Inappropriate Interview

[Book Em Dano 2]

Incredibly cordial, polite, thorough, and respectful response...in contrast to others I've seen.

A Stokes Interview in a marriage based green card application process is referring to an interview when the husband and wife are questioned separately, and their answers are compared by an immigration officer to determine whether the marriage was entered into in good faith. A stokes interview (also known as "marriage fraud interview") is usually a second interview, after the first one when the husband and wife were interviewed together raised some questions about the bona fide of their marriage.

What is a stokes interview?

When an individual sponsors his or her spouse for U.S. permanent residence, they must collectively demonstrate to an USCIS official that their marriage was entered in good faith, and not for the purpose of evading immigration law. They must provide sufficient documents, and go through an interview at a USCIS office where they will answer questions in front of an immigration officer (IO) about their marriage and life together. This first interview usually lasts about 1 -2 hours, and the questions are generally not intrusive.

However, if the IO conducting the first interview is not entirely satisfied and still has questions about the marriage, he/she will schedule a secondary interview known as the "Stokes Interview." During a stokes interview the husband and wife are separated from each other and must answer a series of questions that are rather personal and invasive. The interview will be taped and their statements will be compared against each other. If their answers match very well it is a good indication that the marital relationship is genuine. If not, the couple will be given a chance to explain the discrepancies.

At the conclusion of the stokes interview if the IO is still not convinced, and still has reasons to believe the marriage was created for the purpose of obtaining immigration benefit, he or she will deny the adjustment of status (AOS) petition.

How long does a stokes interview last?

A stokes interview can easily last several hours, depending on the IO, the complexity of the situation and the schedule. Because a stokes interview happens only after the IO already has some doubt about the bona fide of the marriage, expect a long, exhausting and definitely unpleasant experience.

However, don't be scared. Answer the questions truthfully and to your best knowledge. You simply can not guess every question that will be asked, so the best approach is to stay calm and answer the questions honestly.

What types of questions are asked during a stokes interview?

Put yourself in the shoes of an immigration officer, and imagine how you can figure out whether the couple is really married or just pretends to be married for the purpose of getting a greed card. Those are the questions you should expect during a stokes interview.

Although interview questions vary from case to case, they are generally in the following categories:

About your relationship:

where you met, how you met, who pays utility bills, by check or online banking, which bank, what TV shows do you watch together, name a few restaurants you both like, do you have or plan to have kids, what is your first kid's birthday, where was she/he born, when was the last time you had a vacation.

About your spouse:

what job does your spouse have, what was the last job, name the kids from a previous relationship, what time does your spouse usually go to sleep, what side of bed does your spouse sleep on, have you met his/her family, who did you last meet and when, what is the color of your spouse's pajama.

Around your home:

how many bedrooms, showers, toilets are in the house, what is the garbage pickup day, what colors are the window/shower curtains, how many drawers does the nightstand have, where did you get the couch, how was it transported here, how many TVs do you have, what is the brand of your DVD player, where are the telephones located, how much do you pay for internet, what is the mortgage or rent, how do you pay it.

Just before the interview:

who woke up first this morning, what breakfast did each of you have, how you got to the office, what car did you drive or from what station did you get on the subway, how long did it take you to get here.

Although this came from a site where they are talking about an AOS interview, the logic applies to the embassy interview as well. Since the embassy interview will determine whether or not a visa will be issued and the couple is not yet married, I can understand, but not really agree, with the questions the OP was presented with. I feel the questions about condoms are lewd to say the least, but if she said "yes, all the time" and he said" rarely"...no visa. Remember these very personal questions can only be answered correctly if there is a bona fide relationship. And in this case there was.

Sorry you had to go through all that, but in the end, you are now together.

[pddp 240]

I get that, I get those questions were invasive and very personal, that is not lost on me.

Of course there are a million questions could've been resorted to. Consular officers utilize 'discretion' and it's within their discretion to determine what questions to ask, even if it offends, humiliates and embarrasses.

There are other options to avoid being 'Stoked,' refuse to answer, refuse to attend. Securing a visa to the U.S. or any country is a privilege and not a right.

Point is, it should not be within their discretion to resort to these kinds of questions. In my world, the end does not justify the means. The means, though, do reveal character.

[EllisForevaInLuv 0]

have been wanting to put this out there for some time so I might as well do it now.

In general our experience was like anyone else's. A lot of waiting for the NOA2 and then the scheduling of the interview. Everything is nerve wracking and you are always afraid someone is going to tell you sorry and hand back months of hard work. Looking back it's one of those things that you just have to wait on and plug through it and it should all work out, but don't expect it to be a cake walk.

As we were called up to the first window for the interview, they asked my fiance like 2 questions in Spanish and then the woman started to ask me things in English like he wasn't even there. I didn't appreciate that since my fiance didn't speak English. As for the questions, we are just simply not super sentimental people and it really seems that's what they like. When they asked us when we started dating we said the general "oh in January of 2010" and we looked at each other searching for an approximate date. We do not celebrate our "one month of dating" anniversary or even the "one year" anniversary. We starting dating that month but we didn't mark it on our calendar. That was the first thing. Then I got the questions about our wedding plans. As others have stated it seems as though you should just make up a date even if you don't have one just to appease them. We had talked about a date but couldn't finalize it because of WAITING FOR A VISA. So I gave them the date I hoped for and she started asking about the wedding dress. I had already bought it and I loved it, but since I am a simple person, it was a simple dress - your basic strapless without beading, without embroidery and it's only distinguishing feature was one large pleat/fold in the front and light grey in color. So I gave her exactly what it looked like which I realize sounds like pretty much any generic wedding dress description, but that was my dress. After about 15 minutes of that I was waiting for the "your approved" statement and instead we got the question "could you come back at 4 p.m. today for a more extensive interview." Of course we said yes and were sent away with an appointment slip to go sweat out 2 hours. My poor fiance tried to calm me down as we got some food and prepared for the "Stokes interview" as it's called.

We returned and had to wait more, then they called us and he went first. They interviewed him for about 40 minutes while I waited and then he had to wait out of sight while they called me down then he went up to wait. The interviewer was different from the other two people we had talked with and it was a young male. I answered basic questions about my fiance and his family and things like music he likes. Then things got a little more personal. I was asked when was the last time we had sex? where was it? did he use a condom? I was asked who initiates use of the condom and do I ever let him not use one. I could not believe I was being asked things like that but of course I answered all of the questions not wanting any problems and possibly being denied a visa. At the end of everything my fiance was called back down and the guy said that we had passed but we'd have to wait for a decision because he was not authorized to make the final decision.

Following that, we had no further problems with getting the visa, everything arrived fine and we are now in the US, but I sort of want to bring this up with someone here in the US. My family has told me to just let it go and not cause waves, but it really makes me mad that things like that are allowed and no-one is going to say anything for fear of getting denied. Is that really a legal line of questioning? Or am I just being a prude American? Did that happen to anyone else? Before the interview we had talked about things in our relationship, but I didn't want to try hashing out exact answers that we didn't have because I didn't want us to sound like we had scripted what we said. Now I think we should have done something like that just to give them what they wanted to hear.

Im so sorry you had to go through that..but sadly

I've heard of this before. I think it is completely unethical and downright disrespectful!!

[Sean86 31]

Although i feel bad for the OP but the truth of the matter is that We all are getting a privilege in form of a green card. She can choose not to answer those questions but then again she won't get the privilege. There is a reason why its easier for a american to have to theirs partners country ( Well most of the countries) then people moving here.

We all have to bite the bullet and take these or any offensive questions as a part of the process.

[Leatherneck 693]

Point is, it should not be within their discretion to resort to these kinds of questions. In my world, the end does not justify the means. The means, though, do reveal character.

That would be within the discretion of congress and the DOS. You're free to lobby congress to make a change, that is a part of "redress of grievances."

[Leatherneck 693]

Incredibly cordial, polite, thorough, and respectful response...in contrast to others I've seen.

For example?

A Google search would have revealed the same "Incredibly cordial, polite, thorough, and respectful response..."

Edited February 26, 2012 by Leatherneck

[keysjangle 145]

Every time you hear about a Stokes Interview, sexual questions are asked. This isn't something new or unusual. This is a tool they use and that couples are subject to. One of the biggest lessons you learn about immigration is that it is not a right, it is a privilege. Intending immigrants are at the hands of the government, so you just have to deal with it.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Wait a minute...this is an interview for people who are ENGAGED, not married. These questions may be appropriate for a MARRIED couple to ensure the marriage was consummated, but not for an engaged couple.

Sorry I don't have any advice as to your recourse, but I find these questions to be inappropriate (unless you are pregnant = obviously having sex). I hope someone can direct you to the proper channels to report this.

This is a stokes interview in Ecuador. See TBoneTx for further. If they had not had sex, just say "We are not married we don't have sex" If he is in the other room saying the same thing...no problem.

Very intimate questions are used to reveal if a couple is telling the truth about the re;ationship, they have no interest in their sex life per se.

If it is reported they will explain they were doing what is within their authority to prevent visa fraud. Be happy your answers were the same or close enough. Enjoy life.

[Mrs. Best 1]

It must be really diffcult, but as far as i know they are entitled to ask even more private questions...including positions, which i agree is disgusting cause it is not of their business, but at the same time getting in their shoes i understand why they do it.

I had the same experience when i got married. The priest was as inquisitive as this interviwer or worse, he asked not just about sex, but he even asked me if i was a lesbian or if he was gay...i thought they were the most stupid questions in the world, but hey i wanted to get married.

[Leatherneck 693]

This is a stokes interview in Ecuador. See TBoneTx for further. If they had not had sex, just say "We are not married we don't have sex" If he is in the other room saying the same thing...no problem.

Very intimate questions are used to reveal if a couple is telling the truth about the re;ationship, they have no interest in their sex life per se.

If it is reported they will explain they were doing what is within their authority to prevent visa fraud. Be happy your answers were the same or close enough. Enjoy life.

Thank you for chiming in, the very idea of the amount of discretion a CO or an IO has seems to offend many. Guess they're not so familiar with being 'Stoked,' the level of invasiveness and very personal nature of the questions.

[Hank_ 9,174]

There are a million questions they can ask to accomplish their objective that don't involve intimate sexual details. Based on this, you have to wonder whether their goal is to get to the truth, or to humiliate, embarrass and offend. These questions shouldn't be legal, or deemed legitimate.

I don't think being asked if a condom was used and who initiated things all that intimate.... heck I hear more personal details from the woman in front of me at the checkout line as she yaks on her cell phone. Some people seem to get their panties in a twist over anything that is even slightly related to the "S" word....

I guess training films in boot camp are humiliating and offensive too... as they are telling all the guys to "wear a raincoat"....

I initiated it and didn't wear a condom.... jeez!

[Leatherneck 693]

I don't think being asked if a condom was used and who initiated things all that intimate.... heck I hear more personal details from the woman in front of me at the checkout line as she yaks on her cell phone. Some people seem to get their panties in a twist over anything that is even slightly related to the "S" word....

I guess training films in boot camp are humiliating and offensive too... as they are telling all the guys to "wear a raincoat"....

I initiated it and didn't wear a condom.... jeez!

[pddp 240]

That would be within the discretion of congress and the DOS. You're free to lobby congress to make a change, that is a part of "redress of grievances."

Yes. And at the root of such an effort are individuals who have been subjected to humiliating and inapropriate treatment by the government and decide to speak out. Isn't that what the OP is trying to do? Being treated with disrespect is not a privilege.

[Hank_ 9,174]

They were in a private room with no others to hear, much like a doctor asking the very same type of questions .... get over it.

Some countries don't require more intense "validation" before extending the privilege of a visa ... no one was forced to be there or forced to stay... get up ... walk out... no harm ... no foul. Oh ya................ no visa

[Harpa Timsah 13,258]

Yes. And at the root of such an effort are individuals who have been subjected to humiliating and inapropriate treatment by the government and decide to speak out. Isn't that what the OP is trying to do? Being treated with disrespect is not a privilege.

I would think a more useful way to change this is for couples who have been interviewed in Ecuador (who apparently all get treated this way) to band together and alert someone who is in a position to change things - either higher ups in DOS or politicians. Idle complaining makes no changes.

Here is an article on Stokes interviews you might find interesting. It's about these interviews in the US, but they are based on the same principle.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/13/nyregion/13fraud.html?pagewanted=all