Kai G. Llewellyn

Legally she should have been a LPR from the date of her original entry, however DHS's records might not be correct right now. You could try using the endorsed IV as proof, but this would probably cause USCIS enough confusion that they'll put the case in the big pile of 'nope, too complex for now, we'll get around to it later'. I'd suggest ensure DHS's records are correct first, but if she is itching to submit it, and given she's already mailed the packet to CBP deferred inspection, then she may be good to file I-130 anyways.

If you're not in a hurry. Then have your spouse immigrate, live in the US until becoming a US citizen, then she can go back to her home country and visit the US as often as she pleases using a US passport with no visas required. Otherwise no, theoretically you could use the K3 and drag out the AoS, but the K3 is functionally dead, and that plan wouldn't work for long anyways.

Given that you've effectively called me a wakadoo, I'm out. I'm done here. Go Google it yourself and learn something.

Honestly, I can get that adolescents will have issues with a hospital. People that age don't want to be in a hospital, hell I sure as hell wouldn't want to be in a psych hospital. Thanks to media portrayals and well, history, they are quite frankly terrifying. People who have gotten to the point of being in a hospital are at the point of crisis. I'm talking about early intervention. We need to stop people getting to that crisis point to begin with. I absolutely don't dispute the help that hospitals can provide, but ideally we wouldn't be having people getting to that point. Non-crisis mental healthcare is sorely lacking. I'd take BC for example, Provincial Healthcare for mental health is virtually nonexistent until you get detained under the Mental Health Act, because you're deemed dangerous to yourself and others, only THEN do you get help. It's like we're dealing with car crashes, but not preventing them from happening. One shouldn't be at the point of near suicide before they get help, it's almost too late at that point. And I get, you can't prevent car crashes, but you can do various things to make them happen less frequently. Same goes for mental health. Another poster is right, you generally don't wake up with massive mental health issues one day, or are born with it. These things are gradual, the fall into mental health issues is a process, and not the event, and the earlier you're able to help people in that process, the better.

You are absolutely right that there are some very very dark corners of the internet. There's some really messed up stuff out there. Unfortunately, there is an onus on parents to guide their kids not to go near that stuff, educate the dangers in schools, use webfilters at home, and have an easy way for parents to block sites on their kids phones. Educate people of these options and how to do it. 4chan is a goshdarn mess, couple of others come to mind too, Kiwifarms is another. There's just a lot of places out there that encourage people to be their worst selves.

What would you reckon would be the percentages of youth that do want help? It can't be insignificant, and if those people are helped, we may prevent a future tragedy like this. I can't say I'm a fan of 'these people don't want to be helped' so we won't bother trying and will condemn them to their fate. You have to keep trying. At the end of the day, I understand the concerns of people on both sides of this debate. But what I can't accept is we shrug our shoulders and say 'oh well, that's the price we have to pay for the current policies we have'. If we as a society could agree on certain policies that would help address this, I think we'd go a long way to having better outcomes. And that goes on many things in the US, screw being tribalistic to the Dems or GOP. Let's try and agree an issue exists, and then discuss ways to solving it...build a consensus. We can't just put our fingers in our ears and ignore it.

To be honest, teenagers do not have freedom of independence when it comes to healthcare choices - when I was a kid, I'd be taken to psychiatrists whether I'd want to or not. Granted, the onus is on parents to make that happen, but it'd help to get more engagement with parents regarding the importance of mental health care, watching out for the signs and so forth. I grant you, this will not solve all the problems here, but it would help. Make the healthcare accessible, then address barriers to why people aren't using it. A lot of it, at least in my own shoes, is that it's intimidating, especially if you're hauled off to a hospital, there's a lot of preconceived stigma regarding getting help. Hell, if this was able to stop at least one massacre, I'd say that'd be a success. Unfortunately, if society concludes that a lot of people just cannot be helped, then we are pretty much screwed on this.

Can't say I've heard of them, but a quick lookup suggests that they only get involved if you're found not-guilty of serious violent crimes on the basis of insanity. Which kinda sounds like chucking people in the 'loony bin' to me. All I know is that I have to pay $150 out of pocket per hour of counselling. I'm fortunate I can afford that, but a dysfunctional family from a poor background? Not a chance. Any 'free' mental healthcare has had exceedingly long wait times, say in Canada and the UK, it's a six month wait to get free counselling...and a lot can happen in that time. Someone could easily fall into crisis in that time. The ability for early intervention, the ability to easily book an appointment to get help, it's important. Pretty sure my insurance is extremely limited in the mental health coverage beyond doctor's visits and medication. You *might* get a psych appointment partially covered, but that seems about it.

We're not even getting to that point with the current state of mental health access. With the difficulty of access right now, rather than resolving issues before they become a major problem, we seem to have the approach of letting people get to crisis points before really offering them any substantive support. The Doctor's office can provide medication, but it's a bandaid, it doesn't really resolve the problems. They just give you a break from the problems, kinda like Tylenol for your headaches. Actual proper therapy which involves counselling, psychiatrists, cognitive behavioural therapy are the actual solutions here. And it's way too damn hard to access whether you're in the US or elsewhere. Especially if you're from a poor background, the cost alone is a major barrier. I'm hardly talking about dragging people into mental asylums here, moreso that there needs to be easy, free and universal access to mental healthcare for both adults and children, and it's a role that the schools should have as well. If providing mental healthcare is out, gun control is out, what do you suggest we do? Funding the everloving christ out of police departments and having capital punishment clearly doesn't act as a deterrent or prevention of these massacres. Any gun owner should be hugely supportive of improved mental healthcare, it helps ensure the ongoing protection of the 2A while also reducing the negative impacts on society. Win-win if you ask me.

Regardless of one's opinions on gun control, I think universal mental health care should be accessible by all. I think it'd go a long way to keeping the public at large safe. As someone with mental health issues and insurance, getting adequate mental health care is a challenge. Insurance is limited in what it will cover, and it can come at great cost. A kid with a dysfunctional family is completely boned in their ability to get help. Suicide and mental health lines are great for people when they're in crisis, but long term actual treatment, that is something that is far too inaccessible for both people in the US and other countries that have public health systems (as mental health care is never properly funded). You can bang on about being tough on crime, but it doesn't really work. If you've got mental health issues, you won't give two damns about the consequences and absolutely no one should be getting to that point. While tough gun controls have worked well for the UK and many other countries, I genuinely think that they can only be of limited value here, especially when you are working with the confines of the 2nd Amendment. And you can't simply get rid of 2A, firstly because of the amendment ratification process- there would never be consensus for it, and also the precedent it would set. If you could remove one thing from the bill of rights, where does it stop? Unfortunately background checks have had minimal impacts, he would have passed the background check, and I'm also not in favor of locking stuff at age 21, age 18 is the age of adulthood after all. The problem needs to be tackled at the root and that is mental health care. Given that there is a mental health crisis, especially with young people these days, it needs to be addressed otherwise this will keep happening. You can only do so much to keep a gun out of people's hands in the US, the better situation would be for him not to think that pulling the trigger on children would be okay.

To be fair whether or not AoS from B/VWP is allowed or not won't make an iota of difference regarding the RoC Process outside of you incurring RoC misery onto others, and I say that as someone who came in via CR-1. What does make a difference is that recent policy changes allow those who came in via Consular Processing to have their I-751 interviews waived now.

It's simple really... It's far easier for the US government to deny an immigrant visa case whereby the applicant is in their home country and doesn't need to be deported vs. a failed adjustment of status case whereby the applicant could just fall off the radar, or have to be put through removal proceedings. Do I agree with this stance? Not really, Canada on the other hand is perfectly fine with tourists planning to submit an inland application for permanent residence when they enter the country. Though they will refuse to issue a temporary residence visa (if you require one) if they think you're planning to do that. If you're already in possession of a TRV or visa-exempt, then it's no big deal. Could be worse though, the UK doesn't allow you to apply for PR at all (ILR) until you've resided like 5 years in the country, even if you're a spouse. You get a visa granting a stay of 2 years 9 months, then you renew it for a further period, then only after that can you get ILR, and if you were admitted for no more than 6 months you must apply from abroad. At the end of the day really, different countries, different requirements and the joys of being an immigrant is if the government tells you to jump, you say 'how high?'

My suggestion would be that you should probably focus on your relationship with your girlfriend and have her come out and visit you several times, see where things go and whether a future with her and you in the US would be viable someday. Non-immigrant options are out for the long-haul I'm afraid. I think a lot of folks get married here, perhaps earlier than what would be considered 'normal' in a relationship in order to get the ball rolling on the lengthy process that is US Immigration. Me and my husband wanted to have a family gathering for our wedding and spend more time dating, but with a pandemic on the horizon and borders beginning to be slammed shut around the world, we ended up getting married quite quickly and have an informal ceremony down the line once things settle down and finances permit. Absolutely nothing wrong with doing that. But, I do offer a cautionary word of wisdom, if you are getting married earlier than planned, do give it extensive thought and discussion between the two of you, it's far easier to get married than get divorced, and those can be real messy.

One additional thing, we have CCTV in our garage and around the front and back yard. We use the garage as a bit of a 'man cave' for projects and do gardening together. The CCTV has timestamps and with the garden you'll see the changing seasons. So getting photo stills of us basically living a life together over the conditional period should be pretty helpful. Also another vote for USPS informed delivery. Don't delete those notification emails...they've had scans of mail addressed to the both of us, and I'm saving these down as evidence. Letters addressed to the both of you, or at the same address like from the doctor's office, HOA, and govt are pretty good evidence. Others are prescription stubs, me and the hubby use the same pharmacy and our med stubs have our address and date stamp on, so that might help too.

Getting credit in the US with a new SSN can be fun. The most effective thing was to have my husband add me as an authorized user on his credit cards, it effectively copied his credit file over to me and I was then approved for a $5k limit Apple Card around 1.5 months after immigrating. Then we were jointly approved to refi the mortgage on our house under a pretty low interest rate.

USCIS is speeding up EAD processing by decoupling them from the I-131/AP applications which apparently take longer for them to process. You can try and expedite but you need to demonstrate something akin to the below: Urgent humanitarian reasons or emergencies Severe financial loss US Governmental interests Oh...I see this is for a marriage ceremony in Italy. Nope, absolutely not. Hell, I've been married 2 years now and I haven't had a family ceremony or honeymoon thanks to Covid uncertainty and my husband being at risk. You'll have to wait.