LlamaInvasion

They set themselves up for this when they entered the US illegally. The pitiable situation they find themselves in now would not have happened if they hadn't broken the law to begin with. I do have sympathy for their children, but their situation is not the fault of the Alabama government or it's new law. They took the risk that something like this could happen when they entered illegally, and when they chose to have children in the United States. They presumed it wouldn't happen because the federal government has a record of selective law enforcement. The Alabama law mirrors federal law, with the additional caveat that it requires Alabama law enforcement officers to enforce the law. I'm a little disgusted with the media for trotting these people out with their sob stories and completely glossing over the fact that they got themselves into this mess voluntarily.
"I can't stop working. My daughters need shoes and other things."
She shouldn't be working in the US to begin with, and her employer is breaking the law by providing her with a job. What's next? "We're doing the work that Americans won't do!" What they really mean is that they're willing to work for slave wages because they don't have legal status, and there's no shortage of employers in the US who are more than happy to exploit them. If they had green cards then they too would be demanding minimum wage jobs. The ones who use fake ID's and Social Security numbers and lie on an I-9 form are even worse because they actually ARE taking a job that a US citizen or permanent resident would be happy to take.
I know a farmer who grows strawberries near the Northern California coast. He only sells his fruit through roadside stands and local farmer's markets. Because he doesn't have to pay distributors he gets to keep all the profit, so he can afford to pay minimum wage to strawberry pickers. He insists on proof of lawful presence for everyone who shows up for work, and he turns people away every day because he's got more than enough workers by the time the shift starts. Every day he says someone will show up and offer to work for half as much if he'll overlook their legal status. He just laughs and tells them to go find a farmer who is willing to break the law because he's not. Other farmers who sell their produce to distributors are forced to hire illegals because their competitors are hiring them, and the net result is artificially deflated prices.
This is the same reason that unemployment is so high in the US. We can't compete with Chinese labor costs, and we don't charge tariffs to offset the difference. Nobody can afford to produce anything in the US because their competitors will always be able to undercut their retail prices because they're getting their products made in China. Free trade is the reason the middle class are disappearing in America. It's not the greed on Wall Street.
Frankly, I think every state should enact laws similar to Alabama's. Eventually, there would be far fewer people in this situation because they'd simply stop coming if they know the chances of getting away with it were slim. Someone's willingness to break the law is directly proportional to their perceived chances of getting caught.

While there are a few people here who are perennial pessimists, most people here are genuinely trying to help. When someone says that they've done something, or suggests that they want to do something, that's well known here to be a big mistake then people are definitely going to strongly recommend against it. That's why this site exists - to make sure people are getting good advice.
People are told repeatedly not to make any concrete plans until after they have the visa in hand. This advice even comes from the consulates. When someone insists on doing something that they've been told repeatedly not to do then it's only proper for people here to condemn that action. It may not be "nice", but if people "don't say anything at all" then other new members will get the impression that it's OK, and they'll blame VJ for not warning them when their world collapses around them because their visa was postponed or denied.
Just because one person does something they were warned not to do and they get away with it, that doesn't make it advisable for others. One person's experience does not become a blueprint for everyone else. It's the collective experience of everyone that should be relied upon. You might have made firm wedding plans in advance and things might have worked out fine for you. If so, congratulations. However, if you advise someone else to do the same thing and their plans blow up in their faces because the visa is delayed then you'll have to live with the fact that you helped contribute to their misery.

I am the immigrant, if it didn't work it DIDN'T WORK!! OMG seriously? You really think that JUST because my husband imported me he should ignore some small cultural difference or character flaw that would bug him the rest of our marriage and possibly build to resentment? Just like I have every right to leave because of a small cultural difference, as does the OP. I'm not saying the OP shouldn't work at it. We don't know that he didn't. I doubt he's taking divorce lightly. I doubt he's taking the money he spent and is now throwing away seriously. I doubt he's taking the loss of the woman he speaks so highly of lightly, but obviously he has an issue.
You're also assuming the "small cultural difference" IS just a small difference and discounting the idea it could actually be a LARGE cultural difference. Like the guy who married some Filippino that stole his credit card to try and send money home to her family but he caught her in time. Or the guy who married a Filippino, she spent his money like it was going out of fashion, kept insisting on large sums of money to be sent home, lots of presents and when he said no she got a job and sent all HER money home yet contributed nothing to the household. That "small cultural difference" being the money situation WOULD be a deal-breaker for me. I didn't get married to have my husband not support US and OUR marriage and instead support his family back home. I would feel completely used. Here's the thing though, he doesn't OWE YOU an explanation.
You don't know him. You don't know his life. In either event this whole site isn't about judging someone. He asked a question and you all avoided it and instead jumped on him for his life choice/s.
I have reported this thread as it is completely derailed and only 3 or 4 posts actually answer the question and the rest are just judgmental.

Almost all of the cases which have been successful were denied in family court, subsequently sued in civil court and denied, and ultimately upheld in appellate court. The courts usually also offset any support the sponsor had to pay by the amount of income the immigrant already received and any other support already ordered by the family court.
In addition, no court has ever held that a sponsor is obligated to maintain an immigrants income at more than 125% of the poverty guidelines. Presuming the immigrant has no income and that there are no other dependent family members to include in the "household size", this amounts to a little over $1000 per month. If you earn a decent living in California then a family court could easily order you to pay this much or much more in spousal support. If you were married more than 10 years then the order could be for alimony rather than spousal support, which makes you obligated potentially for the rest of your life. Any suit based on the affidavit of support would be moot since the alimony would already exceed the amount required under INA 213A. What's more, a request for spousal support in a California family court based on the I-864 would probably fail since the state's family code already provides a formula which family court judges are compelled to use in determining the level of support. Other states have similar provisions, which is why these cases usually end up in civil courts.
Everyone who comes to this site is strongly encouraged to investigate with due diligence everything that is required of them in this process. The possibility of being sued for support based on the I-864 is real, but in reality it doesn't happen very often. Your biggest risk comes if your income barely qualifies to sign an I-864, or if you marry a deadbeat who has no intention of working to support themselves in the US. In the first case, an order to pay support based on the I-864 would severely stress your income. In the second, you'd likely get hit with the maximum amount of support ordered.
There have been hundreds of cases on VJ of immigrants who divorced their US citizen spouses and sought to retain their immigration benefits. I've not yet read a single case on VJ of an immigrant who successfully sued for support based on the I-864. This combined with the fact that there are a relatively small number of successful cases to found on the internet leads me to believe that this doesn't happen often. It's a risk that should be considered, along with other factors such as the sponsor's ability to actually SUPPORT the immigrant they are sponsoring, as well as the immigrant's ability to support themselves.

We weren't in the process already when I got pregnant, but it still affected us.
On the one hand, it irks me that I'm doomed to forever have ignorant people who know nothing about me or my situation, think that I got pregnant on purpose, or by being careless, when my birth control pills randomly failed for the first time in the 11 years I've been on them. No, I wasn't on antibiotics. No, I didn't throw them up or have diarrhea. No, I didn't take them incorrectly. I've had people call my baby an anchor baby (and boy, do I ever LOATHE that term) by people who didn't realize that the concept doesn't work and that me and my husband would marry regardless of the baby (the only difference is, my son made us opt for AOS rather than K-1/CR-1 after I graduated from college, and I in fact stressed to leave the US before the birth, to avoid birth costs). And I can say that I took my BC pills faithfully, not missing one, correctly, and still ended up pregnant until I'm blue in the face, but people will still think whatever they want because they didn't witness me take my pill every day.
On the other hand, I have my husband (whom I spent five wonderful years with as "just us" before I got pregnant), I have my son, and I am blessed beyond words, and I'm terribly amused that said people who know nothing about me or my situation - on the internet or otherwise - would ever judge me for having my wonderful family.
Every situation is different, and knowing the unlikely, but true scenario I found myself in, I make it a point to try my hardest not to judge others.

Marriage must be founded with pure understanding... It's not about how grand the wedding is but how you keep the marriage works. If he can't seem to afford a big wedding for now then you must understand him... Again it's not about being big and opulent but how you'll keep it sacred... Sometimes we must learn how to appreciate simple joys and blessings to see how true happiness really means Good luck and all the best to both of you <3

Really? Your husband enjoys spending money on expensive shoes and bags? Or is that just you?
Actually, I agree with you. You really are much too shallow to be the kind of parent that a child deserves. I also agree that a pregnancy shouldn't entitle anyone to special immigration privileges. But you've never had a child. Don't presume to understand what having a child means.
I also am not aware of any restaurants that don't allow children (there probably are some but I never went to them anyways). I also wasn't aware that having a kid meant you couldn't go on vacation, spend time with your spouse, or even take off somewhere at the drop of a hat (all things that we do with a kid in tow). I suppose you're right about sleeping in but we have a little different concept of a weekend well spent. In short, I agree that you shouldn't bring a kid into a situation that is unstable because of immigration or finances or a number of other reasons. But 5 years? No, I'm not saying that you should have a kid. You're probably not ready. But your implication that people who get married and settle down and want to have kids on the honeymoon, or after 6 months or a year, are not properly spending time with their spouses is really quite strange.

While the sentiment behind this is nice, I sincerely doubt she'd be open to holding hands and praying, when she 1) prefers communication via e-mail with her spouse (and seriously, that alone is such a huge warning sign), and 2) won't even let him take her hand in the first place, as described in his original post.
OP, I understand this is hard, and I'm very sorry you have to go through this - but this is not looking good. Don't let your feelings for her cloud your rational judgment.

Much depends on the kind of relationship you have with your fiance. You can think you know everything about this person you've been communicating with for months/years and yet when you come to living with them, you realise that there can be more to learn about who they are.
Some families have a lot of sway over their children, others don't. Some people are very cautious with how much access they allow a new partner/spouse to their money and investments, how much they open up to you on an emotional level and how much involvement they want to have with their family as a couple.
Signing a pre-nup isn't a bad thing, provided you understand everything that you are signing away and how much those things mean to your fiance and how much they will affect your marriage. Nobody goes into a marriage wanting a divorce, but when it does happen you need to know what you might do AFTER it and have a plan. If they are asking you to sign away any rights to income or capital from the family business but you are living in the family home, there should also be provision made to cover the cost of helping you move into a place of your own, or to return to your home country in the event you and your fiance part company before you reach 3 years of marriage or citizenship.
Frankly, in your position, I would be absolutely furious that there had been no mention of this upfront. This is incredibly dishonest, and shows a complete lack of respect for your relationship as well as his inability to behave like an adult and discuss issues openly with you. His parents must've known that he was intending to marry for the issue of a pre-nup to have even come up, so why the big secrecy over the wedding date and plans? Seriously? How are you going to prove a bona fide relationship for your Adjustment of Status if his parents and family are unaware of even the wedding date? How much evidence of living together is going to be available if Mommy and Daddy are paying his living expenses, nothing is in his own name and he has a document that says he's not going to share anything with you?
You need to sit him down and work out exactly what his relationship with you really is, and where the line between his relationship with you and his relationship with his parents actually is. At what stage is he planning on setting up his own household, or he is going to wait for his "inheritance" before he learns to fly solo? I'd be looking to sit down with him and his family and discuss this openly, putting all the what-ifs on the table so every possible outcome is known and catered to in any pre-nup. If you're happy with that, get a damned good lawyer and make sure you have SOME rights in this relationship.
I'd be seriously concerned at my role within this family and attaching myself legally to a man who seems to lack the ability to be an independent adult, but only you can judge the merits of the relationship and know if you want to proceed. If you have doubts, go home. There's nothing to stop you continuing the relationship if you return home, and you can always apply for another visa later on if the relationship truly is what you both want.

Actually, I did.
Is e-mail communication and substituting sex for a marriage also common? Because those, in conjunction with the refusal of any counseling or steps to repair their marriage whatsoever, is what's making this look really damn bad for this woman. After all, the alternative to taking corrective steps is the OP leaving her. That's got nothing to do with culture. That's got to do with whether she wants to stay married to the man she supposedly loves or not. She clearly does not. My advice remains the same: Divorce her ####.
You know absolutely nothing about whether the ex was a more reliable cash cow or not. We don't have any information about his financial situation, vs the OP's financial situation, besides the fact that the ex gave her an "allowance." What will she get from the OP? Couldn't possibly be, oh, say, a green card. Derp.
...in my VERY first post in this thread, I was more lenient towards that, than the opposite. I think you're the one not reading posts very carefully.
Personally, I'd be happy if you do check out of this argument, since none of your conclusions have been sensible, logical or helpful.

Jumping to conclusions? You're basing your advice purely on your culture, and not on what the OP has told us.

This list was NOT produced by USCIS. It's from an article by Baughman and Wang, immigration attorneys:
http://lawbw.com/home/why-uscis-might-think-your-application-is-fraudulent/
Please do not try to mislead people into believing advice or information comes from USCIS or any other US government agency unless you know for certain that it does. While the information may, indeed, be accurate, the source is not an official US government source.

Someone's ego is too big to admit they are wrong about stating the OP is 75% likely to die, so we get manipulation instead of admission of error:
First, the pretense you are speaking for everyone by saying "we". Then trying to paint the person pointing out actuarial tables as an angry person. An ad hominem. Not that they've corrected your multiple wrong statements on life expectancy or anything... they're just a mad-dog crazy person boiling with anger.
Next, pretending it is no big deal to you, *shrugs*, not even worth a response - except for the ad hominems and other manipulative arguments. Anything but admit you were wrong, eh?
Once those are pointed out, it of course has to be denied. This is an interesting tactic they put under the denial heading. The first part is almost masquerading as a compliment, except that it is stated with such exaggeration it is clearly contempt instead, and it is followed by the insult which is the actual intention - I can't even read.
This one is a form of denial. Instead of admitting to what you did - which was state rather plainly that others didn't know children grew up - you "admit" to not doing that at all.
A big pile of Rationalization combined with diversion. None of such people are here. You directed your condescention to people here that said nothing of the kind. The OP is a 63 year old man who sounds very responsible. About the last person I would expect to be a crack addict throwing his kids away.
The individual is directed to look in the mirror. This is another ad hominem that reeks with hypocrisy.
Which is exactly why all this derision is such nonsense. The topic of the thread is that very thing: to talk about people's experiences, like mine, of having kids later in life. So what is the point of repeatedly insisting we do what we are already doing? Rhetorical question.
So you are not even a person who had kids later in life and you have zero personal experience to relate on that specific topic. Just the derision, and as someone else has pointed out - a lot of things having nothing to do with it, eg. crack-head parents, people incapable of understanding kids grow up, etc.
You are merely a parent, which makes you no more qualified to speak than the other billions of parents.
Ending with "Peace" is an interesting cap to all this derision, insulting, and manipulative posting. One of the things I did not comment on was how you attacked T-Bone for the responsible point about life insurance. You turned that into an insult too, about how money does not replace a parent. Again, who doesn't know that? It's not only a sound point, but it deserves fuller discussion instead of insulting people who bring it up. How much insurance is appropriate, no matter whether you are 30 or 63 is an important topic. So why show such contempt for it?
You're in my manipulator tractor beam now, and once you're there the only way out is to stop doing it. Admitting you were wrong is something people can respect you for.

A more patronizing post would be hard to find. Children need parents that are not so full of themselves that they have fantasies about grown adults being little babies in comparison to themselves.
You are also dead wrong on this:
According to actuarial tables, a 63 year old male has an average life expectancy of 19 years. It matters a great deal what kind of diet, exercise, alcohol, smoking, etc. that you are doing so a person taking care of themselves has a life expectancy significantly longer whereas an alcoholic chain smoker is going to die in short order.
Do you teach your children to just make things up to support your prejudices? For example, if you don't like blacks then just make up a statistic about 75% of blacks being criminals. No sense in actually knowing what you are talking about, is there?

How do "illegals get free stuff" and, more importantly, how do "we treat our own citizens like #######" if we require foreigners to have either a valid visa, or AP, or a Green Card, in order to enter the U.S. from abroad?

I think you really just need a tourist visa.
You're putting the cart wayyyyyyyyy before the horse here.
As an adult, you probably realize that spending time in person with someone is much much different then spending time on a webcam/phone/online. I'm sorry, but it is. That's not to say you don't have true love, I'm not here to judge. But, I truly think you need to go meet him first, if not multiple times, and let the relationship play its course to marriage.
I dated my husband for SIX YEARS long distance before I moved here on the K1. I did exactly what you did, looked at what my visa options where, and ultimately, it came down to being patient, spending more time together in person, and then letting the relationship naturally progress towards marriage. I was 19 when we started dating, and going to school, I had no money, but I made it work. And then, when I knew I wanted to move and be with him, I started my career back home and saved thousands of dollars, so that when I did move, I wouldn't have to worry about my finances.
You have stated multiple times that finances are an issue, hence the working visa, but you need to consider visiting for now, working and saving lots of money (which is obviously hard when you're also trying to travel and visit each other, but it's not impossible.
We all know what it's like to be desperately in love and wanting to be with that person. You're no different from probably almost everyone here. You say you're thinking about the right now, but you're not! You should be focusing on meeting, not how to spend the rest of your lives together. Try to step outside your situation and look in. Unfortunately falling in love with someone in another country is not an instantly gratifying thing. The relationships take longer to develop and immigration also add time to being together. All things you seem smart enough to realize, yet you still seem so out of touch with reality.
Focus on the right now, which is meeting each other for the first time, getting to know each other IN PERSON and then maybe move on to your second visit, maybe even a third visit before you start talking about packing up and leaving everything you know for someone you haven't even met.

You are not "smart enough". You are ignorant. Vaccines do not cure, they PREVENT. If you are not smart enough to know this then I would recommend going back to high school before making important decisions.

Immigration is a privilege, not a right. She doesn't have the right to be here... she has to ask for permission and follow the rules. She has the right to stay in the Philippines and not put anything in her body, not the right to come here and do so. We all knew the religion angle was phony by the rude talk anyway.
And to say vaccines don't cure anything, I suggest you take a very basic science lesson, because there is a huge body of proof.

What visa did he enter on? What is his status now?
If a good friend was telling me this story about their life I would advise them to divorce and move on. If you two are at the adjustment of status phase I would advise you to pull your affidavit of support. If he already has been approved for a green card then simply divorce and move on.
*Moved from US Citizenship forum to Effect of Major Family Changes forum*

While I agree with a lot of what's been said in this thread so far about racism; how to deal with it, ignoring it, etc - I do feel like I want to comment on something.
I'm quite surprised that as a teacher, you've never seen this before. I'm Asian of origin (adopted) and have always lived in extremely predominantly Caucasian countries/cities/areas. I have white siblings, white parents, a white family, and grew up in a white upper-middle class neighborhood.
In my experience, the age you described this child to be is exactly when they start questioning and commenting on skin color. It was in the first grade someone first commented on my "squinty, funny-looking eyes." It was in the second grade I was first asked why I looked "browner than my sister." And that girl quickly concluded that she didn't think my sister was really my sister, because if she was, we'd either both be brown or both be white. That was devastating to me at the time, but there was no inherent racism behind this girl's conclusion; she was just trying to make sense of how and why I looked different.
Still to this day, children around the 7-10 age range are the ones commenting on my looks, on the rare occasion it does happen. They are simply curious, and have no filter. Any remark coming from a child that age, I personally would take with a grain of salt.

While I agree with a lot of what's been said in this thread so far about racism; how to deal with it, ignoring it, etc - I do feel like I want to comment on something.
I'm quite surprised that as a teacher, you've never seen this before. I'm Asian of origin (adopted) and have always lived in extremely predominantly Caucasian countries/cities/areas. I have white siblings, white parents, a white family, and grew up in a white upper-middle class neighborhood.
In my experience, the age you described this child to be is exactly when they start questioning and commenting on skin color. It was in the first grade someone first commented on my "squinty, funny-looking eyes." It was in the second grade I was first asked why I looked "browner than my sister." And that girl quickly concluded that she didn't think my sister was really my sister, because if she was, we'd either both be brown or both be white. That was devastating to me at the time, but there was no inherent racism behind this girl's conclusion; she was just trying to make sense of how and why I looked different.
Still to this day, children around the 7-10 age range are the ones commenting on my looks, on the rare occasion it does happen. They are simply curious, and have no filter. Any remark coming from a child that age, I personally would take with a grain of salt.

No! Not only will this not work, it won't work because it isn't true. Telling such a lie is a very bad thing. A successful USA immigration process requires truth telling. All ideas of saying, writing or answering anything with something other than the truth must be vanquished from your mind. Otherwise, be ready to plan a life together outside the USA.

While I agree with a lot of what's been said in this thread so far about racism; how to deal with it, ignoring it, etc - I do feel like I want to comment on something.
I'm quite surprised that as a teacher, you've never seen this before. I'm Asian of origin (adopted) and have always lived in extremely predominantly Caucasian countries/cities/areas. I have white siblings, white parents, a white family, and grew up in a white upper-middle class neighborhood.
In my experience, the age you described this child to be is exactly when they start questioning and commenting on skin color. It was in the first grade someone first commented on my "squinty, funny-looking eyes." It was in the second grade I was first asked why I looked "browner than my sister." And that girl quickly concluded that she didn't think my sister was really my sister, because if she was, we'd either both be brown or both be white. That was devastating to me at the time, but there was no inherent racism behind this girl's conclusion; she was just trying to make sense of how and why I looked different.
Still to this day, children around the 7-10 age range are the ones commenting on my looks, on the rare occasion it does happen. They are simply curious, and have no filter. Any remark coming from a child that age, I personally would take with a grain of salt.

While I agree with a lot of what's been said in this thread so far about racism; how to deal with it, ignoring it, etc - I do feel like I want to comment on something.
I'm quite surprised that as a teacher, you've never seen this before. I'm Asian of origin (adopted) and have always lived in extremely predominantly Caucasian countries/cities/areas. I have white siblings, white parents, a white family, and grew up in a white upper-middle class neighborhood.
In my experience, the age you described this child to be is exactly when they start questioning and commenting on skin color. It was in the first grade someone first commented on my "squinty, funny-looking eyes." It was in the second grade I was first asked why I looked "browner than my sister." And that girl quickly concluded that she didn't think my sister was really my sister, because if she was, we'd either both be brown or both be white. That was devastating to me at the time, but there was no inherent racism behind this girl's conclusion; she was just trying to make sense of how and why I looked different.
Still to this day, children around the 7-10 age range are the ones commenting on my looks, on the rare occasion it does happen. They are simply curious, and have no filter. Any remark coming from a child that age, I personally would take with a grain of salt.

While I agree with a lot of what's been said in this thread so far about racism; how to deal with it, ignoring it, etc - I do feel like I want to comment on something.
I'm quite surprised that as a teacher, you've never seen this before. I'm Asian of origin (adopted) and have always lived in extremely predominantly Caucasian countries/cities/areas. I have white siblings, white parents, a white family, and grew up in a white upper-middle class neighborhood.
In my experience, the age you described this child to be is exactly when they start questioning and commenting on skin color. It was in the first grade someone first commented on my "squinty, funny-looking eyes." It was in the second grade I was first asked why I looked "browner than my sister." And that girl quickly concluded that she didn't think my sister was really my sister, because if she was, we'd either both be brown or both be white. That was devastating to me at the time, but there was no inherent racism behind this girl's conclusion; she was just trying to make sense of how and why I looked different.
Still to this day, children around the 7-10 age range are the ones commenting on my looks, on the rare occasion it does happen. They are simply curious, and have no filter. Any remark coming from a child that age, I personally would take with a grain of salt.