RELATED STUDIES

FOREIGN

THE TRANSNATIONAL PARENT

Transnational families are families whose members are separated physically

between two or more nation-states but maintain close ties and relationships

(Schmalzbauer 2004). Transnational family patterns and living arrangements are not a

new phenomenon, but this family arrangement has attracted heightened scholarly

attention since the 1990s. Transnational families face many of the same challenges as

immigrant families but also unique difficulties.

Both immigrant and transnational families must learn to adapt to the new

culture, learn a new language, locate suitable and affordable housing, seek employment,

and adjust to the educational and social systems in the host country. However,

transnational families must also cope with family separation and associated difficulties.

Transnational family arrangements are diverse. Families have various reasons for

migration: some families engage in transnational arrangements voluntarily (e.g., those

involved in educational or labor migration), while others are involuntarily separated by

wars and/or factors beyond their control. Transnational arrangements also take a

multitude of forms: migrant mothers, migrant fathers, the children and families lef

behind, and children as migrants.

Transnational families became distinctive as the years passed by. They needed to

build a new form of relationship to adapt to a new culture and to adjust their being in

different societies. Adapting to family roles is important to fill up the supposed roles (eg.
guardians). However, some families might find hard-on associated difficulties in different

societies especially in maintaining family stability, so adapting to a new change is a must.

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TRANSNATIONAL PARENTS

As opposed to challenging traditional gender norms, transnational family

arrangements reflect, reproduce, and exacerbate traditional gender expectations where

motherhood is constructed around caregiving responsibilities and fatherhood around

economic provision (Dreby 2010; Parrenas 2001; 2005). Transnational mothers ofen

encounter criticism from others in the larger society or in their own families for not

fulfilling their mothering roles. Some women internalize the blame and guilt and do not

consider themselves to be “good mothers.” Even though transnational mothers are not

able to attend to the day-today care of their children, they nevertheless are involved in

their children’s lives. They distinguish their version of motherhood from estrangement or

abandonment. For them, physical absence does not signify emotional or spiritual

absence from their children. They ofen keep in close contact with their children through

daily exchange of email and text messages and through phone calls, letters, and photos.

Research on transnational fathers is limited. The most important finding is that

migrant fathers are not subjected to the same set of societal gender expectations that

are placed on migrant mothers (Dreby 2010; Parrenas 2005). Migrant fathers, like most

other men, are expected to be the primary economic providers in their families. They

are not expected to care for their children’s daily physical and emotional needs, nor do

they bear the moral burden of leaving their children behind. Whereas mothers’ labor

migration is ofen criticized, fathers’ labor migration is celebrated as it fulfills their

provider obligation. Available findings suggest migrant fathers’ behaviors are contingent
upon those of the mothers. For example, migrant fathers take a more active role in

childcare and relationship maintenance only when migrant mothers no longer take on

such responsibilities because of divorce, re-partnering, forming another family, or

lessening contact with their children (Dreby 2010).

Transnational mothers and fathers are supposed to be there with their children.

Transnational mothers are ofen criticized for being physically absent, but they believed

it doesn’t signify emotional absence from their children as long as they keep in contact

using social media platforms. Whereas mothers’ labor migration is ofen criticized,

transnational fathers are honored as it fulfills their provider obligation. They are

expected to provide the financial needs and don’t expect their physical absence and

emotional needs.

THE CHILDREN WHO ARE LEFT BEHIND

Children’s age is an important factor in how they react to their parents’

migration and shape their family’s future migration patterns (Dreby 2010).

Preadolescent children generally do not display overt distress with their parents being

away but engage in various ways of emotional withholding as a response to their

parents’ absences (e.g., naming of local caregivers in Mexico as “mama,” indifference

toward parents, and disregard for parents’ authority). Adolescent children express more

outward resentment toward and conflict with their migrant parents. They are also more

likely to exhibit behavioral difficulties (e.g., acting out) and to underperform in school.

Children who are lef behind also exert power through manipulating the various

expectations they have of their parents. Children express emotional closeness with

migrant mothers through regular phone calls and text messages but articulate emotional
ambivalence and discomfort toward their migrant fathers. In addition, these children

convey different emotional reactions depending on which parents migrated. A handful of

studies have focused on the children who are lef behind in the home countries. In

studying Mexican transnational families, Dreby (2010) finds children lef behind by

migrant parents may be the most disadvantaged of all those involved in such

arrangements. Children are profoundly affected by and vulnerable to the absence of

their parents, especially the long term emotional consequences of separation. However,

contrary to portrayals of children as powerless and lacking agency, Dreby finds children

in migrant families ultimately shape the subsequent migration decisions of their parents

through their emotional expressions and their ability to affect the adults around them.

Children are the most affected in a new system of family form. They are

the ones who are lef behind and the reason why they are lef behind. Because of

a new form of relationship, adapting a change in psychological aspects and

personalities makes them different than the norms. Children exhibit behavior like

neglecting their parents' authority and having a struggle with their parents'

relationship.

THE TRANSNATIONAL CHILDHOOD AND EDUCATIONAL MIGRATION

“Parachute kids” are minor-aged children (between ages 8 and 17) who are sent

by their parents to pursue educational opportunities in countries such as Australia,

Canada, New Zealand, and the United States from Asian countries, particularly Hong

Kong, Korea, Taiwan, and more recently China. “Parachute children” live on their own or

with relatives, host families, or guardians while their parents continue to work and

reside in their home countries. Parents of parachute kids visit when they can, with some
making annual or biannual visits. The parachute kids’ phenomenon emerged in the

1980s and peaked in the mid-to-late 1990s. Parachute kids are a unique group; they

differ from children who grow up in immigrant families as well as adult international

students. Unlike parachute kids, who live alone in their host countries, astronaut or

goose family arrangements consist of one parent (usually the mother) migrating with the

children and the main provider parent (usually the father) staying in the country of origin

to generate and remit earnings to support the family in the new country. In contrast to

the men and women who migrate to work in low-skilled manual labor jobs, earners in

astronaut/goose households tend to occupy high-level or professional positions. The

primary reason for this family arrangement, like that of parachute kids, is the

educational opportunities afforded to children in the host countries (Waters 2002; Chee

2005; Huang and Yeoh 2005; Jeong, You, and Kwon 2013). To these parents, having a

western education is a status symbol that will allow greater social class mobility for their

children and families. These families view their transnational status as the best way to

maximize their income and accumulate capital (Ong 1999; Waters 2005).

Parachute children are children who are assumed to have a higher form

of education for the “future” of their family. Parents who have low-skilled labor

positions and not high incomes are providing their children with a “western

education method” because they believed it is a status symbol that will allow

greater social class mobility for their children and families. The main reason why

they are working abroad is to “maximize their income and to provide greater

education for their children”. The parents believed that greater education means

leisure life in the future.