end and beginning........

[Stan B]

... in response to end and beginning........, posted by Mark H on May 13, 2002

One of my wife's best friends who happens to be a woman in her 50's came to the USA on a K-1 and left her to be after 2 months. Not to stay in the USA, as she plans on going back to Ukraine, but because her fiancee didn't want her to go out and basicly thought he was acquiring a 'live-in' maid.
So sometimes it is the man that can be the scammer and misrepresent himself and paint a picture of himself that isn't true.
Thus yours friends story might be true and that getting a hold of her might not be such a bad thing. Just proceed with caution.
And congrats on graduating & GL in your future endeavors...aloha

[BarryM]

... in response to end and beginning........, posted by Mark H on May 13, 2002

There is a character issue involved here. If she was willing to marry an AM on false pretenses just so she could get a free ride over here, why would you even consider associating with her? How do you know she is telling you the truth? As far as I'm concerned, she is a visa scammer and deserves to be deported and barred from entry to the USA for life.

-blm

[BrianN]

... in response to I would stay away from her..., posted by BarryM on May 13, 2002

it does happen.  especially with insecure types...

[BubbaGump]

... in response to My ex's first husb was just like this, k..., posted by BrianN on May 13, 2002

Except I was the one in the cage.  She was afraid other women would try to pick me up and sleep with me.

[KenC]

... in response to I would stay away from her..., posted by BarryM on May 13, 2002

Barry,
You are a little quick on the conclusions.  Maybe it is your paranoia that has your judgement clouded.  You have to be open to at least the "possibility" that she misjudged her current hubby and he turned out to be a bad guy.  I don't see things as "black & white" as you do.  It must be a gift that you have!  LOL.
KenC

[BarryM]

... in response to a little quick, ain't ya?, posted by KenC on May 13, 2002

I hope you read MarkH's message. The marriage lasted 45 days... not 18 months, 6 months or even 3 months. That sounds pretty fishy to me. Even if her husband was abusive, she should be required to go back. Spousal abuse shouldn't be an automatic ticket to get a green card. It has been abused too much by immigrants.

-blm

[MarkInTx]

... in response to 45 days is a little quick for even a sca..., posted by BarryM on May 13, 2002

I'm not so sure I agree...

If she was deceived by the man, and fell in love with the romantic notion... why should she be "sent packing" when he turns out to be a monster.

I agree that it can be abused, but I think we have to allow some leeway here...

If she came over here and was totally different than what he expected, you would be screaming foul and saying that he should send her packing. Don't pass go, don't collect $200.

So, why when he has been a con artist must she face the humiliation, and expense, of returning home. She probably left a job. She may have given up an apartment. In the case of the woman Mark H is referring to, she also has a child to consider...

Why should the woman assume all of the risk?

If he is abusive... I think it changes everything...

IMHO

[DE]

... in response to Required to go back?, posted by MarkInTx on May 13, 2002

abusive do we?  We hear part of one side of a story.  Have many of you read the RWA forum?  The moment a RW posts that she and her husband aren't getting along, the first thing (or dam near the first thing) the other RWs post is that she needs to claim abuse!  The fact is, it is TOO easy for them to do this.

[MarkInTx]

... in response to But... we don't really know that he was, posted by DE on May 14, 2002


My only comment was that BarryM is suggesting that she gets sent back, no matter what.

If the guy doesn't like her, or if she leaves the guy -- poof, instant deportation.

I'm saying that there are two people involved here, and that's not fair to the woman.

I speak in general. I don't think you can categorically say that any woman who doesn't make it to two years with her new husband should be sent back.

That doesn't strike me as fair.

Nor is it "fair" that a man have to support any woman for ten years if she comes over.

I would like to think that someone is able to look at the evidence and decide each case individually. I know that probably won't happen, I'm just saying what I think is fair...

[wsbill]

... in response to Required to go back?, posted by MarkInTx on May 13, 2002

Gee, that's a loaded question.  Sounds like it's the guy that's taking on this HUGE RISK.

Especially, the bonehead that married in Russia and didn't go the K1 Visa route, that is insane.  You can bet if anyone went on a Social tour that agency would have had a talk with that guy.

This reeks setup.

Just like all the guys are saying, she's got all these e-mails from guys in her past to call on.  How convenient.

[Jack]

... in response to Required to go back?, posted by MarkInTx on May 13, 2002

Every side has two stories and the truth will probably lie somewhere in the middle.

Of course if he deceived her or is mis-treating her she should be allowed to stay, she did nothing wrong and more than likey he broke her heart and dreams. A man like this should not be entitled to the warmth and grace of a Russian woman.

However if this man did nothing wrong, and he was scammed, he probably is broken hearted and she should be deported.

So what really happened, who is in the right and who is in the wrong?  Certaintly it is not for us to decide, but more than likey a court of law and all we can only hope that justice is done accordinly.

[BarryM]

... in response to Required to go back?, posted by MarkInTx on May 13, 2002

The way the laws work in most states, a husband can be charged with abuse without any sort of proof other than his wife's accusation. Even if she says she "feels" threatened, that can be enough for a conviction in some states. The INS only requires a charge of abuse to meet the requirements for a green card, not proof.

I think that requiring the woman to return to her home country is necessary to stop such visa scamming. What would be a better solution would be for the soon to be ex-husband to kick in $3000 - $5000 in living expenses for his immigrant ex-wife upon her exit from the USA. In most of Ukraine and Russia, that would be more than 6 months living expenses. There is risk for both parties but a free ticket on the gravy train here in the USA is completely unfair.

-blm

[KenC]

... in response to and what proof would be required?, posted by BarryM on May 13, 2002

Barry,
You obviously do not what you are talking about.  A RW comes here and has to start her life completly over again from scratch.  Her education and any work experience isn't worth anything in our job market.  Besides any language difficulties, she would have to work at a level that is way below whatever her education and or work experience was back home.  Let's see, a single mom with no work experience or education to open any doors, yeah, that sounds like a bed of roses to me.  How easy do you think it will be for her to support herself and child working at McDonalds?  I say that if she can make it here with the cards she is starting with, WELCOME TO AMERICA, BABY!
KenC

[DE]

... in response to Gravy train?, posted by KenC on May 14, 2002

Sure she comes here without the necessary diplomas etc. that will easily open the job market for her.  Sure she leaves her friends and families, but, isn't this the RISK that she takes in marrying someone she barely knows?  The fact is, many of them take this risk knowing full well that the chance of success is slim.  But when it does fail, most will do anything to not have to return back to their country.  And they certainly find out very quickly that claiming abuse is the loop hole that will at least buy them the time to find someone else so that even if the INS doesn't buy into the abuse, they've been able to delay leaving intil the next unsuspecting victim (I mean husband) saves her.

And in this particular case, does "wierd" and not allowing her to go to ESL classes constitute abuse?  Maybe there are other reasons she is not telling that he can not take her to these classes (maybe they are an hour or two drive away)?

[KenC]

... in response to I disagree, posted by DE on May 14, 2002

DE,
I agree that we don't KNOW for sure either way.  That is why we cannot make a valid judgement in this case.  THAT was the point that I was trying to relay to MarkH.  Check her story out and be very leery.  I wouldn't automaticly write her off as a scammer nor would I necessarily believe everything she says either.  I like the suggestion that someone made to try and contact her soon to be exhusband before getting in too deep with her.  With her already here in this country, Mark has little to risk in contacting her.
KenC