Fading borders, fading utang? Fil Ams and remittances

There is a concept in Filipino cultural tradition called "utang na loob," which loosely means internal "debt" one person owes to another, such as a child's "utang" to their parents.  In terms of Filipino migration, "utang na loob" comes into play with financial remittances sent by overseas Filipinos to family in the Philippines.  As the story goes, parents and siblings often help someone get an education in order to "leave" the Philippines.  That individual often feel an internal debt owed to those who helped them, and thus remittances are an expression of that gratitude.  This description is very simplistic, but it points to a bigger global phenomenon happening with remittances. 

The Philippines, along with El Salvador, India, Bangladesh, and Mexico, are countries whose national revenue rely tremendously on remittances from overseas workers (who are mainly female workers).  In fact, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, president of the Philippines, declared overseas Filipino workers the "bagong bayani" or new national heroes.  This is "transnationalism" at its finest, with those living outside a nation's borders as the "brothers and sisters" from afar contributing to the building and sustaining of the sending nation itself.  In short, remittances embody a new circuitry of international neoliberal capital that sustains a poor and marginalized economic third world through the labor of citizens living abroad. The "utang na loob" of Filipino remittances is just one example of the many cultural occurances due to impact of a global financial crisis (aka globalization).          

As I write this, I am informed that my grandmother just passed away.  Her death happens only 21 days after her 100th birthday.  She was the matriarch of my mother's side of the family (a big, big clan of children, grand children, and great grand children).  Most of the family, including my grandmother, live in Cavite, Philippines.  Now with her gone, the future of the family is unstable.  Who will manage and distribute the family wealth and revenue?  What role do the family members overseas play in contributing to that wealth?  Who will take the place of the matriarch? Sometimes, I guess, family issues are a lot of politics. 

Remittances are a large part of how my family members in the Philippines stays afloat economically.  Simply put, there are no jobs in the area where they live.  I remember a few years ago my siblings and I asked my mother if it were our responsibility to send remittances back to our aunties (my mother only has sisters), cousins, and nephews/nieces.  My mother answered with an emphatic "no."  It was not up to us--as second-generation Fil Ams who really don't have much of a connection to the Philippines aside from a few youthful trips to the country--to "utang" remittances to our family.  We accepted this.

But with our grandmother now gone (she was the last surviving of my grandparents), things have changed.  We were asked by one of my older cousins (who lives in the States) to help alleviate the hospital costs, and now with the funeral expenses.  Even though this isn't necessarily "remittances" we'll be sending, it still a form of money.  Now, I wonder if we'll have to help alleviate more and more costs, given the circumstances with the death, and especially now that many of my nieces and nephews are going to school. 

What do you think?  As second generation Fil Ams, or even first generation, do you feel an obligation to send money to your family in the Philippines?  Is it your responsibility?

And, as perhaps part of a longer discussion, what will families, barrios, and towns in the Philippines look like if a whole generation stops remitting money (i.e., after our parents have passed)?