• Hello Members, This forums is for DV lottery visas only. For other immigration related questions, please go to our forums home page, find the related forum and post it there.

Daughter aging out issue

SusieQQQ said:
In some cases it can take almost 20 years - yes, years, - from petition to issuance. Do you still think that should be frozen at 21?

Edit - sorry, mistake. More than 20 years. Phillipines family F4 petitions current now are those filed in March 1991. So someone 20 then would be 43 now. Should they have been frozen as 21?
Click to expand...

20 years? Wtf
 
BetaPhaggot said:
20 years? Wtf
Click to expand...

Look at F4 category on visa bulletin.
Remember that along with the principal beneficiary cited ie the sibling of USC, his/her spouse and children - under 21 obviously - can be derivatives on that petition. Take a situation with a 20 year old child as derivative to a Filipino F4 principal beneficiary in 1991. Do you think the 20 year old then, now a 43 year old today, should be granted a green card because of CSPA - bearing in mind that person now probably has another few immediate family members, spouse and children, that they can then immediately petition for? Now do you see why mom said that they may as well just throw the borders open if they approach it this way!
 
EURO2014 said:
Visa Bulletin For September 2014:
F2B - 01SEP07 except China, India, Mexico, Philippines. Applicable for LPR's of unmarried daughters/sons above 21 years.
Click to expand...

The 20 years wasn't a prediction of how long he would need to wait to sponsor his daughter, it was to explain why stating that all derivatives should be frozen at 21 years till visa issuance irrespective of when that happened, was being viewed through the very narrow prism of his own case and infeasible as a general rule.

and on the subject of sponsoring his daughter he needs to be clear that some of the suggestions in this forum may lead to an idea that his daughter can remain in the US illegally or out of status while they petition her. If that happens her petition will be denied of course.
 
SusieQQQ said:
The 20 years wasn't a prediction of how long he would need to wait to sponsor his daughter, it was to explain why stating that all derivatives should be frozen at 21 years till visa issuance irrespective of when that happened, was being viewed through the very narrow prism of his own case and infeasible as a general rule.

and on the subject of sponsoring his daughter he needs to be clear that some of the suggestions in this forum may lead to an idea that his daughter can remain in the US illegally or out of status while they petition her. If that happens her petition will be denied of course.
Click to expand...
Sure, no problem from my end of course, SusieQQQ, your feedback to him has been clear and constructive on this and other points. Somehow, on first impression, he doesn't come over as a very sensible guy in appreciation of US immigration laws, though. All the best to you!
 
If somebody moves to the US and leave their children behind, it's them separating their own family, no the US government!

Nobody changed the rules half way through the game. The rules were available to anybody entering the lottery. If they didn't like the rules, they could have walked away!

And people are giving really sound advice here. Do consider the student visa. She can stay on the student visa and then change it to work visa, until you become a citizen. That all of sudden bumps her case to a whole different category and can reduce the process time by maybe a decade! :)
 
mattkaya said:
I have filed a petition on whitehouse.gov and seeking your signatures for a petition to allow aged-out children who do not have access to CSPA and who who had to leave US and could not included on a new GC petition.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pe...-aged-out-children-current-permanent/bXqvmhfv

Thanks in advance to all
Click to expand...

Why could they not be included on a new green card petition?

My problem with the wealth of immigration related petitions is that everyone starts one that relates to their own personal circumstances without caring about anyone else. These rules are there for a reason. Otherwise you can get for example Filipinos over 40 years old coming in as a child dependent if they are derivatives on an FB4!! How does that make sense?
 
mattkaya said:
I have filed a petition on whitehouse.gov and seeking your signatures for a petition to allow aged-out children who do not have access to CSPA and who who had to leave US and could not included on a new GC petition.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pe...-aged-out-children-current-permanent/bXqvmhfv

Thanks in advance to all
Click to expand...

I don't understand what your petition is for - you haven't made it at all clear. Are you saying that I(as an LPR) should be able to sponsor my 26 year old daughter? At what point does that stop? Never?

So let's say I become a citizen and therefore sponsor my Mum to be an LPR. Could she then sponsor my 54 year old sister? Doesn't that seem a bit unworkable to you?
 
Britsimon said:
I don't understand what your petition is for - you haven't made it at all clear. Are you saying that I(as an LPR) should be able to sponsor my 26 year old daughter? At what point does that stop? Never?

So let's say I become a citizen and therefore sponsor my Mum to be an LPR. Could she then sponsor my 54 year old sister? Doesn't that seem a bit unworkable to you?
Click to expand...

I think they mean children who would have been eligible originally but aged out.
Even that is silly. Example: current priority date for FB4 (sibling) visas for Filipinos is april 1991. So a sibling who had a petition approved in April 1991 say with a then 20 year old child, child would obviously have aged out by now. This person is saying that CSPA is not good enough and the child should be able to come now. So the "child dependent" who is now 43 gets to come along...and instantly applies for their likely existing spouse and children now too, who because they are immediate relatives go right to the top of the priority queue ahead of everyone else who has been waiting for years. Somehow this is fair?

It's the old trick of blaming US rules for splitting families, rather than taking responsibility for their own decision to split the families despite knowing the rules.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top