Hi all,

I know I should stay out of this forum, but I am intrigued. I am reading a lot of women came here and have been abused by the US citizen. When I filed for my husband they didn't do the Imbra, but started it a few months after I believe.

Wasn't this to do a background check on the USC to see if they are abusive? Forgive my lack of knowledge on this, but I didn't have to go through this. If I am right, are they actually denying petitions based on this? I was hoping that the new security check would have at least cut down on abuse, but from what I am reading it appears it isn't working.

I am interested to hear from those that had their USC spouse undergo this check and passed, but still are being abused.

Perhaps you may have wanted to post this to the IMBRA forum?

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/index.php?showforum=126

I actually prefer it to stay here. I want to hear from people after the fact, not during the process. This is the true test if the checks are working.

I am like you and read this forum too. From what I understand about the USC's criminal record, it really only comes into play if they file for K-1 or K-3 visas since that is where I see it asked on a form. I think (might be in the IMBRA forum) that someone had a record and had to prove that the fiance was informed about it, though I don't remember. So, I guess I'm curious too as to what really happens. But it seems that if they only filed the I-130, the USC doesn't get checked. I dunno, maybe someone else knows better.

The effect of IMBRA is simply to insure that foreign fiance visa beneficiaries are informed of certain criminal records, if any, before the visa is issued. Petitions are not denied because of IMBRA related criminal records but are denied for failing to comply with the request for court records when required.

If the petitioner is an abuser or pedophile but not currently in prison and provides the requisite court records, the petition is approved and if the beneficiary is duly informed and still wants a visa, the visa is granted.

Yepp.
And just the fact that the criminal record is clean, doesn't mean the USC won't be an a$$ when the foreign spouse gets to the US.

I don't think IMBRA was installed to guarantee the USC won't be abusive.

IMBRA was passed with the intent of prevention through education but does not effectively prevent anything. If a parent wants to sell the availability of theri child to a known pedophile in exchange for a green card, IMBRA doesn't stand in her way. Hopefully, other fraud prevention methods do.

Yes, there are people like that.

Oh I am well aware that a clean record doesn't mean squat. I couldn't help wondering if this big to do over the Imbra is doing anything at all. I seriously can't imagine being an immigrant and knowing that my fiance has a history of abuse, but still coming anyway. But on the other hand they (the abuser) can be pretty slick talking. And to make things worse, someone who wants a visa bad enough to take chances after that kind of knowledge. Recipe for disaster IMO.

Personally I think IMBRA was set up for a different reason, but it back fired. I have heard that one of the visa scams is to claim abuse once the immigrant gets here. Seriously if a USC doesn't have record doesn't mean he won't abuse, and if he has it doesn't mean he will, but nothing can be enforced it sounds like.

So basically the IMBRA is just another waste of time.

I think IMBRA is a good thing, at least there is an attempt to protect a foreign spouse from possible abuse. THat's better than nothing.
I just think that only a very small percentage of potential abusers already has a criminal record.
Majority is probably your everyday a$$ who i.e. takes frusterations,...out on others, specially the spouse.

At the end it is up to everybody individually to try and get to know the person you are going to marry as good as possible, to learn to read red flags as soon as they come up and take them serious.
THere have been so many people on here who said "Yeah, I knew he was tis and that but I didn't think it would get THAT bad, or he wouldn't be like that to ME."