MUST EX HUBBY STILL PAY HEALTH INSURANCE AFTER DIVORCE?

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

Why don't you think about trying to get a job and provide your own insurance for you and your child??? What would you have done in your native country??

Maybe there was national health insurance in her country?

Why don't you chill out.

According to her timeline, OP is from Switzerland. Yes, they have compulsory national health insurance which everyone must pay into, according to their means. Private supplementary insurance is also available.

To answer your question on if/when he has to pay you health insurance. No, unless you win that as a settlement in divorce court. How long were you married? Don't expect to get much out of the court if anything if you were not married a very long time.

Good luck with enforcing the affidavate of support. It is as enforceable as a piece of toilet paper. You can only get the cash back per my research if you become a 'public charge' meaning on welfare. If it were only so easy to just go up and say "i dont want to work, give me welfare and let my ex pay for it all" i think there would be a very large percentage of people on welfare. As it is, they will look at you and see you can probably work with no problems and tell you to get a damn job.

That simple

or, go back where you came from...that is also simple.

Bitter..........table for one.

Agreed.

retiredfromforum, the I-864 affidavit of support HAS been successfully enforced in courts numerous times. I'm not aware of any court that has held it to be "unenforceable", but of course I'm not aware of every single case. I'm only aware of courts stating that they don't have the jurisdiction to enforce it, or that the beneficiary doesn't have the legal basis to request it's enforcement.

As far as her getting "cash back" if she becomes a "public charge", this is NOT what the I-864 provides for. If she collects means tested benefits and becomes a "public charge", the only thing she receives is those benefits. The US government, however, is entitled to get the "cash back". Also, she is not even eligible to apply for any such benefits until she's been in the US for five years.

[Tygrys 143]

In North Carolina divorce proceedings do not deal with property division or support.

You will have to sue him separately for any support (including insurance premiums payment on your behalf) BEFORE your divorce becomes final.

Or, you can have a separation agreement between you and your hubby describing these things, which also must be executed before final divorce date and may be then at discretion of the judge incorporated into divorce.

Edited July 1, 2009 by Tygrys

[SuperDuper! 230]

Thanks for reminding all the men out here: GET A PRE-NUP, AND THEN MAKE SURE IT PULLS YOUR AFFIDAVIT OF SUPPORT IN CASE OF DIVORCE.

And now, back to our regularly scheduled thread....

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

Thanks for reminding all the men out here: GET A PRE-NUP, AND THEN MAKE SURE IT PULLS YOUR AFFIDAVIT OF SUPPORT IN CASE OF DIVORCE.

And now, back to our regularly scheduled thread....

You can't "pull" the affidavit of support, unless you can also get the US government to sign your prenup. The I-864 is a contract with the US government, and they aren't bound by the terms of your prenup. I've read articles on the websites of several attorneys who specialize in prenups with immigrant spouses. All of them say the prenup can't conflict with the terms of the I-864. However, some attorneys feel that a clause can be added to the prenup where the foreign spouse agrees not to sue for compensation according to the I-864 in the event of a divorce.

[rebeccajo 14]

Thanks for reminding all the men out here: GET A PRE-NUP, AND THEN MAKE SURE IT PULLS YOUR AFFIDAVIT OF SUPPORT IN CASE OF DIVORCE.

And now, back to our regularly scheduled thread....

Why should we be reminding just the men?

Is this an issue of mysogynism with you? Or, are you looking for a 'lemon law' clause in the INA? You know - defective spouse and all. Gotta make sure they can be "shipped back to the manufacturer".

[Bobby+Umit 161]

Thanks for reminding all the men out here: GET A PRE-NUP, AND THEN MAKE SURE IT PULLS YOUR AFFIDAVIT OF SUPPORT IN CASE OF DIVORCE.

And now, back to our regularly scheduled thread....

You can't "pull" the affidavit of support, unless you can also get the US government to sign your prenup. The I-864 is a contract with the US government, and they aren't bound by the terms of your prenup. I've read articles on the websites of several attorneys who specialize in prenups with immigrant spouses. All of them say the prenup can't conflict with the terms of the I-864. However, some attorneys feel that a clause can be added to the prenup where the foreign spouse agrees not to sue for compensation according to the I-864 in the event of a divorce.

You can "pull" it before the AOS is approved (which will usually result in the AOS being denied). However, there is one case where they discussed if even that is enough.

The simple act of signing it and sending it in can be considered "binding", regardless if the AOS was approved or not.

This will all have to be fought out in court, as you have mentioned above.

here are the two cases that were brought to my attention - with all the sticky bindings

Case 1

Case 2

(itzallgood @ Jul 1 2009, 08:30 AM)

Thanks for reminding all the men out here: GET A PRE-NUP, AND THEN MAKE SURE IT PULLS YOUR AFFIDAVIT OF SUPPORT IN CASE OF DIVORCE.

Eh? there are quite a few posts here of men trying to get support/gc after they get married/divorced to an USC.

[Old Dominion 26]

The OP needs to go the local Social Services office to see about obtaining health coverage for her child. Different states give the office different names but basically it is what was once called the Welfare Office.

By any government or ethical standard, she needs to try to obtain work of some kind.

Edited July 1, 2009 by Old Dominion

[rebeccajo 14]

The OP needs to go the local Social Services office to see about obtaining health coverage for her child. Different states give the office different names but basically it is what was once called the Welfare Office.

By any government or ethical standard, she needs to try to obtain work of some kind.

No, she doesn't go to the Social Security office. That is Federal government.

She goes to her local Department of Health and Human Services.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

here are the two cases that were brought to my attention - with all the sticky bindings

Case 1

Case 2

This first link talks about the Stump vs. Stump case, which is often held up by attorneys as a classic case of a well-meaning federal requirement going horribly wrong in a state court.

Thankfully, Charles Wheeler's prediction that Stump vs Stump would be set precedents at courts around the country hasn't come to pass. Of the courts that have actually granted relief based on the I-864, most have not imposed such draconian punishment on the sponsor. There have been some oddities, though.

In the case of Younis vs Farooqi, for example, they allowed the amount of compensation to be offset by state mandated alimony payments. They then used the children, who were in the custody of the beneficiary, to establish the household size in determining the poverty level that applied, and then refused to offset the order by the amount of state mandated child support being paid. It seems they felt the I-864 support was intended to benefit only the ex-spouse, while the child support was intended only to benefit the children. It's a mystery to me who they thought was spending that child support money.

Fortunately, few of these cases actually make it to court. Living at the poverty line is not a comfortable existence, and most people can rise above the poverty level (for a single person) with a full-time minimum wage job. I haven't yet heard of a case where the beneficiaries income wasn't allowed to offset the I-864 mandated income level.

[venusfire503 54]

We don't know her circumstances. It's very possible she and her ex had an arrangement where he worked and she stayed at home, and then she found herself being served divorce papers. She wouldn't be the first person to get 'caught' in that situation (but that's another subject). Also, since I don't know very much about her, I have no idea if she is getting anything at all from the divorce - probably little or no alimony, and not even sure about child support. If they had the child together, I would imagine she'd get some, but most likely not enough to take care of everything. Having a child with the USC would make it difficult or impossible for her to "go back to her country". Even if she brought the child here with her, there is the issue of the child no longer getting to see his/her stepfather (which might be a bigger deal than some people think, especially if the child was very young when arriving).

It's also very possible she IS trying to find a job, like many others, and just hasn't been successful yet. She did only mention insurance, and not full financial support, after all. It's hard enough for a USC to get a job right now - imagine how difficult for an immigrant without a work history in this country. Even harder to find one that will pay her enough to live on, especially with child care (I'm assuming the child is not in school yet, and also that she doesn't have family here to help her). We don't know - maybe she is even working part time, and that's why she only asked about health insurance.

Anyway, unless/until she IS successful in finding an adequate job, she has the issue of health insurance. Not just for herself, but also for a child. I don't know if the child is eligible for any free or reduced cost insurance. Her ex should step up and make sure the child is insured, if at all possible. It's probably included in his insurance, if he has any (except maybe if it's her child from before they met - not sure).

Her question was simply if he was required to insure her. As she probably now knows, he's not. However, it might be advisable for him (because of the Affidavit of Support) to provide it in order to prevent the government from going after him if she gets sick - IF there is a way she could get some types of means tested medical benefits. I'll admit I don't know exactly how that works - I'm sure someone else is more knowledgeable about this. I know there was another thread about a USC who was concerned about his father, who he sponsored, and who had no health insurance.

She might be able to convince her soon-to-be-ex to provide health insurance for her short term, while she attempts to get a full time job, if not doing so could come back to bite him in the future (protect them both). I hope for all of them (ex, OP, and the child) that she is willing and able to find a decent job, and soon.

venusfire

P.S. My heartfelt sympathies for ANYONE without health insurance, by the way. Long story, but I'm trying to prevent being in that group myself in the future....