Marriage and Migration: Moroccan Women’s Views on Partner Choice, Arranged and Forced Marriage in Belgium

Abstract

With family reunification as one of the key routes to legally gain entry to the European Union, governments are introducing more stringent legislation to counter abuses such as forced marriages and marriages of convenience. This study explores Moroccan women’s views on partner choice, arranged and forced marriages to ascertain the impact of the migratory context. Moreover, it examined whether the diasporic experience affects the occurrence of forced marriage. Using a participatory approach, focus-group discussions and in-depth interviews were held with women from the Moroccan community in both urban and provincial settings in Flanders, Belgium. Our findings indicate a preference for a partner in Belgium. Religion as opposed to ethnicity emerges as the most important attribute in a partner. Furthermore, religion is also a progressive voice in opinions on forced marriage and the virginity norm. Although forced marriages are no longer a pressing issue among the youth of the Moroccan Belgian community, the immigration legislation and policies that aim to enhance integration and tackle forced marriage and marriages of convenience appear to effectively deter women from choosing a partner from Morocco. Overall, the diasporic experience and migration context do not give rise to an increase of forced marriage among the Moroccan community; yet, arranged marriage is prevalent, even though it is on the decline.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

  1. 1.

    In 2015, the vast majority of first permits for family reunification to TCNs were granted by Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and the UK altogether (EMN Synthesis Report 2017)

  2. 2.

    For EU citizens and their family members, the European directive 2004/38/EC regulates freedom of movement and right of residence. Both Directives were transposed into Belgian residence law (in 2006 and 2007 (Art. 10, 10a, 40a and 40b Aliens Act).

  3. 3.

    Firstly, there is an age requirement: both spouses and partners must be over 21 years old. Additionally, a minimum income is required of at least 120% of the social assistance level (or living wage) and proof of ‘adequate housing’ is needed. Both partners should be covered by health insurance.

  4. 4.

    For the purpose of this paper, the term ‘marriage migration’ is used both in the case of an existing partnership (marriage or equivalent legally registered partner) between a resident of Belgium and non-resident Third Country National (TCN), and in the case of a TCN or non-resident partner coming to Belgium with the aim of entering into a marriage or legal partnership (also referred to as ‘family formation’). An existing partnership denotes that the transnational couple has already officially entered into wedlock or legal partnership in the country of origin. The procedure for family reunification is set in motion in both instances (Desmet et al. 2011).

  5. 5.

    Law of June 2nd, 2013 (BS 23/09/2013).

  6. 6.

    In 2016, Morocco received 3727 first residence permits for family reasons, outnumbering Syria, India and Turkey. Since 2015, Turkish beneficiaries are no longer the second most important nationality (EMN Belgium, Sarolea and Hardy 2017).

  7. 7.

    Family reunification can also involve descendants or ascendants, in addition to spouses.

  8. 8.

    In Belgium, integration policies fall within the scope of the federated entities. Flanders, the Walloon region and the Brussels-Capital Region have each developed their own integration policy according to their debates and objectives regarding the management of cultural diversity. Moroccan and Turkish migrants were the first migrants targeted by these policies. For several years, Flanders has had a compulsory integration programme targeting newcomers. More recently, the two other regions also made their integration programmes for new migrants mandatory. However, the compulsory programs in the Walloon region and Brussels-Capital Region were not yet implemented at the time of research. Moroccan and Turkish migrants were thus differently affected by integration programmes, depending on the region in which they settled (Gsir et al. 2015; Van de Pol and Vanheule 2018).

  9. 9.

    Evaluations of this method show that the quality and quantity of communication between the generations improved significantly (GTZ 2005).

  10. 10.

    The 95 participants consisted of 70 Moroccan women, 11 Belgian women with no Moroccan heritage, 7 Tunesian, 4 Turkish and 3 Syrian women. Our research population group of Moroccan participants consisted predominantly of a mix of first-generation and second-generation women.

  11. 11.

    Forced marriage applies to both formal and informal unions.

  12. 12.

    Child marriage is defined as the marriage of anyone under the age of 18 years, seeing that consent to marriage cannot be free and full when one of the parties is not sufficiently mature to make an informed decision (article 1 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child; article 16(2) Universal Declaration of Human Rights).

  13. 13.

    Leaflet: Vakantietijd: huwelijkstijd? (Translated: Holiday time: time for marriage?). Available at: http://igvm-iefh.belgium.be/sites/default/files/downloads/vakantietijd_-_huwelijkstijd.pdf

References

  1. Aileen, T. (2006). How stricter Dutch immigration policies are contributing to rising Islamic fundamentalism in the Netherlands and Europe. Washington University Global Studies Law Review, 5(2), 451–468.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Anitha, S., & Gill, A. (2009). Coercion, consent and the forced marriage debate in the UK. Feminist Legal Studies, 17(2), 165–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bartels, E. (2000). Maagdelijkheid en maagdenvliesherstel tussen ethiek en beleid: een reactie. Migrantenstudies, 53(1), 45–52.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Belgian Immigration Office. (2015). Residence Permits Issued For Family Reasons. Statistics 2010–2015. Brussels: Federal Public Service Home Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Benradi, M., M’chichi, H. A., Ounnir, A., Boukaïssi, M. M., & Zeidguy, R. (2007). Le Code de la famille. Perceptions et pratique judiciaire. Fes: Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bensaid, N., & Rea, A. (2012). Étude relative aux mariages forcÉs en rÉgion de Bruxelles-Capitale. Brussels: Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bredal, A. (2005). Arranged marriages as a multicultural battle field. In Andersson, M., Lithman, Y. & Sernhede, O. (Eds.), Youth, Otherness, and the Plural City: Modes of belonging and social life (pp. 75-106). Gothenburg: Daidalos.

  8. Brion, F. (2011). Using gender to shape difference: The doctrine of cultural offence and cultural Defence. In S. Palidda (Ed.), Racial criminalisation of migrants in the 21st century (pp. 63–73). Farnham: Ashgate Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Caestecker, F. (Ed.). (2005). Huwelijksmigratie, een zaak voor de overheid? Leuven: Acco.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Carol, S., Ersanilli, E., & Wagner, M. (2014). Spousal choice among the children of Turkish and Moroccan immigrants in six European countries: Transnational spouse or co-ethnic migrant? International Migration Review, 48, 387–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chantler, K. (2012). Recognition of and intervention in forced marriage as a form of violence and abuse. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 13(3), 176–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Chantler, K., Gangoli, G., & Hester, M. (2009). Forced marriage in the UK: Religious, cultural, economic or state violence? Critical Social Policy, 29, 587–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Charpentier, I. (2010). Virginité des filles et rapports sociaux de sexe dans quelques récits d’écrivaines marocaines contemporaines. Genre, Sexualité & Société, 2010(3). https://doi.org/10.4000/gss.1413.

  14. Charsley, K., & Benson, M. C. (2012). Marriages of convenience or inconvenient marriages: Regulating spousal migration to Britain. Journal of Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Law, 26(1), 10–26.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cornelissens, A., Kuppens, J., & Ferwerda, H. (2009). Huwelijksdwang. Een verbintenis voor het leven? Den Haag: Ministerie van Justitie.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Crepaldi, C., Lodovici, M., Corsi, M., & Naaf, S. (2010). Violence Against Women and the Role of Gender Equality, Social Inclusion and Health Strategies. European Commission: Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities.

  17. De Brabander, A. (2012). De strafrechtelijke en criminologische dimensie van het gedwongen huwelijk. Gent: Masterproef Rechten Universiteit Gent 2011–2012.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Descheemaeker, L., Heyse, P., Wets, J., Clycq, N., & Timmerman, C. (2009). Partnerkeuze en Huwelijkssluiting van Allochtone Mannen. Een kwantitatieve en kwalitatieve analyse van het partnerkeuzeproces en het huwelijk van Marokkaanse, Turkse en sikhmannen. Antwerpen/Brussel: Universiteit Antwerpen/Instituut voor de gelijkheid van vrouwen en mannen.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Desmet, G., Leys, D., & Ronsijn, W. (2011). Partnermigratie van derdelanders naar Vlaanderen en Brussel. Een kwantitatieve en kwalitatieve studie. Brussels: Vlaamse Overheid en Europees Integratie Fonds.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Eisenberg, A. M. (2011). Law on the books vs. law in action: Under-enforcement of Morocco's reformed 2004 family law, the Moudawana. Cornell International Law Journal, 44(3), 693–728.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ellsberg, M., & Heise, L. (2005). Researching Violence Against Women. A Practical Guide for Researchers and Activists. Washington DC: World Health Organisation, PATH.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ertürk, Y. (2011). Foreword. In A. Gill & S. Anitha (Eds.), Forced Marriage. A social justice and human rights perspective (pp. xi–xvi). London: Zed Books.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Essen, B., Blomkvist, A., Helstrom, L., & Johnsdotter, S. (2010). The experience and responses of Swedish health professionals to patients requesting virginity restoration (hymen repair). Reproductive Health Matters, 2010(18), 38–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. European Migration Network (EMN). (2017). Synthesis report for the EMN focused study 2016 - family reunification of third-country nationals in the EU plus Norway: National Practices. European Commission: Migrapol EMN [doc 382].

  25. European Migration Network (EMN) Belgium, Sarolea, S. & Hardy, J. (2017). Family Reunification With Third Country National Sponsors In Belgium. Study of the Belgian Contact Point of the European Migration Network (EMN).

  26. Federaal Migratiecentrum Myria. (2017). Migratie in cijfers en in rechten. Brussel.

  27. Felz, M., Said, I., & Triebl, K. (2009). Active against forced marriage. Hamburg: Ministry for Social and Family Affairs, Health and Consumer Protection.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Flah, L. (2012). Bayrat or Spinsters, Single Women Trapped in Social Stigma. Morocco World News, August 18. Accessed 11 Apr 2018. http://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2012/08/52406/bayrat-or-spinsters-single-women-trapped-in-social-stigma/.

  29. Foreign and Commonwealth Office UK. (2014). The right to choose: Multi-agency statutory guidance for dealing with forced marriage. London: Foreign and Commonwealth Office.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Gangoli, G., & Chantler, K. (2009). Protecting victims of forced marriage: Is age a protective factor? Feminist Legal Studies, 17, 267–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Gangoli, G., Razak, A., & McCarry, M. (2006). Forced marriage and domestic violence among south Asian communities in north East England. Bristol: University of Bristol.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Gangoli, G., McCarry, M., & Razak, A. (2009). Child marriage or forced marriage? South Asian communities in north East England. Children and Society, 23(6), 418–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Geetanjali, G., McCarry, M., & Razak, A. (2009). Child marriage or forced marriage? South Asian communities in north East England. Children & Society, 23(6), 418–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Gill, A., & Mitra-Kahn, T. (2012). Modernising the other: Assessing the ideological underpinnings of the policy discourse on forced marriage in the UK. Policy & Politics, 40(1), 107–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Gsir, S., Mandin, J. and Mescoli, E. (2015). Moroccan and Turkish Immigration in Belgium. INTERACT RR 2015/03, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, San Domenico di Fiesole (FI): European University Institute.

  36. GTZ: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (now GIZ). (2005). Generation Dialogue about FGM and HIV/AIDS: Method, Experiences in the Field and Impact Assessment. Eschborn: GTZ.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Hester, M., Chantler, K., Gangoli, G., Devgon, J., Sharma, S., & Singleton, A. (2007). Forced marriage: the risk factors and the effect of raising the minimum age for a sponsor, and of leave to enter the UK as a spouse or fiancé(e). London: Home Office.

  39. Heyse, P., Pauwels, F., Wets, J., Timmerman, Ch. & Perrin, N. (2007). Liefde kent geen grenzen: een kwantitatieve en kwalitatieve analyse van huwelijksmigratie vanuit Marokko, Turkije en Oost-Europa en Zuid Oost Azië. Rapport in opdracht van het Centrum voor Gelijkheid van Kansen en voor Racismebestrijding.

  40. Hooghiemstra, E. (2001). Migrants, partner selection and integration: Crossing Borders? Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 32(4), 601–626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Husain, M. I., Waheed, W., & Husain, N. (2006). Self-harm in British south Asian women: Psychosocial correlates and strategies for prevention. Annals of General Psychiatry, 2006(5), 7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Huschek, D., de Valk, H. A., & Liefbroer, A. C. (2012). Partner choice patterns among the descendants of Turkish immigrants in Europe. European journal of population,28(3), 241–268.

  43. Leerkes, A., & Kulu-Glasgow, I. (2011). Playing hard(er) to get: The state, international couples, and the income requirement. European Journal of Migration and Law, 13(1), 95–121.

  44. Leye, E. & Sabbe, A. (2015). Forced marriage in Belgium. An analysis of the current situation. Ghent: International Centre for Reproductive Health (ICRH), Ghent University.

  45. Marshall, J. (2009). Personal freedom through human rights law? Autonomy, identity and integrity under the European convention on human rights. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Pande, R. (2014). Geographies of marriage and Migration: Arranged marriages and south Asians in Britain. Geography Compass, 8(2), 75–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Phillips, A. (2007). Multiculturalism without culture. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Phillips, R. (2012). Interventions against forced marriage: Contesting hegemonic narratives and minority practices in Europe. Gender, Place & Culture: A Journal of Feminist Geography, 19(1), 21–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Phillips, A., & Dustin, M. (2004). UK initiatives on forced marriage: Regulation, dialogue and exit. Political Studies, 52(3), 531–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Psaila, E., Leigh, V., Verbari, M., Fiorentini, S., Dalla Pozza, V., & Gomez, A. (2016). Forced marriage from a gender perspective. Directorate General for Internal Policies, Department C: Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, European Parliament, September 2016 (PE 556.926).

  51. Ratia, E., & Walter, A. (2009). International Exploration on Forced Marriages: A Study on Legal Initiatives, Policies and Public Discussions in Belgium, France, Greece, UK and Switzerland. Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Reniers, G., & Lievens, J. (1999). Stereotypen in perspectief. De evolutie van enkele aspecten van het huwelijk bij Turken en Marokkanen in Belgie. Migrantenstudies, 15(1), 28–44.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Réseau Mariage et Migration. (2011). Actes de la journée de reflexion et d’échanges du 20 mai 2011. Bruxelles.

  54. Ritchie, J., & Lewis, J. (2003). Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Rude-Antoine, E. (2005). Forced Marriages in Council of Europe Member States: A comparative study of legislation and political initiatives. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Sabbe, A., Oulami, H., Zekraoui, W., Hikmat, H., Temmerman, M., & Leye, E. (2013). Determinants of child and forced marriage in Morocco: Stakeholder perspectives on health, policies and human rights. BMC International Health and Human Rights,13(43). https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-698X-13-43.

  57. Sabbe, A., Temmerman, M., Brems, E., & Leye, E. (2014). Forced marriage: An analysis of legislation and political measures in Europe. Crime, Law and Social Change,62(2), 171–189.

  58. Sabbe, A., Oulami, H., Hamzali, S., Oulami, N., Le Hijr, F.Z., Abdallaoui, M., et al. (2015). Women’s perspectives on marriage and rights in Morocco: Risk factors for forced and early marriage in the Marrakech Region. Culture, Health & Sexuality,17(2), 135–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Saharso, S. (2004). Feminisme en multiculturalisme: twee zielen in ÉÉn borst? Ethiek en Maatschappij, 7, 26–39.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Samad, Y., & Eade, J. (2002). Community perceptions of forced marriage. London: FCO (Foreign and Commonwealth Office).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Schoonvaere, Q. (2014). Belgie-Marokko: 50 jaar migratie. Demografische studie over de populatie van Marokkaanse herkomst in Belgie. Centre de recherche en dÉmographie et sociÉtÉs, UniversitÉ catholique de Louvain & Federaal Centrum voor de analyse van de migratiestromen, de bescherming van de grondrechten van de vreemdelingen en de strijd tegen mensenhandel, juni 2014.

  62. Shaw, A. (2001). Kinship, cultural preference and immigration: Consanguineous marriage among British Pakistanis. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 7(2), 315–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Sterckx, L. (2008). Turkish and Moroccan Youths’ Choice of a Marriage Partner. Lisbon: European Social Science History Conference (ESSCH) February–March 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Sundari, A., & Gill, A. (2009). Coercion, consent and the forced marriage debate in the UK. Feminist Legal Studies, 17, 165–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Van de Pol, S. & Vanheule, D. (2018). Maatschappelijke oriëntatie in kaart gebracht: België. Centrum voor Migratie en Interculturele Studies, Universiteit Antwerpen.

  66. Van Kerckem, K., Van der Bracht, K., Stevens, P. A. J., & Van de Putte, B. (2013). Transnational marriages on the decline: Explaining changing trends in partner choice among Turkish Belgians. International Migration Review, 47(4), 1006–1038.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Vermeirsch, S., Sabbe, A., Temmerman, M., & Leye, E. (2013). De mythe van het maagdenvlies. Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde, 69(9), 440–445.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Zemni, S., Casier, M., & Peene, N. (2006). Studie naar de factoren die de vrijheid van keuze van een echtgenoot beperken, bij bevolkingsgroepen van vreemde oorsprong in België. Ghent/Brussels: Universiteit Gent/Centrum voor gelijkheid van kansen en voor racismebestrijding.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Zoglin, K. (2009). Morocco's family code: Improving equality for women. Human Rights Quarterly, 31(4), 964–984.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank all the participants for their valuable time and input. We are also very grateful to all who reviewed this paper, especially A. La Velle.

Funding

This work was supported by the Flemish Interuniversity Council (Vlaamse Interuniversitaire Raad)–Institutional University Development Cooperation [VLADOC grant 2009-04] and by the Agentschap Integratie & Inburgering [Managers van Diversiteit 2010/01/016].

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexia Sabbe.

Ethics declarations

This study received ethics approval from the Ethics Board of the Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences at Ghent University

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sabbe, A., El Boujaddayni, K., Temmerman, M. et al. Marriage and Migration: Moroccan Women’s Views on Partner Choice, Arranged and Forced Marriage in Belgium. Int. Migration & Integration 20, 1097–1120 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12134-018-00646-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Marriage and migration
  • Family reunification
  • Partner choice
  • Forced marriage and arranged marriage
  • Moroccan community
  • Belgium