1
The Why of Transnational Familial Formations
la suerte viene, la suerte se va por la frontera, la suerte viene, la suerte se va,
el hambre viene, el hombre se va, sin mĂĄs razĂłn, el hambre viene, el hombre se va,
cuando volvera,
por la carretera, por la carretera, por la carretera
[luck comes, luck goes through the border, luck comes, luck goes,
hunger comes, man leaves without a doubt, hunger comes, man leaves,
when will he return,
on the road, on the road, on the road]
âManu Chao, âEl Vientoâ Clandestino (Paris: Virgin Records, 1998)
El hielo anda suelto por esas calles
Nunca se sabe cuando nos va a tocar
Lloran, los niños lloran a la salida
Lloran al ver que no llegarĂĄ mamĂĄ
Uno se queda aquĂ
Otro se queda alla
Eso pasa por salir a trabajar.
[ICE is on the loose out on the streets
You never know when your numberâs up
Cry, children cry when they get out
They cry when momâs not coming to pick them up
Some of us stay here
Others stay there
That happens for going out to find work.â
âLa Santa Cecilia, âIce el Hieloâ Treinta Dias (Universal Latino, 2013)
Seventeen-year-old Marbe and her sistersâfifteen-year-old Emilia and thirteen-year-old Toñitaâlive in the town of ZinapĂ©cuaro in the state of MichoacĂĄn, Mexico. Since birth, they have lived in a father-away transnational family. Their father Sixto also grew up in a transnational family. As a son of a former bracero, he came to understand migration as cyclical and family life as something stretched across international borders. Sixto began helping his family through hard labor at the age of eleven, having only completed the sixth grade. According to Emilia, her father is a brilliant man. While in elementary school, his hard work was rewarded with high grades in math and penmanship. Grammar and spelling were also strengths of his, which makes Marbe, the oldest, feel self-conscious whenever she shares her writing with him. He is the motivation behind Emilia and her sistersâ success in school. âHad he had the opportunity to go to school,â said Toñita, âhe would have done great things, but poverty pushed him to drop out.â When he was younger, his family used to produce and sell the ceramic items they made in their backyard kilns. As the family grew, space was needed to build extra rooms, so the kilns were demolished. This forced the family to purchase the merchandise they once produced to make ends meet.
Sixtoâs father, a U.S. resident, assisted him in getting his papeles. Following in his fatherâs footsteps, Sixto began his commutes to the U.S. in the 1980s. These continued after his marriage to Poncia and the birth of his six childrenâfour daughters and two boys. As a legal resident turned citizen, Sixto spends six months of the year in the U.S., usually in Chicago, Portland, or Alaska, and the rest of the year in ZinapĂ©cuaro. With six children, one en route to college, ailing parents, and a sister under his care, money is always in short supply. He has plenty of contacts that inform him which city he should try on his next trip to the U.S. Sixto leaves in June, after Holy Week and Saint John the Baptistâs Day (June 24), and returns by November just in time for the Christmas holidays.
Seventeen year-old Elena arrived in Napa in 2002 at the age of thirteen to live with her father Silvio. Like Sixto, Silvio began commuting to Napa for work as a young man. Once he married, his cyclical commutes continued until 2002. Living in Oaxaca, Elena always knew her father lived in Napa. Events such as Fatherâs Day or school-related activities provided painful reminders of her fatherâs absence, of his geographic location and distance from family and home. Because her father always returned in April, July, and December of each year, Elena always knew when to expect him. As a U.S. resident, his commutes were regular and relatively easy as the border did not serve as deterrent. When he was away, he called every week. Elenaâs household did not have a phone then, so each Sunday, wearing their Sunday best, they walked to the phone booth down the street to await his call. During his visits, outings to fairs, restaurants, and belated birthday celebrations were common. For Elena, his departures meant feeling empty and lonely. She recalled one particular departure: âOn one occasion, my mom and dad told me that, when my dad was about to leave [back to Napa], he told us he was leaving, butâI was little, I donât know, I must have been four, I donât know, I think, Iâm not sure, and my mom says thatâI grabbed my lunch box and I went to get a bag of chips and some frutsis (Mexican juice drinks) and when my dad was about to leave, I grabbed his hand and told him âall right, letâs go!ââ Elena became emotional as she shared this particular story, but insists she never felt abandoned by her father. At home, her mother always made his presence felt by speaking about him and consulting with him on any decisions she made about the childrenâs schooling and household matters. Her extended family, including grandparents, also lived nearby. They cared for and looked after Elena and the family. She found comfort in knowing her father cared for her and loved her very much.
The stories of the three sisters and of Elena represent two examples of transnational families. The first concerns girls still living in this familial arrangement while the second is an example of a family that once lived transnationally but later experienced what Zavella describes as family reunification.1 Reunification may be a kind of misnomer since, for some families, it may actually mean unification for the first time, as some children may grow up without ever living with their father or mother. When they dwell in the same household in the U.S. or Mexico, it may be the first time that all members of the family live together. In both examples, the girls were raised in a transnational family from birth with a migrant father whose commutes to the U.S. began in the 1980s.
The majority of girls that I interviewed in ZinapĂ©cuaro and in Napa came from this transnational familial arrangement. Sixto and Silvio left their families for work in the U.S. in order to provide them with better living conditions and opportunities. Sixtoâs ability to provide for his family from the U.S. is reflected in Marbe, Emilia, and Toñitaâs enrollments in school. In 2012, Marbe was in her third year as a nursing student at La Michoacana; Emilia was completing her last year of high school and preparing to take the entrance exam to enroll in La Normal, with hopes of earning a degree in childhood education; and Toñitaâs high marks in high school were being rewarded with scholarships.2 The family owns their home and manages to get by economically. Similarly, while Elena lived in Mexico, her father Silvio was able to pay tuition for her and her brothers at a private Catholic schoolâa luxury in rural towns. Silvio also sent enough money in remittances for his family to enable them to own their own home and a couple of businesses: a minimart and a bakery. For these girls, their fathersâ departures materially improved their lives. Silvio decided to bring Elena, her mother, and her siblings to Napa while Sixto has emphatically refused to take his family to Chicago, Alaska, or Portland.
There is something seemingly traditional in these girlsâ stories that revolve around a man leaving to the U.S. in search of a better future for his family. As Rhacel Salazar Parreñas (2005) explains, for many families in migrantsâ countries of origin, a fatherâs departure is expected and celebratedâit becomes a logical part extension of his role as the breadwinner.3 This chapter examines the formation of transnational families with a focus on father-away families. This familial formation is the product of twentieth-century U.S. immigration policy, of failed neoliberal economic policies in Mexico, and of the global restructuring witnessed from the late 1970s onward that has placed men and women on the migrant path.
The Production of Transnational Families: An Overview
When I began to conduct interviews in Napa in 2006 and subsequently in Zinapécuaro in 2010, I noted a pattern. Most of the girls were born into an already existing father-away transnational family. Their fathers began migrating to the U.S. during the 1980s and 1990s. This period saw devaluation of the Mexican peso and an end to government subsidies guaranteeing low prices for food and fuel, creating an economic crisis. The resulting increase in migration to the U.S. led to the passage of the Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA) of 1986 by the U.S. Congress, which in turn led to the militarization of the border on the U.S. side. These seemingly distant events registered themselves indirectly in the lives of the girls I interviewed, in the form of migration and family fragmentation.
A long prior history of labor control and recruitment paved the way for the creation of transnational families in the 1980s and 1990s. They followed a pattern of movement north from Mexico established by U.S. employers over decades seeking cheap and willing labor.4 This labor recruitment was shaped by draconian U.S. immigration policies that excluded and restricted entry by racialized and ethnic groups deemed unassimilable. During the first half of the twentieth century, nativists claimed racialized and ethnic groups were a threat to the racial composition of the nation and, thus, to its very being. While U.S. law and custom resisted granting citizenship and full social membership to Mexican immigrants, U.S. employers welcomed the profits made from the exploitation of low wage immigrant labor. Immigration control functioned as labor control, not reducing the number of immigrants arriving in the U.S. but making sure that their legal vulnerabilities prevented them from bargaining freely over wages and working conditions. Three immigration acts in particularâin 1917, 1921, and 1924âwere passed to control entrance into the U.S. and preclude future generations of citizens. Mexicans were exempted from the restrictionist policies directed at other immigrants, not because they were deemed assimilable within the nation, but because of the cheap and disposable labor they could provide.5 During the second half of the twentieth century, the militarization of the U.S.-Mexico border disguised labor exploitation as border defense.
Following DeGenovaâs arguments about how migration produces subordinate inclusion for Mexican migrant workers, the section below provides an overview of the production of transnational families.6 Central to this chapter is how and why fathers left for the U.S. and the varied ways in which their daughtersâ lives became entangled within these migratory practices.
Immigration Policies in the Twentieth-Century U.S.
Transnational families where the father is the migrant emerged in concert with twentieth-century U.S. immigration policy and labor recruitment. During the nineteenth century, between the end of the Mexican-American War and the 1900s, estimates indicate that fewer than 50,000 migrants arrived in the U.S. from Mexico.7 By the 1860s, however, men from northern Mexico were already commuting to California for work.8 Though small in numbers, cohorts of Mexican men migrated to the U.S. and formed transnational families.9
Mexican migration and the formation of transnational families continued into the early years of the twenty-first century. Although there has been a recent decrease in U.S.-bound Mexican migration that should not be overlooked, processes of migration are so rooted in Mexican familiesâsuch as the ones in this studyâthat a complete cessation seems unlikely.10 When debates over immigration arise in the U.S., proposals for visas for low-skilled workers continue to be one of the solutions. These proposals are reminiscent of previous guest worker programs such as those during the bracero years that targeted mostly single men to labor in low-skilled jobs, and the laws governing special agricultural workers (SAW) under IRCA that continue to address the demand for cheap labor to sustain agricultural production and the service sector in the U.S. economy.11
Drawing on the generative scholarship of Sassen, DeGenova argues that migration is produced and patterned systemically.12 In the case of Mexico, this production began in the early 1900s, during a time of heavy recruitment of Mexican workers known as the era of the Enganche (1900â1929). Enganchadores would travel into Mexico to hire men as railroad laborers and bring them to the U.S.13 The Immigration Acts of 1917, 1921, and 1924 had practically eliminated all other sources of cheap labor as the U.S. practiced a closed-door immigration policy. These acts targeted Asian migrants not included in the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 or the Gentlemenâs Agreement of 1907, as well as Southern and Eastern European migrants who possessed allegedly undesirable religious and political views purported to threaten the ontology of the U.S. nation. The Immigration Act of 1917 enforced literacy tests, but exempted Mexicans. The Immigration Act of 1921 barred the âAsiatic zone that ran from Afghanistan to the Pacific.â14 The architects of this 1921 act also ârestricted immigration to 355,000 a yearâ and âset a quota for each European country at 3 percent of the number of foreign-born of that nationality residing in the United States in 1910,â targeting Southern and Eastern Europeans deemed to be the âwrong kind of migrants.â15 By 1924, the new immigr...