Marriage produced child

[mr and mrs 187]

you must be worried about your ROC packet not being strong enough if you are concerned about an RFE and hoping that the baby production will seal the deal evidence-wise in the eyes of USCIS.

seems you are looking for a particular answer and seem unhappy with people's responses. caveat poster.

you submitted your packet the best you could. USCIS will review it and make decisions. if an RFE comes, you will deal with it. this game is about hanging in there.

[VanessaTony 3,567]

I had the toughest AOS case one could think of, and everybody was waving a red flag at me even on visajourney. From the moment the AOS interviewing officer saw my wife was 8 month pregnant, I knew from his attitude he had made up his mind. The interview went more like a job interview that has already been awarded to me. Regardless of what members say here(Most don't have the pride of being parents) I know that a Birth certificate of your child from the marriage is the MOST heavily weighted document in your application. Stick around and my case decision will prove that fact.

PS: please don't start an argument with me over this. I am just sharing my own view with the OP

I'm not starting an "argument". You're stating something as if it is fact so I am offering my take.

You don't "know" that the minute he saw your wife he changed his mind. Unless you're a mind reader you don't know what he was thinking. Several people (without the "price of being parents") also had simple 5 minute interviews, or even get approved without interview. You THINK they considered her pregnancy. She could be pregnant by the mailman, her pregnancy doesn't really mean anything except SHE had sex.

Here is the list they judge fraud on: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/USCIS_Fraud_Referral_Sheet.pdf

Edited November 16, 2011 by Vanessa&Tony

[Germanimmigrant 12]

I am not particularly worried about my package as I think it is strong in every way possible. I and my wife have carefully selected the material of which this package is comprised.

Thus, my question was more a theoretical one. Being immersed in the process, I have taken a certain liking to learning about immigration laws and cases. I am not the only one on this board, I suppose?

The common claim of an anchor child for gaining immigration privileges doesn't really apply to ROC as such privileges have already been gained. Thus, I thought the presence of a child might - at this point! - corroborate the validity of the marriage. Vanessa&Tony added, in theory it JUST proves that SHE had sex. Ok, that is true. Can't argue with that. However, does it not matter that on a birth certificate the husband is listed as the father. Before the law, the mailman has no control over the father's exertion of his parenting right unless he (mailman) fights it in a court of law. Wouldn't that mean whoever is the father on the birth certificate serves in that role before the law, regardless whether it is a court of law or USCIS?

To poster "himher": I thank you for chiming in but I would also recommend that you be careful about your own "certainty." If your answer to a particular question is based on your own experience, then that is fine and valuable. I did not know any of your own background. Thanks for pointing it out. I am sure you make good points that are commonsensical. You made your first post sound like it had been ordained of USCIS proper. That is why I was asking about your source. There is no need to validate yourself by calling me "sport." I am not your sport.

I would like to keep this conversation civil and polite. But I have every right to question the answers that are given here. I'm even happy when someone questions my own comments and shows me, for instance, that my thinking was erroneous.

Edited November 16, 2011 by Germanimmigrant

[Exasperated 5]

The common claim of an anchor child for gaining immigration privileges doesn't really apply to ROC as such privileges have already been gained. Thus, I thought the presence of a child might - at this point! - corroborate the validity of the marriage.

Though by the same token: if we assume that the "production" of a child would make the ROC so much easier and more pain free (as seems to be your theory), then the presence of a child may well work as an anchor child for purposes of simplifying the ROC process (and maybe allowing its approval when there is little other proof of a real relationship - not that I imply that's necessarily your case as I'm not familiar with it).

It just seems logical to me that if you yourself think having a child would be so beneficial to the ROC, the USCIS could (in theory of course) also envision a risk when it comes to children being used for that very purpose. Removal of conditions is really an "immigration privilege" in and of itself.

Just my 2 cents. Not that any of this matters if the USCIS loses your application for removal of conditions.

Edited November 16, 2011 by Exasperated

[Germanimmigrant 12]

I read about your story and the "misplaced" package. It truly sucks! My condolences!

No, it was not my theory that the mere "production" (terrible word, isn't it?) of a child during conditional residency makes it easier. It was rather a question and I wanted to glean from people's responses here whether they had a particularly uneventful ROC process or not. It's hard to tell anyway, as the reasons for someone's painless or painful process could have hinged on other factors. But I was just curious and have myself no definite answer to that.

Though by the same token: if we assume that the "production" of a child would make the ROC so much easier and more pain free (as seems to be your theory), then the presence of a child may well work as an anchor child for purposes of simplifying the ROC process (and maybe allowing its approval when there is little other proof of a real relationship - not that I imply that's necessarily your case as I'm not familiar with it).

It just seems logical to me that if you yourself think having a child would be so beneficial to the ROC, the USCIS could (in theory of course) also envision a risk when it comes to children being used for that very purpose. Removal of conditions is really an "immigration privilege" in and of itself.

Just my 2 cents. Not that any of this matters if the USCIS loses your application for removal of conditions.

[Exasperated 5]

I read about your story and the "misplaced" package. It truly sucks! My condolences!

Thank you! I really don't want to hijack this thread with my story though, it's just hard to stop talking about it since I'm beyond frustrated.

I think it's very difficult to answer your question in a definite way since there the USCIS has a very inconsistent policy overall when it comes to how they decide cases. I very well think it can help you in some cases (depending on who adjudicates your specific case), but I think it depends on really personal factors, like their own attitudes, if they like kids (!) and other factors. It depends on whether it touches a tangent with the individual decision-maker.

For instance, we don't have kids but me and my husband met online, and spent years communicating over the internet as friends before slowly falling in love and moving in together. I could tell the adjudicator for our green card was visibly moved by our story, and he later told us he had a family member who met their spouse the exact same way. So it touched a personal note with him. But if we had gotten some evil old witch with an "I don't believe in internet love" attitude, they would probably have given us more trouble. The same could be the case for couples with children - very situation dependent.

But of course, I hope that your case is handled by someone with amazing affection towards children and towards couples with children, so that it all goes smoothly.

[Brother Hesekiel 2,235]

Vanessa&Tony added, in theory it JUST proves that SHE had sex. Ok, that is true. Can't argue with that. . . . . I'm even happy when someone questions my own comments and shows me, for instance, that my thinking was erroneous.

As a citizen of a Christian nation, I argue that having a baby doesn't even prove that SHE had sex. Look at our Lord and savior's mother, Mary. She was a virgin and still gave birth. So I wouldn't jump the gun here.

Listen . . . RoC is very simple.

If you have a 'real' marriage, it will be approved; if you don't have a valid marriage, don't live together, and thus have no way to prove what's not the case, be prepared for an RFE. It's really that simple.

[mr and mrs 187]

it's just hard to stop talking about it

just try.

As a citizen of a Christian nation, I argue that having a baby doesn't even prove that SHE had sex. Look at our Lord and savior's mother, Mary. She was a virgin and still gave birth. So I wouldn't jump the gun here.

<3

[Exasperated 5]

just try.

.....no comment

[trillium13 84]

From another perspective-we don't have any children, and we had no issues with our ROC at all. So it's certainly not the only important thing.

[sasaqlain 24]

I'm not starting an "argument". You're stating something as if it is fact so I am offering my take.

You don't "know" that the minute he saw your wife he changed his mind. Unless you're a mind reader you don't know what he was thinking. Several people (without the "price of being parents") also had simple 5 minute interviews, or even get approved without interview. You THINK they considered her pregnancy. She could be pregnant by the mailman, her pregnancy doesn't really mean anything except SHE had sex.

Here is the list they judge fraud on: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/USCIS_Fraud_Referral_Sheet.pdf

So you are so dumb as to suggest that science hasn't evolved enough to tell who the father of the child is. No person in the right frame of mind would gamble a childs future just to earn certain rights in this country. Its called DNA testing. Thats whY I asked not add idiotic suggestions. And, yes i stated some facts too. A child is not the utmost evidence but certainly weighs more if present among others. Its absence certainly doesn't state that a marriage is not legit. Anyways.......

[VanessaTony 3,567]

The common claim of an anchor child for gaining immigration privileges doesn't really apply to ROC as such privileges have already been gained. Thus, I thought the presence of a child might - at this point! - corroborate the validity of the marriage. Vanessa&Tony added, in theory it JUST proves that SHE had sex. Ok, that is true. Can't argue with that. However, does it not matter that on a birth certificate the husband is listed as the father. Before the law, the mailman has no control over the father's exertion of his parenting right unless he (mailman) fights it in a court of law. Wouldn't that mean whoever is the father on the birth certificate serves in that role before the law, regardless whether it is a court of law or USCIS?

I really thought I added the part about DNA but that must have been another thread. It actually started a conversation between my husband and I about how a father, absent of a DNA test, can't ever really know for 100% sure that he is the father. This takes a really large amount of trust on the part of the father. Don't get me wrong I think such trust is important in a relationship (and it's interesting to wonder whether a woman would be so trusting - we're naturally suspicious) but I've always thought that DNA tests should be standard. The woman always knows for sure she's the parent. I said to Tony that I would be totally 100% okay with doing DNA tests on any kids of ours so he has the same certainty.. but even saying it (and typing it now) makes it seem like I'm saying he doesn't have reason to trust me, which is why I think they should be standard. Take away the stigma that it means he doesn't trust you. Stop making it about trust and instead about reassurance. Anyway

From what I understand, a child born in wedlock is assumed to be the child of the husband. I recall a court case where the man had found out she'd cheated and that the child wasn't his (I believe he had DNA to prove it). He wanted to stop paying child support (they weren't together anymore) but he didn't know who the father was. The court denied cancelling child support.

Here are some cases:

- http://www.khou.com/news/local/Houston-man-forced-to-pay-child-support-for-child-that-DNA-proves-isnt-his-124472429.html

- http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/22/magazine/22Paternity-t.html?pagewanted=all

- http://articles.cnn.com/2007-07-11/us/paternity.cases_1_paternity-child-support-dna-results?_s=PM:US

- http://www.ajc.com/news/man-jailed-for-child-91830.html

I know that derails the thread a bit but kinda explains my stance on DNA testing being standard before any father is nominated, and that when paternity is disproved any past child support payments must be refunded by the mother (she knew there was a "chance" and she screwed the guy over).

For ROC, as someone else said, it's not really as bad as you would think. I think sending JUST the birth certificate wouldn't get you approved (I can't say for sure because I don't think anyone has done only that) but it doesn't hurt. Oh, and there have been cases of people having kids solely to prove their relationship, which is why I'm so strongly against it being used as a factor to judge relationship.

[himher 634]

Source of certanity:

I am only 100% certain (outcome based analysis) that we filed everything needed to adjudicate the case.

I am also 100% certain that we did not file anything along the lines of what you are thinking.

SO: If you filed what we filed (we filed based on experiences of successful filers on this site) your case can, with 100% certainty, be adjudicated.

If you file something else then your case may or may not be adjudicated.

Got the logic? (sport)

I also had the (rare) privelege of standing while an initial petition was being reviewed (LOL) and getting anything other than the stuff specifically requested tossed back over the counter/returned to me LOL......which makes me believe, based on what I saw, that most of the attachments and documentation we send in get round-filed on the spot.

I am not particularly worried about my package as I think it is strong in every way possible. I and my wife have carefully selected the material of which this package is comprised.

Thus, my question was more a theoretical one. Being immersed in the process, I have taken a certain liking to learning about immigration laws and cases. I am not the only one on this board, I suppose?

The common claim of an anchor child for gaining immigration privileges doesn't really apply to ROC as such privileges have already been gained. Thus, I thought the presence of a child might - at this point! - corroborate the validity of the marriage. Vanessa&Tony added, in theory it JUST proves that SHE had sex. Ok, that is true. Can't argue with that. However, does it not matter that on a birth certificate the husband is listed as the father. Before the law, the mailman has no control over the father's exertion of his parenting right unless he (mailman) fights it in a court of law. Wouldn't that mean whoever is the father on the birth certificate serves in that role before the law, regardless whether it is a court of law or USCIS?

To poster "himher": I thank you for chiming in but I would also recommend that you be careful about your own "certainty." If your answer to a particular question is based on your own experience, then that is fine and valuable. I did not know any of your own background. Thanks for pointing it out. I am sure you make good points that are commonsensical. You made your first post sound like it had been ordained of USCIS proper. That is why I was asking about your source. There is no need to validate yourself by calling me "sport." I am not your sport.

I would like to keep this conversation civil and polite. But I have every right to question the answers that are given here. I'm even happy when someone questions my own comments and shows me, for instance, that my thinking was erroneous.

Edited November 17, 2011 by himher

[aravis227 1]

I had the toughest AOS case one could think of, and everybody was waving a red flag at me even on visajourney. From the moment the AOS interviewing officer saw my wife was 8 month pregnant, I knew from his attitude he had made up his mind. The interview went more like a job interview that has already been awarded to me. Regardless of what members say here(Most don't have the pride of being parents) I know that a Birth certificate of your child from the marriage is the MOST heavily weighted document in your application. Stick around and my case decision will prove that fact.

I'm glad your interview went so smoothly! However, I would argue whether that happened solely because of your wife's pregnancy. It was a slightly different situation, but when we attended my husband's K1 interview we were able to listen to the interviews before us. With both couples the interviewer was suspicious-sounding and not helpful. When we went up the same interviewer was incredibly easy on us and passed us with only a few questions asked. I wasn't pregnant, so obviously that didn't play a part. Unless you specifically asked the examiner, it could have been anything about you, your wife, your packet, or (most likely) the way you interacted with each other before you even said a word.

[Germanimmigrant 12]

Got the logic? (sport)

Not really, buster! But as long as my adjudicating officer isn't possessed by the same pseudo-masculine bravado, I should be safe! Given your online persona, I must assume that you're the USC male part of "himher". Did I nail it? 100% certainty!