Whether through traditional law or modern torture, the body has always been a privileged site on which to demonstrate the evidence of power. But for immigrants, the poor, and, more generally, the dominated—all of whom have to prove their eligibility to certain social rights—it has also become the place that displays the evidence of truth. In France, as immigration control increases, asylum seekers are more and more submitted to the evaluation of their physical sequels and psychic traumas, as if their autobiographical accounts were not sufficient. In this article, we show how nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) deal with the dilemmas posed by this situation, how they develop protocols standardizing their expertise, and how their medical authority progressively substitutes itself for the asylum seekers' word. In this process of objectification, it is the experience of the victims as political subjects that is progressively erased.

However obvious it might seem today that victims of persecutions suffer from psychological consequences of the violence inflicted on them, its political implications are a recent phenomenon. In the last decade, asylum seekers in France, as in other European countries, have been more and more often subject to demands of psychiatric expertise to prove the cogency of their claim to the status of refugee. This social innovation results from the convergence of two processes: on the one hand, the rapid decline in the legitimacy of asylum, leading to increasing expectations for evidence to establish the reality of persecutions; on the other hand, the emergence of trauma as a nosographical category legitimizing the traces of violence. At the crossroads of these two histories, a social field, mainly occupied by NGOs, has developed to answer this new need for proof from state institutions, with an increasing specialization on victims of torture and on psychic trauma, the two dimensions being partially independent. The final paradox is, however, that in a context of generalized suspicion toward refugees, the recognition of trauma at a collective level is counterbalanced by its limited impact on the evaluation of individual cases.

Since 2015, the notion of hospitality has been a guiding principle and a key demand for individuals and organisations that provide direct support to refugees in Europe. Through a set of interviews conducted with volunteers active in the Refugees Welcome movement in Britain, France and Italy, this article explores the motivations and experiences of individuals who practise (private) hospitality by hosting refugees in their homes. Looking specifically at the ‘responsibility’ that emerges from the practice of hosting, we show that the experience of private hospitality is based on narratives stressing feelings of love and family-like relations, and thus creates the expectation of an affective connection between the host and the guest. We maintain that this process is highly ambivalent as it risks creating and reproducing everyday intimate bordering processes.