And...

[pushbrk 13,073]

Umm, I see how this works with you MM, anytime someone questions you or your statements it is "Misinformation or wrong". You remind me of the little spoiled kid at the playground that does not get her way and then cries out "Since I am losing I am taking my toys and going home you cheat and are not fair!" Nice try, but you need to show me and prove your statement is not disinformation for WE ALL KNOW you ramble on about topics which you are spreading disinformation and inaccuracies that are not correct about either. I am waiting for you to prove your statement on the affidavit of support all I see is your sanctimonious feelings being expressed here, prove it for a change please. AND if you cannot then stop making inaccurate disinformation statements about it.

Are you 110% sure?

Just wanted to thank all of you for the comments advising calm. Fortunately the day after I posted we had a very long talk, and worked out a ton of issues.

A late night phone call from her cousin, explaining that certain often repeated comments regarding wanting to go home, not wanting to be married, etc. were apparently common expressions used during arguments (large and small) from where both my wife and her cousin are from. Her cousin explained that during her first year (of a 10 year marriage to her German husband) she probably said such things at least a hundred times. The comments are blanket statements that "something" large or small is bothering them and not literal statements of desire to end the respective marriages. Her cousin has been married ten years now!

Anyway, we discussed that such statements may be common in the PI, at least where these two are from, but here they are heard quite literally. And it is nearly impossible to trust the strength of a marriage when they are repeated, which they have been for a few months.

As to those who commented that I wanted to turn to ICE at the first sign of a problem, no, not at all what I meant when posting. Nor is it exactly accurate to say I kicked her out, she was packing her things, and when I said if you are going to keep saying you want to go, you should go sooner not later, she called some friends, and wound up with a place to go that night. But I would also say, I want her to be happy, and if she isn't, then yes I would not want her to leave but would feel obligated to allow her too. I love her enough to sacrifice my heart for her, if that was what she chose.

All of this also showed her she is not as alone as she sometimes feels. She has some new, good friends! She also realized, that although her job is not exactly high paying, she has a great deal more financial resources now than after years of where she was working before. So out of a horrible night came some pretty good realizations for her. That, and of course she did not mean her words, she was pretty devastated, as was I, at the thought of our marriage ending.

In doing the K-1 I have committed myself to legal obligations for the care and financial maintenance of my wife, for 10 years, and was asking a serious question as to what my legal obligations are to USCIS in the event my wife does decide to leave prior to having her own right to be hear via 10 year green card or US citizenship. Obviously the hope for us both is that the marriage is forever, and I don't take it lightly, and some of the responses seem to suggest the inference that I do.

Having so recently gotten out of the clutches of USCIS I had no desire to get either of us back in to their sites! But I think I was, despite being quite despondent at the time, asking a serious question. What does USCIS expect me to do, any of us to do, if our K-1 spouses should abandon our marriages?

Anyway, thanks for all of the responses, even those that seem to be more about admonishing without all the facts!

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to everyone!

Were she to leave, and remain in the US, you would still be locked into the affidavit of support.

Yes I am. We know you love to spread misinformation, but were she to go on means tested benefits, they could come over the petitioner who signed an affadavit of support, even if the marriage didn't work out.

And I know this has been discussed before, but there's at least one divorce case where the I-864 was introduced as evidence that the spouse needed to support the immigrant even though the marriage had dissolved. Perhaps not the way it was meant to be interpreted, but that judge did interpret it that way.

Are you 110% sure?

Just wanted to thank all of you for the comments advising calm. Fortunately the day after I posted we had a very long talk, and worked out a ton of issues.

A late night phone call from her cousin, explaining that certain often repeated comments regarding wanting to go home, not wanting to be married, etc. were apparently common expressions used during arguments (large and small) from where both my wife and her cousin are from. Her cousin explained that during her first year (of a 10 year marriage to her German husband) she probably said such things at least a hundred times. The comments are blanket statements that "something" large or small is bothering them and not literal statements of desire to end the respective marriages. Her cousin has been married ten years now!

Anyway, we discussed that such statements may be common in the PI, at least where these two are from, but here they are heard quite literally. And it is nearly impossible to trust the strength of a marriage when they are repeated, which they have been for a few months.

As to those who commented that I wanted to turn to ICE at the first sign of a problem, no, not at all what I meant when posting. Nor is it exactly accurate to say I kicked her out, she was packing her things, and when I said if you are going to keep saying you want to go, you should go sooner not later, she called some friends, and wound up with a place to go that night. But I would also say, I want her to be happy, and if she isn't, then yes I would not want her to leave but would feel obligated to allow her too. I love her enough to sacrifice my heart for her, if that was what she chose.

All of this also showed her she is not as alone as she sometimes feels. She has some new, good friends! She also realized, that although her job is not exactly high paying, she has a great deal more financial resources now than after years of where she was working before. So out of a horrible night came some pretty good realizations for her. That, and of course she did not mean her words, she was pretty devastated, as was I, at the thought of our marriage ending.

In doing the K-1 I have committed myself to legal obligations for the care and financial maintenance of my wife, for 10 years, and was asking a serious question as to what my legal obligations are to USCIS in the event my wife does decide to leave prior to having her own right to be hear via 10 year green card or US citizenship. Obviously the hope for us both is that the marriage is forever, and I don't take it lightly, and some of the responses seem to suggest the inference that I do.

Having so recently gotten out of the clutches of USCIS I had no desire to get either of us back in to their sites! But I think I was, despite being quite despondent at the time, asking a serious question. What does USCIS expect me to do, any of us to do, if our K-1 spouses should abandon our marriages?

Anyway, thanks for all of the responses, even those that seem to be more about admonishing without all the facts!

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to everyone!

Were she to leave, and remain in the US, you would still be locked into the affidavit of support.

Yes I am. We know you love to spread misinformation, but were she to go on means tested benefits, they could come over the petitioner who signed an affadavit of support, even if the marriage didn't work out.

And I know this has been discussed before, but there's at least one divorce case where the I-864 was introduced as evidence that the spouse needed to support the immigrant even though the marriage had dissolved. Perhaps not the way it was meant to be interpreted, but that judge did interpret it that way.

You betcha!

Show me and prove it then.

Google is your friend. There have been two widely publicized cases where judges used the I-864 to justify their requirment for spousal support equal to 125% of the poverty level. I think the judges were wrong and so do many others but it has happened.

[zqt3344 21]

You are correct and you are on the right path, I agree with your posts, it is not clear cut 110% like some think.

Just attempted to read that document or parts of it. Seems in order for immigrants to get benefits...a) agency is to determine if immigrant has a sponsor, sponsor and spouse's assets are to be used to determine if immigrant gets benefits which even the document admits, by doing so the immigrant will get denied benefits, or will usually get denied since sponser and spouse's combined income will be over qualification guidelines.

[TracyTN 237]

It's know if my husband and I were in some rocky waters, my first thought would not be to notify the government.

Exactly.

At the same time, I wouldn't announce my marriage over simply because someone forgot to tape something for me.

LOL, even the OP didn't say that. It sounds like either the movie erasing was the last event marking the time of the announcement. Perhaps it was also the last straw to prompt a tantrum, but nobody suggested the departure was "because" of. Google "coincidental correlation" or "post hoc, ergo propter hoc".

In any event, USCIS is not the answer.

I'm so glad you're here to clear things up for us simple minded folk. Because I never would have understood the entirety of the situation without you explaining it to me. WHEW - crisis averted once again!!!

My point was simply that making a leap from something not being taped to 'Its OVER' is pretty pathetic, not to mention immature, regardless of any underlying issues in the marriage.

I never said USCIS was the answer, so I assume that remark was directed at the OP.

*edited for typo*

Edited December 27, 2007 by TracyTN

[tito 1]

"My point was simply that making a leap from something not being taped to 'Its OVER' is pretty pathetic, not to mention immature, regardless of any underlying issues in the marriage."

That's a good point...and reason enough to say, "wow, wife...you don't seem mature enough to be in a marriage. We made a mistake. Grow up and then call me when you do."

Apparently, some of these spouses actually think that the crown comes with their entry visa. Doesn't work that way...but the stories seem to be repeated over and over.

The affidavit of support should not be a guideline for spousal support at all. That concerns ONLY the extent to which the USC is obligated for social services (and not all...) the immigrant tries to use when the immigrant cannot himself or herself meet federal poverty guidelines. That does NOT give rise to any obligation or presumption that the USC is obligated to pay spousal support to an immigrant in ANY amount for ANY period of time.

Edited January 6, 2008 by tito

[pushbrk 13,073]

The affidavit of support should not be a guideline for spousal support at all. That concerns ONLY the extent to which the USC is obligated for social services (and not all...) the immigrant tries to use when the immigrant cannot himself or herself meet federal poverty guidelines. That does NOT give rise to any obligation or presumption that the USC is obligated to pay spousal support to an immigrant in ANY amount for ANY period of time.

I think most reasonable minds would agree. Nevertheless there have been cases where judges used the I-864 to order spousal support, so it's worth bearing in mind.

[diadromous mermaid 36]

The affidavit of support should not be a guideline for spousal support at all. That concerns ONLY the extent to which the USC is obligated for social services (and not all...) the immigrant tries to use when the immigrant cannot himself or herself meet federal poverty guidelines. That does NOT give rise to any obligation or presumption that the USC is obligated to pay spousal support to an immigrant in ANY amount for ANY period of time.

The operative words here, perhaps unfortunately are does not and not cannot. In the precedential cases, Stump v Stump being one, the judge awarded support based upon the existence of the I-864 pledge and the alien was not required to mitigate that obligation by trying to seek work.

[tito 1]

OUCH! That's lousy. In California, anyway, deference is afforded the duration of the marriage when it comes to spousal support...and the rules and regulations specify the reason(s) for the affidavit of support (to ensure that there is no public charge for certain social services, as I understand...it's NOT a guarantee that the immigrant is entitled to "x" number of dollars...although I could see that an attorney would want to make that argument). In the absence of other criteria, if the immigrant is entitled to SOME spousal support, the poverty guidelines would or might offer some basis for an award...but there are and should be a lot of other factors involved as well. I suppose that the outcome would depend upon applicable state dissolution laws.

[melusine 5]

note on affidavit support....

i read somewhere recently it was just 2 or 3 years the affidavit support in the k1 visas ??

right? wrong ?

[athena_ny 1]

note on affidavit support....

i read somewhere recently it was just 2 or 3 years the affidavit support in the k1 visas ??

right? wrong ?

The I-134, done at the consular level, is not legally binding. The I-864 done for AOS, is legally binding for 10 years, or until the alien has at least 10 years of continuous work, or dies.

[john_and_marlene 162]

note on affidavit support....

i read somewhere recently it was just 2 or 3 years the affidavit support in the k1 visas ??

right? wrong ?

The I-134, done at the consular level, is not legally binding. The I-864 done for AOS, is legally binding for 10 years, or until the alien has at least 10 years of continuous work, or dies.

The passage of 10 years is not one of the criteria for removing the I-864 obligation. If the immigrant never satisfies 40 qualified work quarters, the obligation can continue for life.

[athena_ny 1]

note on affidavit support....

i read somewhere recently it was just 2 or 3 years the affidavit support in the k1 visas ??

right? wrong ?

The I-134, done at the consular level, is not legally binding. The I-864 done for AOS, is legally binding for 10 years, or until the alien has at least 10 years of continuous work, or dies.

The passage of 10 years is not one of the criteria for removing the I-864 obligation. If the immigrant never satisfies 40 qualified work quarters, the obligation can continue for life.

I wasn't aware of that. Thanks!

[pushbrk 13,073]

note on affidavit support....

i read somewhere recently it was just 2 or 3 years the affidavit support in the k1 visas ??

right? wrong ?

The I-134, done at the consular level, is not legally binding. The I-864 done for AOS, is legally binding for 10 years, or until the alien has at least 10 years of continuous work, or dies.

The passage of 10 years is not one of the criteria for removing the I-864 obligation. If the immigrant never satisfies 40 qualified work quarters, the obligation can continue for life.

I wasn't aware of that. Thanks!

When the immigrant becomes a citizen, the I-864 obligation also terminates.

[john_and_marlene 162]

note on affidavit support....

i read somewhere recently it was just 2 or 3 years the affidavit support in the k1 visas ??

right? wrong ?

The I-134, done at the consular level, is not legally binding. The I-864 done for AOS, is legally binding for 10 years, or until the alien has at least 10 years of continuous work, or dies.

The passage of 10 years is not one of the criteria for removing the I-864 obligation. If the immigrant never satisfies 40 qualified work quarters, the obligation can continue for life.

I wasn't aware of that. Thanks!

When the immigrant becomes a citizen, the I-864 obligation also terminates.

There are other ways to satisfy the requirement, I just wanted to point out that the passage of 10 years has never been one of them.

That's why I said the obligation can continue for life.

BTW, the immigrant doesn't really even have to ever work a day on their own to satisfy the 40 quarters. If the marriage lasts long enough for the spouse to satisfy 40 quarters during the marriage, the obligation also ends -- even though the immigrant spouse would lose those quarters following a subsequent divorce.

[john_and_marlene 162]

I just had another thought as well. Because of the way qualified quarters are counted for married couples (each spouse also counts the qualified quarter of the other), If both are accumulating qualified quarters, the obligation could be met even in 5 years.

[athena_ny 1]

note on affidavit support....

i read somewhere recently it was just 2 or 3 years the affidavit support in the k1 visas ??

right? wrong ?

The I-134, done at the consular level, is not legally binding. The I-864 done for AOS, is legally binding for 10 years, or until the alien has at least 10 years of continuous work, or dies.

The passage of 10 years is not one of the criteria for removing the I-864 obligation. If the immigrant never satisfies 40 qualified work quarters, the obligation can continue for life.

I wasn't aware of that. Thanks!

When the immigrant becomes a citizen, the I-864 obligation also terminates.

I knew that one but left it out (that was accidental).