QUOTE(David A. @ Jan 25 2007, 11:43 PM)

QUOTE(meauxna @ Jan 25 2007, 07:28 PM)

QUOTE(atp @ Jan 25 2007, 05:20 PM)

As it has happened before in the US, the lawmaker/legislator did not think through the whole ramifications, or maybe he DID but deemed that the Law and its benefits were worth the price. We USCs end up having to bite the bullet and deal with another layer of red tape into what is a slow and disrespectful process.
It shouldn't be this difficult to be able to marry a foreigner and be united with her in your home country.
Be realistic now, how could legislators anticipate this fairly minimal ramification that affects a VERY small minority of USCs?
We are not entitled to this method of filing. No one here is being penalized. Everyone here still has the same option that everyone else on VJ has, namely to get in the same US petitioning line as everyone else. No one here is being put through extraordinary difficulty. I understand that it is confusing, and changes plans, but won't it help to maintain some perspective?
Bear in mind that your VJ comrades are waiting in the line that you think is unacceptable.
PS: not disagreeing with you about how it 'should' be.
I agree with Mo. In my own selfish ways I wished things worked out for me because DCF was the quickest route and I was only 4-5 days away from the visa. The advantage has been taken away, but not the fact that you can
STILL petition for your spouse or relative. It's not totally over for us.
Meauxna, first let me tell you that I respect very much what you do here in the VJ forums as well as the others who devote their time to help strangers in the difficult processes involving immigration/visas. I read many of your posts and they helped, including your DCF guide.

However, I do not agree with you when you say that we were not entitled to file the I-130 through a consulate in the first place, that they did it as a "favor". If the service is available and permitted by the Dept. of State and USCIS, it is a sanctioned process and an option to the USC that meet its requirements.
I agree with you when you say that the present situation is confusing and that it changes plans, and it certainly helps to not only maintain perspective but also to be pragmatic about the whole situation, which is what I am doing. Now I will decide between the other routes available and there is nothing that I can do now about it, wether I like them or not. However I never said that these other venues are unacceptable, what I did say is that they are a disrespectful process that in my humble opinion shouldn't take so long in keeping families apart. The processes are way better than some years ago, but are far and away from being good.

This whole situation is a setback in the plans of all the people in the middle of this and they are right to be upset. Of course a USC still has other options, but to those who met the requirements filing the I-130 through a consulate was the process that kept a family apart for the least amount of time. Now I'll join the ranks of my many fellow USCs who are going through K1/K3/CR1/IR1... No problem in that ! But there was no basis for your comparison between who was doing DCF and who wasn't. Anyone who could do a better, faster option would do so.
David A., this is not about being selfish, the people who opted for the DCF and hadn't filed their petitions yet, now are unable to do so, and the ones who did file their I-130's are now waiting for an answer and having to deal with the frustration and anxiety of being in the middle of the process such as you are. There is nothing selfish in this, people had an option available that isn't more and this is affecting them. There is no selfishness in this.
Also, Legislators should take into the consideration the ramifications and impact that their laws will have. Period. Independently of the number of USCs abroad, they were impacted by this law, USCs abroad should've been taken into consideration. Again, maybe the lawmaker
did think about all ramifications but decided that the law was worth it,
we'll never know. I got the short end of the stick in regard to laws that were rushed before and let me tell you that it sucks big time.
Like John said, good Law, bad implementation.
Meauxna, keep up your good work helping people out.
PS - Unbelievably rude comment, Yodrak, shame on you.
I had contrary to all the advise given booked a ticket in anticipation of an interview date, delayed, so I had to re-book it.
I took a chance, cost me the re-booking fee, would do the same again.
It is foolish to do so if you are not prepared to live with the consequences, not rude, just the truth.
I think you have to have a thickish skin to post on these boards, I do make mistakes, if people do not like what is said which is correct then that's their problem, not mine or anybody elses.