Asserting children's rights through the digital practices of transnational families

• Published in: Family relations Vol. 72; no. 2; pp. 458 - 477
• Main Authors: Ducu, Viorela, Hărăguș, Mihaela, Angi, Daniela, Telegdi‐Csetri, Áron
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Hoboken, USA Wiley Subscription Services, Inc 01.04.2023; National Council on Family Relations
• Subjects: Caregivers; Child Advocacy; Children; children's rights; Childrens rights; Communication; Communication (Thought Transfer); Communications technology; digital copresence; Environment; Families & family life; Family relations; Family Relationship; Focus groups; Information Sources; Information technology; Internet; Internet access; Interviews; Labor; Migration; NGOs; Nongovernmental organizations; Overseas Employment; Parent Responsibility; Parents & parenting; Participation; registers of presence; Relatives; Rights; Semi Structured Interviews; Social Action; Social Support Groups; Society; Sociology; transnational families; Transnationalism; transparency of communication; Ukrainian; Moldova; Romania; Ukraine
• ISSN: 0197-6664; 1741-3729; 0197-6664
• DOI: 10.1111/fare.12828

Objective This study investigates how transnational families function as advocates, channels, and iterators of children's rights in the context of digital communication. Background Transnational parents are involved in practices of doing family through digital copresence, in doing rights toward society and coagency among family members, creating a rights context. Method Data were collected in Moldova and Ukraine through 102 semistructured interviews and 10 focus group discussions with adults and children in transnational families and caregivers, and 24 interviews with experts from local and national authorities as well as NGOs. Results Transnational parents represent their children by engaging in digital communication practices with institutions and maintain family togetherness through involvement and support of children within transnational family relationships. Communication with institutions is burdened by distrust of and constraints regarding information and communication technologies (ICT) access, the limited availability of adults as interlocutors for daily communication, and deliberate nontransparency of communication at both ends. Conclusion Digital communication offers families the capability to represent children's rights externally, and to create internal family togetherness as a potentially new register of presence, articulated by the limits and specificity of the mode of communication employed. Implications Inclusive digital communication capacities of transnational family members necessary for the practice of family togetherness, exercise of parental responsibilities, and support for children's participation should be enhanced on both ends as well as within and without the family.