i need some help or idea

[aaron2020 11,652]

What the hell are you on about? Legally adopting her niece is not committing fraud! Good grief. If your criteria for what commits fraud includes such circumstances, then any couple here who met through an international dating site has committed fraud....according to your logic. Get a grip.

It is immigration fraud if you are adopting a family member for the purpose of petitioning for the person. That is why the requirement is that the adoption meets the Hague Convention and the child has to be an orphan.

See 8 CFR 204.3 as to why a legally adopted child who is not an orphan will not eligible for a visa.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

It is immigration fraud if you are adopting a family member for the purpose of petitioning for the person. That is why the requirement is that the adoption meets the Hague Convention and the child has to be an orphan.

See 8 CFR 204.3 as to why a legally adopted child who is not an orphan will not eligible for a visa.

Ok. All I was suggesting is to look into legal adoption. I was not giving out advice to commit fraud. I didn't know the exact immigration laws, but thought that adoption may be a possibility based on my knowledge of couples who adopt foreign children.

[aaron2020 11,652]

Ok. All I was suggesting is to look into legal adoption. I was not giving out advice to commit fraud. I didn't know the exact immigration laws, but thought that adoption may be a possibility based on my knowledge of couples who adopt foreign children.

People adopt children and get immigration visas all the time. The problem is when people adopt family members for the purpose of immigration.

People who can't have children or want more children who complete a foreign adoption has to adhere to certain rules in order for the child to get an immigration visa. Most of these are strangers' adoptions - meaning the adopted parents don't know the child or the child's family beforehand. So the purpose is to create a family, not to circumvent the immigration laws.

When a person adopts a family member for immigration purposes, it is suspicious to the US Government. Would the adoption have taken place if an immigration visa was not involved? If the answer is yes, and the primary purpose is not to circumvent the immigration laws, then it is likley that the child will get a visa.

Here, you have a woman who lived with this child for 6 years without adopting the child. Only when she becomes an LPR does she show any interest in adopting the child. Why? So the child can get an immigration visa. That is why it is not allowed unless the child is a true orphan. This is a sham adoption. It is not for the purpose of creating a family. It is for the purpose of getting that child an immigration visa. That is why it is not allowed. The sham adoption is what makes it immigration fraud.

[Anh map 2,098]

What the hell are you on about? Legally adopting her niece is not committing fraud! Good grief. If your criteria for what commits fraud includes such circumstances, then any couple here who met through an international dating site has committed fraud....according to your logic. Get a grip.

Read the OP again. They changed the birth certificate once from birth mother to the grandmother. Now asking if it's ok to change the parentage on the birth cert again to make immigration possible. Where is my grip off base?

The rules for adoption are another matter. The child must be orphaned. Which other posters have addressed.

[aaron2020 11,652]

Read the OP again. They changed the birth certificate once from birth mother to the grandmother. Now asking if it's ok to change the parentage on the birth cert again to make immigration possible. Where is my grip off base?

The rules for adoption are another matter. The child must be orphaned. Which other posters have addressed.

Brother, you are in the right. The OP is asking if she can get away with listing herself as the mother on her niece's birth certificate. This is clearly fraud.

The OP's interest in making her niece her "child" is for the sole purpose of obtaining an immigration visa. This is also clearly fraud.

Galt's gallstones is making broad statements without backing them up.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Brother, you are in the right. The OP is asking if she can get away with listing herself as the mother on her niece's birth certificate. This is clearly fraud.

The OP's interest in making her niece her "child" is for the sole purpose of obtaining an immigration visa. This is also clearly fraud.

Galt's gallstones is making broad statements without backing them up.

IMO, when a Filipino talks of changing the name on the BC, they aren't talking of deliberately committing fraud. One should be sensitive to the cultural and language differences when replying to a foreigner who was sincerely asking for advice.

There's nothing wrong with making educated guesses or speculation when it comes to immigration laws here as long as it's clear to everyone that such advice is just that and should be verified. I only said what I thought might be a legal avenue for her. If this site were that stringent on such advice, we all might as well stop giving advice and let this place be run by immigration lawyers.

[VivaBaños 2]

So you are asking how much fraud is too much?

Did you list your future miracle child as your on any of the documentation presented up to this point? How will you explain suddenly being a mother?

How much do you want to put your ability to stay in the US at risk?

It is against the VJ TOS to give advice on how to commit visa fraud.

This is exactly what I was thinking when I read the first post.

[aaron2020 11,652]

IMO, when a Filipino talks of changing the name on the BC, they aren't talking of deliberately committing fraud. One should be sensitive to the cultural and language differences when replying to a foreigner who was sincerely asking for advice.

There's nothing wrong with making educated guesses or speculation when it comes to immigration laws here as long as it's clear to everyone that such advice is just that and should be verified. I only said what I thought might be a legal avenue for her. If this site were that stringent on such advice, we all might as well stop giving advice and let this place be run by immigration lawyers.

It's very wrong making "educated guess" and "speculation" about the law. You give people false hope and the wrong information. You are that "guy" or "person" who people heard they could do things which they cannot. When you guess and speculate, you have no foundation in the law to back up what you say. Back it up with the law if you have something useful to say.

If you are going to give advice, make sure that the advice you give has a foundation in the law. Don't make up stuff because you think it makes sense. The law does not necessarily make sense.

By the way, just because fraud is accepted in lots of countries does not make it a cultural issue. You know that the information is not the truth. It's a lie. It's fraud. In some countries, more fraud is tolerated than in others. It doesn't make it a culture thing. It's a tolerance and acceptance issue.

Edited January 11, 2010 by aaron2020

[HeatDeath 431]

I don't think anybody was asserting with any authority that adoption would definitely be a viable course of action - only that it was the only even vaguely possible course of action that anybody could think of. That it seems (to people with more familiarity with the relevant law) as obviously impossible as any other form of petition pretty much closes the book on this possible plan. There certainly seems, as aaron said, no viable way to import this child.

Can you get a student visa for elementary school? B)

[one...two...tree 2,762]

It's very wrong making "educated guess" and "speculation" about the law. You give people false hope and the wrong information. You are that "guy" or "person" who people heard they could do things which they cannot. When you guess and speculate, you have no foundation in the law to back up what you say. Back it up with the law if you have something useful to say.

If you are going to give advice, make sure that the advice you give has a foundation in the law. Don't make up stuff because you think it makes sense. The law does not necessarily make sense.

By the way, just because fraud is accepted in lots of countries does not make it a cultural issue. You know that the information is not the truth. It's a lie. It's fraud. In some countries, more fraud is tolerated than in others. It doesn't make it a culture thing. It's a tolerance and acceptance issue.

Are you an immigration attorney? If not, then what makes you qualified to give out credible legal advice here any more than anyone else? Laws are often complex and complicated and not so easily interpreted by lay people, hence why we have experts who study law. I have been here long enough to see people misrepresent what seemed to them, plainly written immigration law as well as seeing arguments over the written laws. The OP asked for other member's advice here. What I stated was not off the wall or outrageous in any way.

Good grief...why do we always get these immigration nazi's that infiltrate this site with their omnipotent understanding of immigration laws, to tell us lowly members here how wrong we are with our advice? May I suggest taking the Bar exam so you can stop pretending to be a lawyer?

I don't think anybody was asserting with any authority that adoption would definitely be a viable course of action - only that it was the only even vaguely possible course of action that anybody could think of.

Thank you.

[Peace be still 6]

Good Luck babykim, with getting your niece here to the States. Just make sure you do everything legal so that it won't come back to bite you in the rear end. I pray that your dreams come true.

[marklovetina 52]

what if the the child was her own.. and she just named the child to her parent's name... many people here in the Phil. are doin it.. especially if they had a kid on their early age...

is there any chance for these kids...?

[aaron2020 11,652]

Are you an immigration attorney? If not, then what makes you qualified to give out credible legal advice here any more than anyone else? Laws are often complex and complicated and not so easily interpreted by lay people, hence why we have experts who study law. I have been here long enough to see people misrepresent what seemed to them, plainly written immigration law as well as seeing arguments over the written laws. The OP asked for other member's advice here. What I stated was not off the wall or outrageous in any way.

Good grief...why do we always get these immigration nazi's that infiltrate this site with their omnipotent understanding of immigration laws, to tell us lowly members here how wrong we are with our advice? May I suggest taking the Bar exam so you can stop pretending to be a lawyer?

Thank you.

So, do you always resort to calling people Nazi when you don't have an intelligent argument?

When you make up the law or give advice without looking things up, you are not doing anyone any service. I've researched the law. Have you? Or are you just flapping your gums?

Edited January 11, 2010 by aaron2020

[HeatDeath 431]

what if the the child was her own.. and she just named the child to her parent's name... many people here in the Phil. are doin it.. especially if they had a kid on their early age...

is there any chance for these kids...?

Later on, when the child is an adult, doing things on their own, it may not matter as much (While it is still arguably misrepresentation, an adult might not be held responsible for documentation fraud committed by their parents and elders decades ago). But when the child is living with and under the care of their biological parents, it is very difficult for those biological parents to assert their legal powers as legal parents in any official capacity if they are not listed as biological parents on the birth certificate.

The birth certificate is what establishes the parent child link in the eyes of US (and presumably Philippine) law. Any legal operation in which status or benefit is derived from parent to child or vice-versa through the parent-child relationship depends on that piece of documentation. If it is fraudulent, then any immigration benefit awarded or derived through that relationship becomes suspect, and subject to later revocation should the fraudulent nature of the birth certificate come to light.

When parents mess with their children's foundational identity documents for petty social reasons, it deeply complicates any future interaction between their children and the government. It is a profoundly selfish act. I wouldn't say there is no hope for these children, but certain actions will always be difficult for them. For example, they can pretty much forget about sponsoring their parents later in life. They've been denied documentary proof that their biological parents are actually related to them.

Edited January 11, 2010 by HeatDeath

[one...two...tree 2,762]

So, do you always resort to calling people Nazi when you don't have an intelligent argument?

When you make up the law or give advice without looking things up, you are not doing anyone any service. I've researched the law. Have you? Or are you just flapping your gums?

Simply reading up on immigration law is not equivalent to the actual studying and practicing of law and you're being delusional if you think that qualifies you to give credible legal advice. As a member here, you are permitted to give an educated guess or speculation, or simply copy and paste a particular code of immigration law as an answer when another member is asking for other members' advice. They don't come here seeking legal advice that they wouldn't later on verify on their own, or if they do, then they are deeply mistaken. I will continue to provide helpful advice as best I can, and will qualify my statements that I'm not 100% certain as to the actual law, other than copying and pasting it when I find it. Beyond that, nobody here, including yourself can come on here and give credible legal advice with absolute certainty. If you are a fan of law, I'd recommend reading famous landmark cases as they demonstrate how even the legal experts battle law in court, even when astonishingly, the law was plainly written. Imagine that.

Edited January 11, 2010 by Galt's gallstones