Germany plans to suspend family reunification

https://www.dw.com/en/germany-plans-to-suspend-family-reunification/a-72565576

by Just-Sale-7015

14 comments

  2. Another bone for the fascists, it has no significance.

    The number of asylum seekers are already way down (44% down compared to April last year).

    As Russia gets weaker and weaker their hybrid war is getting weaker too, they cannot push as many people into Europe anymore. If you want to solve the problem for good fuck up Russia even more.

  4. Good, the system has been abused beyond belief and isn’t fit for purpose.

    Returns need to be running into the thousands per month.

    Syria sanctions are lifted, they can return home. Same for the Afghans, they’re normalising relations etc etc

    Best scenario for everyone.

  5. Headline is overblown, it’s to suspend family reunification in some cases involving asylum seekers, not for immigration in general or even all asylum seekers, but the direction of Germany’s immigration policy has been clear for a while now. is Germany heading for a solid middle, or is it gonna eventually reach a completely exclusionary situation? That’s the big question.

    > There are currently around 351,400 people with subsidiary protection status living in Germany, the majority from Syria. They receive a residence permit, typically for an initial one year, and have the right to live and work in Germany and access social benefits. But while asylum-seekers and recognized refugees have the right to reunification with spouses and children under the age of 18 under German and EU law, those with subsidiary protection status do not.

  6. By conceding that immigration is bad is how you get the facist to eventually win, immigration is good, the bad consequences could be prevented with welfare and psicological therapy but instead let’s make immigrants lives even worse and create even more crime

  8. That’s a bad idea, they just have to fix the loopholes. Not stop it. Also isn’t that EU law?

    Edit: To all the downvoters: So you rather have lone, desperate and sad young men instead of men that seek a job so that they can provide for their young family?

    Great idea…

    This doesn’t lower immigration like you hope, instead it will increase the money they sent home and Increase illegal immigration.

  11. IIRC the vast majority of “irregular immigrants” (so those not having to fulfill immigration conditions like a work visa) are the result of family reunification. So by reducing it, maybe even ending it entirely down the line (under the justification of “if they can wait for their son to reach the safe country, then in how much anger are they really?”) then it would probably MASSIVELY reduce the amount of new irregular migrants coming in, while also making Germany a much less desirable location. Either the entire family flees together (and receives asylum together) or you will likely never see them again.

    After all the idea of asylum is to safe someone’s life that is in imminent danger. Nothing more or less. Family reunification was always just a bonus. If the lives of the family members are in imminent peril then they too can each individually apply for asylum. But the fact they can just stay in the “dangerous” country for years if needs be and then just be shipped all in a big family unit to Germany after ONE family member got asylum in Germany is kind of against the spirit of the refugee system in my opinion.

    Especially because once the danger has passed we actually want the refugees to go back home… and that’s more encouraged if their family is waiting there and discouraged if the family stays with them in Germany, having built a (relatively) cushy life there.

    I can see family reunification being reduced from a right for refugees to something the government will only apply on a case by case basis (and then largely only used for refugees that are culturally more “compatible” i.e. Ukraine and less so on nations deemed incompatible, so African and Arab ones).

  12. This feels like a violation of human rights and children’s rights. We all should be protecting the right to family life, not making it harder for people to live with their immidiate family members in the country they have immigrated to.

    Children have the right to grow up with their parents and siblings. All these circumstances will affect the child’s overall well-being and development, which this proposal seeks to violate by denying the right to family reunification. No proposal on immigration policy should violate human and children’s rights.

    This kind of forced separation affects to people’s ability to properly settle in their new country and integrate. When there’s no safe or legal way to reunite, people will take irregular routes, which is never the best or a safe option for anyone (the people itself or for the government).

  14. Wtf is wrong with this comment section?

    I can understand to be critical of immigration, but there seems to be multiple people not knowing the difference between asylum seekers and regular immigration and I’ve seen several flat out racists posts get upvoted.

    Seriously?

Comments are closed.