I N T E R NAT I O NA L
J O U R NA L O F
SOCIAL WELFARE
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2397.2011.00837.x
Int J Soc Welfare 2012: 21: 361–371
ISSN 1369-6866
Surviving underground: Irregular
migrants, Italian families, invisible
welfare
ijsw_837
361..371
Ambrosini M. Surviving underground: irregular migrants,
Italian families, invisible welfare
The aim of this article, which focuses on the Italian case and
its domestic and care sector, is to highlight two aspects. The
first concerns the interaction among unauthorised migrants,
the demand of their labour on the one hand and the other
social actors they meet during their settling process on the
other hand. The second concerns the nature of the irregularity
of their condition, which is dynamic and often transient.
Despite the increasingly fierce declarations, the reality does
not correspond to the claims regarding control of the migration flows. Recognised or disguised forms of tolerance with
only occasional implementation of severe measures – such as
deportation – and regularisation processes of different kinds
and with different purposes seem to be more the rule than the
exception in Italy, as in other developed countries.
Introduction
Between 1996 and 2008, about 5–6 million migrants
[International Centre for Migration Policy Development (ICMPD) 2009] in the European Union (EU)
have gone from having an irregular status to a regular
one. Twenty-two EU countries out of 27 have adopted
various measures of regularisation. Therefore, the
irregular condition has become a temporary and
changeable status for many migrants. It often involves
considerable difficulties and suffering; nevertheless,
migrants might also consider it to be a stage in a
process, the price to pay for entering a world of hope
and opportunities (Ambrosini, 2010).
The same concept of illegal immigration can also be
seen as ‘a legal, political and social construct of the
twentieth century, which has only gained prominence
during the latter third. It is a blurred concept; it is
loaded with ideological import; it is highly politicised’
(Düvell, 2006: 29).
In this context, Italy is the EU country that has
granted the largest number of regularisations, through
six amnesties in 22 years and through other covert
forms of regularisation. For example, the four amnesties granted between 1986 and 1998 involved 790,000
people; a further 630,000 were regularised in 2002;
Maurizio Ambrosini
Department of Social and Political Studies, University of
Milan, Milan, Italy
Key words: irregular immigration, domestic sector, Italy,
welfare system, underground economy, migration policies
Maurizio Ambrosini, Department of Social and Political Studies,
University of Milano via Conservatorio 7, Milano 20122, Italy
E-mail: [email protected]
Accepted for publication 18 May 2011
300,000 applications are now under evaluation (regularisation of 2009); and many other migrants have been
legalised by immigration quotas.
In Italy, as in other countries, a significant number
of regular and irregular migrants are employed as
domestic workers, babysitters or carers of elderly
people in native-born families (Andall, 2000; Parreñas,
2001). The system of care services is still based largely
on families and women, although there is an increasing
participation of women in the labour market outside
the home despite the growing number of elderly in need
of care. This has led to the growth of an informal
welfare system in which waged immigrant women
enter Italian families, as they do in the rest of Southern
Europe and elsewhere, to help them carry out the many
tasks socially assigned to women (Jordan, 2006). As
employers, the families are the main actors in the regularisation process, having been involved in hiring
unregistered migrants and in managing the migrants’
underground work, especially that of the women, as
they welcome and accommodate them in their homes.
The last amnesty (2009) concerned exclusively this
sector, which confirms the fact that the work of immigrants, including irregular ones, in Italian families is
considered necessary and that they are hardly ever
punished.
Int J Soc Welfare 2012: 21: 361–371
© 2011 The Author(s) International Journal of Social Welfare © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare.
Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA
361
Ambrosini
The objective of this study was to analyse the
survival practices and resources of undocumented
migrants working in Italian families, and the paths they
have taken to gain the status of regular residents. The
study was based on research conducted in this field over
the years 2003 to 2010.
Methodology
The results presented in this article came from a series
of studies conducted in northern Italy, in the regions of
Lombardy and Liguria. The following list is a summary
of the main methodological aspects of the research:
(1) Research into the regularisation process in the
years 2002–2003, based on 420 interviews using
questionnaires with migrant workers, both men
and women, who were directly involved in the
procedures (116 domestic workers, 159 company
employees and 131 unemployed at the time of the
interview), carried out in Milan in 2003 in centres
and organisations (e.g., Caritas, trade unions) that
offer migrants advice and support in submitting
applications for regularisation, plus 14 qualitative
interviews with employers in the families and an
additional 13 qualitative interviews with company
employees (Ambrosini & Salati, 2004).
(2) Qualitative research conducted in 2004 on the work
of immigrant women in the ‘living in’ home care of
elderly Italians in the areas of Milan and Brescia
(Lombardy region). The following people were
interviewed: 11 members of staff from centres of
mediation for employment supply and demand
[mainly non-governmental organisations (NGOs),
voluntary associations and services related to trade
unions]; 17 foreign workers aged between 24 and
50 years coming mainly from Eastern Europe
and Latin America; five elderly people with
carers; and 14 Italian carers (mainly daughters
of elderly people requiring carers) (Ambrosini &
Cominelli, 2005).
(3) A survey of female migration and transnational
families conducted in Genoa and the Liguria region
in 2009, based on 300 structured questionnaires
administered to immigrant women with minor children who were still living at home or who had been
recently reunited with their family (178 from the
Andean region, 52 from Eastern Europe, 41 from
new EU member countries and the rest from other
countries), found through social services, NGOs,
trade unions, and who, in two cases out of three,
were employed in the home care field, and 30 indepth interviews with Latin American women and
men with experience of transnational family ties
(Ambrosini & Abbatecola, 2010).
(4) Research on transnational families, family
reunions and teenage children, conducted in
362
Lombardy in 2008–2009 and based on questionnaires administered to 422 parents (165 women and
257 men); 432 questionnaires administered to children, found in various ways and coming from different countries; 25 life stories of migrant mothers
(16 Latin American, five Eastern European, four
African); and 26 qualitative interviews with adolescents of immigrant origin (14 Latin American,
the others from different countries) (Ambrosini,
Bonizzoni & Caneva, 2010).
Other data were drawn from the surveys carried out
each year in Lombardy by the Regional Observatory for
Integration and Multi-ethnicity (Osservatorio regionale per l’integrazione e la multietnicità) on a representative sample of 9,000 immigrants.
From these research studies, carried out in the
pursuit of different objectives, several of the results
are presented here to illustrate the issues under
consideration.
Entering and leaving an irregular condition
The first step in the analysis is to focus on the causes of
irregular migration. We should note that a social and
political construction of the phenomenon is involved,
that is, that the host societies have the power to define
certain processes of human mobility across national
boundaries as illegal. Having made this clarification,
three groups of causes can be identified.
First of all, there are economic reasons, according to
which labour markets attract workers who do not have
any rights and who are completely flexible and exploitable. The economics of ‘otherness’, which Calavita
(2005) discussed in reference to the Italian and Spanish
cases, reaches its peak here. The tendencies towards the
labour market’s liberalisation, the increased use of outsourcing and the reduction of public social protection
all encourage the use of undocumented migrants, in
contrast to the declared commitment to close national
borders (Rea, 2010). The gap between a labour market
that requires a cheap workforce and a policy that
announces border closure is often seen as an important cause of irregular migration (Cornelius, Martin
& Hollifield, 1994). Indeed, for some scholars,
this outcome is consciously sought by political and
economic actors in order to have workers who are
not protected by law or by collective agreements
(Baldwin-Edwards, 2001). The pre-existence of large
sections of the informal economy, rarely challenged by
public authorities, promotes the absorption of illegal
immigrants on the lower rungs of the economic system
(Triandafyllidou & Kosic, 2006).
Second, contrasting interests and inconsistencies in
the regulation policy can be identified: the ‘liberal constraint’ that requires the protection of human rights
(Boswell, 2007; Hollifield, 1992); the interests of some
Int J Soc Welfare 2012: 21: 361–371
© 2011 The Author(s) International Journal of Social Welfare © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare
Surviving underground
sectors (e.g., tourism or international trade); and the
scarce resources allocated for the implementation of
policies of control in comparison with the phenomenon’s dimension (Ambrosini, 2008). Thus, governments are more uncertain and contradictory, more
articulated and under greater pressure than they would
like to be (Penninx & Doomernik, 1998).
A third explanation of irregular migration refers to
the immigrants’ agency and its networks. This issue is
explicitly or implicitly addressed in most literature on
‘globalisation from below’ (see Sassen, 2007; Smith &
Guarnizo, 1998/2003), solidarity and mutual aid among
relatives and countrymen (Portes & Rumbaut, 2006),
and transnational migrations (Balibar, 2006; Glick
Schiller, Basch & Blanc-Szanton, 1992; Ossman,
2007). These studies emphasise the migrants’ efforts to
improve their living conditions and to evade the restrictions on mobility imposed by the host societies (Rea,
2010). Sympathetic attention has been given to the
strategies used to circumvent the rules – to the survival
strategies, and to the ethnic community’s solidarity
which allows its members to move around and to take
refuge – in order to enter the interstices of the host
country’s economy in the struggle to gain rights and
some form of citizenship (Sassen, 2007).
The second step refers to the reasons why the domestic and caring sector, in particular, attracts irregular
migrants, especially in Italy and in Southern Europe
(Baldwin-Edwards & Arango, 1999; King & Black,
1997; Ribas-Mateos, 2004; for Spain: Solé & Flaquer,
2005), and also elsewhere (Anderson, 2000; Düvell,
2009; Van Valsum 2010; Widding Isaksen, Devi &
Hochschild, 2008). From a sociological perspective,
one can speak of a post-industrial society that retrieves
and revitalises pre-industrial labour relations, enabling
native women to continue their professional careers
while maintaining their traditional roles as family managers, compensating for the shortcomings of support
from the state and in the sharing of housework
(Ambrosini, 2008; Andall, 2000).
On the other hand, it should be mentioned that
domestic work conveniently and easily meets four
needs of migrants who do not have the documents they
need in order to settle, to move around freely and to
look for a job within the host countries. It offers a safe
house, a job, a chance to save money and some level of
protection from controls carried out by the authorities.
On this latter point, Triandafyllidou and Kosic (2006:
122) observed that ‘the nature of their work, which
confines them in the home of the family, renders both
them and their employers less exposed to police checks
on violations of immigration and labour law’.
In many developed countries, families are one of the
main sources of attraction for labour migration. As we
have already mentioned, the Italian case is particularly
emblematic of the growth of a parallel welfare system,
which is informal and half-hidden, especially in home
care for the elderly, assisted 24 hours a day by immigrants, usually women, who live with them under the
same roof. This solution is seen as cheaper and as more
respectful of the habits and dignity of the elderly than
placing them in sheltered housing. Therefore, it has
become widespread both socially and geographically.
According to recent estimates, the number of workers
employed in the sector is about 1 million (ISMU News,
17 December 2010). The immigrant domestic servant is
no longer a status symbol for wealthy families in large
cities; he/she is now also found in small towns and in
working-class neighbourhoods, working for pensioners
in low- and middle-income brackets, and in the most
remote villages of the peninsula, including the south.
Another implication is the high incidence of irregular
situations: the need for assistance often occurs suddenly
and cannot wait for the complex authorisation procedures required for the entry of new workers. Furthermore, an irregular immigrant costs less, is more flexible
and makes fewer demands. Moreover, a person who has
just arrived, who does not know the language and who
has few or no social contacts is the most willing candidate to undertake hard work, but with the advantage
of having board and lodging. Therefore, the most marginal foreigners, the ‘Others’ par excellence, become
the most useful in daily practices (Calavita, 2005).
In addition, employers do not usually welcome
strangers from abroad into their homes and formally
hire them, entrusting them with their most beloved
and defenceless family members. Consequently, in the
domestic sector, it is common, at least initially, to hire
immigrants who still do not have the required documents as a kind of tryout. At the same time, it is difficult
to blame employers, such as families who need
someone to take care of their elderly and children. In a
way, undocumented immigrants’ work can be considered socially useful and even necessary (Ambrosini &
Cominelli, 2005).
However, these particular labour relations also come
at a cost, especially in terms of private life and leisure
time. They require considerable emotional commitment, resulting from the implicit task of listening,
keeping someone company and offering emotional
support. Italian families buy work, but they actually
demand affection.
Another major problem for the migrants is being
separated from their families, especially from their
children. The irregular condition prevents migrants
from leaving and going back to their home countries. In
a sense, it makes them prisoners in the receiving
country. Undocumented women who work as domestic
workers in native families are the key actors in the
formation of transnational families and long-distance
emotional ties, an issue that is being addressed by the
growing amount of international literature (see e.g.,
Int J Soc Welfare 2012: 21: 361–371
© 2011 The Author(s) International Journal of Social Welfare © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare
363
Ambrosini
Baldassar, 2008; Boccagni, 2010; Bonizzoni, 2009;
Suarez-Orozco, Todorova & Louie, 2002).
The hard work and compromised living conditions
that these jobs involve lead to certain consequences.
Over time, once they have obtained a residence permit,
most workers try to get away from the live-in position
which is difficult to tolerate in the long-term. Many
of them try to reunite with their families, or at least
their children, formally or informally. Consequently,
the domestic and care sector continues to attract new
undocumented immigrants to replace those who have
left it.
Survival resources and practices
Eight classes of resources can be identified within this
area of employment. When combined, these resources
allow undocumented immigrants to survive, to integrate to some extent in the receiving society and to
prepare the ground for applying for regularised status.
All immigrants share a number of resources; some
resources are easier to activate for women working in
the domestic and care system, while others are specific
to these women’s particular social conditions.
In the first group, we can identify networks. There is
ample international literature to show the long-standing
importance of networks for the arrival and settlement
of new immigrants (Bashi, 2007; Hagan, 1998; Massey
& Espinosa, 1997; Massey et al., 1998; Portes, 1995).
Migrants with irregular status depend more on their
networks than regular residents do, when seeking
employment or finding accommodation, for gathering
information and for many other needs (van Meeteren,
2010). Networks promote and organise the arrival of
unauthorised migrants, providing varying degrees of
help with varying degrees of self-interest depending
on whether they consist of close relatives, friends or
strangers. In sociological terms, we can say that social
capital is of paramount importance for irregular
migrants (van Meeteren, Engbersen & van Sal, 2009).
In our research on transnational and rejoined families conducted in the Liguria region, of the 300 women
interviewed, eight out of 10 had arrived alone, relying
on the support of a social network consisting of relatives and compatriots. Around half of them relied on
relatives, the other half on friends and acquaintances
(Erminio, 2010).
In previous research concerning immigrants living
in Milan who were involved in the 2002 amnesty, more
than 60 per cent of them stated that they had found their
current job through the help of relatives and friends. In
the domestic and care sector, the rate is even higher
(65.5%). We also have to take into consideration
the help provided by Italian friends (8.6%) and by
religious or charitable institutions (5.6%) (Ambrosini
& Salati, 2004).
364
In the domestic and care sector, as in other sectors, it
is possible to identify intensive processes in the formation of ethnic niches, with the very rapid grouping of
migrants of the same nationality. Clusters of Filipinos,
Peruvians, Ecuadorians, Ukrainians and Moldavians
have found jobs in this sector, in varying degrees
of concentration according to different local labour
markets, where a group can be more numerous than
another depending on date of arrival and success in the
entry process. For example, Genoa has been experiencing for some years a strong concentration of SouthAmerican migrants, especially Ecuadorians, while in
Naples and in the Campania region, the Ukrainian
group is generally the most numerous.
Besides Filipinos and Sri Lankans, who are
employed as servants and maids by middle- and upperclass families, most of the immigrant women start to
work in the sector that involves the most demanding
activities, that is, providing live-in care for the elderly;
then they switch to domestic housekeeper duties, especially domestic jobs paid by the hour, which implies
autonomy in their accommodation and more freedom
in their private life. In many cases, this transition
coincides with access to official immigration status.
At the same time, reliance on networks, which is
stronger at the beginning of the process and for those
with irregular status, tends to decrease with the passing
of time as knowledge of the language and the labour
market improves and social contacts are broadened
(Hagan, 1998). Therefore, daily or weekly appointments and meeting places emerge locally, providing
contact between compatriots and intermediaries who
mediate between labour demand and supply, and
even offer forms of economic exchange through the
sale of jobs.
Confirming the results of several other research
studies regarding different national groups, Vianello
(2009) described in some detail the practice, carried out
by Ukrainian women, of selling useful contacts to find
a job, with prices varying according to the type of job
offered. The care of a seriously ill person is more tiring
so it is worth less than a job as housekeeper or babysitter. Prices vary between €100 and half of the first salary
(€300–€400). Only family and strong friendship ties
are exempt from this financial bargaining (called blat,
a term meaning barter), and even then, they are not
always exempt. According to Vianello (2009), it is a
kind of monetisation of reciprocity relations, whose
origin lies in the crisis of post-Soviet societies, and it
has spread into emigration phenomena due to lax social
control. Lagomarsino (2006) had already found a
similar outcome when studying Ecuadorian immigrants
in Genoa, documenting the sale not only of jobs but
also of accommodation.
In parallel, we can observe the formation of stereotypes in Italian families, with immigrants of certain
Int J Soc Welfare 2012: 21: 361–371
© 2011 The Author(s) International Journal of Social Welfare © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare
Surviving underground
nationalities being considered particularly suitable for
carrying out certain activities, and therefore being
favoured over others simply because of their country of
origin. In studies of labour economics, this phenomenon is known as ‘statistical discrimination’: a characteristic, whether positive or negative, observed in some
components of a particular social group, is applied to
the whole group, favouring or penalising their chances
of being hired or promoted. Thus, simply the place of
origin can become a passport for entry into the domestic and care sector or, in other cases, an obstacle.
A second resource that irregular immigrants
employed in the home care sector share with other
unauthorised immigrants is work. Work is the cornerstone of the settlement practices of undocumented
migrants in countries where participation in the labour
market is the main, and often the only, source of legitimation for the newcomers.
For women, domestic work is their main employment opportunity, particularly for those who do not
have a regular residence permit. According to the
extensive research carried out in 2009 by the Regional
Observatory on Integration and Multi-ethnicity in
Lombardy, irregular migrants in Lombardy were estimated at between 117,000 and 190,000, or 13 per cent
of the total foreigner population residing in the region.
Over 16 per cent of irregular migrants worked as
domestic care workers or babysitters, and 13.3 per cent
provided domestic help (Sciortino, 2010). Considering
that the data do not separate workers by gender, and that
31 per cent of the sample are classified in the category
‘other jobs’, we can say that undocumented migrant
women are heavily concentrated in the domestic and
care sector.
In the research carried out in the Liguria region, we
pointed out that the phenomenon occurs even more
extensively, considering the difficult conditions of the
local labour market, and two women out of three who
were interviewed worked in the domestic and care
sector as carers for the elderly (43 %) or provided
domestic help (23%) (Erminio, 2010).
However, there is also a qualitative difference in the
social representation of domestic work compared with
other jobs. Domestic and care work is perceived as
socially useful, but it is hardly ever recognised as a real
job; it is an integral part of daily life, but it has no
clearly defined boundaries, either in terms of tasks or
of working hours, leading not only to serious forms of
abuse and exploitation but also to the development of
friendships and emotional bonds. Apparently, the job
requires no special skills and qualifications because it is
presumed that it consists of performing traditional care
and housekeeping activities that are culturally assigned
to women.
Although it decreases as regularisation approaches,
the concentration of immigrant women working in the
domestic and care sector remains high. We can say that
although the acquisition of a regular status implies an
increase in bargaining power, furthers access to better
working conditions, allows immigrants to achieve
autonomy and favours the reuniting of families, it offers
a real opportunity for professional upgrading to only
some workers.
In general, considering the continual flow of new
immigrant women who start from the bottom, that is,
from irregular employment conditions in the domestic
and care sector, we have not observed many signs of
progress. According to the survey conducted by the
Regional Observatory for Integration and Multiethnicity in 2009 in Lombardy, 18.7 per cent of immigrant women (with both regular and irregular status)
worked as domestic care workers, 16.2 per cent as hourly
paid domestic workers, 6.5 per cent as live-in domestic
workers, 5.1 per cent as housekeepers and 2.7 per cent as
babysitters. Compared with the year 2001, only a few
changes can be noted: more jobs are now classified as
‘care’, while fewer jobs are classified as merely ‘domestic help’, but this fact may depend on the greater visibility obtained through care work for the elderly as time
goes on, a job which previously was very often confused
with mere housework (Blangiardo, 2010).
A third resource that domestic and care workers have
in common with other irregular migrants is access to
some public services. Undocumented immigrants are
by definition the weakest group in terms of enforceable
rights. In the ‘civic stratification’ (Morris, 2002), they
occupy the lowest position. However, the ‘liberal constraint’ to be met by countries wishing to be regarded as
complying with international conventions obliges them
to acknowledge certain rights, such as emergency
medical treatment and education for children. These
rights are part of the package of resources that allow
undocumented immigrants to survive in and enter the
receiving societies, waiting to emerge into the sunlight.
Today, however, in Italy and elsewhere, certain
government policies are an attempt to undermine
undocumented immigrants’ access to public services,
with the support of public opinion, despite the opposition of NGOs and the resistance of many professionals
in the same services. This is a component of the internal
control strategies against irregular immigration (van
Meeteren, 2010). Thus, a daily battle sees confrontation between the institutions of control and the staff of
educational, assistance and health services who are
often inclined to ‘cheat the legislator honestly’, that is,
to give undocumented immigrants (and those in a transient or uncertain status) access to services (Zincone,
1999). Local level bureaucracies play a salient role
here, interpreting the rules, giving useful information,
helping to fill in the application forms and, most of
all, deciding on the eligibility of the applications
(Campomori, 2007).
Int J Soc Welfare 2012: 21: 361–371
© 2011 The Author(s) International Journal of Social Welfare © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare
365
Ambrosini
A difference can be found between domestic
workers and other irregular migrants; sponsored and
accompanied by their Italian employers, domestic
workers manage to access certain public institutions
more easily (mainly health care), obtain information
and benefit from services they need. Where interpretative and discretionary margins can be found, employers
mediate, insist and protest, bringing into play their
knowledge and ability to influence operators and decision makers.
A fourth resource, in theory equally available to
all migrants in an irregular situation, is support from
various solidarity institutions. Valuable resources for
survival and the shift to a regular status originate from
the relationship with institutions that offer solidarity,
such as religious organisations, trade unions and
various associations. Health care, for example, is provided in cases of urgent need by public hospitals, but
most of the usual services are provided through NGO
surgeries where doctors work as volunteers. Several
charities offer free meals to anyone in need, most of
whom are undocumented immigrants. Many associations and religious organisations offer language courses
which meet the needs of those who do not have access
to courses offered by the public system. Regularisation
paperwork is handled by services set up by the trade
unions, Caritas and other organisations. In the research
concerning workers involved in the 2002 amnesty, 54.9
per cent declared that they had received some kind
of help from Italian civil society organisations, for
example, information about regularisation procedures
(23.4%), free lunches (21.7%), Italian language courses
(12.3%) and hospitality in homeless shelters (12.3%)
(Ambrosini & Salati, 2004).
Lastly, we must remember the political role played
by these institutions in an overall negative context.
These include advocacy organisations, which lobby for
amnesties and protest against legislative measures
designed to affect immigrants.
Here, too, Italian families often act as intermediaries
when accessing these services, providing information,
guidance and so forth. In this way, domestic workers
frequently enjoy the benefit of receiving quicker
answers and better treatment.
A fifth paradoxical resource for all irregular immigrants consists of the lack of effectiveness of the repressive apparatus. One of the reasons for the continuous
flow of undocumented migrants, and the necessity for
amnesties, is the modest results of the interception,
detention and deportation system. The Italian case is
particularly interesting because of the gap between the
claims of political representatives and actual results.
In 2009, out of an estimated 500,000 undocumented
immigrants, there were only about 14,000 expulsions,
that is, less than 3 per cent. There are about 1,800 places
available in the whole country in the Identification and
366
Expulsion Centres for the detention of immigrants
waiting for deportation, and the actual rate of expulsion
of inmates in 2009 was 38 per cent, lower than in the
previous years (Caritas-Migrantes, 2010).
When it comes to women engaged in household
chores and care, the unwritten rule is almost that of a
generalised tolerance. One could say that they are not
treated politically nor perceived socially as illegal
migrants. The windows of opportunity opened up by
amnesties or regularisations represent the other side
of the coin of the limited effectiveness of deterrence:
the strategy of irregular migrants is to evade controls,
wait patiently for a favourable opportunity and, finally,
take advantage of the right moment to regularise. As
already mentioned, Italian regularisations have mainly
favoured care workers and the domestic and care sector;
the last one, in 2009, was restricted exclusively to them,
in explicit and official terms.
A sixth resource, one that is not exclusive but is
more accessible to women who live and work in Italian
families, refers to emotional ties and marriage alliances, that is, the establishment of sentimental relationships with Italian men, sometimes leading to marriage.
It is generally known that women who migrate alone
have often left behind broken families or are widows or
single parents (Banfi & Boccagni, 2009). Many of them
migrate in order to attend to their children’s needs as
they do not have the support of a partner. In other cases,
the departure is a socially acceptable way of ending a
relationship that is no longer working.
In our research on transnational and rejoined families in Lombardy, we pointed out that only 43.3 per cent
of the women interviewed, who have under-age children in the homeland or who have rejoined their families (N = 165), declare themselves ‘married’, while
another 13.4 per cent report living with a partner
(Ambrosini et al., 2010). According to the research on
this same issue carried out in the Liguria region, 31.3
per cent of the women in the sample (N = 300), all of
whom have under-age children in the homeland or in
Italy, are separated or divorced, 12.5 per cent of them
are unmarried and 5.1 per cent are widows. Almost
half of them, therefore, are officially available on the
‘marriage market’ (Ambrosini & Abbatecola, 2010).
An analysis of the in-depth interviews reveals that
even though the presence of under-age children can be
an obstacle for the establishment of lasting relationships, seeking an Italian partner is a strategy used in
order to acquire a regular status and to improve their
own and their children’s standard of living. A typical
case is marriage to one of the sons of the elderly person
they are looking after. Usually, the men are older than
the immigrants and have previous marriages.
The use of marriage as a strategy for regularisation,
however, has aroused the concern of the government.
Until 2009, legislation had traditionally been generous
Int J Soc Welfare 2012: 21: 361–371
© 2011 The Author(s) International Journal of Social Welfare © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare
Surviving underground
towards Italian citizens’ foreign spouses, who quickly
acquired citizenship, but the new rules introduced in
2009 have placed a serious obstacle in the way of
undocumented residents: they are excluded from civil
acts, including marriage. This represents another form
of ‘internal control’.1
However, despite the law, love affairs and relationships continue to occur, inside and outside the home.
These relationships can produce situations of domination, deceit, even violence, or they may be a major
vehicle for social integration, despite status and power
asymmetries (Peruzzi, 2009). From a strictly legal point
of view, marriage in Italy offers the fastest way of
getting access to citizenship: even in 2008, over 60 per
cent of naturalisations were obtained through marriage;
among these cases, more than seven out of 10 concern
foreign women who married Italian men, on average
about 10 years their senior. It was only in 2009 that, for
the first time, naturalisations by residence (22,162, of
which 63.4% were for men) exceeded naturalisations
by marriage (17,122, of which 13,169 were for women,
equivalent to 76.9%) (Caritas-Migrantes, 2010).
In the research on transnational families carried out
in Lombardy (Ambrosini et al., 2010), we found some
interesting cases, one of which is Veronica, a single
mother with three children. Two of them joined her in
Italy and, especially for the arrival of the second child,
the help she received from the much older Italian man
she married was crucial. At the moment, the former
partner of the first son and the granddaughter also live
with them.
The case of Elisabeth is slightly different. She had
problems bringing her son over, and he arrived in Italy
at the age of 13. Partly because of difficulties in the
relationship with her new Italian partner, she preferred
to send him back to Ecuador. However, the son later
became convinced that he had better opportunities in
Italy and returned. The family’s reunion was possible,
despite the son being over 18 years old, because the
mother was married to an Italian (Ambrosini et al.,
2010). We can say that Italian men often have to pay a
price, in terms of new roles and family responsibilities,
for their desire to establish a stable relationship with a
foreign woman, who is often much younger and better
educated than they are.
A seventh resource is specific to the domestic and
care sector: the involvement in ‘familiar’ relationships
with the Italian families for whom they work. The particular characteristics of live-in care workers, especially
when the job involves the care of the elderly and children, often lead to a change in interpersonal relationships with their employers. Employers and workers eat
1
A very recent sentence of the Constitutional Court (July
2011) has cancelled this rule, but has not erased the political
will associated with it.
together, take walks together, watch TV together and so
forth. Very often, the employers interviewed referred to
the immigrant worker as ‘one of the family’, even ‘like a
daughter’, as we pointed out in the qualitative research
conducted a few years ago on this issue, which included
interviews with employers, immigrant care workers
and elderly relatives (Ambrosini & Cominelli, 2005).
The elderly expect their workers to relieve them of
loneliness and depression, to be a substitute for children
and other relatives who cannot be as close to them as
they would like. This issue has ambivalent implications.
It generates invasion of privacy, places demands that exceed the normal work obligations and sometimes leads
to sexual harassment. But it also provides resources for
migrants: first and foremost, the willingness of most
families to regularise them when the opportunity arises.
Sometimes employers provide aid that goes well beyond
their contractual obligations, for example, support for
the reunification of spouses or children, even allowing
them to stay in their home, or letting them stay in the
house after the death of the elderly person and the end
of the working relationship. Other research studies, such
as Korac’s (2001, 2009) work on Balkan refugees in
Rome, have documented this point: employers can
exploit their domestic workers, but they can also protect
and help them beyond their contractual duties, and
often, the two aspects go together.
We can quote two testimonies from our latest
research concerning transnational and rejoined families
(Ambrosini et al., 2010):
When my daughter arrived, the lady I worked for let
her stay in her house. She [my daughter] stayed there
for four months. Then I said, ‘I will face up to my
responsibilities, I will find a house’, and they helped
me, they gave me a helping hand and I rented a
house. (Rosa, Ecuador)
Gradually my husband also started to go there, more
and more often, and my employer understood that he
was a good person too (. . .). He [the employer] grew
fond of me because his daughters were far away and
he seldom saw them, only during the holidays, he
actually had only us [with him] and in April I went
back to him, he provided a double bed and I stayed
there with my husband. (Tatiana, Moldavian)
The support of the Italian employer families and the
overlapping of family and work relations help to
explain another phenomenon: women increasingly tend
to be the first to migrate, especially those belonging to
those national groups that are more active in the domestic and care sector. Husbands, if there are any, often
arrive later, but only in less than one case out of five
through the normal process of family rejoining: 52.4
per cent of the husbands entered Italy with a tourist
Int J Soc Welfare 2012: 21: 361–371
© 2011 The Author(s) International Journal of Social Welfare © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare
367
Ambrosini
visa, later trying to re-emerge because of an amnesty or
an immigration quota (Ambrosini et al., 2010).
Finally, the involvement in some kinds of family
relationships with the Italian families that employ them
may also respond, to a certain extent, to the emotional
needs of the migrants themselves, who are separated
from their loved ones. As an immigrant working
woman remarked:
I’m doing fine here, very fine, they are good, because
they are like my family, because I (. . .) do not have
anybody here, I did not have any friends, I did not
know any fellow citizens (. . .): I have found the
family I didn’t have. (Ambrosini & Cominelli,
2005: 171)
This phenomenon, however, has another consequence: even when it does not imply hidden forms of
exploitation, it shifts the working relationship to a different level, creating mutual ties and obligations that
can become difficult to manage and to untangle. When
an immigrant working woman decides to change her
job, perhaps after being helped in regularising her
juridical position, employers very often interpret this
choice as a betrayal of trust: it implies a breach of
personal relations, too. It may appear to be more a
conflictual family separation than the normal conclusion of a working relationship.
The eighth and last resource lies more in the psychosocial order. We can call it, taking the cue from
Bryceson and Vuorela (2002), caring and frontiering.
The everyday life of migrants in irregular status cannot
be separated from their concern for their loved ones left
at home, especially their children. We could say that a
resource that helps them to tolerate their difficult situation is the awareness of being able to ensure a better
life for those they love, maintaining contact with them
despite the distance. The support of the substitute caregivers, especially maternal grandmothers, plays a vital
role, although it is not always sufficient to fill the void
left by the departure of the mother and the insufficient
presence of fathers (Widding et al., 2008).
Communication with caregivers and transmission of
affection to their children are important aspects of the
daily life of migrant women. This concern has noteworthy practical implications. People, particularly women,
engaged in household chores and live-in care are
important suppliers of remittances due to their ability to
save money, regardless of their legal status. In the
research carried out in the Liguria region, 83 per cent of
the women regularly sent remittances to their relatives
in their homeland, to the tune of €300 each month on
average, which is around one-third of the salary; but
this amount can increase to over 60 per cent of the
salary when women live with the employer family
(Ambrosini & Abbatecola, 2010).
368
They also use courier services that connect Italian
cities to many destinations in Eastern Europe, through
which they send money, gifts, letters and so forth
(Ambrosini, 2009). But they also have to heal the pain
of separation that extends over time, often beyond
expectations. Telephone services, thanks to the widespread availability of mobile phones and to the increasingly lower costs, are an essential aid, but the use of
new communication technologies is also gradually
developing.
The difficulty of living in under precarious conditions and with few rights is offset by the expectation of
being able to meet the needs of their children at home,
to support them in their studies and possibly to arrange
for their arrival at a later stage.
The irregular stay as a transient condition?
The phenomenon of irregular immigration results from
the interaction between the movement across borders of
people with ‘weak’ nationalities and the border control
implemented by the states. The concept of illegal immigration, therefore, appears multifaceted, changing over
time and from one country to another, and it is not
easy to define [International Centre for Migration
Policy Development (ICMPD), 2009]. As we have
observed, irregular migrants in Italy mainly enter the
country with a legal visa, and then they fall into an
irregular condition, especially if they have an informal
job. In the end, most of them are able to emerge as
authorised workers and residents. Domestic and care
workers are the most accepted and most eligible to
obtain a regularised position. We can say, therefore,
that the irregular immigrant, especially a working one,
incorporated in a context of family relationships, seems
to be a transitional figure, waiting for legalisation,
rather than a rule breaker destined to be punished and
sent back to his/her own country. The waiting period
tends to protract, a grey area of ‘liminal legality’ grows
(Menjívar, 2006), suffering increases, but the direction
does not change. National boundaries, entry authorisation procedures, residence permits and definitions of
regular and irregular conditions all show that they have
a conventional origin and a flexible configuration.
In light of the results presented here, the plight of
irregular migrants employed in domestic and care work
can be observed as a pathway. In our research on transnational and rejoined families, only 16.8 per cent of
the interviewed adults entered Italy with a residence
permit. The rest have all been involved in more or less
long-term experiences of informal work and nonauthorised residence (Ambrosini et al., 2010).
In the case of Greece, Glytsos (2005) identified a
sort of ascending trajectory of the migrant status,
beginning with a ‘state of illegality’, moving on to
a ‘temporary amnesty’, then to ‘legalisation under
Int J Soc Welfare 2012: 21: 361–371
© 2011 The Author(s) International Journal of Social Welfare © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare
Surviving underground
suspension’ and finally culminating, after 10 years, in
‘unconditional legality’. In a similar vein, we can identify in the Italian experience a kind of pathway, with
various key stages:
• Arrival and inclusion, supported by networks, very
active in meeting the demand for home care services, a sector that does not hesitate to turn to
undocumented immigrants, despite widespread
prejudice against any immigration that is defined as
undocumented or illegal;
• The phase of survival in the shadows, during which
the relationship with the Italian families they work
for is crucial because the immigrants relate with
employers with whom they develop complex
dynamics of emotional attachment and labour
exploitation;
• The emergence stage, during the periodical regularisation campaigns, thanks to the availability of
employer families and the support of solidarity
organisations;
• Once they have a residence visa, and perhaps leave
their live-in jobs, they switch to jobs that allow them
to have a private life and, where appropriate, to
reunite with their families.
This transient vision of the irregular condition
gives migrants and their networks a certain degree of
autonomy and initiative. They are not only the subject
of the contradictory pressures of demand, which
requires them to work, and of regulation policy, which
seeks to prevent them from residing and working
legally. While they have to adapt to considerable conditioning, they give themselves objectives, develop
projects and try to carry them out. In sociological
terms, they also have agency; they are not simply being
crushed by structural constraints.
In addition, if survival in the harsh conditions of
unauthorised immigrants is their most immediate and
pressing objective, their power of initiative is not cancelled by this (see van Meeteren, 2010). By combining
the resources available, trying to find others and developing links and affiliations, they pursue aspirations of
emersion, of regular stay and of better conditions of
work and life. Especially where mothers with young
children left at home are concerned, they add family
reunification to these goals.
Conclusions: conflicting narratives, actors on
the move
Despite growing political sensitivity to the phenomenon of irregular immigration and the numerous
actions taken to combat it, several factors explain its
continual reproduction. The focus in this article has
been on the demand of the domestic and care sector,
entwined with other factors: the sponsorship of ethnic
networks, the protection accorded by Italian families
and the support of several solidarity institutions. In
this article, I have tried to explain how the irregular
migrants can settle, work, look for the opportunity to
legalise their status and follow the regularisation
procedures.
In contrast, the repressive actions, more effective
at the borders, are more expensive (in economic and
social terms) and difficult to implement throughout the
country, and they often seem to be quite random and
sporadic displays of authority made by sovereign states.
These are focused mainly on reassuring domestic
public opinion with adequately advertised international
agreements, the tightening up of regulations and reinforcement of control practices, in an attempt to address
the demand to defend the social order. These demands,
at the same time, are fomented by political actors in a
top-down process. In recent years, Italy has been an
exemplary case.
However, referring to Rea (2010), we can argue that
receiving states have ‘three hands’: With the first one,
by liberalising labour markets and increasing the possibilities of subcontracting, they create conditions
that favour the use of undocumented workers; with
the second one, they proclaim a merciless fight against
illegal immigration; and with the third hand, states mitigate the contradiction through regularising measures.
Heavily stigmatised, the irregular migrants become a
component of the social organisation, and eventually,
if they manage to avoid controls or effective measures
of detection, they become normal residents and even
citizens. Despite increasingly fierce declarations, the
reality does not match the claims made regarding
control of the migration flows. Recognised or disguised
forms of tolerance (Vasta, 2008), only occasional
implementation of hard measures – such as deportation
– and regularisation processes of different types and
with different purposes seem to be more the rule than
the exception in Italy as in other developed countries.
At the same time, in the public discourse, irregular
migrants are the subject of conflicting. Most of the
literature treat them as victims, considering the economic and political conditions that force them to move
and then segregate them into working niches, being
subject to exploitation and without rights. Public
opinion generally considers them ‘clandestine’, violators of borders and rule breakers of the territorial state
sovereignty, thus villains (Anderson, 2008). Others
consider them as a kind of romantic heroes, defeating
an unfair political regulation of human mobility
through their ability to exploit and take advantage of
interstices and ladders in the control procedures (e.g.,
Tarrius, 2002).
Without overestimating rationality and strategic
abilities, which in many cases prove to be not very
effective, we can regard migrants as persons struggling
Int J Soc Welfare 2012: 21: 361–371
© 2011 The Author(s) International Journal of Social Welfare © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare
369
Ambrosini
for a better life against a system of constraints,
embedded in networks, sponsored by native families
and solidarity institutions. The condition of irregular
migrants, despite its difficulties, is therefore not an
objective fact, not a ‘landlocked’ destiny, but rather can
be seen as a painful journey towards a desirable future.
Receiving countries should ask themselves whether it is
fair to demand such a price for letting migrants work
and live legally in their territory.
References
Ambrosini M (2008). Irregular Immigration: Economic Convenience and other Factors. Transfer 14(4): 557–572.
Ambrosini M, ed. (2009). Intraprendere tra due mondi: il
transnazionalismo economico dei migranti [To Undertake
Between Two Worlds: The Economic transnationalism of the
migrants]. Bologna: Il Mulino.
Ambrosini M (2010). Migrants dans l’ombre. Causes,
dynamiques, politiques de l’immigration irrégulière
[Migrants in the Shadow. Causes, Dynamics and Policies of
Irregular Immigration]. Revue européenne des migrations
internationales [European Review of International Migrations] 26(2): 7–32.
Ambrosini M, Abbatecola E, eds. (2010). Famiglie in movimento. Separazioni, legami, ritrovamenti nelle famiglie
migranti [Families on the Move. Separations, Links and
Reunions in Migrant Families]. Genova, Italy, Il Melangolo.
Ambrosini M, Cominelli C, eds. (2005). Un’assistenza senza
confini. Welfare ‘leggero’, famiglie in affanno, aiutanti domiciliari immigrate. Milan, Lombardy, Italy, Osservatorio
regionale per l’integrazione e la multietnicità [Regional
Observatory for Integration and Multi-ethnicity].
Ambrosini M, Salati M, eds. (2004).Uscendo dall’ombra. Il
processo di regolarizzazione degli immigrati e i suoi
limiti [Coming out of the Shadows. The Regularisation
Process of Immigrants and Its Limits]. Milan, Italy, Franco
Angeli.
Ambrosini M, Bonizzoni P, Caneva E (2010). Ritrovarsi altrove.
Famiglie ricongiunte e adolescenti di origine immigrata
[Meeting Up Again Elsewhere. Reunited Families and Youth
of Migrant Origin]. Milano, Osservatorio regionale per
l’integrazione e la multietnicità, Regione Lombardia. [Milan,
Regional Observatory for Integration and Multi-ethnicity,
Lombardy region].
Andall J (2000). Gender, Migration and Domestic Service. The
Politics of Black Women in Italy. Aldershot, UK, Ashgate.
Anderson B (2000). Doing the Dirty Work? The Global Politics
of Domestic Labour. London, Zed Books.
Anderson B (2008). ‘Illegal Immigrant’: Victim or Villain?
COMPAS, Working Paper No. 64 (WP-08-64). Oxford, UK,
University of Oxford.
Baldassar L (2008). Debating Culture Across Distance: Transnational Families and the Obligation to Care. In: Grillo R, ed.
The Family in Question: Immigrant and Ethnic Minorities in
Multicultural Europe, pp. 269–291. Amsterdam, Amsterdam
University Press.
Baldwin-Edwards M (2001). Southern European Labour
Markets and Immigration. A Structural and Functional
Analysis. MMO Working Paper No. 5. Available at
http://www.mmo.gr/pdf/publications/mmo_working_papers/
MMO_WP5.pdf [last accessed 28 April 2011].
Baldwin-Edwards M, Arango J, eds. (1999). Immigrants and
the Informal Economy in Southern Europe. London, Frank
Cass Pub.
Balibar E (2006). Strangers as Enemies. Further Reflections
on the Aporias of Transnational Citizenship. Globalization
370
Working Papers, 06/4. Hamilton, Ontario, Canada,
MacMaster University.
Banfi L, Boccagni P (2009). Transnational Family Life: One
Pattern or Many, and Why? A Comparative Study on Female
Migration. In: Kofman E, Kohli M, Kraler A, Schmoll C,
eds. Gender, Generations and the Family in International
Migration, pp. 221–240. Amsterdam, IMISCOE-AUP
Series.
Bashi VF (2007). Survival of the Knitted. Immigrant Social
Networks in a Stratified World. Palo Alto, CA, Stanford
University Press.
Blangiardo GC, ed. (2010). La presenza straniera in Lombardia.
Aggiornamento del quadro di riferimento e analisi
delle dinamiche 2001–2009 [The Presence of Foreigners
in Lombardy. Updating of the Framework and Analysis of
the Dynamics 2001–2009]. In: Osservatorio regionale per
l’integrazione e la multietnicità, ed. Dieci anni di immigrazione in Lombardia [Ten Years of Immigration in Lombardy],
pp. 155–186. Milano, Regione Lombardia, Osservatorio
regionale per l’integrazione e la multietnicità [Regional
Observatory for Integration and Multi-ethnicity, Milan,
Lombardy Region].
Boccagni P (2010). Migrants’ Social Protection as a Transnational Process: Public Policies and Emigrant Initiative in
the Case of Ecuador. International Journal of Social Welfare
20(3): 318–325.
Bonizzoni P (2009). Living Together Again: Families Surviving
Italian Immigration Policies. International Review of Sociology 19(1): 83–101
Boswell C (2007). Theorizing Migration Policy: Is There a
Third Way? International Migration Review 41(1): 75–
100.
Bryceson D, Vuorela U, eds. (2002). The Transnational Family.
New European Frontiers and Global Networks. Oxford/New
York, Berg.
Calavita K (2005). Immigrants at the Margins. Law, Race and
Exclusion in Southern Europe. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge
University Press.
Campomori F (2007). Il ruolo di policy making svolto dagli
operatori dei servizi per gli immigrati [The Role of Policy
Making of the Operators in Services for Immigrants]. Mondi
migranti 3: 83–106.
Caritas-Migrantes (2010). Immigrazione. Dossier statistico 2010
[Immigration. Statistical Report 2010]. Rome, Italy, Idos.
Cornelius A, Martin L, Hollifield JF (1994). Controlling Immigration. A Global Perspective. Palo Alto, CA, Stanford
University Press.
Düvell F, ed. (2006). Illegal Immigration in Europe: Beyond
Control. London, Palgrave Macmillan.
Düvell F (2009). Irregular Migration in Northern Europe: Overview and Comparison. Clandestino Project Conference,
London, 27/3/2009. Oxford, UK, COMPAS, University of
Oxford.
Erminio D (2010). Dalla maternità transnazionale al ricongiungimento: la molteplicità dei percorsi [From Transnational Motherhood to Reunion: The Variety of Paths]. In:
Ambrosini M, Abbatecola E, eds. Famiglie in movimento.
Separazioni, legami, ritrovamenti nelle famiglie migranti
[Families on the Move. Separations, Links and Reunions in
Migrant Families], pp. 17–90. Genova, Italy, Il Melangolo.
Glick Schiller N, Basch L, Blanc-Szanton C (1992). Towards
a Transnationalization of Migration: Race, Class, Ethnicity
and Nationalism Reconsidered. The Annals of the New York
Academy of Sciences 645: 1–24.
Glytsos NP (2005). Stepping From Illegality to Legality and
Advancing Towards Integration: The Case of Immigrants in
Greece. International Migration Review 39(4): 819–840.
Hagan J (1998). Social Networks, Gender and Immigrant Incorporation: Resources and Constraints. American Sociological
Review 63(1): 55–67.
Int J Soc Welfare 2012: 21: 361–371
© 2011 The Author(s) International Journal of Social Welfare © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare
Surviving underground
Hollifield JF (1992). Immigrants, Markets, and States. The Political Economy of Postwar Europe. Cambridge, MA, Harvard
University Press.
International Centre for Migration Policy Development
(ICMPD) (2009). REGINE Regularisations in Europe. Study
on Practices in the Area of Regularisation of Illegally Staying
Third-Country Nationals in the Member States of the EU.
Final Report. Vienna, January.
Ismu News. Newsletter 24. 17 December 2010.
Jordan B (2006). Poles Apart: How Each EU Country Gets the
Migrant Workers It Requires. In: Düvell F, ed. Illegal Immigration in Europe: Beyond Control, pp. 197–208. London,
Palgrave Macmillan.
King R, Black R (1997). Southern Europe and the New Immigration. Brighton, UK, Sussex Academic Press.
Korac M (2001). Cross-Ethnic Networks, Self-Reception
System, and Functional Integration of Refugees from the
Former Yugoslavia in Rome. Journal of International Migration and Integration 2(1): 1–26.
Korac M (2009) Remaking Home: Reconstructing Life, Place
and Identity in Rome and Amsterdam. Oxford, UK, Berghahn
Books.
Lagomarsino F (2006). Esodi e approdi di genere. Famiglie
transnazionali e nuove migrazioni dall’Ecuador [Gender
Exodus and Landings. Transnational Families and New
Migrations From Ecuador]. Milan, Italy, Fondazione Ismu–
Franco Angeli.
Massey DS, Espinosa KE (1997). What’s Driving Mexico–U.S.
Migration? A Theoretical, Empirical and Policy Analysis.
American Journal of Sociology 102(4): 939–999.
Massey D, Arango J, Graeme H, Kouaouci A, Pellegrino A,
Taylor JE (1998). Worlds in Motion. Understanding International Migration at the End of the Millennium. Oxford, UK,
Clarendon Press.
Menjívar C (2006). Liminal Legality: Salvadoran and Guatemalan Immigrants’ Lives in the United States. American Journal
of Sociology 111(4): 999–1037.
Morris L (2002). Managing Migration: Civic Stratification and
Migrants Rights. London, Routledge.
Ossman S, ed. (2007). The Places We Share. Migration, Subjectivity and Global Mobility. Lanham, MD, Lexington.
Parreñas RS (2001). Servants of Globalization. Women, Migration, and Domestic Work. Palo Alto, CA, Stanford University
Press.
Penninx R, Doomernik J (1998). Towards Migration Regulation
in Globalized Societies. In: Van Amersfoort H, Doomernik J,
eds. International Migration. Processes and Interventions,
pp. 129–138. Amsterdam, The Netherlands, Imes.
Peruzzi G (2009). Coppie miste di oggi. La mixité sentimentale
nell’Italia del nuovo millennio [Mixed Couples of Today. The
Sentimental Mixing in the Italy of the New Millennium].
Mondi migranti 1: 67–83.
Portes A, ed. (1995). The Economic Sociology of Immigration.
New York, Russell Sage Foundation.
Portes A, Rumbaut RG (2006). Immigrant America, 3rd edn.
Berkeley, CA, University of California Press.
Rea A (2010). Conclusion. Les transformations des régimes de
migration de travail en Europe [Conclusion. The Transformations of the Regimes of Labour Migration in Europe]. In:
Morice A, Potot S, eds. De l’ouvrier immigré au travailleur
sans papiers. Les étrangers dans la modernisation du salariat
[From the Immigrated Worker to the Undocumented Migrant
Worker. Foreigners in the Modernization of Labour], pp.
307–315. Paris, France, Karthala.
Ribas-Mateos N (2004). How Can We Understand Immigration
in Southern Europe? Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies
30(6): 1045–1063.
Sassen S (2007). A Sociology of Globalization. New York,
Norton.
Sciortino G (2010). Continuità e mutamento nella popolazione
straniera in condizione irregolare in Lombardia [Continuity
and Change in the Irregular Foreign Population in Lombardy]. In: Blangiardo GC, ed. L’immigrazione straniera
in Lombardia. La nona indagine regionale, pp. 145–158.
Milano, Osservatorio regionale per l’integrazione e la multietnicità, Regione Lombardia [Milan, Regional Observatory
for Integration and Multi-ethnicity, Lombardy region.].
Smith MP, Guarnizo LE, eds. (1998/2003). Transnationalism
from Below. New Brunswick, NJ, Transaction Publ.
Solé C, Flaquer L, eds. (2005). El uso de las political sociales
por las mujeres inmigrantes [The Use of Social Policies by
Immigrant Women]. Madrid, Spain, Instituto de la Mujer
[Institute of the Woman].
Suarez-Orozco C, Todorova LG, Louie J (2002). Making up
for Lost Time: The Experience of Separation and Reunification Among Immigrant Families. Family Process 41(4): 625–
643.
Tarrius A (2002). La mondialisation par le bas. Les nouveaux
nomades de l’économie souterraine [Globalization From
Below. The New Nomads of the Underground Economy].
Paris, France, Balland.
Triandafyllidou A, Kosic A (2006). Polish and Albanian Workers
in Italy: Between Legality and Undocumented Status. In:
Düvell F, ed. Illegal Immigration in Europe: Beyond Control,
pp. 106–137. London, Palgrave Macmillan.
Van Meeteren M (2010). Life Without Papers. Aspirations, Incorporation and Transnational Activities of Irregular Migrants in
the Low Countries. Rotterdam, The Netherlands, Erasmus
University.
Van Meeteren M, Engbersen G, van San M (2009). Striving for
a Better Position: Aspirations and the Role of Cultural, Economic, and Social Capital for Irregular Migrants in Belgium.
International Migration Review 43(4): 881–907
Van Valsum S (2010). Déni de statut: La non-régulation des soins
et services domestiques aux Pays-Bas [Denial of Status: The
Non-regulation of Care and Domestic Services in the Netherlands]. In: Morice A, Potot S, eds. De l’ouvrier immigré au
travailleur sans papiers. Les étrangers dans la modernisation
du salariat [From the Immigrated Worker to the Undocumented Migrant Worker. Foreigners in the Modernization of
Labour], pp. 45–67. Paris, France, Karthala.
Vasta E (2008). The Paper Market: ‘Borrowing’ and ‘Renting’
of Identity Documents. COMPAS, Working Paper No. 61
(WP-08-61). Oxford, UK, University of Oxford.
Vianello FA (2009) Migrando sole. Legami transnazionali
tra Ucraina e Italia [Migrating Alone. Transnational Ties
Between Ukraine and Italy]. Milan, Italy, Franco Angeli.
Widding Isaksen L, Devi SU, Hochschild AR (2008). Global
Care Crisis. A Problem of Capital, Care Chain, or Commons?
American Behavioral Scientist 52(3): 405–425.
Zincone G (1999). Illegality, Enlightenment and Ambiguity: A
Hot Italian Recipe. In: Baldwin-Edwards M, Arango J, eds.
Immigrants and the Informal Economy in Southern Europe,
pp. 43–82. London, Frank Cass.
Int J Soc Welfare 2012: 21: 361–371
© 2011 The Author(s) International Journal of Social Welfare © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare
371