Why must child be 21 to apply for parent??

[OhhhYouKnow 0]

According to the I-130 instructions, "If you are a citizen you may file this form for: 1..., 2. your parent if you are at least 21 years old"

What is the logic behing this rule? Is it not in the best interest of a young US citizen to allow his/her mother to come to the US as soon as possible? Is there another route available for the biological parents of children who are legal US citizens?

[Niels Bohr 72]

I don't think there's any logical route. This is more of a political logic than anything else. I wouldn't worry about it much.

[jula 0]

According to the I-130 instructions, "If you are a citizen you may file this form for: 1..., 2. your parent if you are at least 21 years old"

What is the logic behing this rule? Is it not in the best interest of a young US citizen to allow his/her mother to come to the US as soon as possible? Is there another route available for the biological parents of children who are legal US citizens?

A sponsor (child) must be able to prove that he/she can financialy support beneficiary... can a 10 yaer old do that?

Besides, a young US citizen doesn't have to stay in the US; she/he can always live with parents outside the US.

[Otto 83]

According to the I-130 instructions, "If you are a citizen you may file this form for: 1..., 2. your parent if you are at least 21 years old"

What is the logic behing this rule? Is it not in the best interest of a young US citizen to allow his/her mother to come to the US as soon as possible? Is there another route available for the biological parents of children who are legal US citizens?

Curiosity - how old are you? (obviously you don't have to answer) Is it that long of a wait?

Edited April 1, 2007 by Karin und Otto

[Chica Yeyé 41]

What is the logic behing this rule? Is it not in the best interest of a young US citizen to allow his/her mother to come to the US as soon as possible? Is there another route available for the biological parents of children who are legal US citizens?

It is indeed in the best interest of a child to leave with his parents (strike that for abusive/alcoholic/addict parents who couldn't care less about said child), but I think... (and thinking on Sunday mornings is NOt my forte) that it has to do with several things:

1.- avoiding illegal aliens to use the system based on having children on US soil (and NO, I am NOT going to start a war/rant against ilegal immigrants. I am be more compassionate than that).

2.- If you're not of legal age to drink, you're not of legal age to vote, smoke, hold a credit card; then you're not old enough to sponsor anyone.

Remember, sponsorship always has the financial string to it. Hope you can solve your case some other way

"Advise" : Check out the websites for USCIS and others, also, PM senior members who may have more info than this simple mortal.

Peace, L.

[kitkat1 5]

I don't think there's any logical route. This is more of a political logic than anything else. I wouldn't worry about it much.

?????

Of course there's a logical route, not political. As Len and Bren said,

.- If you're not of legal age to drink, you're not of legal age to vote, smoke, hold a credit card; then you're not old enough to sponsor anyone.

[Otto 83]

What is the logic behing this rule? Is it not in the best interest of a young US citizen to allow his/her mother to come to the US as soon as possible? Is there another route available for the biological parents of children who are legal US citizens?

It is indeed in the best interest of a child to leave with his parents (strike that for abusive/alcoholic/addict parents who couldn't care less about said child), but I think... (and thinking on Sunday mornings is NOt my forte) that it has to do with several things:

1.- avoiding illegal aliens to use the system based on having children on US soil (and NO, I am NOT going to start a war/rant against ilegal immigrants. I am be more compassionate than that).

2.- If you're not of legal age to drink, you're not of legal age to vote, smoke, hold a credit card; then you're not old enough to sponsor anyone.

Remember, sponsorship always has the financial string to it. Hope you can solve your case some other way

"Advise" : Check out the websites for USCIS and others, also, PM senior members who may have more info than this simple mortal.

Peace, L.

FYI - Voting Age in US is 18...

[Chica Yeyé 41]

FYI - Voting Age in US is 18...

Did not say otherwise my dear friend... same logic applies - not old enough to do some things, not old enough to sponsor parents. Thans for the info though

[Otto 83]

Did not say otherwise my dear friend... same logic applies - not old enough to do some things, not old enough to sponsor parents. Thans for the info though

I know you didn't...my fat-fingers replied to wrong posting...but at any rate....

I agree- thems are the rules...that all you can say...

[Niels Bohr 72]

I don't think there's any logical route. This is more of a political logic than anything else. I wouldn't worry about it much.

?????

Of course there's a logical route, not political. As Len and Bren said,

.- If you're not of legal age to drink, you're not of legal age to vote, smoke, hold a credit card; then you're not old enough to sponsor anyone.

So, you're telling me that if you're 17 or 18 and have a few million dollars. Money wouldn't be a reason to not being able to sponser, give another valid reason. Have you even thought of that? Hmm...I think not.

[Nagishkaw 510]

And what exactly are the chances of that happening?

[Niels Bohr 72]

No. I wanted to make a point. Many employers are willing to hire workers age 16+. Working minimum wage can still get you to exceed that Federal Poverty Guideline. There must be another reason why they chose 21+.

[Otto 83]

No. I wanted to make a point. Many employers are willing to hire workers age 16+. Working minimum wage can still get you to exceed that Federal Poverty Guideline. There must be another reason why they chose 21+.

I would think it is because Age of Majority varies from state to state. All states however, recognize 21 as an Age of Majority.

It's the same rule for everyone basically - can vote, but not buy alcohol...for example..

[kitkat1 5]

I don't think there's any logical route. This is more of a political logic than anything else. I wouldn't worry about it much.

?????

Of course there's a logical route, not political. As Len and Bren said,

.- If you're not of legal age to drink, you're not of legal age to vote, smoke, hold a credit card; then you're not old enough to sponsor anyone.

So, you're telling me that if you're 17 or 18 and have a few million dollars. Money wouldn't be a reason to not being able to sponser, give another valid reason. Have you even thought of that? Hmm...I think not.

Try for a second to think logically. How many 17 or 18 year olds have a few million dollars? How many 16 years old who work part time (and most go to school the rest of the time) would make enough income in one year with three years worth of tax returns to support that and to be able to sponsor someone? There is no political reason behind the minimum age to sponsor someone, it's sheer common sense. If there was a national age of majority, they would have used that.

[Nancy2015 2]

But one can sponsor a spouse if he/she is under 21. So, if you have a legal right to sponsor a spouse, why can't you sponsor a parent?

Edited April 1, 2007 by Jewel12