This article considers the argument that immigration controls can be protective of migrants/victims of trafficking. It examines how the avoidance of “harm” has become central to immigration enforcement and considers the implications of this with particular reference to children. It argues that the language of protection and harm risks inscribing the state as an appropriate protector, not just for children, but for at-risk migrants more generally. This is deeply problematic when, through immigration controls and practices, the state is implicated in constructing this vulnerability.
Anderson, B. (2012) ‘Where’s the Harm in That? Immigration Enforcement, Trafficking, and the Protection of Migrants’ Rights’, American Behavioral Scientist, 56(9): 1241-1257