

foreign spouse in violation of support orders as measures of last resort to enforce compliance.

But these measures also do not ensure payments will occur sustainably.

Ultimately cross-border separation adds layers of complexity to spousal support: concerns

arising from the uncertainty of the international laws, challenge in sending funds across borders

effectively and consistently, and effectiveness of enforcing orders around the world. Lovers

aspiring for domestic harmony in divorce do so at the expense of exacerbating chaos affecting

the political divide. They agree that binational divorce has problems associated with

jurisdictional issues, flow of money and clash of cultures over spousal support. Parties fail not

only to heal personally but also in finding judicial finality. For married couples who are living in

each other’s countries, divorce leaves them in new legal and financial terrain overnight.

d) Recognition of foreign divorce decrees

Couples today are very mobile and have more interaction across the world and this has

contributed to cross border divorces in the world. There is a legal issue that come in to play

especially on the aspects of recognition and enforcement of foreign divorce decrees. Every state

has its legal procedures, statutes, and public policy aspects in determining whether or not to

acknowledge a divorce conferred in another state. The majority of countries demand that at least

P a g e | 42

one of the spouses has a connection with the country providing the divorce and that both

individuals have been given their fair hearing. Problems arise when either both or one of the

couples move from their original country and seek a divorce in a different foreign country. The

enforceability back in their home countries also becomes an issue. For example, a spouse may

strategically file the petition in a country that is considered to have a better settlement or

easier/faster dissolution of marriage, known as a “quickie divorce. ” Some states or countries do

not acknowledge or do not implement these divorces. Likewise, a divorce may be refused

recognition where it offends strongly felt public policy such as gender discrimination or the

spouses are close relatives. It is to be understood that there are very intricate choice of law rules

which determine whether the law that was followed in the foreign court was in conformity with

the law of the country where enforcement of the decree is sought. European Union regulations

even permit refusal of recognition where this is “manifestly contrary” to public policy. There are

also problems where one party was not served adequately or that the proceeding would have

been barred under domestic law. International law allows nations to consider issues of diplomacy

and mutual goodwill with other nations against local laws and customs. In binational divorces,

the inconsistent application across countries poses the risk that one or both of the spouses remain

legally married in some jurisdictions. The determination of the foreign decrees’ validity, finality,

and enforceability helps to determine financial and custody arrangements, right to divorce or

remarry, immigration, and more other crucial issues that may arise for divorced couples and their

children across borders. It remains difficult to achieve harmonization of private international law.

e) Impact of cultural norms on divorce proceedings

Culture is another factor that plays a crucial role when it comes to divorce between couples of

different nationalities. Views on divorce as a process, properties division, children’s

P a g e | 43

arrangements, and the admissibility of requests are significantly different in different countries

and cultures. This becomes particularly difficult when the couple seeking a divorce hail from

different cultural backgrounds and would have different views regarding the post-divorce

financial freedom, continued alimony, child support and custody where one parent is favored

against the other; For example, Islamic law, which applies to personal law, is particularly

unfriendly towards women when it comes to divorce, distribution of marital property or custody

of children. Islamic countries enable the husbands to easily divorce their wives through a mere

word, give them more rights to property than wives, have the right to children over wives and

restrict the chances of wives to get maintenance. It said that such proceedings could prejudicially

affect women of Islamic origin during international divorce. In the same way, the differences in

the way that concepts of community property are understood make it possible to face

disagreements over the division of assets. Wives also have different financial expectations after

divorce and other aspects of child custody such as age of children, chances of remarriage etc. are

also cross culturally different. To solve such intricate legal issues, it is essential to address the

conflict of policy considerations relating to gender roles, child welfare, safeguarding vulnerable

homemakers through intricate legal analysis. In sum, the international divorce is the process of

achieving the different ideas of equity, justice and equality in marriage within two different

cultures – the key factors in functioning of the divorce.

f) Mediation and alternative dispute resolution

In cases where international couples experience challenges in issues of separation or divorce

mediation and other procedures of ADR offer nonjudicial means. Mediation is more friendly in

combing out disputes as compared to courts and can also reduce the level of hostility. Foreign

couples are therefore more alert to mediated agreements that the courts will enforce while

P a g e | 44

destination countries for cross-border families are gradually strived to promote mediation as one

of the ways of solving family law matters. However, choice of law issues on the enforceability of

fallen settlements pose a great challenge to couples and mediators with question as to whether

some are invalid on cultural consideration.

For example, the types of divorce existent and procedures to complete the divorce may vary

from one country to another and as such has ingredients of private international law. In

particular, in cross-border divorce and property division, mediators should be aware of the rules

governing international jurisdiction and risks of enforcement as they mediate to help achieve

each spouse’s objective – for instance, to obtain permission to move with children or to gain

custody. Such outcomes are thus contingent on the legal frameworks of a case; international

family mediators seek advice from foreign lawyers where some of the proposed arrangements

seem legally uncertain in the light of the laws of the foreign country in question. Similarly, some

facts about different property and spousal support systems in spouses’ countries allows mediators

build up hopes for discussion of practical options. In the social practice of international couples,

it is possible to solve the problem of separation independently, but to do this, legally enforcement

agreements define the spouses’ cultural representation of their roles and commitments in the

family as well as after divorce.

6. CROSS-BORDER CHILD CUSTODY AND ACCESS

Interstate child access to the other parent is another large and acute legal and social issue of the

families that are separated by the border. This is particularly so where parents live in different

countries because of factors such as migration, employment, or divorce; it is difficult to

determine which country has the jurisdiction to make custody determinations or how a child can

be physically with a parent who is in another country. For example, if a French mother retakes

P a g e | 45

her American child to France for visiting her and living with her after she had a divorce with the

American father, a problem arises when the mother seeks exclusive custody in France while the

father seeks rights in USA The Hague convention on international child abduction provides a

working model but difficult to implement and parents may just play ‘abduction’ against

‘retention’ to win over. Apart from legal matters there are social barriers that can prevent cross-

border co-parenting – how costly it is to have to cross a border simply to be with ones’ child or

the social cultural way of raising children. Mothers are affected a lot as children prefer to live

with them and the ordeal of coming up with new complex legal processes that will ensure safe

and meaningful access. They serve the purpose of social inclusion and interaction in other

regards through video calls and other virtual means but cannot replace the physical interaction of

the non-custodial parent with the kid. Lastly, and despite the fact that both the parents’ actions

are in the best interest of the child, the parents are set against each other by issues of sense and

necessity in the legal and practical aspects of cross border child custody. Difficulties in

communicating and cooperating with the opposite ex-partner require plenty of positive

motivation and endeavors to cultivate co-parenting relationships notwithstanding the

geographical, cultural and psychological distances. Legal persons and social services do not

coordinate and do not deal with such connected matters as visa, language, and financial aspects

concerning the custody. It is thus clear that there is a need to come up with more ideas on

policies and access so as to meet the needs of such families. Thus, as the global migration results

in the impact and diversification of populations, the approaches to avoid conflict are the ways to

find the solution to the still significant issue – the balance of power in the international child

custody – because the fates of parents and children who confront cross-border separation

influence people’s lives.

P a g e | 46

Some of the issues are legal jurisdiction, differences in laws/policies across countries, costs

involved, problems in relation/parenting, unequal balance of power and responsibilities and

responsibilities and burdens, lack of legal policies and suitable child/family welfare services.

Several problems concerning the legal and social aspects of cross-border child custody are

mentioned in the paragraph including the questions of the jurisdiction, differences between the

countries’ legislation concerning the custody, financial concerns and the resources needed,

continuation of the relationship between child and the non-custodial parent, the issues of

different cultures in child rearing the psychological impact of the disruption and inadequacy of

the current legislation in providing for the issue of international child custody.

a) Hague Convention on International Child Abduction

For the international couples, mediation and other forms of ADR are non-litigious means that act

if there are some difficulties in separation or divorce. Other advantages of mediation include

mediation which is more friendly in handling disputes as compared to courts and can as well

reduce the level of hostility. Foreign couples, for this reason, are more aware of mediated

agreements that the courts will approve while destination countries of cross-border families are

slowly attempting to promote mediation as a means of addressing family law issues. However,

the choices of law concerning the effect of settlements are complex for couples and mediators

and many cultural factors arising in negotiations.

For example, the kind of divorce that may be sought and the procedures that need to be

complied with may vary from one country to another, and such variations have got elements of

private international law. In particular, cross border divorce and distribution of property require

special attention in the form of rules on jurisdiction and the risk of enforcement in order to help

each spouse to achieve his or her goal, for instance, to gain permission of spouse to relocate or to

P a g e | 47

gain custody of children. Outcomes mediated thus therefore depend on the legal systems of a

case and international family mediators seek advice from foreign lawyers where some of the

potential agreements may at first blush seem uncertain as to their enforceability in a foreign

jurisdiction. Similarly, having information about different systems of the property and support

helping spouses in their countries reminds the mediators of the practical nature of the task carried

out. In mediation, the problem of separation can be solved by the couple, but in order to do this,

legally justified decisions accurately convey the spouses’ cultural attitudes towards their roles

and responsibilities in the family and after the divorce.

b) Determining habitual residence of children

Another problem often dealt with in cases of international child abduction is to determine which

country is the child’s habitual residential place. When the parents are legally married and they

live in different countries and wish to separate, they have to determine the court that has

jurisdiction to make decisions of the custody of the child under the legal system that the child

usually resides in. Although, the citizenship or nationality of a child in a particular country is not

the sole basis to determine the habitual residence of the child but several other factors are

considered. First, the court looks at the last place the child lived for some appreciable time before

being removed. This is with the view of determining where the child has anchored themselves

with regard to school, friends, sport and other activities as well as the society. Second, the last

wishes of the parents in relation to place of residence of the child are considered. For instance,

where the parents agreed to allow the child to reside with one of them in another country for

some work-related reason, then this common intention will still subsist, even though the child

may still be residing in this other country due to the breakdown of the marriage relationship.

Third, to some extent, the age of the child could matter because the older children are likely to

P a g e | 48

have clearer intentions and attitude to the related connections to a country. In other words, there

is no definitive time or date that can be placed on what most of us would define as habitual

residence and so the quality and nature of a child’s experiences along with their relations to

different countries are assessed using these sorts of parameters. The more important of these

concepts is habitual residence to determine which country is entitled to make or amend custody

orders in accordance within the Hague Convention to protect children from their removal or

retention in other countries. It is important not to have any of these children left in limbo –

having been shuttled between two systems of custody when what should be provided is a clean

transfer from one country to another.

c) Relocation disputes in international context

These include child custody cases where the parents are separated or divorced where one lives in

a particular country and the other in another country; child maintenance cases; and cases or

applications by either parent who want to remove the child to live in another country. Both the

legal and social characteristics of the cross-border family relocation cases present legal and

social questions to the courts which refer to the rights of each parent and the question of which

type of custody is more suitable for the child. In the international level, the best course of action

towards the resolution of such a dispute remains still undefined.

Some countries strictly conform to international child relocation closely looking at the child

access to both parents and the left-behind parent. For instance, while responding to the survey,

the Belgian courts through the judges established that some of the factors that they deem more

important than the benefits of the relocation include the stability of the existing arrangements for

the child and direct contact between the child and both parents. This is in parallel with some of

the ‘friendly parent’ provisions whereby the court is able to perceive gestures made towards

P a g e | 49

enabling the child to see the parent as a willingness to share time with the child and other parent.

But the restrictive approach entirely or largely influences the legal rights and freedoms of the

custodial parents, and the right to free movement among them. It can also be a way of

overlooking the actual active contribution of other agents/elements such as grandparents

included in this broad family may have in child nurturing and interactions in some cultures.

However, judges have also been accused of being very liberal on the issue of international

relocation showing inadequate concern on the psychological effect it will have on the non-

relocating parent as well as the continued access that they will have to the child. In some of these

courts there seems an inclination of seeming to be more responsive to the custodial interest for

instance the right to decide the time and circumstances a child may be moved from one home to

another than the non-custodial interest. Inability to have straightforward characteristics of legal

management of cross border child custody disputes or classification of types of cases which

might be considered permissible or prohibited in relation to relocation might be the reason for

differences in legal approaches and possible ethical problems in relation to restrictions or

allowances of rights to the involved parties in such sensitive issues.

d) Enforcement of custody and access orders abroad

As indicated, the enforcement of custody and access orders across borders is a relatively

challenging assignment. In the case where parents are separated and one of the parents decides to

move to another country with the child of his or her own, the left behind parent feels the pain of

the many barriers to attempt to communicate with the child with the aim of creating a

relationship. New country may not recognize or enforce the custody or access order from the

country of origin in cases where the left-behind parent has such order. It is also fought at the

P a g e | 50

international level by several treaties that promote international cooperation, although to

different extents.

Hague Convention on Child Abduction is meant to ensure that the abducted child is returned

swiftly to the country of habitual residential within the help of central authorities. However, it

does not take custody rights indicate. The Hague Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law,

Recognition, Enforcement and Co-operation in Respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures

for the Protection of Children aims at better recognition and enforcement of decision in the area

of parental responsibility of the contracting states. But unfortunately, a considerable number of

countries today are not members of these conventions. Domestic laws can also be a hinderance to

the enforcement processes and procedures. Some countries do not need a foreign order to be

registered as such to be enforced while others need the order to be assessed before it gets

enforced. It is also important to note that there are a lot of differences as far as the general

procedures and prerequisites of recognition are concerned.

These are administrative and legal procedures, high costs of litigation in other countries, and

even the cultural difference in as far as child custody is concerned and limited cooperation from

the foreign governments. If they are, however, able to obtain an order of access in another

country, a constant supervision of the access rights can present difficulties. However, some

progress has been made through international conventions; much more, however, is needed to

make the process less of an ordeal and ensuring real enforcement of the child’s right to maintain

relationships with both parents. More coherence is needed with the existing standards and

processes to be able to genuinely provide enforceable chances for the left-behind parents to

possess the custody and access rights across the globe. Hence, it is crucial that it is highlighted

P a g e | 51

that this is not a purely legal matter, but it has its roots in social and emotional domain and the

solution can only come from addressing all of it.

e) Cultural considerations in custody decisions

Any time a judge is confronted with a case of child custody in which the parents are from two

different cultures, the judge will most probably think of how this aspect of culture may be

relevant to the welfare of the child. It becomes difficult to determine the ability and capacity of

the parent to meet the child needs since child rearing beliefs and practices may differ culturally

with those believed by the parents. Even though cultural factors cannot be determinative for

custody cases as the best interest of the children and their rights override the rights of the parents,

cultural factors cannot be ignored at all as they significantly contribute towards a child’s identity

issues and emotional issues. For instance, religious requirement of parents may impose

educational learning attitudes or expectations, behavioral standards, lifestyle and decision, and

type of enculturation that parents wish their children to imbibe, may seem incompatible when the

couple decides on divorce. What is required in managing resulting value tensions, therefore, is an

appreciation of how each parent perceives cultural values and possible isolation of minority

practices. The apprehended cultural feel, family and community ties and even the relations of the

relatives might endow the children with ample support, strength and belongingness.

Consequently, the tests write down how some of the parenting plans like joint physical custody,

parenting schedules, request for relocation, or decisions making authority might either

predispose or alleviate culture related conflicts between the parents. They can assist in helping

them realize the cultural biases that they possess as the evaluator and appeal to what could be

considered pro-dominate cultural bias and hold a strongly favorable view of the dominating

cultural expectations when aiming to offer a fair and balanced children centered evaluation.

P a g e | 52

While complex, facilitating intercultural understanding, conflict resolution and pluralistic

accommodation of divergent childrearing strategies between parents whenever possible serves

the ultimate objective: Two, the design of custody arrangements with regard to accountability of

children’s socialization needs as well as their positive cultural orientation during family

transformation.

f) Technology and long-distance parenting

Today there are many international marriages because the process of globalization and mobility

has improved. In the same regard, it has also occasioned high international divorce and

separation rates. A major void in transnational families after divorce or separation, is on how

they can jointly decide on the management of their children. Hence, through the analysis of the

changes in the communication technology in the last few decades, it is observed that binational

marriage breakdown has impacted on the practicing of long-distance parenting. Since many

divorced or separated parents live in different countries, video calls, and messaging applications,

as well as social media, enable them to communicate often and in several instances,

simultaneously. For instance, the separated parents can read to their children, talk, monitor

homework, attend teachers’ conferences and be part of special events in a child’s life, through

video calls. Group conversation also enable the divorced parents to upload pictures, videos and

status on the lives of their children.

In as much as technology has made it easier for parents to parent children living far away, it has

also introduced new problems. This can lead to conflict since the parents may have a different

perception on the use of technology in parenting. There may also be another disadvantage of

technology enabled monitoring or involvement in children development and relations. Also, the

chances of miscommunication or constructive assumptions may not be lacking in the case of the

P a g e | 53

virtual interactions. Some people have complaints of privacy infringement, security, and time

that one spends in front of the screens. Both parents might agree to long-distance co-parenting

after the separation at work, but may lack access to devices, knowledge, and or time to use

technology aptly. Lastly, the use of new and enhanced communication technologies alongside

face-to-face communication, as far as is possible, is the best way to meet the challenges that

divorced binational parents face in child rearing across countries. Ultimately, it depends upon the

separated parents to properly utilize technology in a constructive and efficient manner and make

their transnational children a priority.

7. INTERNATIONAL CHILD SUPPORT AND MAINTENANCE

International child support and maintenance is not a small issue for families experiencing legal

and social issues in the other country. When parents want to separate and live in different

countries, it becomes quite difficult to come up with well-defined child support responsibilities.

As it can especially be seen in the level of conformity and standardization that is required across

measures, laws, and policies dealing with child support calculation and enforcement, there are

clear areas of weakness. This leads to confusion, financial demands and disappointments to

parents and the children in equal measure. For instance, the current amount of child support may

be seen as reasonable in the light of one traditional that may prevail in one country whereas the

same amount is considered to be utterly meager in the country with comparatively higher living

standards. In some situations, if there was a custody order and child support in a definite country

it would not operate or cannot be implemented if one of the parents moved to another country.

These consist of the Hague Convention on the International Recovery of Child Support and

Other Forms of Family Maintenance for enhancing cooperation and legal unity as long as many

states have not ratified this convention. Still, to maneuver the governmental and judicial systems

P a g e | 54

in different countries, the parents face numerous challenges and barriers. Support proceedings

must be transferred to other countries which at times cost more money and take more time;

exchange rates too are a problem. Trips for court and meeting with the inmates may arise and

these are some of the expenses which low-income earners cannot afford since these expenses are

most of the times neither reimbursable nor recognized by the judicial system. On the social side,

the situation troubling family relations and limiting the communication between children and the

non-custodial parent in terms of time and space. Consequently, children are subjected to the

following effects: The child loss his or her regular schedule, has no idea of the future, and is

financially unstable when parents are involved in cross-border child support matters. They

proposed reforming some of the problems related to cross – state, cross – country issues of child

support by clearing the international treaties, having reciprocal agreements, making calculations

fairer, doing paperwork to a lesser extent and having central registers. However, certain specific

states still maintain full and exclusive jurisdiction over family matters and international relations

are still more limited and thus irregular. For as long as globalization continues not to offer fixed

global structures and standards, the passage through the global child support ordeal will persist

being a drastic test for children and separated parents living in different countries.

a) Hague Convention on International Recovery of Child Support

Hague convention concerning the civil aspects of international child abduction is one of the

major conventions which would assist the family who have link with two or more countries in

case of child custody dispute across the border. According to the provisions of the Hague

Convention which was entered into in 1980 and took effect early 1983, if a child is taken by one

of the parents from one convention country to another without the consent of the other parent

who has lawful custody of the child, then such a child can be regarded as being abducted or

P a g e | 55

retained unlawfully. The convention gives direction on how best to seek the return of the

wrongfully removed or retained child so that officials of both countries – Canadian, American,

and others – can work in concert and ensure the safe return of the said child. Among the most

crucial principles of the treaty is that the governing bodies of the state of the child’s habitual

residence should not interfere with the decision about custody rights and should immediately

return the child to their country of origin. The theory of presumptions underlying the Hague

Convention is that the authorities of the country of the child’s habitual residence are best placed

to determine custody rights. There are circumstances that have been placed in the convention for

instance where there is risk that the child will be exposed to bodily harm in the country of

habitual residence, the child does not have to be taken back to the country of habitual residence.

However, a convention country like Canada cannot refuse to have a child back on the basis of

some custodial dispute or domestic violence between the couple. But only grave risk is thought

to be adequate to make any responsible person deny the child the right to be taken back home.

There is still another advantage of the Hague Convention – the rate of work, the legal system of

the country in regard to which an action has been brought has to work over the case not more

than in two months. The Hague Convention is one of the largest international conventions in

force in the present day with membership of over one hundred countries; it therefore gives a

framework for dealing with legal and social aspects of international child abductions. However,

there have been some criticisms of the same in the following ways; the convention doesn’t

balance in some ways the best interest of a child with the interest of the ability to return a child

as early as possible to his or her home country to determine custody/ lack of adequate protection

for victims of domestic violence situations. Yet, inasmuch as this convention is useful in terms of

P a g e | 56

providing a legal framework for cross-border families and authorities to cooperate in child search

and return of stolen children.

b) Establishing and modifying support orders across borders

It is therefore when parents are separating and living in different countries that it is not easy to

put in place and guarantee the payment of child support. Each country therefore has its laws,

standards, and procedures for computation, variation, and enforcement of child support.

Nevertheless, at the international level, there are many treaties and conventions that many

nations subscribe to in as much as the formation and modification of support orders are

concerned. By signing this treaty formulated in the form of the Hague Convention on

International Recovery of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance, countries

articulate rules and regulations pertaining to those issues. Some of the signatory countries has to

provide services for the purpose of receiving application for child support from other countries,

implement any existing orders and vary the support provisions where there are changes in

circumstances. They also have to permit cross border transfer of funds and cannot discriminate

the creditor based on country of origin or nationality.

Maintenance can be obtained cross-border for inhabitants of the European Union through

standard methods of a Central Authority which is present in the European Union. The EU

Maintenance Regulation prescribes the identifying of the court of the Member State to have

jurisdiction, and the law to be applied of the Member State, based for the child’s habitual

residence and the rule that the first seized court must apply. This concerns recognition and

enforcement of orders; they simplify alteration of orders when changes in conditions prevail. In

cross- border cases, they are expected to provide legal aid insisted on by the constitution. At the

same time, the same cultures protect spousal maintenance overseas, according to EU laws. There

P a g e | 57

are also regional maintenance arrangements in Nordic countries Caribbean Africa and so on.

However, some of these countries have not signed to these international instruments and this

leaves gaps.

Thus, there are other forms through which cross-border support may be provided without

recourse to the general international agreement between nations. These are enforcement and

recognition of support orders and co-operation between the authorities and the transfer of

payments. In such a way, treaties assist in eliminating jurisdictional and procedural barriers while

addressing migrant families and ‘locking in’ parents, so they cannot shirk their responsibilities

and escape to another country. However, the bilateral agreements can only be made where the

two countries have a minimum required administrative capacity and base. Globalization goes on

extending the borders, and, therefore, needs cooperation to address the issues of financing

children and families beyond the borders.

c) Enforcement of child support in foreign jurisdictions

Child support enforcement across borders is thus founded on legal and practical disputed

territories. This is even more difficult where those parents separate and the two are from different

countries because designing and enforcing correct child support is no easy task. Most often, the

legal systems of the participating countries are quite irreconcilable, and diplomacy is always an

issue in most cases. At times even when a foreign court has demanded payment of child support

there are issues of transferring the amount to the other country and /or even tracing the non-

compliant parent who may be in hiding to avoid making the payments. Also complicating the

issue, not all countries have laws or treaties on the collection of child support under their

domestic laws.

P a g e | 58

There are a number of bilateral and multilateral agreements designed to improve cooperation

with regard to the enforcement abroad of orders for spousal and child maintenance by giving

people effect to recognition and assistance in respect of such orders as are already in force.

However, many countries today are not members of such treaties and as such makes their

implementation somewhat limited. State laws related to the enforcement and collection of the

maintenance payable under a foreign maintenance order are also widely dissimilar. Some permit

direct access of foreign applicants to their national bodies for making or recognition of child

maintenance. Some others anticipate the claims to be lodged through special Central Authorities

for the purpose of enforcing support orders with other countries. With regard to states that never

had support regime existing, the applicant from foreign country faces a set of legal and practical

challenges in order to receive maintenance. Between treaty partners or cooperative jurisdictions

bureaucrats turn people and prevent them from getting the help they need; red tape, the face-off

of conflicting laws holds things up. Last but not least, incomplete coverage and lack of

coincidence of foreign legal systems intimate continuous delays and insufficient service delivery

in child maintenance across borders. For children of cross-border families seeking financial

support, it may be important for the cost of this serious issue to be met through better cross-

jurisdictional cooperation on the rules and enforcement of jurisdictional rules.

d) Currency exchange and cost of living adjustments

The correct levels of child support in transnational family matters become almost impossible to

determine because countries embrace different currencies, and the cost of basic amenities differs.

Child support can also be calculated on the basis of income percentage but when the incomes and

costs are in different currencies this may be a problem. Once more, even where the support

award or the agreement designates the currency (for instance, the US Dollar), changes relating to

P a g e | 59

such foreign currency carry significant effects to actual support received over the funding

duration. For instance, the value of a certain sum of money within a particular currency may

reduce when there is change in the rate of exchange between the US dollar and the European

Euro. For instance, if the German parent contributes 00USD monthly to the American parent.

This will be equivalent to 750 EUR, courtesy the exchange rate of 1 USD to 0. 75 EUR.

However, in case the Euro appreciates by 20 percent to the dollar, the 00 every month payment

would be equal to 600 EUR only. Thus, while the face value of money has not changed, inflation

and changes in exchange rates can really bring a weed reduced amount of financial support in

change for a certain price that puts financial burdens on the caregiving parent and the child in

this instance. Likewise, the cost of raising a child in some countries is much higher because the

cost of everything: such as child care, education and medical care which have become

comparatively expensive. For instance, what would 1000 US$ per month signify —1000 US$

per month would be way more than the basic necessity for life in Poland than in the UK. These

relative costs and fluctuations in currency are issues which judges and family mediators

encounter when determining they amounts of child support across borders for families.

Recurring features in cross-border child maintenance agreements therefore include provisions for

the adjustment of the exchange rate and living costs in both countries in order to ensure that the

award in real terms grows in line with inflation but without eroding the reasonable standard of

living in the households of the separated parents.

f) Challenges in collecting international child support

Among the most significant issues associated with the implementation of international child

support the lack of a cohesive, worldwide framework for the enforcing of child support orders

can be cited. Relative to the child support there is striking disparity with regard to the ways of

P a g e | 60

child support calculation, ordering, modification and enforcement across the countries. Even the

most fundamental question – which country is competent to hear the case – may pose problems.

This is something that the Hague convention on the international Recovery of child Support and

other form of family maintenance is trying to address but many countries including the U. S are

not members or signatories to the convention. This is so because the support amounts within the

various countries differ due to the differences in the methods adopted in arriving at the figures.

Forcing through bureaucratic procedures a claims process or, worse, through a much more

expensive tender and negotiations to gain support across borders is costly or may be too high a

cost for whatever amount might have been ordered. The practical factors of enforcement become

a problem where an order is already existing because of the lack of MJA between states,

cooperation of governments, and similar legal systems. Some countries do not allow the

deduction of wages, or the freezing of property to enforce orders that come from other countries.

Non-recognition and non-enforcement of orders and delay there from are attributed to reliance in

official time-consuming inter-state mechanism. All this sums to lack of compliance since one

cannot enforce rights and duties where there are no contracts to back the standardized

frameworks. Another way politics impacts on the political economy of the international relations

is by influencing the symbiotic relationships that some polities have. Last but not least, it

essential to take into consideration that the enforcement of international child support

presupposes a huge amount of the knowledge of different legal systems, using lawyers in foreign

states that, in turn, means high costs and high levels of stress for the individuals. It can be thus

actively prevented or considered to be pointless even by attorneys who are legally responsible for

its execution. But it mainly depends on more countries becoming parties to multilateral accounts

and cooperation agreements which remove current obstacles to computation, territoriality and

P a g e | 61

recognition/enforcement. However, there is the problem of global participation being on the

basis of voluntary and domestically unpopular policies that seem to subordinate foreign creditors

anger nationalist sentiment. To tackle all these challenges, it is prerequisite to have a standard

approach of the family law, which may seem quite unachievable because of the great cultural

disparities, which are the roots of norms regarding child support obligations of states. Another

factor that undercuts enforcement is that families relocate to other countries which are not part of

the cooperatives. At the same time, it is possible to note that the amount of suitable and equally

efficient solutions for such people is still quite small.

e) Impact of differing legal systems on support obligations

It is still an issue in law and practice that the role of different legal regimes in operating child

support in interjurisdictional families has not been resolved yet. This is one of the issues; While

determining the amount of child support, the number of children; incomes of any earning parent;

and the cost of living in the respective countries are considered, and where appropriate,

considering the needs of the children. For instance, some systems rely strictly on cast iron

mathematics or algebra while other give the judges the leeway. These substantive differences can

lead to a difference of several folds in the child support orders, irrespective of the financial status

of the parents. Also, there are disparities in the formation, alteration, and enforcement of

procedures for recovery of child support. Some systems require vast quantities of financial data

and annual information changes while others use estimates which do not change for dynasties.

All these procedural differences pose great practical concerns who may cause variation in the

support that parents perceive from the system.

It also impacts the ability to cross border enforcement of child support because of the different

legal systems. Trying to enforce a maintenance order in an attempt to recover from a defiant

P a g e | 62

parent in another country is near to being impossible mainly due to the above stated lack of

cooperation between the agencies as well as differences in jurisdiction. Even choosing which

country’s law prevails when there are two or more conflicting orders in the same chain for the

same parties raises quite legal questions. In addition, the conversion of support orders into

foreign currencies and the transfer of the funds internationally may also be expensive as well as a

long process. In some of these circumstances, by the time the child support is received this

money is significantly less than the other money relative to the other currency. All of these

enforcement issues impact the primary caregiver, usually the mother, and the children who need

stable and enough money to meet their needs.

The harmonization of the two legal systems can in a similar manner be said to be a mirage as a

way of attaining fairness in child support that would adequately provide for the needs of

children. This might be due to enhanced international rules being more evident, the National

level cooperation enhanced and proper ways of cross-national cooperation put in place.

Nevertheless, achieving reciprocity across different codes of family law is not without some

problems that are peculiar to this branch of law and for which there are no definitive answers.

Another possible course in the best interest of more families might be gentle facilitation and

shared physical and legal parenting as well as individualized plans that include the desirable

elements of both systems.

8. CROSS-BORDER ADOPTION AND SURROGACY

Adoptions and surrogate motherhood have officially and unofficially become alternative means

of family formation across borders. Tremendous increase in globalized populations who wish to

adopt or acquire a child through gestational carriers or surrogates from other countries, legal and

ethical issues arise. Issues to do with the laws of countries include eligibility for adoption, fees

P a g e | 63

paid to surrogate mothers, and rights of the adopted children or the foreign-born children. These

countries include USA where international adoptions have either been banned or stringently

regulated to avoid buying or otherwise obtaining children through other unlawful means while

on the other end of the scale, there are numerous developing countries, which do not have

stringent adoptions legislation and scant regard for protection of children against trafficking.

Lack of legal equivalences can lead to legal vulnerability of adoptive parents and doubts as to the

legal regime of adoption, or immigration status of a child. There is also debate as to whether the

surrogates should be paid in such less developed countries as India.

Adoption/surrogacy across boards has social and psychological implication of assimilation and

parental bond in adopted/surrogate children with adopting or intended parents of a different color

or ethnicity. Concerning birth history and further questions related to separation after birth, the

issues of disrupted attachments can be met. Similarly, there is stereotype in many cultures against

non-conjugal and transracial adoption. Still, researches concerning the health of the

internationally adopted or birthed children are limited, however, most of them turn out well in

loving families despite the risks. It is clear that self and/or parental acceptance and awareness of

the multiple cultural resources with which children are endowed are determining conditions of

these outcomes. Finding other parents who also adopted a child from a foreign country is not

only possible but can also be of benefit to other families because it makes it easier for other

families to fit into the many hardships which come with raising children across cultures.

Nevertheless, issues relating to transnational families will continue to be contentious, while

many others argue for the protection of children’s rights much as what is in their best interest,

rather than witnessing the development of strictly drawn some standard policies that cannot

accommodate the exercise of globalization realities that makes many things including

P a g e | 64

transnational adoptions and surrogacies possible. However, with enough international

cooperation, this new state of affairs can be made to serve the common good of the families that

are willing and capable of raising a child, with or without reference to his or her place of origin.

a) Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption

The Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption is an arrangement of global law that provides

safeguards for intercountry adoption and aims at eradicating the vices and scams connected to

the process. It has also resurfaced the issue of regulation and over sight because adoption across

borders has become common since couples in the developed countries are seeking children in the

less developed countries. However, problems surface as to how the implementation of the

program is going to take place and adhere to the provisions of the Convention standards. For

example, when the Convention issues directive to make domestic placement a preferred option

before intercountry adoption, some countries of origin might not have robust domestic adoption

system and relevant legal frame work. Opponents of the Anti-Convention have argued that the

convention has altered the procedure of intercountry adoption to be even more complex and put-

up barriers that will deny children those who need them a chance at being adopted.

And, in connection with this, one more problem arises – the differences in the degree of

commitment to the principles of the Convention and the ways of its interpretation and application

from country to country. These are labelled get or receiving countries that tend to focus more on

the convenience that potential adopters will derive than the welfare of children. Lack of

compliance with some of the provisions of the Convention is still evidenced by continued corrupt

practices such as unlawful financial gains and contacts with the adoption service organizations.

Nevertheless, some of the population of the sending country continues to participate in unethical

adoption due to the poor Rule of law and governance. It has also been a major challenge to some

P a g e | 65

of the countries that have ratified the Convention to meet the implementation of all the

safeguards of the Convention. Thus, the Hague Adoption Convention being still a giant stride

toward the formulation of international standards for safer intercountry adoption has not yet

stopped adoption concerns and abuses in the world.

However, it must be mentioned here that for the surrogacy arrangements; it is quite significant

to know that no such guidelines or standards are recognized globally. As more reproductive

technologies are enabling new ways of surrogacies that cross borders and may entail dramatic

power relations between the involved parties and have issue of commercialization, the absence of

policy on this area, raises legal and morally concern for families that are created through

surrogacies. In the absence of global treaties that check cross border surrogacies, children who

are genetically produced through such arrangements are likely to be in vulnerable positions and

so are the rights of any of the involved participants. At last, both intercountry adoption and

global surrogacy show the limitation of the legal regimes governing formation of the cross-

border families through assisted reproductive means and become a danger for vulnerable

individuals and families when legal advances do not catch up with the growth of the field of

third-party reproduction.

b) Legal and ethical issues in international adoption

Legal issues of adopting a child internationally: The laws of the two countries are different on

adoption Laws of the country, and cultural perception of family and children’s rights are

different. Among them is the issue of the rights of adopted children any time they are relocated to

another country other than that of their origin. Discussions about the element of international

adoption stem from the premise that it takes advantage of vulnerable birth families, or promotes

illegitimate practices, child stealing or selling. Adoption regulations are used to prevent abuses in

P a g e | 66

adoption but the result is that the adoption procedures become lengthy and cumbersome making

some adopters to seek intervention of the law to circumvent a procedure or a regulation.

A fourth source of conflict is the social definition of family and parenthood; the idea of

adoption and esteem of the children who have been adopted and their relation with the birth

culture varies across the countries. Western adoption practices mean that fostering and adoption

should be life-long, and the birth family ties should be severed completely while in other cultures

adoption is seen as providing care and at the same time maintaining lineage relations. These two

conflicting cultural practices create moral dilemmas to do with personal identity as well as

citizenship among adoptees of transnational origin.

Other ideas are worries about inequality between the ‘sending’ and the ‘receiving’ nations;

adoption, notably, stems from developing countries with immature institutions to the developed

Western countries, making imperialism’s shadow loom large. The countries banning international

adoption argue that this is to protect such vulnerable families or prevent a wiping out of a

culture. On the same note, some people argue that restriction on international Adoption are

oppressive to children or nationalism is always favored where the interest of the child is at heart.

Current discords in these areas concern such dichotomies as a child’s rights as against the

community rights, or the positivist approach to rights and justice on the international level, and

the natural law approach to rights and justice on the international level.

c) Cross-border surrogacy arrangements

Other type is international surrogacy where intended parents look for a surrogate mother in

another country and this has slowly gained popularity in the recent past. This increasing

phenomenon transmutes into a legal and ethical problem and contributes to the further confusion

P a g e | 67

of the legal elements of international adoption and multiple governance of families. Thus, where

there are cross-border surrogacy arrangements, there might be question of competing legal

regimes that could create a lot of legal uncertainty when it comes to determining who is legally

recognized as the parent or even issues to do with citizenship for any resulting from such

arrangement children or even purely commercial concerns. For instance, paid surrogacy is legal

in Ukraine, Georgia, Russia and so on, while forbidden in France, Italy, Spain and the like. This

leads the intended parents to ‘fertility tourism’ to countries with more favorable laws on

surrogacy. However, in some countries they may outlaw commercial surrogacy or just refuse to

consider the foreign birth certificates which include the intended parents thus leaving the

children in a precarious legal position on issues to do with citizenship.

These excursions also prompt moral questions of Possible exploitation of subservient surrogates

in the third world, irony of power, and lack of medical insurance. The Hague Conference on

Private International Law has made an attempt to sketch a convention on international surrogacy

with a view to articulating the stability of the legal parenthood and child relationship and, of

course, the nationality of the child. In any case, most of them have not attained a legally binding

agreement because of divergent approaches in internal policies on the socially constructed

concepts of woman, mother, family and reproductive autonomy. Hence, cross-border surrogacy

allying with immigration and healthcare, human rights and justice, will continue posing legal and

socio-political quandaries of citizenship, parenthood, individuality, and legitimacy of bio-

relations in different kinship organization within and beyond sexual binaries of gender and

sexuality in postmodern globalized civil society.

P a g e | 68

d) Citizenship and parentage in international surrogacy

The two concepts which emerge as big questions in any country that finds itself in a position to

confront the question of international surrogacy are citizenship and legal parentage of the child.

When intended parents arrange for a surrogate to carry a pregnancy across national borders the

question of the child’s citizenship emerges as does the question of to whom the child is

genetically related. Indeed, a considerable number of these countries does not have specific

legislation on such circumstances in cases of surrogacy relationships with transnational

performers. This could make some children turn into stateless or their legal parentage status will

remain uncertain. In the countries where there is adoption of legislation on surrogate motherhood

there is a big disparity on the aspect of citizenship and parenthood. There are also some issues

when one speaks of constructing citizenship for the babies from the international surrogacy. Still,

one should mention that jus soli laws may be in conflict with jus sanguinis laws of the mentioned

states. The surrogate country on the other hand grants first nationality by birth and on the other

hand intended parents have to undergo through expensive and lengthy processes to get parental

recognition and citizenship of the child in home country. Long procedures imply that children

stay in a legal ‘no man’s land’, without citizenship rights. Therefore, defining legal parentage is

also defined differently from one jurisdiction to the other in regards to the definition of the

surrogate as birth mother as opposed to intended parent/parents under the notion of genetic

relation or contracts of surrogacy. Bearing in mind that surrogacy has become popular with

people globally, inequalities in citizenship and parentage laws are fueling the call for codes of

practice on intercountry adoption. However, some very important questions remain open as to

how these various complicated concepts of legal parenthood should be determined and whether

the nationality should be provided for by birth right or in a biological or in an intentional sense.

These problems often define the outcomes for children’s rights and their best interest, their

P a g e | 69

condition, and development. Thus, it is possible to conclude that the problem of citing

citizenship and parentage in the framework of an international surrogacy is still a question that

directly relates to the rights of the surrogate and the intended parents, and still remains under the

control of the rather unsystematic legislation of different countries. Much policy focus is needed

so as not to leave the children who are under the special cross-border reproduction arrangements

without nationality or family connections or other basic citizenship rights.

e) Cultural sensitivity in adoption practices

Cross-border adoption or international adoption, which refers to a situation where a child grows

up with a set of parents from a different culture zone has some implications in terms of C/R and

Acculturation. Adoptive parents should be willing to take as much effort as they could to learn all

about the child’s country of origin: its background, the traditions, language, and culture, so that

the child can be accommodated in the best way possible. Most of the time, children are instantly

and forever severed from their birth culture with no way of preserving it. This can only result in

terrible identity crises in later years.

Child adoption centers should ensure that potential parents receive sufficient cultural

preparation that addresses the cultural background of the kid in the light of the cultural aspect of

the adoption. families should attempt to teach and foster the cultural lens by integrating the

cultural aspect in the food they eat; the language they use, travelling, books, and friends within

the diaspora. This culture keeping helps the adoptees to keep contact with the country of their

origin, while in the process of developing positive self-image. If cultural issues are not

considered the adoptee might develop and exhibit signs of an emotional or behavioral disorder.

P a g e | 70

That is, cultural relevance in international adoption translates to honoring the child’s basic right

to cultural belonging through acknowledging the child’s new environment or state and the child’s

immutable connection with the cultural roots. It is a sensitive process, and should be carried out

with a lot of consideration among the interested parties. At many times, and this is a process over

which the adoptees can have no control over, they should never be made to feel that they should

move between two worlds or two different selves. The culture they possess should be respected

the same time that a new culture is infused to them—one does not negate the other in a decent,

reflective way, not to mention, in behalf of the child. A family willing and able to help a child

find answers to harsh questions and embrace different perspectives on the world is so much

better off than a family that will mold the child to fit their compliance. Cultural intolerance has to

be traded for looking for similarities for the sake of the child in the long run.

f) Case studies: successes and controversies

A rather famous example of international adoption is the story of the adoptive parents from

America, and celebrity, Angelina Jolie, who adopted children from Cambodia, Ethiopia and

Vietnam. Since adopting homes for children who cannot find homes otherwise, she has been

reproached for inciting a line of infant selling in third world nations. The most publicized and

controversial case of surrogate motherhood is that of Gammy, a baby born to a Thai surrogate

mother for an Australian couple. The intended parents took home the healthy sister of Gammy

from the hospital; however, Gammy was left behind suffering from Down Syndrome. This case

especially exhibited the ethical issue in relation to the fact that those who hire surrogate mothers

can reject babies they deem ‘damaged. Last but not the least; practice of commercial surrogacy

for foreign couples in Thailand was banned.

P a g e | 71

Some countries in Africa such as Ethiopia and Uganda have ceased intercountry adoption on

grounds of abuse and trafficking and even though it limits the adverts for the adoptive parents,

the reasons are to spare the children from abuse. Indian policies have sometimes been formulated

in response to sensational surrogacy cases; in the case of ‘Baby Manji’, a Japanese child was

born to a surrogate after his /her father had divorced while the surrogate was pregnant, resulting

in India prohibiting single individuals and gays from accessing surrogacy. Subsequently, India

totally banned commercial surrogacy for it was perceived that poor women were being exploited

by intended parent. These examples suggest that, in this specific domain at least, policy is

actually affected by sensationalized cases.

In as much as regulation of surrogacy is meant to protect the rights of the child and surrogate

mother it ends up having adverse effects on the genuine persons who genuinely wish to create

families across national boundaries. The critics of commercial cross-border surrogacy argue that

such restrictions deprive poor women of possibly sources of income. We hence anticipate more

changes in policies because of the constantly shifting global discussion on this subject due to

incidences of abuse or any other matter. Surrogacy on the self-same hand alongside with the

adoption across the borders will listing down as some of the topics that are pregnant with

controversies and many more such open-ended questions. Academics and policymakers

concerned with child welfare face the perennial issue as to how to ideally place children for

adoption who are in need of families, without encroaching on the rights of surrogates and

adoptable children in foreign countries.

9. SOCIAL AND CULTURAL ADAPTATION OF CROSS-BORDER FAMILIES

Thus, cross-border families are presented with social and cultural adjustment issues that are

peculiar to their situation because they are exposed to two or more cultures and legal

P a g e | 72

environments. Intimate relationships as well as sexual encounters by partners from different

countries bring about blended families that cut across the international borders, especially

through bearing of children. These families need not only to accommodate each other’s different

cultural differences, but also the challenges of living a transnational life. Cultural and language

differences often come up as couples and children become articulate in more than one language.

Cross-cultural families are faced with quandaries on which culture or tradition to uphold in child

rearing and celebrations, and this is done most prudently and diplomatically. Specifically, holiday

traditions may be another area of conflict if the partners have different religious and cultural

backgrounds.

On a more structural level, cross-border families face problems associated with immigration;

legal status, visa requirements, and policies of family reunion that hamper the ability to live

together permanently or travel frequently. Working within a large organization is not easy as it

entails dealing with bureaucracy and this may create a feeling of ‘otherness’. or they are

somewhere in between, not fully situated in one country or the other. It should be noted that

family members may feel disconnected from systems such as health care, education, and child

protection that may differ between countries and can be complex or even impossible to navigate

as a foreigner. The social and cultural integration can also be a problem among cross-border

families due to factors such as nationality, ethnicity, language, among others.

Nevertheless, there is a strong desire for an integrated identity exhibited by numerous cross-

border families who make efforts to overcome structural and cultural barriers by reapplying

social and cultural practices in a different context. They develop close transnational support

networks since they share commonalities with other cross-border and immigrant families. It is

then followed by new traditions and other forms of what can be referred to as “third cultures”

P a g e | 73

that combine the cultural backgrounds. Finally, therefore, adaptation has its consequences but, at

the same time, it can lead to higher levels of tolerance, flexibility and acceptance in well-planned

cross-border families. It would be interesting to point out that the existence and the experiences

of the Aborigines in relation to diversity could serve as valuable insights into immigration and

multiculturalism policy matters since countries worldwide continue to struggle with the social

and cultural effects of globalization and the increasing mobility of people across the globe.

a) Acculturation strategies and challenges

Acculturation process experiences many challenges when the families are relocated from one

country to the other due to language, cultures, values, and behaviors. Several acculturation

processes which an immigrant is likely to go through have been discussed and they include

assimilation, integration, separation and marginalization. Issues of life cycle, migration and

intermarriage are composed to present some of the thorniest dilemmas of timing and level of

acculturation. This leads to conflicts between generations within the family system since the rate

of acculturation of different members of the family not necessarily the same especially between

the older generation and the young one. Parents may need their children to socialize to maintain

the heritage culture and language, while children will jump straight into the adopted culture of

the society they learn in school and from peers. It is thus on the family relations that stress is put

when bartering out these acculturation differences; the different strategies of parenting must

therefore be culturally suitable in a way that the original culture is appreciated but the adopted

culture is also recognized. Apart from relational problems, cross-border families face

institutional problems related to work, education, health care, and voting if they do not negotiate

the language of the host country or if they are discriminated against. Lack of necessary attention,

appreciation for the complexity and provision of interventions in these systems may disrupt the

P a g e | 74

possibilities for lessening of isolation and integration of Immigrant families. There is a need

therefore to create positive immigration, educational, health, and other social policies/programs

that enhance/encourage healthy integration and/or reduce the risk factors. In conclusion,

acculturation is one of the biggest concerns in adjustment in transnational families that

influences the family system and its relations with organizations. There is need for

ethnographically sound scholarly work and policy to establish the procedures that such families

go through to achieve translation so as to maintain the heritage culture while embracing the host

culture.

b) Language barriers and communication issues

Whenever two people embark on a business relationship, and the two parties speak different

languages and come from different cultures, then this will show up as language barriers. These

communication difficulties therefore flow through to the journey of social and cultural

acculturation for cross-border families. It compromises the abilities of the partners to convey

thoughts and feeling in second languages. There are certain differences that are not distinguished

when information translated from one language to the other. What needs to be witnessed is the

fact that the very same people who understand both the languages and the cultures find it hard

when defining specific notions, which are exclusive to their partners’ cultures. Failure to

appreciate the issue that emanates from use of wrong word or interpretation of the language

barrier may lead to rivalry and suspicion within the family that leads to break up of the relations.

Language and communication barrier are even worst off when cross border families proceed in

having children. Thus, the main language the bilingual children use may be the language of the

non-native parent with whom the child spends most of his time. This is a blow to other kind of

affection that children may have with other figures in their parent’s life. More challenges are

P a g e | 75

presented if one of the mates or both know a third language, which is not comprehensible to a

partner or children. It could also result to the first-degree extended families on both sides of the

marriage in a way dissociate themselves with the grandchildren as those are raised in an entirely

different environment and learning a totally new language. It hinders attainment of cultural

identity and belonging of the families/ children who are in between two languages and cultures.

Courtship manners and norms and operating cultural practices and standards also vary with new

social roles people adopt and this ought to be well understood between partners and within

households. Where there is language issue one can as well not sit down with the partner and talk

or deliberate on those issues let alone come up with social and cultural viable solutions. As

indicated earlier, there are disadvantages of outsourcing translation services. Another probable

feeling of relational partners affiliated with direct referential silence is the feeling that they are

being excluded. This help may have no understanding of romantic partnership and can also fail

to adopt the family unit. All of them need an internal linguistic translation between the cultures

in order to be able to deal with the difficulty of the process of adjustment with relatives.

c) Education and integration of children

The questions of concern when such families relocate are mainly the educational needs of the

children and how they will be able to adapt to change of culture. It is against this background

that there are questions that most families encounter when transferring from one country to

another that range from differences in school systems, curriculum and language of instruction.

For example, a French-Canadian family moves to the United States: The student(s) may have to

adjust to coverage of tests, school year system, organizational activities at school, and methods

that may be applied particularly in the area of discipline between the Québécois and American

system. Below are some of the challenges that children may have: Inability to be able to follow

P a g e | 76

instructions where the content of the whole lesson is taught in another language. Where the

student was in a class and there are few people of his or her ethnicity, this can socially put the

child at a disadvantage. Among such factors are poor educational results and psycho-social

maladjustment. Apart from tuition fees, the parents are now expected to identify school places

for their children, seek extra language lessons if needed, adapt to new roles likely to be required

of them and deal with any problems as and when they arise. Third, educational disruption,

students’ frequent changes of scenery and often, school, due to one of the parents’ work

conditions. Almost every member of schools, families and policymakers requires coming

together with solutions to challenges which include records transfer between schools, curriculum

match when children switch the educational systems mid- year and other matters of continuity

including special education services. Strategies in supporting CALE and multilingual students

aim to capture how well ‘full-inclusion’ can be managed for students and the extent to which

they learn best in classrooms. Involvement in bilingual education, ethnic student association,

multicultural mental health services, and multicultural orientation that reflects customs and

languages of the new country enable children to have a social inclusion and competency in the

new school system and culture. Specific, concerned educational assistance holds great value for

the quality of lives and the prospects of kids who traverse countries.

d) Maintaining cultural identity across generations

The issue of maintaining cultural heritage and bequeathing cultural values to future generations

presents some interesting complexities for cross-cultural families. Parents negotiate the dilemma

of socializing themselves and their children into the host culture while at the same time

maintaining and transmitting cultural heritage from the home country. This process starts in the

home since parents are in the best position to put up an environment that contains aspects of the

P a g e | 77

native culture. Parents can put up artwork and objects from the traditional culture, prepare ethnic

foods, use the native language, celebrate holidays unique to the country, and introduce children

to traditional music, dancing, reading and movies. It is also important that the person remains

connected with other relatives and friends who come from that culture or background because

they also play a role of passing on that cultural identity. However, getting information mainly

from parents and relatives may lead to isolation in the host country and not gain the necessary

cultural experience. Hence, it becomes the noble responsibility of parents to ensure that their

children learn how to integrate and assimilate both cultures as opposed to reverting to their home

culture exclusively. There is always a difference between the cultural practices of a family and

the cultural practices of the society in which children go to school and make friends. During this

period, parents act as significant mediators, talking to children about variances and how to

successfully integrate the changes while maintaining tradition at home. Such an approach is

flexible and integrative and therefore children can be assured of developing their own

hyphenated cultural identity. A bicultural identity not only enables them to engage with the

mainstream host society while also affiliating with other people with the same roots. Being proud

of their multicultural identities enables them to become ‘cultural mediators’, bridging two people

of different ethnicities – a valuable asset in today’s global society. Ensuring the retention of the

family cultural practices as discussed thus directly relates to the adaptation of the family and the

larger community. The capacity of cross-border families to maintain the traditions of the first

culture while adapting to the new second culture has direct implications on cultural differences

and social harmony at the societal level.

The fundamental idea is based on the integration approach that makes it possible to develop

culture rather than to preserve the culture that has been formed. The parenting process of cultural

P a g e | 78

identity combined with cultural openness results in the change of the identity from one

generation to another – by adding new host elements while still maintaining the connection with

the roots. This fluidity of cultural identity reflects the emerging social web generated by

increasing cross-border mobility. In the same manner that the dominant culture metamorphoses

to accommodate the increasing diversification of influences, subcultures are also bound to evolve

harmoniously in a very natural way through families who strive to instill the spirit of traditions

and customs through generations by transforming them as appropriate for the given society and

environment.

e) Building support networks in new communities

After migrating across the border, the process of establishing new support structures is vital but

difficult. Literature shows that transnational spouses experience loneliness and do not find

sources of support in new cultures. Intercultural partnerships presuppose interaction with

different cultures, norms, languages, and life styles. As much as it can be exhilarating, beginning

anew in such unknown territories can be quite daunting without some form of tether.

This is important as they offer practical and emotional support as cross border couples and

families start their new life. Preliminary adaptation challenges could be eased by placing the

services that help immigrants to obtain documents, find housing or healthcare and other services

for settlement and integration. Participation in cultural organizations and associating with other

immigrants with same origin provides social relations and preserves cultural values. Engaging

multicultural community groups creates those bridges locally. Volunteering is also beneficial

because it lets spouses bring applied skills and, at the same time, interact with people, also locals,

who have like-minded interests. Attending religious organizations that embrace one’s belief

P a g e | 79

system and faith or are offering both immigrant’s and American- born religions helps immigrants

to find spiritual connection. Cross cultural stress processing groups to reduce isolation.

Virtual transnational networks are also prominent for cross-border families. Stay connected with

parents, siblings, or friends from back home through video calling maintains affection. Global

diasporas are connected through social media groups where they support one another as they

engage in the diasporic process. In this way, the continuity of traditions is possible through

shared and synchronous ritual, ceremony, custom, and language facilitated by digital access.

Sustaining relationships internationally and building them domestically allows cross-national

families to assimilate socially and sustain key aspects of their cultural identity across national

boundaries. Multidimensional, oral, and digital support networks are therefore important for

cross-border families to form and sustain.

f) Impact of transnationalism on family dynamics

In transnational families, it is common for members to be physically apart from each other for a

part or most of their lives; therefore, the challenges they experience in trying to remain

connected as a family and in coping with new cultural contexts are immense. Studying Latin

American and Caribbean transnational family, it can be understood that separation affects them

psychologically, especially with married couple and parents and children who are separated for

years. The migrant fathers’ absence leads to mothers and children experiencing sadness, anxiety

and feelings of abandonment. The non-custodial parent can become sad and even guilty for

missing milestones of the children’s daily lives. Long-term spatial distance can compromise

marital and parental bonds; a number of studies indicate that transnational families have a higher

prevalence of divorce, partner abuse, and child misconduct compared with non-migrant families,

but there are still limited empirical findings available. This brings changes in family roles and

P a g e | 80

relationships, for example, grandmothers taking care of the grandchildren who are left behind.

Long-term separated families may change their needs: parents may find they do not have much

in common, or may become emotionally distant after years apart; children may feel detached

from once missing migrant parents. Coping varies regarding SES, culture, and gender; there is a

dearth of research and more emphasis has been placed on the experiences of mothers and

children who are left behind with the migrant father as compared to other family members.

Technological advances such as video calls keep the family connected but do not reduce the

distance between them. The differences between cultures of destination and origin countries also

affect the dynamics of families over time – migrants may change their ways of dressing,

speaking, behaving, which in the eyes of the more conservative family seem unfamiliar and

wrong upon their reunion. Culturally, negotiating meanings and conducts between the members

of transnational families is a continuous and on-going process which occurs across the distances

but also role and relation shifts.

10. ECONOMIC CHALLENGES FOR CROSS-BORDER FAMILIES

There is also the issue of families with members living in different countries, which is also an

economic concern. One challenge is the cost of sustaining relationships with others especially

when the relationship transcends geographical boundaries. Transportation and other

miscellaneous costs often include travel which is usually both required and costly. For instance,

an American who has a partner in Europe may be spending thousands of dollars per year to visit

his/her partner. Legal formalities for travelling also attract expenses such as acquiring of tourist

or residency visas permits among others. Moving money also comes with the added cost of fees

when transferring money across borders. Of the 0 billion transferred every year by migrant

workers to families in home countries, the charges incurred on the transfer affect this amount.

P a g e | 81

Life in cross-border families is challenging as these families need to design ways of working,

saving, and spending across borders. It is common for members to secure employment, with the

intention to finance reunifications, for instance a parent with a job in another country to support

the children who were left behind. Fluctuations in cost of living and wages in various countries

makes it challenging to plan for the financial future. This is because, expenses on major jointly

owned purchases such as a house if the family may regather is unable to be made without

identifying the right currency to save, the best banks to save in, and who among the family

members must save it in whose name. Taxes form another level; countries differ in their

approach to taxing income, property, investments, and inheritances and so on. A spouse may

have to pay taxes as a non-resident to an authority that is not privy to the family status in another

country.

Bureaucracy also has financial implications in terms of visas, paperwork, and compliance.

Immigration, social services, banking, utilities, and many others all contribute to the

multiplication of expenses. Hiring professional services to assist with regulatory issues might be

necessary. For example, lawyers for spouses, who want to get married or divorced, may need

attorneys admitted in both countries. Again, interpretation and translation also attract extra

expenses. It comes to the point that simple processes like getting married or even opening a joint

account are next to impossible.

In general, cross-border living schemes create multi-faceted financial and economic impacts. As

we see today we are connected via modern technology but concrete structures are still there.

Families spend considerable amount of money to maintain the relationships over distance and

boundary. The matter goes beyond a mere economic rationality where the costs and benefits are

counted, but personal values that determine whether these families are willing to pay the price of

P a g e | 82

transnationality. Stability in economic relations when people are geographically separated means

a willingness to find a ‘middle ground’ and make sacrifices and ‘work out’ solutions on several

levels of personal finance.

a) Employment restrictions and work permits