Migration is not a mere biographical footnote, but a distinct axis that shapes families across generations. The migration genogram maps this axis structurally — making visible what disappears in the sedentary assumptions of the standard genogram.

Migration as a Distinct Biographical Axis

The classic McGoldrick genogram implicitly assumes a family living in one place, branching out generationally. This assumption is historically narrow — even within Europe, millions of families have migrated over the past 150 years, whether overseas, through industrialisation, displacement, or labour migration. The migration genogram addresses this by treating migration not as an exception, but as structural information on par with birth, marriage, and death.

Thomas Hegemann and Ramazan Salman have documented in Transkulturelle Psychiatrie (Psychiatrie-Verlag, 2010 and subsequent editions) how much transcultural work in German-speaking contexts benefits from an explicit migration axis. If migration is only seen as "background", the specific biographical ruptures — and the strengths developed in overcoming them — are overlooked.

Symbol Extensions

Various conventions have been developed for visual representation, though no binding standard exists. The following have proven effective:

  • Country silhouettes or flags on individual symbols — indicate the places of residence throughout a person's life.
  • Migration arrows with year — connect place of origin and destination, ideally with the reason for migration (work, flight, family reunification).
  • Dashed connections across national borders — mark transnational family relationships where members remain connected across distances (remittances, regular visits, digital presence).
  • Residence status markers — where legally relevant: tolerated stay, residence permit, permanent settlement permit, citizenship, and any status changes with dates.
  • Language markers — first, second, third language; where relevant: language loss in the second or third generation.

GenoEasy and other software tools support these extensions to varying degrees; for handwritten genograms, a legend at the margin suffices.

Differentiating Forms of Migration

The term "migration background" is statistically useful but too broad for clinical purposes. Migration sociology distinguishes at least five forms, each generating its own dynamics:

Labour migration — the classic "guest worker" migration of the 1960s and 70s, but also current highly skilled migration. Characteristic: originally intended as temporary, often with the myth of return.

Forced migration — departure under compulsion, often with a traumatic history and unclear residence status. Lesson 19 is dedicated to this setting.

Circular and transmigration — repeated movements between two or more locations, often for work or family reasons. Research tradition: Ludger Pries, Faist.

Late repatriation — post-Soviet migration of ethnic German families after 1990; long underrepresented in German genogram practice, despite involving several million people.

Educational migration — students, au pairs, scholarship holders; often framed as "temporary", with specific biographical disruptions if return does not occur.

It is worthwhile to explicitly note the form in the genogram — it structures subsequent generations in different ways.

Generational Dynamics: G1, G2, G3

Migration research has found three generational patterns to be heuristically useful — while remaining cautious about schematic thinking:

G1 — the migrants: Experience the rupture directly. Common features: high pressure to adapt, economic priorities, language barriers, and a central attachment to the region of origin. Ursula Boos-Nünning and Yasemin Karakaşoğlu have shown in Viele Welten leben (2005) that G1 often remains in a "life plan for a limited time" — even decades after the original migration.

G2 — between worlds: Born in Germany or immigrated as young children, socialised in two reference systems. Common features: bridge and translator roles for parents, educational advancement as a family project, conflicts around loyalty and personal life choices.

G3 — searching movement: Here, the migration experience often paradoxically returns as a question — where do we actually come from, what was lost? G3 is often the generation that initiates a migration genogram in the first place.

This pattern is a heuristic, not deterministic — individual variation is considerable, and as Hardy & Laszloffy described for the cultural genogram: hypotheses, not diagnoses.

Conversation Anchors: Language, Status, Remittances

Three topics have proven particularly fruitful as entry points in practice:

Language loss and language use: Which language is spoken in which generation, with whom, and on what topics? Language loss is often accompanied by the feeling of no longer being able to "truly" get to know grandparents — a frequently painful, but rarely directly named family theme.

Residence status: A precarious legal situation profoundly shapes families — even in the second generation, who may themselves be long secure. "We always had to behave ourselves" as a family rule often originates here.

Remittances and transnational obligations: Money transfers, caring responsibilities for relatives in the country of origin, regular visits — these transnational ties are often invisible in the counselling room, yet have a major impact on life decisions.

Pitfalls in Practice

Two methodological questions regularly arise:

The interpreter setting: If G1 does not speak the counselling language sufficiently, a professional interpreter is indispensable — not family members, especially not children. The interpreter setting fundamentally changes the genogram conversation; the triadic relationship must be methodologically reflected upon (see Lesson 19).

Undocumented family members: Some individuals do not appear in official documents — born without registration, died abroad, living with precarious residence status. They belong in the genogram, with appropriate marking. In terms of data protection law (GDPR Art. 9), recording this information is particularly sensitive — see Lesson 16.

Practice Vignette

A 28-year-old client of the third generation, with parents and grandparents of Turkish origin, seeks counselling due to unclear job dissatisfaction. The migration genogram reveals: the grandparents came in 1971 as guest workers, "just for two years". Two years became fifty — but in family conversations, the idea that everyone would one day return was never abandoned. The mother (G2) based her career choice on this hypothesis (something "useful in Turkey as well"), and the client herself feels a diffuse pressure not to "settle down too firmly" — professionally or privately. The myth of return has shaped decisions across three generations, without ever being spoken aloud.

Research Status & Discussion

Over the past two decades, German-language migration research has clearly shifted from a deficit to a resource paradigm. Boos-Nünning and Karakaşoğlu, later Aladin El-Mafaalani (Mythos Bildung, 2020) and Naika Foroutan, have documented that focusing on "problems" in migrant families systematically overlooks the adaptation and coping resources these families have developed.

A central debate concerns the culturalisation of social problems. When a family lives in precarious economic circumstances, has conflicts with authorities, and experiences educational barriers, it is analytically risky to explain this primarily in "cultural" terms — often, social situation and experiences of discrimination are the stronger drivers. The German Association of Systemic Therapy and Family Therapy (DGSF) explicitly recommends in its guidelines for transcultural systemic work not to read migration as a marker of pathology.

Methodologically, the migration genogram has a growing, but still limited, empirical basis in psychiatric and psychotherapeutic research. Springer publications in recent years (including Mehrgenerationenperspektive und Genogramm, 2024) and ongoing work at the Centre for Migration and Health (Hanover) have continuously developed the field.

Cross-References

  • Module 1 "Family Forms Worldwide" — cultural variation
  • Module 2 "Loyalties" — Boszormenyi-Nagy's concept in a transnational context
  • Module 4 Lesson 1 "Cultural Genogram" — methodological foundation
  • Module 4 Lesson 19 "Refugees and Asylum Seekers" — acute phase and trauma

Further Links