5 Assignment 10

In “Global Care Crisis,” authors Arlie Hochschild, Sambasivan Uma Devi, and Lise Widding Isaksen explain that each year there is a steady increase in the number of women migrants. These women are moving far away from their families and taking jobs as caretakers, nannies, maids and nurses in order to help provide for their families. Women migrate to the North to countries where the economy is better which leaves the south with no skilled workers and limited resources. The idea of the commons is being a part of a whole. The authors insist that a capitalistic view lacks the opportunity from people to live as a part of a community. They believe that just as the capitalism that developed wore away the commons in 18th century Europe, the same is occurring in respect to the North’s economic wellbeing destroying the commons of the south. We see this because one of the consequences of a mother migrating away is that the relationship between her and her children shifts. Although she may be able to support her children financially, she cannot nurture and support them emotionally and mentally. These are important features to a child’s development. The mother is the primary caregiver in a household so her absence distorts family relations because now that responsibility belongs to the father, who might neglect to exhibit these characteristics. Migrant women sacrifice a lot for the potential well being of their family but what is not seen is how their children react. They may question why their mother left them and even have resentment towards their absentee mothers. These children would also have lower grades than children living with both parents. They feel lonely, sad and confused. What I found to be troubling was that the well-being of the markets in the North depended on migrant women leaving their families to bestow their natural caregiver instincts on other people that are not their kin; not because they wanted to, but because they had to. Especially because leaving their families behind came with public shame. They were deemed bad mothers or materialistic although they too didn’t want to be separated. They wanted a better life for their kids and migrating for a job was the way they knew how to ensure that life.

In “Global Care Crisis: A Problem of Capital, Care Chains, or Commons?” various scholars argue that the concept of “the common” is important to drive their point on the issue of South-North migration. Their concern on the migration of women is that they leave behind their children and the effects of that separation are extreme to both of their lives. The market and the society are the causes of this issue, by exploring history they realized the relationship between the two is very similar to back then but now it took a different from. Women are pulled towards the market of the North while the social relations are deteriorated in the south. From one side of the spectrum it might be beneficial for the economy and well being of the family but on the other side the emotional and development of the children will suffer a lot and weaken.  According to the authors, it is necessary to look at it a whole which is made up by integrity of a family by gestures of love and physical connections plus a fair economy to survive. The concept of the common is required for the completion of the whole because if it is ignore then it will be narrow to the realization of the impact it has on the children life whom are the future generations. When children are separated from their mothers their ability to connect to an unknown world will be weaker than others that grow up with both of their parents. It can be argued that the market is necessary but not as the care a mother and a father should provide their children. However, there is a lot of pressure forcing parents to migrate and as a consequence their children and other family members to be affected for good or bad.

Lise Widding Isaksen, Sambasivan Uma Devi, and Arlie Russell Hochschild address several concepts associated with the migration of women from third world countries to more profitable countries within Global Care Crisis: A Problem of Capital, Care Chain, or Commons?. 

To begin explaining the concept known as “the commons” we must understand why its practice is necessary. Due to economic, political, and social factors prevalent in their countries of origin, many mothers relocated in order to create a better standard of living for themselves and their families. These women would often work as caretakers for other families, while leaving their elder children or superiors to care for their younger youths. These younger women would then send money to families back home. The money they earn is received from the services they provide in these more developed and economically stable countries. They take the paid responsibilities more financially stable people are less likely inclined to take on. Such as babysitting and caring for a child of the family or cleaning the apartment or house for that family, cooking for that family. So the commons which is the cycle of care is being transferred in many two ways. Where the children that are left behind by the mothers who go to seek new lives in the more developed countries transfer their care and concern to the kids of the people that pay them. In return the children left behind get financial assistance they would not have received from their mothers if they were employed in their second or third world country where jobs were not ample. So more or less the commons is like a community in a way or it is also like an exchange of services. Their is also a stereo type that carried these mothers but it is irrelevant just as the subject of feminism is to immigration.

In the article, “Global Care Crisis: A Problem of Capital, Care Chains, or Commons?” Arlie Hochschild, Lise Widding Isaksen, and Sambasvian Uma Devi had argued that the main focus on the concept of the commons to understand the South and North migration. This article discussed how mothers from southern countries have to leave their family and children and travel to northern countries to care and take care of families that is not their own. When they travel to these northern countries, they get jobs such as nannies, caregivers, etc. These writers of this article talks about the commons. The commons is the community of families within the care chain. There is many different arguments about the feelings of this article. Many people would assume that these mothers are bad mothers because they are leaving their families in order to go take care of another family. The biological kids of the mothers are left with other relatives to take care of them. There are both advantages and disadvantages for these women to become migrants and travel the world taking care of other people. Most of the time, the money they make they send it back home to there family. Everything one way or another has to come down to the economical system. The reason these women would travel to other countries and leave their families is so they can earn money. Usually most of the time these women have migrated from third world countries that are very poor and will go to a country that is extremely rich like the United States.  These woman had to have a balance between their work life and their personal life.

In Global Care Crisis: A Problem of Capital, Care Chain, or Commons? by Lise Widding Isaksen, Sambasivan Uma Devi, and Arlie Russell Hochschild, the authors discuss concepts surrounding the South-North migration of women. One of these concepts is referred to as “the commons,” which can be described as somewhat of a barter system between members of a care chain. Individuals within a common provide for others within the community in exchange for something that serves as a benefit to their families.

Financial, educational, and health incentives contributed to the migration of women from their impoverished origins to more economically-stable countries. After arriving to the destination, many women were presented with opportunities to start their own businesses, obtain improved housing, and were offered competitive salaries that assisted them in funding their children’s education. Though the decision to abandon their homelands seemed well worth it in some instances, it also came with many sacrifices. Mothers were often forced to leave their own children to tend to those from another family, causing them to be stereotyped as “bad mothers” or “materialistic”.

The concept of “the commons” is necessary to comprehend the social challenges that these women face as they seek opportunities that their homelands cannot provide, as well as the challenges that their children must overcome back home. The mothers are deprived of their families and a complete maternal experience, due to the prolonged separation from her children. They work only to send money as remittances to their children. The children on the other hand are often forced to care for one another in place of their mother, or are raised by an elderly member of the family. They do not get to build intimate relationships with their mothers. This system only works to serve capitalism and its call for laborers and negatively impacts both migrants and their children.

The author discusses how an increasing number of female workers are migrating from their home lands to other prosperous countries. However Parrenas explains how a Filipina mother had to leave behind her children in order to find work. A global care chain is when there are interlinked relationships around the world from caring for one another when the parents are away at work. The author also describes how a commons is shared land that can be used to collect firewood, hunt, and allow animals to graze large acres of land.

Many citizens from all over the world were frequently anxious about the balance between work and family. They did not have any time to visit their families and very often missed them. Not only do families migrate for work but they also migrate for food and shelter. In some instances, parents feared being labelled as bad parents for having to leave their children to find work. However, I don’t think they should have feared this because they are creating a better future for their kid(s) as well as leaving them with a trusted friend or family member. The kids would most likely be understanding when the parent comes back from work. Additionally, they were several families that envied those who migrated for work and could participate in global care chains.

They were some kids who became older that seemed to question why their parents left for work while their colleagues parents stayed. These are all situational instances, some children have better opportunities than others and depended on the image of the parent’s role.

There was also complications in parental roles in new families. Often times children felt that they had to look after their siblings moreso than the host parent  could do for them.

Lastly, the author concludes explaining how the market has hindered life living in the commons in that most families migrated to find work and not stay in these rural areas.

The article “Global Care Crisis: A Problem of Capital, Care Chains, or Commons?” Arlie Hochschild, Lise Widding Isaksen, and Sambasivan Uma Devi discusses the global economical systems that exist in the world and how it affects different counties. Economics play a huge role in people’s lives because the economical instability in certain countries forces people to migrate.

Global migration was going for almost three hundred years. People leave their homelands in a search of a better place and a better pay. This is a reasoning behind migrations. People are always looking for a comfort place to live. However, this articles explores a more darker side of the migration because it goes dipper into people’s lives as a migrant individuals. Mainly this article focuses on women and sacrifices they had to make in order to achieve what the were looking for. As authors stated women had to leave their homes, relatives and children, so they could leave to another country and work there. Daughters left hometowns and travelled to north in a search of a better pay. Most available jobs were in the home care. So, basically women could find jobs only as caretakers or nanny’s. At this point another discussion starts by the authors because women were looking after children of their employers and not their own. Unfortunately, children, who were left in third world countries, were left without mothers and sometimes children would even forget their mothers. Thus, women, who left, had to make a lot of sacrifices in order to provide for their families. We can also make a parallel with a time of slavery, when slave women had to take care of children of their masters.

In case of “the commons” the migration of women disrupts this whole concept. According to the authors “the commons” concept is based on a community that works on sharing and helping each other. However, this concept does not work if one crucial detail is missing. That detail is a model of mother and motherhood. Thus, everything comes down to the economical system of the world. If every third world country would be as developed as a first world country, in economical and financial way, then the need for migration would disappear. People wouldn’t have a need to migrate in a search of a better pay because they would be satisfied with what the get in their homelands.

The commons was originally a term used in the 15th century in relation to land that was used for livestock to graze. This land was intended for shared use for everyone. The commons can also take on a different meaning that takes the form of a community rather than land. Within this community, people are expected to work together and provide services for each other. In the 15th century land became privatized so people weren’t able to share land they way they used to. Land became restricted, and the same thing happened to communities through migration. The way people can work for and with each other changed. The meaning of this concept in relation to the concerns discussed by the authors, is that there is a strong need of the commons within third world countries. Able bodied adults are heavily needed to provide their services as caretakers to the elderly and children, or as nurses and teachers, but this is also the same population of people who are leaving their countries to go to other first world nations in order to do work for a higher pay so they can financially support their family. We require this concept of the commons in order to understand how complex issues related to migration are, and how the efforts to provide a better life can lead to other problems especially for children. The idea of the commons could be applied to land use, family dynamics and community dynamics so it, along with financial gain, is necessary to understand in order to see how it impacts everyone like the children for example. The children who didn’t have their mother around them didn’t do as well in school, and experienced feelings of sadness that impacted their lives in many ways. Because women weren’t able to physically care for their children their love became commodified. Gifts and money were exchanged for taking care of someone’s child. The psycho-social growth of children became a great concern because of migrating mothers.

In order to understand the migration between the South and North we have to focus on the concept of “the commons”. Arlie Hochschild, Lise Widding Isaksen, and Sambasivan Uma Devi discuss the concepts affected by migration which are care chains, commons and the problem of capital. In “Global Care Crisis: A Problem of Capital, Care Chain, or Commons” the authors mainly talk about the migration of mothers from Southern countries to the United States. The authors discuss the concept of care chain which basically means that the older daughter from a poor family helps to take care of her siblings in order for her mother to work as a nanny caring for the children whose mothers migrated to take care of the children of rich family.  The care chain can have a positive and negative effect on the family, yes the child life is improve because of the remittances send to them but not growing up with a stable, union family can effect the children. The communities that the families belong to are refer to as the common in this article. In the care chain everyone depends on one another for support in order to survive. In order to make enough money to support their family, these mothers migrated to the United States where they made five times more money than what they would of made in their native country. In many cases migrant mothers would leave their children with family members or even their eldest child in order to be able to move. Once they arrived in the United States they found jobs working as nurses, housekeepers, and caregivers. Many people viewed migrant mothers as selfish, materialistic and bad moms because of the long time they spend separated from their children, when in reality the reason they’re separated from their children was in order to help provide for them.  The money these mother sent back to their native countries, allows the opportunity to improve the lives of the the children that were left behind.  The money sent back to these countries in forms of remittances also help to contribute to the nation economic development.

In the reading “Global Care Crisis: A Problem of Capital, Care Chains, or Commons?” by Arlie Hochschild, Lise Widding Isaksen, and Sambasivan Uma Devi, they mention the term commons. The term commons was first referred to the land of the fifteenth century English villagers where they could freely graze their sheep and cattle, collect firewood, and hunt game. The British then took the land and didn’t let the commoners use it. The word commons could also mean the community of families that people belonged to within the care chain. The purpose of migration was to seek for better paying jobs. The mothers would be more likely to migrate away from their own families including their young children is all due to higher paying jobs. You would think that the commons that are left in their home lands would be against migration but they actually benefited from it. The mothers would send back home  remittances. The third world government capitalized from it as well because they were able to tax  hard currency remittances. Even though the mothers were providing for their children they did face a huge social cost which was shame. Talking about how the mother’s children were doing was a taboo topic, they were sensitive and considered it a private matter. Alexandro Portes defines social capital as the accumulation of “social chits”. In the exchange of social chits, they leave open the time for repayment. Between migrant mother and caring-giving kin, there is an exchange of social chits. This right here would be considered the term care chains. While the mother is off working, either her older daughter, her sister, or any sort of kin would look after her younger children. Even with the conflict of not being there for their children, most migrants saw themselves as using their remittances to better their families, which are the commons.