how to best use the 90 days prior to marriage k-1

[mox 298]

Let's be clear here: the 90 days is not a get to know you time.

If you need that time to get to know your fiance, you shouldn't have petitioned yet!

There's nothing wrong with the 90 days being a "get to know if your fiance is going to be able to adapt to a new life" period. Some people simply can't do it, as much as they love their partner. It's heartbreaking, but it's better to find out before signing papers than after.

[Fandango 1,440]

This is the question I have-would the OP [ or did the OP] or his fiance go to the interview stating he /they would be using the 90 days as a sort of "trial" period? if so-it would make the letter of intent filed with the K-1 rather redundant, no?

The fact that the visa is good for 90 days pretty much implies a "cooling off" period was anticipated. Otherwise it would be more like 10 or 30 days. Remember that the K-1 dates back to the '80's. I don't know what the filing times were back then, but I'll bet you could get your "foreign bride" into the US within a couple months. Couple that with the fact that there was no internet to exchange emails and photos, plus the high cost of long distance, and you could be meeting someone at the airport who you fell in love with on vacation, but who you really don't know. So I don't think any interviewer would have a problem with the beneficiary saying at the interview that they were going to marry towards the end of the 90 day period. That's what it was designed for.

You can bet your azz that if you said it was a ''trial period' or 'cooling off' period, that you'd never have gotten approved. I think you're being a bit semantical in nature here...because while it's not a problem to marry at the end of the 90, it's not designed for the purpose of 'cooling off'. I mean focking hell, your fiance just got here and you're gonna 'cool off'????

Don't use the 80s to justify marrying a stranger.

And btw, did you actually READ your letter of intent that you signed?

[tmma 467]

This is the question I have-would the OP [ or did the OP] or his fiance go to the interview stating he /they would be using the 90 days as a sort of "trial" period? if so-it would make the letter of intent filed with the K-1 rather redundant, no?

The fact that the visa is good for 90 days pretty much implies a "cooling off" period was anticipated. Otherwise it would be more like 10 or 30 days. Remember that the K-1 dates back to the '80's. I don't know what the filing times were back then, but I'll bet you could get your "foreign bride" into the US within a couple months. Couple that with the fact that there was no internet to exchange emails and photos, plus the high cost of long distance, and you could be meeting someone at the airport who you fell in love with on vacation, but who you really don't know. So I don't think any interviewer would have a problem with the beneficiary saying at the interview that they were going to marry towards the end of the 90 day period. That's what it was designed for.

But that's not what you said at the beginning of this post...You said a " cooling off period"-go to the interview and say that.

This is the question I have-would the OP [ or did the OP] or his fiance go to the interview stating he /they would be using the 90 days as a sort of "trial" period? if so-it would make the letter of intent filed with the K-1 rather redundant, no?

The fact that the visa is good for 90 days pretty much implies a "cooling off" period was anticipated. Otherwise it would be more like 10 or 30 days. Remember that the K-1 dates back to the '80's. I don't know what the filing times were back then, but I'll bet you could get your "foreign bride" into the US within a couple months. Couple that with the fact that there was no internet to exchange emails and photos, plus the high cost of long distance, and you could be meeting someone at the airport who you fell in love with on vacation, but who you really don't know. So I don't think any interviewer would have a problem with the beneficiary saying at the interview that they were going to marry towards the end of the 90 day period. That's what it was designed for.

You can bet your azz that if you said it was a ''trial period' or 'cooling off' period, that you'd never have gotten approved. I think you're being a bit semantical in nature here...because while it's not a problem to marry at the end of the 90, it's not designed for the purpose of 'cooling off'. I mean focking hell, your fiance just got here and you're gonna 'cool off'????

Don't use the 80s to justify marrying a stranger.

And btw, did you actually READ your letter of intent that you signed?

GMTA Lisa.

[Fandango 1,440]

This is the question I have-would the OP [ or did the OP] or his fiance go to the interview stating he /they would be using the 90 days as a sort of "trial" period? if so-it would make the letter of intent filed with the K-1 rather redundant, no?

The fact that the visa is good for 90 days pretty much implies a "cooling off" period was anticipated. Otherwise it would be more like 10 or 30 days. Remember that the K-1 dates back to the '80's. I don't know what the filing times were back then, but I'll bet you could get your "foreign bride" into the US within a couple months. Couple that with the fact that there was no internet to exchange emails and photos, plus the high cost of long distance, and you could be meeting someone at the airport who you fell in love with on vacation, but who you really don't know. So I don't think any interviewer would have a problem with the beneficiary saying at the interview that they were going to marry towards the end of the 90 day period. That's what it was designed for.

But that's not what you said at the beginning of this post...You said a " cooling off period"-go to the interview and say that.

This is the question I have-would the OP [ or did the OP] or his fiance go to the interview stating he /they would be using the 90 days as a sort of "trial" period? if so-it would make the letter of intent filed with the K-1 rather redundant, no?

The fact that the visa is good for 90 days pretty much implies a "cooling off" period was anticipated. Otherwise it would be more like 10 or 30 days. Remember that the K-1 dates back to the '80's. I don't know what the filing times were back then, but I'll bet you could get your "foreign bride" into the US within a couple months. Couple that with the fact that there was no internet to exchange emails and photos, plus the high cost of long distance, and you could be meeting someone at the airport who you fell in love with on vacation, but who you really don't know. So I don't think any interviewer would have a problem with the beneficiary saying at the interview that they were going to marry towards the end of the 90 day period. That's what it was designed for.

You can bet your azz that if you said it was a ''trial period' or 'cooling off' period, that you'd never have gotten approved. I think you're being a bit semantical in nature here...because while it's not a problem to marry at the end of the 90, it's not designed for the purpose of 'cooling off'. I mean focking hell, your fiance just got here and you're gonna 'cool off'????

Don't use the 80s to justify marrying a stranger.

And btw, did you actually READ your letter of intent that you signed?

GMTA Lisa.

We're in tune as always, marra

[bakofoil 27]

I'm just disappointed that this thread isn't delivering what it appeared to; valuable advice on ways in which to utilise the time waiting for permission for the beneficiary to start working or useful tips on how to cope with adjusting to life in a new country.

I agree with those who have already stated that the 90 day period is not a cooling off period. Whilst historically it may have served that purpose, there is no way in this climate that I would be undergoing this process at all if I wasn't as sure as I can be that my future is with my fiance in the US.

Believe me, giving up friends, family, belongings, not to mention a good career and facing the prospect that I may have to retrain or take a lower paid job is less important to me than being with my fiance for life. If I wasn't sure that we can make it work then we wouldn't have submitted the K1. He knows what I am giving up for him and he is as committed to making this work as I am.

I'm sorry but it is as simple as that. If you have doubts beyond the things we can never forsee then you should not be petitioning for a fiance visa.

(Oh and please note that as part of the application process you state your INTENT to marry your fiance(e) within the 90 days, the application does not cater for those who are still thinking about it.)

Edited October 24, 2007 by babblesgirl

[pushbrk 13,166]

There are practical matters to attend to in the 90 days allowed for marriage, such as marriage arrangements and licenses. It is not designed for but is unfortunately too often used for a trial period. You don't sign letter of intent to try out a relationship for 90 days. You sign letters of intent to marry.

The period is actually too short for many to plan and have big traditional weddings because the dates can't be firm until the visa is in hand and couples understandably want to be reunited as soon as possible.

Using the 90 days as a trial period with somebody who gave up their whole life and family back home is treachery, IMO, or just plain selfish. One who does that is no prize.

[Fandango 1,440]

Great posts, guys! It's really comforting to see that there are those who agree with me & Tmma!

For a while I started to think we fell into an alternate universe

[mox 298]

You can bet your azz that if you said it was a ''trial period' or 'cooling off' period, that you'd never have gotten approved. I think you're being a bit semantical in nature here...because while it's not a problem to marry at the end of the 90, it's not designed for the purpose of 'cooling off'. I mean focking hell, your fiance just got here and you're gonna 'cool off'????

Well unless someone can dig the actual intent of the 90 days out of Google or something, I don't think the argument of why there is a 90 day period is going to be settled. I think it can be inferred though, since 90 days is a pretty significant period.

And fine, I'll concede that "cooling off" was a poor choice of words, although quite frankly I don't think it's all that far off. MANY couples in the US these days live together before marrying, just to make sure they're doing the right thing. Call it cooling off, or a trial period or whatever. It happens, and although it may not be everyone's visions of rainbows and unicorns, it works for a lot of people. If both people are in agreement that they will use the 90 days in this manner, who are we to question it? If, on the other hand, only one partner sees it this way, then that's a problem.

In any case, I'll try this again: moving to a new country away from your friends and your family is a HUGE deal. Some people who had the best of intentions simply cannot deal with that shock. They love their partners, but ultimately cannot deal with the new life. It happens, and it happens a lot. There's no shame in taking the time available to make sure it's going to work. OTOH, some people just "know" and that's cool too.

I notice the most vehement opposition is coming from westerners, with the notable exception of pushbrk. It's one thing to move from Canada or Britain (where I lived for 3 years) to the US. Try moving from Malaysia or Russia or Japan. That's practically a move to another planet.

Don't use the 80s to justify marrying a stranger.

And don't take me out of context. I'm saying that the K-1 dates back to the '80's, when many of the assumptions that are being made in this argument didn't apply.

And btw, did you actually READ your letter of intent that you signed?

No, I just signed it. What's it say?

[britty 1]

This is very clear cut to me. When both parties in a relationship decide they want to be married and spend the rest of their lives together, they make a K-1 application. It doesn't matter what will happen ahead or how the relationship will pan out, the fact is that those two people are in love right now and want to be together. When the K-1 is granted it is because USCIS believe their is a bonafide relationship, one that will result in marriage. No one can ever guarantee the longevity of a relationship or what will happen in the future, but it is what you feel and believe right now that should lead you to enter this process. To worry that you might be taken for a ride, that your SO may bad mouth you to friends and family in their home country, or that he or she may be sending emails or developing contacts you do not approve of, denotes to me a person who is not ready to marry. Adjusting to your new life in the USA does have its problems, but the love of your life should be more important that any geographical issues. The 90 days grace before marriage is NOT a trial period. It is simply a timeframe to help organise your wedding.

[bakofoil 27]

I don't think that the values presented here are typical of 'Westerners' and actually you are doing a disservice to all the people who have petitioned for and married a non-western beneficiary. The fact remains, that the K1 is for people, english-speaking or not, to bring their fiance(e) to the US and marry them, not live-together, try things out, play at being together. It's a marriage visa, nothing more, nothing less.

I appreciate that there are more difficult circumstances to endure with some countries as opposed to others. I am fortunate to be from a country which operates under the visa-waiver program. That alone has given me the opportunity to visit the US twice and for extended periods before making the decision to get married. I understand others don't have this same fortune. I also appreciate that culturally the UK is not *that* far-removed from the US, although it would be wrong to assume things will be easy. The K1 is something none of us can take lightly; petitioner or beneficiary, western or not.

I should also point out that the hardship may not be the beneficiary's alone. The petitioner should be aware of the responsibility he/she takes on when bringing someone from a different country. These are things which should be discussed and settled BEFORE applying. It's no good arguing after the event that 'I gave up everything for you!' or 'I never asked you to give those things up, we were just trying things out!'

[tmma 467]

You can bet your azz that if you said it was a ''trial period' or 'cooling off' period, that you'd never have gotten approved. I think you're being a bit semantical in nature here...because while it's not a problem to marry at the end of the 90, it's not designed for the purpose of 'cooling off'. I mean focking hell, your fiance just got here and you're gonna 'cool off'????

Well unless someone can dig the actual intent of the 90 days out of Google or something, I don't think the argument of why there is a 90 day period is going to be settled. I think it can be inferred though, since 90 days is a pretty significant period.

And fine, I'll concede that "cooling off" was a poor choice of words, although quite frankly I don't think it's all that far off. MANY couples in the US these days live together before marrying, just to make sure they're doing the right thing. Call it cooling off, or a trial period or whatever. It happens, and although it may not be everyone's visions of rainbows and unicorns, it works for a lot of people. If both people are in agreement that they will use the 90 days in this manner, who are we to question it? If, on the other hand, only one partner sees it this way, then that's a problem.

In any case, I'll try this again: moving to a new country away from your friends and your family is a HUGE deal. Some people who had the best of intentions simply cannot deal with that shock. They love their partners, but ultimately cannot deal with the new life. It happens, and it happens a lot. There's no shame in taking the time available to make sure it's going to work. OTOH, some people just "know" and that's cool too.

I notice the most vehement opposition is coming from westerners, with the notable exception of pushbrk. It's one thing to move from Canada or Britain (where I lived for 3 years) to the US. Try moving from Malaysia or Russia or Japan. That's practically a move to another planet.

Don't use the 80s to justify marrying a stranger.

And don't take me out of context. I'm saying that the K-1 dates back to the '80's, when many of the assumptions that are being made in this argument didn't apply.

And btw, did you actually READ your letter of intent that you signed?

No, I just signed it. What's it say?

Comment on the bolded part- The thing is that you are NOT marrying an American...Apples and oranges........Living together for enough time to see if they take to the States is not an option we as petitioners have- and you chose to accept that when you apply for the K-1.

Besides it takes a whole lot longer than 3 months to truly "assimilate" [for want of a better word] into a new culture after a major move, anyway-for anyone.

The 90 days is NOT a get to know you or if you fit in period.

Doesn't it make more sense to BE SURE beforehand...like before you sign a document to the US Govt stating you WILL marry this person before asking your love to give up their life back home?

Make more visits there-sure it takes time and $$$ but a whole lot less time and $$$ than if it does not work out after they are already here-and surely better for your loved one too.

It just seems azz backwards to try and do damage control/test waters AFTER documents like letters of intent and I134 are signed and people have moved half way across the planet.

You cannot compare a relationship with a foreign fiance(e) to that with an American-you don't sign the Govt into your engagement with an American. You make a commitment to the Govt in a foreign engagement-no matter where on the planet the beneficiary is from.

[LoriLawless 0]

There are practical matters to attend to in the 90 days allowed for marriage, such as marriage arrangements and licenses. It is not designed for but is unfortunately too often used for a trial period. You don't sign letter of intent to try out a relationship for 90 days. You sign letters of intent to marry.

The period is actually too short for many to plan and have big traditional weddings because the dates can't be firm until the visa is in hand and couples understandably want to be reunited as soon as possible.

Using the 90 days as a trial period with somebody who gave up their whole life and family back home is treachery, IMO, or just plain selfish. One who does that is no prize.

I agree.

[bakofoil 27]

This is very clear cut to me. When both parties in a relationship decide they want to be married and spend the rest of their lives together, they make a K-1 application. It doesn't matter what will happen ahead or how the relationship will pan out, the fact is that those two people are in love right now and want to be together. When the K-1 is granted it is because USCIS believe their is a bonafide relationship, one that will result in marriage. No one can ever guarantee the longevity of a relationship or what will happen in the future, but it is what you feel and believe right now that should lead you to enter this process. To worry that you might be taken for a ride, that your SO may bad mouth you to friends and family in their home country, or that he or she may be sending emails or developing contacts you do not approve of, denotes to me a person who is not ready to marry. Adjusting to your new life in the USA does have its problems, but the love of your life should be more important that any geographical issues. The 90 days grace before marriage is NOT a trial period. It is simply a timeframe to help organise your wedding.

[AmericanGentleman 0]

Truth be told, 90 days of living with someone hardly scrathces the surface of getting to know someone and/or their true intentions. That being said, I think it is wrong to do stuff like snooping your fiance's emails back home. All your really doing when you do that is trying to validate and/or justify your own paranoia.

"What if he/she is only marrying me so he/she can come to the US?"....Probably the biggest fear from people in our cluster right? Well...what is really wrong with that reason? Does that automatically mean that the marriage will never be a good one? I think not. The bold truth is that we marry because we want a better life for ourselves. Would you think it such a bad thing if a single mom goes to single bars in hopes of finding a man to marry to help her raise her kids? Is it such a bad thing that a man might go to the same bar in hopes of finding a wife to take care of his house and to bear his children? Doesnt every woman dream of marrying a prince and becoming a princess? The initial reasons are all the same, we look for a partner to better and enrich our lives. There is no shame in it.

Modern culture seems stuck on the notion that we must be in love to marry. Historically, love was considered a bi-product of a good marriage and not an initial requirement for a marriage. The love that is generated from a good marriage is what truely keeps it all together. And that love can come regardless of the initial reason you got married. Maybe the reason America has a 53% divorce rate is because we base our marriages too much on love and not what generates that love.

Me and my fiance are extremely fond of each other, but we are not deeply in love yet. I could easily say we love each other, but we are both rationalists. We realize that it love, or the notion of love, at such an early stage of a relationship is more of a state of mind rather than a tried and tested cement between us. So we do not put on any airs to act otherwise. We have discussed this in great length and we have decided to base our marriage on respect and place our trust in each other. We both are 100% confident that we will grow to love each other deeply because we are going to build our marriage on a greater foundation than emotions.

I do not mean to discount any of you who are marrying and basing the foundation on your marriage on love. I only wanted to illustrate that it is ok to have a variety of reasons to initally marry. It is what you do in that marriage that will make it valid or a sham.

[Fandango 1,440]

You can bet your azz that if you said it was a ''trial period' or 'cooling off' period, that you'd never have gotten approved. I think you're being a bit semantical in nature here...because while it's not a problem to marry at the end of the 90, it's not designed for the purpose of 'cooling off'. I mean focking hell, your fiance just got here and you're gonna 'cool off'????

Well unless someone can dig the actual intent of the 90 days out of Google or something, I don't think the argument of why there is a 90 day period is ..going to be settled. I think it can be inferred though, since 90 days is a pretty significant period.

And fine, I'll concede that "cooling off" was a poor choice of words, although quite frankly I don't think it's all that far off. MANY couples in the US these days live together before marrying, just to make sure they're doing the right thing. Call it cooling off, or a trial period or whatever. It happens, and although it may not be everyone's visions of rainbows and unicorns, it works for a lot of people. If both people are in agreement that they will use the 90 days in this manner, who are we to question it? If, on the other hand, only one partner sees it this way, then that's a problem.

In any case, I'll try this again: moving to a new country away from your friends and your family is a HUGE deal. Some people who had the best of intentions simply cannot deal with that shock. They love their partners, but ultimately cannot deal with the new life. It happens, and it happens a lot. There's no shame in taking the time available to make sure it's going to work. OTOH, some people just "know" and that's cool too.

I notice the most vehement opposition is coming from westerners, with the notable exception of pushbrk. It's one thing to move from Canada or Britain (where I lived for 3 years) to the US. Try moving from Malaysia or Russia or Japan. That's practically a move to another planet.

Why am I hearing that it's the 'big bad gov'ts fault for making me marry a stranger'? Big deal...it's practically another planet...there is plenty of opportunity for the USC to go there....you know, to take responsibility for their own relationship instead of b!tching about gov't restraints.

Again...you say 'cooling off' was a bad choice of words, then you say 'let's call it a cooling off'! That's so funny. But it's NOT a cooling off period...and furthermore...if the period was 180 days...I'm sure many would abuse it for the 'trial' aspect. Hey, if it doesn't work, ship her back and get a new one, eh?

But why a USC would delay getting their foreign partner on the path to a greencard is astounding.

You know what? If people have doubts and they still bring their partners over....they know what's what. Let's not even pretend that every marriage is full of love in the traditional sense....There are many lonely USCs and many desperate foreign SOs. And each benefits from the union. So hey...everyone's happy I suppose....but people need to realize what they have and not try putting lipstick on a pig making it be something else. If you're marrying someone you don't know....and you've uprooted that person from everything in her life....well 90 days isn't going to make a helluva lot of a difference, really. 'oh I didn't know her when she came, but 89 days later, we're soulmates!'

I mean really. Buyer Beware and all that jazz.....

Don't use the 80s to justify marrying a stranger.

And don't take me out of context. I'm saying that the K-1 dates back to the '80's, when many of the assumptions that are being made in this argument didn't apply.

And btw, did you actually READ your letter of intent that you signed?

No, I just signed it. What's it say?

Don't be snide. It doesn't suit the conversation.