Canadian Single Dad of 2 young U.S. citizens

[SingleDad2usc 71]

There is not much more to the story. And the last thing I've been since these children's birth in the US - selfish. Selfish could be the term to use in re: to birth mother, who surrendered the children to local authorities shortly after birth (with birth defects due to her prescription drug abuse) and who became a USC, and who has never paid a penny in Child Support

[Adriene H 89]

Out of curiosity, how are you supporting yourself?

I'm guessing taxi driver, courier, food delivery .... something that requires a DL

[SingleDad2usc 71]

very composed and defensive, prestine record

[Ihavequestions 419]

I'm guessing taxi driver, courier, food delivery .... something that requires a DL

Bingo, along with one of the children's disability checks and a rent subsidized apartment.

[Ihavequestions 419]

Please again: do not mention Canada. Children will not leave NYC, and no authorities (despite existing Fed Laws, or lack of present path) will want to go on record of separating us - given all of the locally issued directives for this family over the decade.

Federal law always trumps whatever happens locally, and certainly if it's a child protective services worker's opinion.

Always.

[LIFE'SJOURNEY 970]

There is not much more to the story. And the last thing I've been since these children's birth in the US - selfish. Selfish could be the term to use in re: to birth mother, who surrendered the children to local authorities shortly after birth (with birth defects due to her prescription drug abuse) and who became a USC, and who has never paid a penny in Child Support

Those children will never loose their USC so I don't understand your point on that, but you as the parent cannot be counter productive for them. You will always be looking over your shoulder. So yes that is selfish that they have to constant live in fear and disarray because you as the parent have legal issues of being in the US.

The only issue I can see what makes this bigger than a bread box, is the money being received thru the government for the welfare of these children. I could be wrong on this aswell, you may be financially stable without aid.

I doubt the wife(mother) has obtained her USC, so that is probably a non-issue.

[bigdog 376]

More than agree no DIY, get the best lawyer you can, immediately.

[Justine+David 218]

LIFE'SJOURNEY is right: I shouldn't play around the exit. I should maintain continuous presence.

Please again: do not mention Canada. Children will not leave NYC, and no authorities (despite existing Fed Laws, or lack of present path) will want to go on record of separating us - given all of the locally issued directives for this family over the decade.

Edited: btw AmyWrites, where did you get "came to the US illegally"? Overstayed - YES, didn't have life's choice

Your children "won't leave NYC"??? A 9 year old and an 11 year old should not be dictating to a parent --> it works the other way! Yes, adolescents may whine and gripe, but *you* are the person in charge, not them. My Dad is career military. Did I whine and cry about moving to a new state every couple of years throughout the entirety of my childhood? Of course I did! My little sister in particular had her raring tantrums about it too. But we went, anyway.

I'm sure the feds will have this on their record if you get deported. They do.not.care. about you or your circumstances: only if you can prove a viable pathway to permanent residency. I hope you'll be able to find a way to stay here, but you may NOT have a choice in the matter. If your children can't stand the thought of having someone else in their life, then your path is clear to make plan B JUST IN CASE. I don't understand why you won't make contingency plans on a very real possibility. Surely it's worse to be deported and not have your kids just because they don't have their passports yet? What does it hurt for them to own passports of both countries?

Edited July 7, 2012 by Justine+David

[SingleDad2usc 71]

LIFE'SJOURNEY, your last post is very confusing...To try and clarify it:

1. Directives have come not just from children's caseworkers, education and medical professionals. They also have come from State Courts.

2. I have no doubt birth mother has successfully gone all the way to USC award - no one would ever catch her in a lie.

An ironic twist: last year I tried intake at the best known citywide pro-bono Law Office. I then received a letter: "we're sorry that we'll be unable to represent you due to an adversarial conflict"... So much for her 2006 VOIP sworn testimony in Support Court

[LIFE'SJOURNEY 970]

Then what you have written tells me, you donot have sole custody of these children. You are still under the courts direction regarding custody of these children. If you have sole custody of your children, NO one can stop you from removing them out of the country.

Again, as I said before there are more missing pieces to this story.

[SingleDad2usc 71]

Justine+David:

1. Younger child can't be taken to Canadian climate. You readers fail to grasp: when he starts trembling of chill, he is likely to go into seizure. When he has asthma excecerbation due to his nose stuffed up in cold - he's prone to have a seizure. If his daily routines are properly managed and he is under constant supervision - he may only have a few seizures per month. In contrast to daily

That's why ACS supervises the house 365 days a year - to make sure his routines are not jeopardized.

2. Please stop about Feds don't care: State judges made comprehensive orders re: this family, and local child protective services have been FORCED to vigilently comply. At Family Court, I was provided a lawyer. But I have also won, without a lawyer, all fair hearing decisions over the years, when local agencies were not complying

[SingleDad2usc 71]

Then what you have written tells me, you donot have sole custody of these children. You are still under the courts direction regarding custody of these children. If you have sole custody of your children, NO one can stop you from removing them out of the country.

Again, as I said before there are more missing pieces to this story.

No. I have FINAL ORDER OF CUSTODY since 2005. ACS case, however, has remained open due to children's medical. And ACS continues to assist the family daily. Yes, theoretically I have the right to take them anywhere - but in reality, they should only continue where they are. Again: too bad Immigration Law doesn't have good path for me; but I have to carry on. Please everyone: stop repeating there is a huge risk. The only risk is if my record is blemished; I try not to allow that

[Deputy Purple 1,294]

I spent 10 years as a single father and not once did I use them as an excuse to break the law.

You claim the 9 year old can't live in Canada because of the cold climate yet you live in New York with all of the pollution and cold winters, I guess Canada doesn't have heating in the winter?

What kind of example are you setting for your children? Break the law when it works for you because you can get away with it... If the kids can survive NYC then why can't they survive Toronto, I would guess only because you want to live in the US.

If you really cared about what's best for your kids you'd move them to the place where you could actually work to support them and set a good example as a parent instead of being selfish & childish complaining about how bad your situation is. Get divorced, move to Canada and be a good Dad to your kids.

[AmyWrites 593]

Immigration authorities won't care about your circumstances. Everyone in the US illegally (including overstayers like yourself, that you came legally doesn't change that what you're doing now isn't legal), did it for a reason, they all have a story, therefore that you have one doesn't matter either. And frankly, NYC is cold and polluted, so I don't see your argument about why the cold will affect them.... at least Canada will have cleaner air... if it really mattered you'd be in Texas or some other warm state.

[GlobeHopperMama 95]

Justine+David:

1. Younger child can't be taken to Canadian climate. You readers fail to grasp: when he starts trembling of chill, he is likely to go into seizure. When he has asthma excecerbation due to his nose stuffed up in cold - he's prone to have a seizure. If his daily routines are properly managed and he is under constant supervision - he may only have a few seizures per month. In contrast to daily

That's why ACS supervises the house 365 days a year - to make sure his routines are not jeopardized.

2. Please stop about Feds don't care: State judges made comprehensive orders re: this family, and local child protective services have been FORCED to vigilently comply. At Family Court, I was provided a lawyer. But I have also won, without a lawyer, all fair hearing decisions over the years, when local agencies were not complying

The problem is the difference between federal immigration authorities (who literally DO NOT CARE) and local and state authorities, who do. You will find that immigration would prefer to put a child into state custody in a situation where they consider the child's best interests served by staying in the state, meanwhile sending the parent to another country. There have been several high-profile cases where this has happened, and where children have even been adopted by other families, simply because the birth parent lacked proper legal status in the US, no other proof of neglect. It's a big deal and not something that automatically protects you as the parent.

Also, I have plenty of US citizen friends who have been placed in terrible situations, where their foreign spouse is deported or otherwise unable to come to the US, and the US immigration does not care that they have documentation mandating that their child remain in the current course of education or risk losing all progress (for example in the case of a severely autistic child), or that they have a custody arrangement with their child's birth parent prohibiting them from removing the child from the US. These people have had to make terrible decisions, some moving their child out of country despite the fact that their entire health and well-being will be severely damaged, or choosing to leave a child behind in the US in order to make a life with their spouse and the children they have together with him/her. Immigration does not care about these hardships to a US CITIZEN, so please don't be startled when you're being told that they're really not going to care for a foreign citizen present without legal permanent status in the US. My son has no major medical or developmental complications, so for me it was "easy" (ha) but even so, I have to deal with him crying for home every week, crying for all of our family that he used to see weekly who now live across the ocean, struggling to make friends in a language and culture he doesn't understand, and that doesn't even count the struggles of us parents as we try to forge a living in a country that is completely foreign to both of us, where we don't speak the language, and are helpless without the assistance of coworkers and friends. Yet we do this because it's currently the only way to provide a safe and comfortable upbringing for our son, together with both of his parents. I am a US citizen. The federal government of my birth country doesn't bend to my needs or those of my US citizen son, nor are they bending to the needs of US citizen children in exceedingly worse situations, so I just want to warn you that your experiences at the state level may not be replicated at the federal level, with the distinct exception of Cancellation of Removal, if you are able to get into proceedings.

And I may sound like a broken record, but unless you really feel like going it on your own at the risk of jeopardizing the welfare of your kids, you really should talk to one of the lawyers who has experience in these issues, regardless of which path you feel is best to pursue. Many offer free or low-cost consultations and at first, that's all you need. But don't put faith in the federal government to protect you or your kids from being sent out of the US if it ever comes to that.