Having kids only means you have sex.

[cdneh 3,112]

And on more than one occasion, we have read here on VJ about a child born to the Mother overseas. Upon DNA testing...the USC was not the Father.

[dawning 212]

1 hour ago, Ontarkie said:

Yes she came right out and said it. 

Interesting, so that contradicts the info the OP heard... perhaps officers don't all weight evidence the same way.

[Boiler 45,535]

I doubt they said all you need to be is a Baby Mama and a GC is yours.

[NigeriaorBust 4,087]

 This topic has me thinking of the pregnancy on "before the 90 days"    She obviously thought a child was her ticket to secure a path to the US.  I wonder how many anchor babies are conceived from love , not as a reason to come stay here until birth and wait out the 21 years.  Wasn't there a recent case where some woman was asking on here how her newly adult daughter could petition her ? 

[ch3john 308]

All cases are different, all embassies are different, all IO's are different.

To flat out say having a baby only proves you had sex and is not good evidence is just wrong. Otherwise, birth certificates wouldn't be on USCIS's website of supporting evidence. 

That's not to say having a baby can/should be your only evidence. There are many pieces that tie everything together to prove a bona fide marriage, and a baby is one of those pieces.

Again, it's on USCIS's site for evidence. I'm not sure why some people are so adamant in saying it's not evidence and proves nothing but having sex. Same can be said for a having a joint bank account. It only proves you went to the bank together and opened an account. (not my actual thinking, just an example of an "opinion")

 

[Mrsjackson 300]

19 minutes ago, ch3john said:

All cases are different, all embassies are different, all IO's are different.

To flat out say having a baby only proves you had sex and is not good evidence is just wrong. Otherwise, birth certificates wouldn't be on USCIS's website of supporting evidence. 

That's not to say having a baby can/should be your only evidence. There are many pieces that tie everything together to prove a bona fide marriage, and a baby is one of those pieces.

Again, it's on USCIS's site for evidence. I'm not sure why some people are so adamant in saying it's not evidence and proves nothing but having sex. Same can be said for a having a joint bank account. It only proves you went to the bank together and opened an account. (not my actual thinking, just an example of an "opinion")

 

No but you raise a good point. A lot of people talk on here about how anyone can have sex and it doesn’t have to mean anything but it’s good to point out that the same can be said for any relationship evidence. People can get on a plane and visit each other and take photos together without it being a real relationship. People can go to a bank like you said and open a joint account. I think what some people don’t acknowledge is that, and while I am sure there absolutely ARE cases of foreigners being so desperate to get into the US they are willing to conceive an “anchor baby”, out of all the different kinds of things you can fake to try and conjure up some image of a relationship where there is none - having a baby with someone is extreme and probably unlikely. Most people are not callous enough or sociopathic enough to purposefully have a baby with the intention of abdandoning the poor little thing. Most people are not capable of that. Having a baby with someone to immigrate would be an extreme length to go to - much more extreme than falsely opening up a joint account or putting both names on a credit card or creating a pattern of visiting each other via plane tickets. 

 

Nothing you submit to USCIS really proves anything and that’s why they use their discretion. They’re not a pack of dummys over there. They know what red flags to look for and they use their common sense. We don’t provide anything to them that 100 percent proves that we’re not faking the relationship. 

Edited October 3, 2018 by Mrsjackson

[SunflowerSweet 1,321]

Is it possible that having a child together could be a helpful factor to your case in the right context? Sure. It could. 

 

I don’t believe for a second that TWO different people with USCIS told you that it’s the BEST evidence. And if they did, that’s just ludicrous. Others have already brought up fertility issues and same gender couples that would be severely discriminated against if that were true. Also, you claim they mentioned this at your AOS interview? There are a significant number of couples who have only been married a handful of months by the time of the AOS interview, making already having a child in wedlock physically impossible, even for the most fertile of people. So, yeah, no.

 

Also, “Well uhhh it’s on the USCIS website so it must mean it’s amazing perfect evidence” is a bad argument. They also mention family/friend affidavits on the form instructions, and we’ve already beaten the horse to the moon and back about how they are not something that holds much water.

Edited October 3, 2018 by MorganandMichael

[Mrsjackson 300]

2 hours ago, Ontarkie said:

Yes she came right out and said it. 

That’s interesting for sure. I’m surprised she told you what held more weight. My experience was much different. My entire interview was about my full name, my USC’s full name and then just questions about our daughter. They wanted to see her CRBA, her birth certificate and pictures. 

[ch3john 308]

7 minutes ago, MorganandMichael said:

Is it possible that having a child together could be a helpful factor to your case in the right context? Sure. It could. 

 

I don’t believe for a second that TWO different people with USCIS told you that it’s the BEST evidence. And if they did, that’s just ludicrous. Others have already brought up fertility issues and same gender couples that would be severely discriminated against if that were true. Also, you claim they mentioned this at your AOS interview? There are a significant number of couples who have only been married a handful of months by the time of the AOS interview, making already having a child in wedlock physically impossible, even for the most fertile of people. So, yeah, no.

 

Also, “Well uhhh it’s on the USCIS website so it must mean it’s amazing perfect evidence” is a bad argument. They also mention family/friend affidavits on the form instructions, and we’ve already beaten the horse to the moon and back about how they are not something that holds much water.

Thanks for your first line acknowledging that it could be good evidence. 

Not sure anyone, I will admit i didn't read all of the comments, said it's amazing perfect evidence if it's on the website. Speaking for myself, I said it's one of the pieces proving a bona fide marriage, not a silver bullet, but one of the pieces. Otherwise it wouldn't be listed as supporting evidence. 

[Ontarkie 14,227]

Just now, Mrsjackson said:

That’s interesting for sure. I’m surprised she told you what held more weight. My experience was much different. My entire interview was about my full name, my USC’s full name and then just questions about our daughter. They wanted to see her CRBA, her birth certificate and pictures. 

It was definitely different. I had a folder of extra evidence, the birth certificate too since she was born after I sent in the app. 

[SalishSea 17,837]

It is about the totality of a particular couple's situation.  Have kids together?  Great, that is pertinent.  Second marriage at age 50 for both?  Same sex couple?  Young couple who choose to not have kids?  All of those situations become part of the story.   It does not detract or add.  It simply is considered, along with all of the other information about who the two people are, and their relationship.  

[HarryWL 262]

Disagree completely. 

 

I have to pose this question to the OP: who’s evidence is stronger, a couple that adopted a child together or a couple that conceived a child together? 

[ch3john 308]

4 minutes ago, HarryWL said:

Disagree completely. 

 

I have to pose this question to the OP: who’s evidence is stronger, a couple that adopted a child together or a couple that conceived a child together? 

Depends on what other evidence they have. Having a child is not a silver bullet, just a piece of all the other evidence they have. 

[Orangesapples 1,954]

5 hours ago, Ontarkie said:

You may want to read in the Effects forum where the USC parent  was completely abandoned along with the child.  The immigrant parent to never look back once they got what they wanted. That child was nothing more then a pawn. This was not only by a so called father but mothers have also ditched their child when they got what they were after. 

Did they also abandon the joint bank accounts, joint credit cards, joint insurance, joint lease? Does that mean that joint bank accounts mean nothing? 

 

Nobody is arguing that children together is enough evidence for bona fide marriage. And no one is saying that without children you can't be approved. Absolutely nobody is claiming that, it's a strawman. But children are a very strong evidence and this has nothing to do with discrimination. In many countries, for example, family approval is very important but that's not considered discrimination against those with bad family situations. It's just that certain things are more convincing than others. 

 

And children from flings are not a good example. We're not talking about people randomly getting knocked up and then deciding not to terminate for whatever reason. We're talking about a couple that's living together. How many couples live together and then have a child without them being an actual couple? I don't know any. 

 

Having pictures together proves nothing but that the two people were somewhere at the same time and a camera was involved. Does that mean pictures are not good evidence? Of course not, they can be great evidence, especially for fiance visas. But they're not enough. 

 

Joint insurance is easy to break. It's really not a complicated thing. Joint bank accounts - also easy to either close or just open your own account and ask your employer to deposit your paycheck there. Joint credit cards? Let's be serious here, people open and close credit cards all the time. Chat logs? I have chat logs with all my friends and family, does that mean I'm married to them? 

 

Living together? People live together as roommates all the time. This doesn't mean they're in a relationship. Having a mortgage together? OK, that's pretty hard to get out of and it's a great piece of evidence, not that scammers would mind being added to a house deed. But let's assume that a mortgage together is a very strong piece of evidence because it just is. Then could you argue that it's discriminatory against: people who can't afford to buy a home (yet or maybe ever); people living in high cost of living cities where real estate prices are insane; people who already have their mortgage paid off before they get married; people who don't want to own and home; people who don't want to borrow money for religious reasons; people who don't believe in shared debt; couples that have decided to have only one person on the mortgage because of credit score or debt issues, etc. Should USCIS stop considering joint mortgages as very strong evidence because not everyone can show it? Certainly not. The fact remains that most people don't take this decision to get a joint mortgage lightly. 

[SalishSea 17,837]

1 hour ago, HarryWL said:

Disagree completely. 

 

I have to pose this question to the OP: who’s evidence is stronger, a couple that adopted a child together or a couple that conceived a child together? 

Why would it matter?   Love is love.   A parent is a parent.