questions about love and commitment relative to K1 process

[Rob_Lesya 4]

Although I DO think you've hit upon the solution ---- EVERYone who wants to use the K-1 as a "trial period" should be completely open and honest (which is after all, the "responsible adult" thing to do ) and include this caveat language within their "Statement of Intent". If USCIS approves their petitions and the Embassy issues the visas with these caveats in place -- then more power to them and enjoy the "free trial"!! Anyone out there willing to take that challenge?

And while we're at it, we should also disclose to the government if we're going to have ####### or oral sex with our fiance(e), if we plan to have children (and how many), what religion we are and what religion we will raise our children to be, how many guns we own, the username and passwords to our Myspace and Facebook accounts, political party affiliations, and a list of books that we have ever checked out from the public library or bought on Amazon.com. After all, that would be the "responsible" thing to do, now wouldn't it.

What we're talking about in this discussion is intent to get married --- if it's not such a big deal, why NOT fully disclose it? As you admit, it's because the person adjudicating the petition won't look favorably on it. Why??? Because it's a violation of the law.

And believe me -- you're NEVER going to find ANYBODY who's as much of a "NO government is good government" and "government stay out of my life" person as I am. But the government's not forcing anyone to file an I-129F. You're free to move to your fiancee's country, both of you are free to move to a 3rd country and live there, you're free to try to sneak her across the border and live illegally ever after (unless you're hispanic and then you'll eventually get an amnesty ). But once you decide to fill out the government form and seek government sanction of your actions, you have to abide by the government rules and the laws. And currently, those rules and laws state that you have to have an intent to marry a foreign alien before they can legally be classified as your fiancee. End of story.

[Rob_Lesya 4]

Under your interpretation, anything except marriage is fraud.

Oh ABSOLUTELY NOT! You're now arguing apples and oranges. As I have said, people change, their feelings change, their attitudes change, their intentions change. There is nothing wrong with that.

But at the moment that you sign a statement of intent attesting to the fact that you intend to marry person X, if you are thinking to yourself, "well, maybe I will... I'm not really sure... we'll just see how it goes" THEN under my interpretation (and under the law) you are committing fraud.

OK-- last post in this thread, I promise!

From this point on we'll just have to agree to disagree--- althought it does seem like there is very little that we are actually disagreeing on at this point.

[mox 298]

What we're talking about in this discussion is intent to get married --- if it's not such a big deal, why NOT fully disclose it? As you admit, it's because the person adjudicating the petition won't look favorably on it. Why??? Because it's a violation of the law.

A violation of the law would be if you didn't have intent to marry. Intending to marry within 90 days or having the fiance(e) leave the country is still intention to marry. I was pretty clear on why I wouldn't fully disclose such a plan. It's not because it's illegal, it's because the monkey working the desk to approve your application probably has neither the time nor the frontal-lobe development to understand the delicate intricacies of an adult relationship. The guy working the desk wants to see "intent to marry." If he sees anything else, then his head starts to hurt and he gets confused. And confused bureaucrats are like confused rhinos. Nothing good comes from it.

I'm not going to convince you that using the 90 days as a trial is perfectly legal, so whatever. But seriously, why does it matter? What skin is it off your back if a couple comes over here and either marries or separates within 90 days? How does it personally harm you or anyone else? Everything about their decision-making is internal to their own relationship, and as long as they marry or depart within 90 days, who the heck cares?

[Cixelsyd 1]

And I really liked where this thread was going until the last 2 or 3 pages. It started out with people having some good profound thoughts added to a good conversation and ended with arguing over interpretations about the 90 days law. In the end, it doesn't really matter what we think it says because they appoint people who's sole job is to decide what the law says.

If it isn't illegal:

We call this thinking outside the box. Doesn't matter if we agree or not.

Just need to ask, is it really that big of a deal.

If it is illegal:

So is breaking the speed limit and tying your giraffe to a lamp post in Alabama.

Just need to ask, is it really that big of a deal.

I would argue any resources put into resolving this particular problem would be a waste of time. I would rather see the efforts placed in stream lining the process of applications. We all know why it takes so long, but there has got to be better ways of going about the process.

I should have posted something relevant to the OP, but since I wasted my 2 koleek on the aforementioned I'll try and muster up something that sounds profound but really isn't.

To the OP:

From reading your last post, it sounds you don't really need a conclusion. Maybe you're just feeling nervous sometimes, maybe you feel impatient other times, maybe you have so many other unexplainable thoughts or emotions going through your head. I know it sounds masochistic, but enjoy it; how many other times in life will you have these intense moments.

[Rob_Lesya 4]

What we're talking about in this discussion is intent to get married --- if it's not such a big deal, why NOT fully disclose it? As you admit, it's because the person adjudicating the petition won't look favorably on it. Why??? Because it's a violation of the law.

A violation of the law would be if you didn't have intent to marry. Intending to marry within 90 days or having the fiance(e) leave the country is still intention to marry. I was pretty clear on why I wouldn't fully disclose such a plan. It's not because it's illegal, it's because the monkey working the desk to approve your application probably has neither the time nor the frontal-lobe development to understand the delicate intricacies of an adult relationship. The guy working the desk wants to see "intent to marry." If he sees anything else, then his head starts to hurt and he gets confused. And confused bureaucrats are like confused rhinos. Nothing good comes from it.

I'm not going to convince you that using the 90 days as a trial is perfectly legal, so whatever. But seriously, why does it matter? What skin is it off your back if a couple comes over here and either marries or separates within 90 days? How does it personally harm you or anyone else? Everything about their decision-making is internal to their own relationship, and as long as they marry or depart within 90 days, who the heck cares?

I said my previous post was the last one---- but see... the circumstances made me change my intention.. and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that!

Don't worry Mox, I'm not losing sleep over the issue. I have plenty of other stresses in my work and life to disrupt my sleep just fine! I DO have some of the same concerns as Blues Fairy, of folks "clogging up" the system and forcing those with "legitimate" applications to have to wait longer and endure more BS. But for me, that concern is more of a "rhetorical rant" rather than a genuine concern. In fact, given the current circumstances in Chelyabinsk regarding Lesya's defense of her PhD, I'm kind of hoping that our application gets slowed down just a little bit. If my calculations on the timeline are correct, we'll more than likely end up asking to reschedule the interview.

But ironically, a bigger concern for me would be those same confused bureaucrats that you're also a bit concerned about. My concern is that eventually they'll catch on to the fact that more and more people are filing I-129f's and then NOT getting married. They just might decide that they need to examine the issue, change the procedures, institute a mandatory waiting period into the process, and of course increase the fees, we ALWAYS must increase the fees. And in the end it will become more time-consuming, more stressful, and more expensive for EVERYone involved.

But again, none of this is something I'm stressing about.

[mox 298]

Cyxelsyd, the reason it matters (IMHO) is because occasionally the question comes up, and I think it's important that people who are considering the K visa process be educated as much as possible. If all somebody reads about is one side of the argument, then they're likely to believe that's the only side. I've made my point and I'm done arguing this for now, but I'll put my $0.02 in every time it comes up (twice in two different forums this week as it turns out). In the end, everyone has to make their own decisions, but at least they're making an educated decision.

I would argue any resources put into resolving this particular problem would be a waste of time. I would rather see the efforts placed in stream lining the process of applications. We all know why it takes so long, but there has got to be better ways of going about the process.

No reason we can't do both, although...

In the end, it doesn't really matter what we think it says because they appoint people who's sole job is to decide what the law says.

[mox 298]

But ironically, a bigger concern for me would be those same confused bureaucrats that you're also a bit concerned about. My concern is that eventually they'll catch on to the fact that more and more people are filing I-129f's and then NOT getting married. They just might decide that they need to examine the issue, change the procedures, institute a mandatory waiting period into the process, and of course increase the fees, we ALWAYS must increase the fees. And in the end it will become more time-consuming, more stressful, and more expensive for EVERYone involved.

Heh. Really though, I think that's a stretch. For starters, USCIS would have to actually keep statistics on filings versus marriages. Maybe they do already--it would be easy enough to compare AOS filings to K1 approvals, but I think the biggest problem would be getting anyone in the system to care. What's the incentive to revise the process to ensure more successful marriages? The current climate right now is to keep immigrants (even legal immigrants) out of the country, so what's the incentive to improve the system to retain more? I guess that's pretty crass thinking on my part, but I really think that's how Washington thinks.

As for all the rest...well yeah, I can see that happening. Immigration is a real hot-button issue of course, and it would make Washington-sense to make the process even more difficult and expensive for even legal immigrants. But I see that happening anyway, because (as Slim is fond of saying) people are stupid. Get your mail order brides now folks, while they're still priced to sell!

[Rob_Lesya 4]

What's the incentive to revise the process to ensure more successful marriages? The current climate right now is to keep immigrants (even legal immigrants) out of the country, so what's the incentive to improve the system to retain more? I guess that's pretty crass thinking on my part, but I really think that's how Washington thinks.

Oh Mox! Now you're starting to disappoint me! I thought YOU-- of all people-- had spent enough time trying to decipher Washington-logic that you would understand where such an incentive would come from. I imagine it being something like this:

"Ok now, we're going to add some additional forms, an additional background check (to protect our nation's security of course), and an additional 6 month wait time. At the same time, we're going to triple all processing fees. All of this combined, will help ensure that only those who are truly serious about this endeavor will bother to go through the process. The result is that our department will be processing 20, 30, perhaps even 40% FEWER applications (i.e, doing less work) but we still will be increasing the amount of revenue generated by our department."

"The new metric for efficiency in our department will be the Success Utilization Criteria. This will be calculated by determining the number of your approved I-129 petitions as a percentage of the resultant approved Adjustment of Status applications. All of you should always keep a close eye on your SUC rate. Anytime I point to any of you, you should be able to tell me off the top of your head the exact degree to which you SUC. By increasing the extent to which we all SUC, we will come to better represent exactly what the American people expect of their government agencies"

[mox 298]

LOL!

[Thomas-n-Elena 0]

And while we're at it, we should also disclose to the government if we're going to have ####### or oral sex with our fiance(e),

They already know.

if we plan to have children (and how many),

They already know

what religion we are and what religion we will raise our children to be,

They already know

how many guns we own,

They already know

the username and passwords to our Myspace and Facebook accounts,

They already know

political party affiliations,

They already know

and a list of books that we have ever checked out from the public library or bought on Amazon.com.

They already know!!!!!

[slim 1,525]

What if the intent to marry is "I intend to marry that guy so I can get a green card." That would be perfectly legal and within the purpose of K-1, right?

[baron555 934]

What if the intent to marry is "I intend to marry that guy so I can get a green card." That would be perfectly legal and within the purpose of K-1, right?

Of course it is. To appease the hijackers of this thread (which did start out so nicely and then got taken way out in left field) (You guys ought to be on the Fiance.com forum; you'll fit right in!)

of course that sentence is true as long as the couple says the following in their minds: "I intend to marry that guy so I can get a green card and live the rest of my life in happiness with him."

[johnj 0]

You guys ought to be on the Fiance.com forum; you'll fit right in!

I followed that forum for months about four years ago, made a few friends from that forum but I will not return. IMO, nothing now but a bunch of gripping, back-stabbing, misinformation, etc.

[clueless_in_usa 8]

Please allow me to butt in, because I am somewhat familiar with the OP's concerns... and no, I did not decide to write in to argue about the "90-day trial period."

My advice to the OP is to be very careful with the decision to marry in the current conditions. One thing that I did not see anybody mention is the harsh reality that foreign women face in this country, especially women from Russia. Let us start with a very derogatory adjective often used towards Russian women in the USA, regardless of how she met her husband/fiance: "Mail Order Bride." (somebody even said it in this thread).

My point is that most Russian women who marry American men usually find an antagonistic society that adds huge pressure to the situation. Therefore, if the woman is not very sure (if not 100% at least very close) that she wants to live in this country (because she really loves the man), she may find it difficult to survive here and she will probably give up at the first opportunity.

As an example, when I broke the news about my wanting to marry a Russian lady, I was advised to "be careful" and "not do it" or "at least wait a few years so you can be sure that she is not only after a Green Card." I personally do not care about the comments others make (even my own family members). I am thick-skinned and I always do what I think is right for me. But I am fully aware of the environment she will have to face and I have made sure to tell her that it is not a "walk in the park." In fact, she even asked me to move to Russia with her, but...

...anyway, to the OP, she may be hot and you may be having the time of your life, but that will not shield you from disappointment if she is not really sure that she wants to be with you, no matter what external difficulties you face together. my thoughts to you: "you two must seriously talk about the realities of life and make sure that you will join forces for a better future together if you both decide to go through this process. Without a serious commitment, you have a better chance of failure.

Life is cruel. but it somehow seems to be more cruel for so-called MOB who come to America. Even when the relationship is ideal, it is really tough for both partners.

Maybe others who already completed the process can confirm or deny what I wrote here.

[Turboguy 6]

Clueless, those were good comments. I think a lot of foreign women see the USA as a land of opportunity with lots of high paying jobs. It can be very hard for them here. They can have a college eduction in their home country and have a hard time even landing a job at WalMart here. Some professons of course transfer better than others. Many can't drive and have a strong enough accent that makes a job dealing with people harder to get. Having realistic expectations and a supportive husband can make a world of difference.

I saw the figures a long time ago on the percentage of K-1's that actually marry and I don't recall exactly but it was in the 60% range. Someone said a few posts back that we all intend to get married. I don't think that is always the case. I think most of the AM I have seen intend to marry the RW but I do think a number of the RW want to come here to make up thier mind and really everyone should have their mind made up first. I have seen a number of failed K-1's with the people I have known. Of course I was even one of those myself several years ago. I am sure there are some cases where the guy says he has a nice house and a good job and when she arrives finds the nice house is a run down double wide and his nice job is as a garbage man but I think in most failures it is that she learns more about the man and decides he is not someone she wants to spend her life with. Most of the failures I have seen have been one week wonders. The man went and spend a few days or a week with the woman, started a K-1 and never went back. I think had they followed up and spent time getting to know the other person before doing a K-1 it might have saved a lot of disappointment and hearbreak. Mostly it is the women who decide to go back. I only know of one case where the guy decided to send her back and that was after 5 days together. I have to think getting to know each other better would have shown whatever he saw.

I do think if people spent the time getting to know each other first the 40% that go back would be greatly reduced. Blues Fairy talked about it cloging the system. If there were 40% fewer K-1's it would unclog the system, wouldn't it?

Personally I think everything that goes wrong gives ammunition to those who want to make the system tougher. Failed K-1's, Green Card Girls who fake abuse, and all other problems and the better everything works the easier it will be for everyone. People really should take the time to get to know someone they plan to spend thier life with and be sure of their intent before they file for a K-1.