Skip to content
1981
image of Performing under pressure: Probationary migrant wives and marital expectations in Hong Kong and Melbourne, Australia

Abstract

Migrant wives on spouse visas find themselves in a state of transition. The conditional and temporary nature of their legal status positions these women precariously, with their wait for permanency causing legal limbo. Although research into the insecurity and precarity of women on spouse visas is increasing, we know little about how power imbalances between these women and their sponsor husbands are enacted and sustained through quotidian family practices. Responding to this gap, this article analyses the everyday experiences of 39 wives who, after migrating with a type of spouse visa to Hong Kong ( = 20) and Melbourne, Australia ( = 19), faced significant pressure from their husbands to perform ‘good wifeliness’. Although highly diverse and residing in two different social contexts, these women are connected by how these expectations can be traced to their visa status, specifically its purpose (for an intimate partnership), transitional and probationary nature and underlying sponsorship arrangement. Ideas of good wifeliness imposed by the women’s husbands are further underpinned by pressures to demonstrate legal deservingness as migrants seeking to move from a transitional legal status to permanent residency. Remnants of this dynamic continue even after separation, pointing to the long-lasting effects of arriving by spouse visa.

© 2025 Intellect Ltd
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/tjtm_00081_1
2025-12-15
2026-04-12

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abraham, Margaret and Vasil, Stefani (2025), ‘Immigrant women, domestic and family violence and the state: A contextual global analysis of the United States and Australia’, International Sociology, online first, https://doi.org/10.1177/02685809251346395.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Acedera, Kristel A. F. and Yeoh, Brenda S. A. (2020), ‘“Until death do us part?”: Migrant wives, left-behind husbands, and the negotiation of intimacy in transnational marriages’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 46:16, pp. 3508–25, https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2019.1592414.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Anderson, Bridget (2000), ‘Doing the dirty work?: The global politics of domestic labour’, in M. K. Zimmerman, J. S. Litt and C. E. Bose (eds), Global Dimensions of Gender and Carework, London: Zed Books, pp. 226–39, https://doi.org/10.1515/9781503625723-020.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Anderson, Michelle J. (1992), ‘A license to abuse: The impact of conditional status on female immigrants’, Yale Law Journal, 102:6, pp. 1401–30, https://doi.org/10.2307/796973.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Anitha, Sundari (2011), ‘Legislating gender inequalities: The nature and patterns of domestic violence experienced by South Asian women with insecure immigration status in the United Kingdom’, Violence against Women, 17:10, pp. 1260–85, https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801211424571.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Baas, Michiel (2017), ‘The mobile middle: Indian skilled migrants in Singapore and the “middling” space between migration categories’, Transitions: Journal of Transient Migration, 1:1, pp. 47–63, https://doi.org/10.1386/tjtm.1.1.47_1.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Balgamwalla, Sabrina (2014), ‘Bride and prejudice: How U.S. immigration law discriminates against spouse visa holders’, Berkeley Journal of Gender, Law & Justice, 29:1, pp. 25–71, https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2235858. Accessed 18 October 2025.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Borges Jelinic, Ana (2020), ‘Australia’s family violence provisions in migration law: Comparative study’, Flinders Law Journal, 21:2, pp. 259–94, http://hdl.handle.net/10072/419127. Accessed 18 October 2025.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Borges Jelinic, Ana (2025), ‘“In the middle… waiting for a future”: Time and waiting in partner visa migration and family violence in Australia’, Transitions: Journal of Transient Migration, 9:1, pp. 27–48, https://doi.org/10.1386/tjtm_00063_1.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Borges Jelinic, Ana and Ridgway, Alexandra (2024), ‘Migrant women’s narratives of good wifeliness: An Australian case study of migrant agency’, in L. Espinoza Garrido, C. Gebauer and J. Wewior (eds), Mobility, Agency, Kinship: Representations of Migration Beyond Victimhood, Cham: Palgrave MacMillan, pp. 153–74, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-60754-7_7.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Brainer, Amy (2025), ‘In bed with the state?: Queer and trans migrations through marriage’, Sociology Compass, 19:8, https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.70097.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Briddick, Catherine (2020), ‘Precarious workers and probationary wives: How immigration law discriminates against women’, Social & Legal Studies, 29:2, pp. 201–24, https://doi.org/10.1177/0964663919839187.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Campbell, Kimeka and Prins, Esther (2016), ‘Taking initiative and constructing identity: International graduate student spouses’ adjustment and social integration in a rural university town’, International Journal of Lifelong Education, 35:4, pp. 430–47, https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370.2016.1197332.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Candela, Amber G. (2019), ‘Exploring the function of member checking’, The Qualitative Report, 24:3, pp. 619–28, https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2019.3726.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Charsley, Katharine (2005), ‘Unhappy husbands: Masculinity and migration in transnational Pakistani marriages’, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 11:1, pp. 85–105, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9655.2005.00227.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Charsley, Katharine and Liversage, Anika (2015), ‘Silenced husbands: Muslim marriage migration and masculinity’, Men and Masculinities, 18:4, pp. 489–508, https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184x15575112.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Chauvin, Sébastien and Garcés‐Mascareñas, Blanca (2014), ‘Becoming less illegal: Deservingness frames and undocumented migrant incorporation’, Sociology Compass, 8:4, pp. 422–32, https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12145.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Chauvin, Sébastien, Salcedo Robledo, Manuela, Koren, Timo and Illidge, Joël (2021), ‘Class, mobility and inequality in the lives of same-sex couples with mixed legal statuses’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 47:2, pp. 430–46, https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2019.1625137.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Chiu, Tuen Yi and Choi, Susanne Y. P. (2019), ‘The decoupling of legal and spatial migration of female marriage migrants’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 46:14, pp. 2997–3013, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003240402-8.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Constable, Nicole (2003), Romance on a Global Stage: Pen Pals, Virtual Ethnography, and ‘Mail Order’ Marriages, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Constable, Nicole (2009), ‘The commodification of intimacy: Marriage, sex, and reproductive labor’, Annual Review of Anthropology, 38:1, pp. 49–64, https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.37.081407.085133.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Cranston, Sophie and Tan, George (2023), ‘Privileged migration and the family: Family matters in corporate expatriation’, in J. L. Waters and B. S. A. Yeoh (eds), Handbook on Migration and the Family, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 217–31, https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789908732.00021.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Crouch, Coleen L., Adrian, Amanda L., Adler, Amy B., Wood, Michael D. and Thomas, Jeffrey L. (2017), ‘Military spouses stationed overseas: Role of social connectedness on health and well-being’, Military Behavioral Health, 5:2, pp. 129–36, https://doi.org/10.1080/21635781.2016.1272014.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Erez, Edna, Adelman, Madelaine and Gregory, Carol (2009), ‘Intersections of immigration and domestic violence: Voices of battered immigrant women’, Feminist Criminology, 4:1, pp. 32–56, https://doi.org/10.1177/1557085108325413.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Faier, Lieba (2007), ‘Filipina migrants in rural Japan and their professions of love’, American Ethnologist, 34:1, pp. 148–62, https://doi.org/10.1525/ae.2007.34.1.148.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Fraser, Heather (2004), ‘Doing narrative research: Analysing personal stories line by line’, Qualitative Social Work, 3:2, pp. 179–201, https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325004043383.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Fresnoza-Flot, Asuncion (2025), ‘Intersubjective vulnerabilities in the global reproductive systems: Filipino migrant women and their families in Europe and beyond’, Dialectical Anthropology, 49:3, pp. 403–18, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10624-025-09791-x.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Gomes, Catherine (2021), ‘Transience as method: A conceptual lens to understanding evolving trends in migration, mobility, and diversity in the transnational space’, Migration Studies, 9:3, pp. 649–76, https://doi.org/10.1093/migration/mnz027.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Hoogenraad, Henrike (2021), ‘Marriage migration as happiness projects?: Africa-origin male marriage migrants’ experiences with marriage migration to Australia’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 47:9, pp. 2144–60, https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2020.1729106.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Huang, Chia-Yuan (2019), ‘The unspoken dilemma of expat wives: Gender roles and relations within Taiwanese expatriate families in Singapore’, Translocal Chinese: East Asian Perspectives, 13:1, pp. 35–56, https://doi.org/10.1163/24522015-01301003.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Innes, Alexandria (2023), ‘Migration, vulnerability, and experiences of insecurity: Conceptualising insecure migration status’, Social Sciences, 12:10, p. 540, https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12100540.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Itzigsohn, José and Saucedo, Silvia G. (2002), ‘Immigrant incorporation and sociocultural transnationalism’, International Migration Review, 36:3, pp. 766–98, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2002.tb00104.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Judge, Neil A. and Walton-Roberts, Margaret (2023), ‘Transnational marriage migration: Agency, structures and intimate gendered governmentality’, in J. L. Waters and B. S. A. Yeoh (eds), Handbook on Migration and the Family, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 33–50, https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789908732.00008.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Kim, Minjeong (2013), ‘Weaving women’s agency into representations of marriage migrants: Narrative strategies with reflective practice’, Asian Journal of Women’s Studies, 19:3, pp. 7–41, https://doi.org/10.1080/12259276.2013.11666155.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Kofman, Eleonore (2004), ‘Family‐related migration: A critical review of European studies’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 30:2, pp. 243–62, https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183042000200687.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Lan, Pei-Chia (2008), ‘New global politics of reproductive labor: Gendered labor and marriage migration’, Sociology Compass, 2:6, pp. 1801–15, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9020.2008.00176.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Lanyon, Charley (2014), ‘How the law is changing divorce in Hong Kong: The “graveyard of marriages”’, South China Morning Post, 18 August, https://www.scmp.com/lifestyle/family-education/article/1574206/court-ruling-changes-nature-prenup-settlements-hong-kong. Accessed 18 October 2025.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Lauring, Jakob and Selmer, Jan (2010), ‘The supportive expatriate spouse: An ethnographic study of spouse involvement in expatriate careers’, International Business Review, 19:1, pp. 59–69, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2009.09.006.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Lee, Euna, Kim, Seung-Kyung and Lee, Jae K. (2015), ‘Precarious motherhood: Lives of Southeast Asian marriage migrant women in Korea’, Asian Journal of Women’s Studies, 21:4, pp. 409–30, https://doi.org/10.1080/12259276.2015.1106856.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Lee, Maggie, Chan, Anika, Bradby, Hannah and Green, Gill (2002), ‘Chinese migrant women and families in Britain’, Women’s Studies International Forum, 25:6, pp. 607–18, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0277-5395(02)00339-4.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Meares, Carina (2010), ‘A fine balance: Women, work and skilled migration’, Women’s Studies International Forum, 33:5, pp. 473–81, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2010.06.001.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Menjívar, Cecilia and Lakhani, Sarah M. (2016), ‘Transformative effects of immigration law: Immigrants’ personal and social metamorphoses through regularization’, American Journal of Sociology, 1121:6, pp. 1818–55, https://doi.org/10.1086/685103.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. O’Donnell, Samantha (2025), ‘Punishable victims: Interrogating intersections between gender-based violence and punitive migration policies in Australia’, Journal of Gender-based Violence, 9:2, pp. 212–33, https://doi.org/10.1332/23986808y2024d000000053.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. O’Donnell, Samantha, Ridgway, Alexandra and Borges Jelinic, Ana (2025), ‘Ubiquitous waiting: Migrant women, temporariness, and waiting as an affective atmosphere’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, pp. 1–20, https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2025.2536165.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Oakley, Ann (1981), ‘Interviewing women: A contradiction in terms’, in H. Roberts (ed.), Doing Feminist Research, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, pp. 30–61, https://doi.org/10.1515/9781474471398-019.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Oakley, Ann (2018), The Sociology of Housework, Bristol: Policy Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Palriwala, Rajna and Uberoi, Patricia (2008), Marriage, Migration and Gender, New Delhi: Sage Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Parreñas, Rhacel S. (2005), ‘The gender paradox in the transnational families of Filipino migrant women’, Asian and Pacific Migration Journal, 14:3, pp. 243–68, https://doi.org/10.1177/011719680501400301.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Piper, Nicola and Lee, Sohoon (2016), ‘Marriage migration, migrant precarity, and social reproduction in Asia: An overview’, Critical Asian Studies, 48:4, pp. 473–93, https://doi.org/10.1080/14672715.2016.1226598.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Quah, Sharon E. L. (2015), Perspectives on Marital Dissolution: Divorce Biographies in Singapore, Singapore: Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Quah, Sharon E. L. (2020), Transational Divorce: Understanding Intimacies and Inequalities from Singapore, Abingdon: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Raj, Anita and Silverman, Jay (2002), ‘Violence against immigrant women: The roles of culture, context, and legal immigrant status on intimate partner violence’, Violence against Women, 8:3, pp. 367–98, https://doi.org/10.1177/10778010222183107.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Ridgway, Alexandra and Lowe, Kate (2022), ‘Looking within: A call for greater reflexivity in expatriate research’, Sociological Research Online, 27:4, pp. 1077–93, https://doi.org/10.1177/13607804221107677.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Riessman, Catherine K. (1990), Divorce Talk: Women and Men Make Sense of Personal Relationships, New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. Robertson, Shanthi and Robarts, Rosie (2022), Rethinking Privilege and Social Mobility in Middle-Class Migration, Abingdon: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Robinson, Kathryn (2007), ‘Marriage migration, gender transformations, and family values in the “global ecumene”’, Gender, Place & Culture, 14:4, pp. 483–97, https://doi.org/10.1080/09663690701439793.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Robinson, Kathryn (2024), Marriage Migration, Intercultural Families and Global Intimacies, Singapore: Palgrave Macmillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Royal Commission into Family Violence (Victoria) (2016), Report and Recommendations, vols 1–7, Parl Paper No 132, Melbourne: State of Victoria, http://rcfv.archive.royalcommission.vic.gov.au/Report-Recommendations.html. Accessed 18 October 2025.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Salih, Ruba (2000), ‘Shifting boundaries of self and other: Moroccan migrant women in Italy’, European Journal of Women’s Studies, 7:3, pp. 321–35, https://doi.org/10.1177/135050680000700306.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. Schaeffer-Grabiel, Felicity (2006), ‘Planet-love.com: Cyberbrides in the Americas and the transnational routes of US masculinity’, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 31:2, pp. 331–56, https://doi.org/10.1086/497347.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. Scheibelhofer, Elisabeth (2008), ‘Combining narration‐based interviews with topical interviews: Methodological reflections on research practices’, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 11:5, pp. 403–16, https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570701401370.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Segrave, Marie and Vasil, Stefani (2024), The Borders of Violence: Temporary Migration and Domestic and Family Violence, Abingdon: Taylor & Francis.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Sportel, Iris (2016), Divorce in Transnational Families: Marriage, Migration and Family Law, Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Statham, Paul (2020), ‘Living the long-term consequences of Thai-western marriage migration: The radical life-course transformations of women who partner older westerners’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 46:8, pp. 1562–87, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003188780-3.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Suter, Brigitte (2019), ‘Migration as adventure: Swedish corporate migrant families’ experiences of liminality in Shanghai’, Transitions: Journal of Transient Migration, 3:1, pp. 45–58, https://doi.org/10.1386/tjtm.3.1.45_1.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Uekusa, Shinya and Lee, Sunhee (2020), ‘Strategic invisibilization, hypervisibility and empowerment among marriage-migrant women in rural Japan’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 46:13, pp. 2782–99, https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2018.1500885.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Vasil, Stefani (2024), ‘“I came here, and it got worse day by day”: Examining the intersections between migrant precarity and family violence among women with insecure migration status in Australia’, Violence against Women, 30:10, pp. 2482–510, https://doi.org/10.1177/10778012231159414.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Vertovec, Steven (2004), ‘Trends and impacts of migrant transnationalism’, working paper, Oxford: Centre on Migration, Policy and Society and University of Oxford.
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Voolma, Halliki (2018), ‘“I must be silent because of residency”: Barriers to escaping domestic violence in the context of insecure immigration status in England and Sweden’, Violence against Women, 24:15, pp. 1830–50, https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801218755974.
     [Google Scholar]
  70. Wagner, Regine and Childs, Merilyn (2006), ‘Exclusionary narratives as barriers to the recognition of qualifications, skills and experience: A case of skilled migrants in Australia’, Studies in Continuing Education, 28:1, pp. 49–62, https://doi.org/10.1080/01580370500525707.
     [Google Scholar]
  71. Wang, Hong-Zen (2007), ‘Hidden spaces of resistance of the subordinated: Case studies from Vietnamese female migrant partners in Taiwan’, International Migration Review, 41:3, pp. 706–27, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2007.00091.x.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Wee, Kellynn, Lam, Theodora, Spitzer, Denise and Yeoh, Brenda S. (2023), ‘Love labour’s cost?: Gendered migration and intimate labour in Asia’, Gender, Place & Culture, 30:5, pp. 609–18, https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369x.2023.2179025.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Williams, Lucy (2010), Global Marriage: Cross-Border Marriage Migration in Global Context, Hampshire: Palgrave MacMillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Yeoh, Brenda S. and Huang, Shirlena (2010), ‘Transnational domestic workers and the negotiation of mobility and work practices in Singapore’s home‐spaces’, Mobilities, 5:2, pp. 219–36, https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101003665036.
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Yeoh, Brenda S. and Khoo, Louisa-May (1998), ‘Home, work and community: Skilled international migration and expatriate women in Singapore’, International Migration, 36:2, pp. 159–86, https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2435.00041.
     [Google Scholar]
  76. Yeung, Wei-Jun J. and Mu, Zheng (2020), ‘Migration and marriage in Asian contexts’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 46:14, pp. 2863–79, https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2019.1585005.
     [Google Scholar]
  77. Zhang, Juan and Yeoh, Brenda S. (2020), ‘Searching for oriental simplicity: Foreign brides and the Asian family in Singapore’, Gender, Place & Culture, 27:10, pp. 1415–37, https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369x.2019.1703651.
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Cole, Jennifer (2014), ‘Producing value among Malagasy marriage migrants in France: Managing horizons of expectation’, Current Anthropology, 55:S9, pp. S85–S94, https://doi.org/10.1086/675928.
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Pellander, Saara (2023), ‘Buy me love: Entanglements of citizenship, income and emotions in regulating marriage migration’, in A. Andrikopoulos, J. Moret and J. Dahinden (eds), Cross-border Marriages: State Categories, Research Agendas and Family Practices, Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 140–55, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003372400-9.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1386/tjtm_00081_1
Loading
Performing under pressure: Probationary migrant wives and marital expectations in Hong Kong and Melbourne, Australia
Intellect ; https://doi.org/10.1386/tjtm_00081_1
/content/journals/10.1386/tjtm_00081_1
/content/journals/10.1386/tjtm_00081_1
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Article
Keywords: spouse visa ; precarity ; migrant women ; Australia ; divorce ; marriage and family pressures ; Hong Kong ; transient migration

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test