Search

Der Artikel vergleicht verschiedene Definitionen der Bevölkerung mit Migrationshintergrund und verwendet dazu die Daten des Mikrozensus 2018. Als Abgrenzungsmerkmale werden Staatsangehörigkeit, Wanderung und familiärer Migrationsbezug vorgestellt sowie darauf basierende mögliche Definitionen des Migrationshintergrunds. Es wird gezeigt, wie stark sich die Definition auf die Berechnung auswirkt und welchen Teilpopulationen abhängig von der Definition ein Migrationshintergrund zugeschrieben wird oder nicht. This article compares various definitions of the population with a migrant background using data from the microcensus 2018. Citizenship, migration and the family background with regard to migration are the classification criteria presented, together with possible definitions of migrant background based on these criteria. The article shows to what extent the definition influences the calculation and which parts of the population are assigned a migrant background depending on the definition used.

The term “migration background” is commonly used in Germany today, but this neologism is only 20 years old. As an official category, it is even much younger. There has been only little research concerning the new population category, which emerged around the turn of the millennium. Thus, the question how the “migration background” could become the central category describing migration related diversity in Germany is not answered yet. This article fills this gap by exploring the context of the emergence of the “migration background” including the history of ethnic categories in German official statistics. It describes the actual definition of a “migration background” which became an official category in 2007 when the German Federal Statistical Office started publishing data regarding “the population with a migration background” based on the microcensus, a 1% household survey with mandatory participation. The central questions are: how national membership is imagined, how is it inscribed in definitions, and what adaptions had to be made over time? To answer these questions, different sources as questionnaires, publications of results of the microcensus and national reports on children and youth are analysed. Using interpretative methods, it is shown how a new taxonomy of the population in Germany was created, how it was influenced by international and national educational research, and to which extent it reshaped the perspectives on newcomers and natives. It is shown that the new category is tightly bound to citizenship and summarizes a number of older ethnic categories, but excludes also immigrated Germans who immigrated shortly after Second World War and from the former German Democratic Republic. Therefore, the label “migration background” is misleading because inherited citizenship and ancestry is in the centre of the definition rather than migration experience.

In den Jahren 1992-1995 kamen ca. 35 Tausend bosnische Kriegsflüchtlinge nach Berlin und wurden vorübergehend geduldet. Nach Kriegsende 1995 sollten sie schnellstmöglich wieder zurückkehren. Traumatisierte und Ältere ohne Angehörige im Heimatland wurden weiterhin geduldet bis Bosnien-Herzegowina wieder aufgebaut ist. Doch der Wiederaufbau verlief schleppend. Mit dem Friedensvertrag von Dayton begannen nicht Frieden und Wiederaufbau, sondern die Konsolidierung der ethnischen Grenzen in demokratischen Strukturen. Deshalb sahen viele Flüchtlinge keine Möglichkeit in ihre Heimatorte zurückzukehren und versuchten ihre Rückkehr hinauszuschieben. Möglich war dies mithilfe der Attestierung einer kriegsbedingten Posttraumatischen Belastungsstörung und ihre psychotherapeutische Behandlung, die den Inhabenden und ihren Familienmitgliedern eine Aufenthaltsverlängerung ermöglichte und ab dem Jahr 2000 den Erhalt eines dauerhaften Aufenthaltstitels. Die Verbindung einer psychischen Krankheit und ihrer Psychotherapie mit einem Aufenthaltsrecht ist neu in der Geschichte des deutschen Ausländerrechts und obwohl Berliner Psychiater, Psychiaterinnen, Psychologinnen und Psychologen maßgeblich an der Schaffung der „Traumatisiertenregelung“ beteiligt waren, wurden ihre Atteste von der Berliner Verwaltung in Frage gestellt. In der Dissertation werden die Standpunkte der Flüchtlinge, Behandelnden und der Verwaltung dargelegt und ihre Interaktionen beschrieben.Die Rolle des Krankheitskonzeptes der Posttraumatischen Belastungsstörung wird als "boundary object" (Star/Griesemer 1989) untersucht. Der Schwerpunkt liegt auf den Lebenswelten und Taktiken der Flüchtlinge, sich in Berlin zurechtzufinden und Anerkennung und Verständnis für ihre Situation zu finden. Ihre Bedürfnisse wurden in einen psychotherapeutischen Bedarf übersetzt und damit den Berliner Psychotherapeutinnen und -therapeuten ein neues Betätigungs- und Professionalisierungfeld geboten, was kritisch hinterfragt wird. From 1992 until 1995 about 35 thousand Bosnian war refugees fled to Berlin and were allowed to stay temporarily. After the end of the war in 1995 they were expected to leave as soon as possible. Traumatized persons and elderly without relatives in Bosnia had the possibility to prolong their visa until Bosnia is reconstructed. But the rebuilding process progressed only slowly. With the end of the war did not start the expected peace time and rebuilding but the consolidation of ethnic borders inside democratic structures. Therefore many refugees did not see a possibility to return to their property and tried to delay their return. This was possible with an medical statement certifying a war related posttraumatic stress disorder and their psychotherapeutic treatment. These medical statements ensured the extension of the visa for the concerned person and its family members. From 2000 onwards they could receive a permanent residence title. The connection of a mental illness and psychotherapy with residence entitlements is a novelty in the German aliens law. And despite the fact that psychiatrists and psychologists from Berlin were leading actors in the establishment of the „regularization of the traumatized“ their medical/psychological statements were impeached by the authorities. The dissertation describes the viewpoints of refugees, treating physicians and psychologists and the authorities and how they interact with each other. Additionally is the concept of posttraumatic stress disorder examined and discussed as „boundary object“ (Star/Griesemer 1989). An important aspect is the description of life worlds and tactics of the refugees to get along in Berlin, to gain respect and appreciation for their situation. Their needs were translated into a psychotherapeutic demand and this led to the invention of a new field of work and professionalization for psychotherapists in Berlin. This development is critically reflected.