Dijital Aile Pratikleri ve Göç: Birleşik Krallık’taki Türk Göçmenlerin Deneyimleri

Öz

Ulusaşırı göç, ailelerin bakım, mahremiyet ve aidiyet ilişkilerini sınır ötesinde sürdürmelerini gerektirirken dijital medya bu ilişkilerin temel altyapısı haline gelmiştir. Bu çalışma, Birleşik Krallık’taki Türk göçmenlerin dijital iletişim aracılığıyla aile ilişkilerini nasıl sürdürdüklerini incelemektedir. Farklı yaş ve statülerdeki 29 katılımcı ile yapılan yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler, WhatsApp ve FaceTime gibi platformların gündelik eşzamanlı varoluşu mümkün kıldığını, ancak bedensel yokluğun yerini dolduramadığını göstermektedir. Katılımcılar, dijital mecralar üzerinden duygusal danışmanlık, maddi transfer ve pratik destek sağladıklarını; gençlerin ise kuşaklar arası dijital aracılar olarak işlev gördüklerini belirtmiştir. Bayram kutlamaları ve doğum günleri gibi çevrimiçi ritüeller aidiyet duygusunu pekiştirirken aynı zamanda görünürlük ve ahlaki denetimi artırmaktadır. Bulgular, gündelik dijital etkileşimlerin ulusaşırı aileliği pekiştirdiğini ortaya koymaktadır. Çalışma, dijital teknolojilerin göçmen aile yaşamında hem dayanışmayı sürdüren hem de bedensel yokluğu derinleştiren ikili rolünü vurgulayarak dijital göç ve aile araştırmalarına kuramsal ve ampirik katkı sunmaktadır. Elde edilen sonuçlar, dijital okuryazarlık ve kuşaklar arası etkileşimi güçlendirmeye yönelik politikaların geliştirilmesi için de önemli çıkarımlar sağlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ulusaşırı Aile
• Dijital Medya
• Göç
• Türk Diasporası
• Dijital Yakınlık

Digital Family Practices and Migration: Experiences of Turkish Migrants in the United Kingdom

Abstract

Transnational migration reshapes how families sustain care, intimacy, and belonging across borders, with digital media increasingly central to these ties. This study examines how Turkish migrants in the United Kingdom maintain familyhood through digital communication. Based on semi-structured interviews with 29 participants, the findings show that platforms such as WhatsApp and FaceTime function as infrastructures of everyday co-presence, enabling routine coordination and reassurance while highlighting the irreplaceability of physical proximity. Participants described offering emotional counselling, financial transfers, and practical assistance across borders, while younger generations often acted as digital mediators bridging literacy and etiquette gaps. Online rituals, such as Bayram (Eid) greetings or birthday celebrations, reinforced belonging yet intensified moral surveillance and visibility. The findings demonstrate that everyday digital interactions consolidate transnational solidarity while deepening awareness of absence. The study contributes to scholarship on digital migration and transnational familyhood by conceptualizing digital media as infrastructures of intimacy and care. These insights also hold practical implications for policies and programmes that promote intergenerational digital literacy and emotional well-being in migrant families.

Keywords

• Transnational Family
• Digital Media
• Migration
• Turkish Diaspora
• Digital Intimacy

References

1. Acedera, K. A., & Yeoh, B. S. (2019). ‘Making time’: Long-distance marriages and the temporalities of the transnational family. Current Sociology, 67(2), 250–272. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392118792927
2. Albert, I., & Ferring, D. (2018). Intergenerational solidarity in adulthood: The role of family norms in intergenerational support and ambivalence. Društvena istraživanja: časopis za opća društvena pitanja, 27(1), 5–25.
3. Alinejad, D. (2019). Careful co-presence: The transnational mediation of emotional intimacy. Social Media + Society, 5(2), 2056305119854222. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119854222
4. Aslantaş, M. (2021). Sosyal Medya Kullanımının Düğün Fotoğrafçılığına Etkisi. Erzurum Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (13), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.29157/etusbed.895652
5. Baldassar, L. (2008). Missing kin and longing to be together: Emotions and the construction of co-presence in transnational relationships. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 29(3), 247–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/07256860802169196
6. Baldassar, L. (2016a). Mobilities and communication technologies: Transforming care in family life. In M. Kilkey & E. Palenga-Möllenbeck (Eds.), Family life in an age of migration and mobility: Global perspectives through the life course, 19–42. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-52099-9_2
7. Baldassar, L. (2016b). De‐demonizing distance in mobile family lives: co‐presence, care circulation and polymedia as vibrant matter. Global Networks, 16(2), 145-163. https://doi.org/10.1111/glob.12109
8. Baldassar, L., & Merla, L. (Eds.). (2014). Transnational families, migration and circulation of care: Understanding mobility and absence in family life. Routledge.

9. Baldassar, L., Nedelcu, M., Merla, L., & Wilding, R. (2016). ICT-based co-presence in transnational families and communities: Challenging the premise of face-to-face proximity in sustaining relationships. Global Networks, 16(2), 133–144. https://doi.org/10.1111/glob.12108
10. Barros, C. (2023). Connection in transnational families: Face-to-face and digital spaces in Portuguese emigrants. Trends in Psychology, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43076-023-00309-4
11. Baykara-Krumme, H., & Fokkema, T. (2019). The impact of migration on intergenerational solidarity types. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 45(10), 1707–1727. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183x.2018.1485203
12. Bengston, V. L., & Oyama, P. S. (2007). Intergenerational solidarity: Strengthening economic and social ties. United Nations. https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unyin/documents/egm_unhq_oct07_bengtson.pdf
13. Bilecen, T., Kaya Tilbe, F., & Mahmutoğlu, V. (2025). Integration practices of Turkish families in the UK: A comparative biographical study of first and second wave migrant families. The History of the Family, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/1081602x.2025.2496221
14. Bozdağ, Ç. (2014). The digital bridge between Turkey and Germany: Transnational use of digital media in the Turkish diaspora. In Contemporary Turkey at a glance: Interdisciplinary perspectives on local and translocal Dynamics, 157–172. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-04916-4_12
15. Brandhorst, R., Baldassar, L., & Wilding, R. (2020). Transnational family care ‘on hold’? Intergenerational relationships and obligations in the context of immobility regimes. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 18(3), 261–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/15350770.2020.1787035
16. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
17. Brinkmann, S. (2018). The interview. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed., pp. 576–599). SAGE Publications.
18. Bryceson, D., & Vuorela, U. (Eds.). (2020). The transnational family: New European frontiers and global networks. Routledge.
19. Cabalquinto, E. C. (2018). Ambivalent intimacies: Entangled pains and gains through Facebook use in transnational family life. In A. S. Dobson, B. Robards, & N. Carah (Eds.), Digital intimate publics and social media, 247–263. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97607-5_15
20. Cabalquinto, E. C., & Hu, Y. (2023). The transnationalisation of intimacy: Family relations and changes in an age of global mobility and digital media. In Handbook on migration and the family, 84–100. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789908732.00011
21. Çetiner Özyılmaz, E. (2025). Toplumsal Dayanışmada Sosyal Medya: Sosyal Medyaya Güven ve Hayırseverlik İlişkisi. Erzurum Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, (23), 41-55. https://doi.org/10.29157/etusbed.1711799
22. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
23. De Silva, M. (2017). The care pentagon: Older adults within Sri Lankan-Australian transnational families and their landscapes of care. Population, Space and Place, 23(8), e2061. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2061
24. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2011). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
25. Kilkey, M., & Merla, L. (2014). Situating transnational families’ care-giving arrangements: The role of institutional contexts. Global Networks, 14(2), 210–229. https://doi.org/10.1111/glob.12034
26. King, R. (2002). Towards a new map of European migration. International Journal of Population Geography, 8(2), 89–106. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijpg.246
27. Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2015). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
28. Leurs, K., & Prabhakar, M. (2018). Doing digital migration studies: Methodological considerations for an emerging research focus. In Qualitative research in European migration studies, 247-266. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76861-8_14
29. Levitt, P., & Schiller, N. G. (2004). Conceptualizing simultaneity: A transnational social field perspective on society. International Migration Review, 38(3), 1002–1039. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7379.2004.tb00227.x
30. Lüscher, K. (2011). Ambivalence: A “sensitizing construct” for the study and practice of intergenerational relationships. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 9(2), 191–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/15350770.2011.568338
31. Madianou, M., & Miller, D. (2012). Migration and new media: Transnational families and polymedia. Routledge.
32. Onay, Ö. (2024). Navigating racialisation and whiteness. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies, 11(2), 105–122.
33. Özbilgin, M. F., Yıldız, H., Erbil, C., & Bağlama, S. H. (2025). Formation of an academic diaspora: A study of scholars from Turkey in the higher education sector in Britain. International Migration, 63(2), e70010. https://doi.org/10.1111/imig.70010
34. Robertson, Z., Wilding, R., & Gifford, S. (2016). Mediating the family imaginary: Young people negotiating absence in transnational refugee families. Global Networks, 16(2), 219–236. https://doi.org/10.1111/glob.12111
35. Sampaio, D., & Carvalho, R. F. (2022). Transnational families, care and wellbeing: The role of legal status and sibling relationships across borders. Wellbeing, Space and Society, 3, 100097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wss.2022.100097
36. Savigny, H. (2019). Cultural sexism and the UK higher education sector. Journal of Gender Studies, 28(6), 661–673. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2019.1597689
37. Sinanan, J., & Hjorth, L. (2018). Careful families and care as ‘kinwork’: an intergenerational study of families and digital media use in Melbourne, Australia. In Connecting families? 181-200. Policy Press. https://doi.org/10.1332/policypress/9781447339946.003.0010
38. Sirkeci, I., Şeker, B. D., & Çağlar, A. (2015). Turkish migration, identity and integration. Lulu.com.
39. Vázquez Maggio, M. L., & Mejía, G. (2023). The Role of Mobile Apps in Transnational Family Connections and Emotions from the Perspective of Mexican Migrants in Australia. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 44(3), 367–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/07256868.2023.2208527
40. Wilding, R. (2006). ‘Virtual’ intimacies? Families communicating across transnational contexts. Global Networks, 6(2), 125–142. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0374.2006.00137.x
41. Zani, B., & Cockel, I. (2022). Introduction-Migrants and Their Smartphones: Interlaced Mobilities Online and Offline. Transfers, 12(3), 3-7. https://doi.org/10.3167/TRANS.2022.120302