child born in india or USA? which is better?

K

kjkc

New Member
Hi,
I am a US citizen and my wife is permanent resident. We are expecting a baby.
We are thinking about the delivery of child either in India or US?
Are there any advantages? disadvantages?
which is better? any ideas?
Just wanted to get some insights.
Yout inputs greatly appreciated.

Regards,
Kala
 
Do you have health insurance in the US? If not, delivery will be much more affordable in India. A complicated delivery, especially if premature, could easily cost over $100,000 in the US without insurance.

But from a US citizenship perspective, having the baby born in the US is much better. If the baby is born outside the US, you'll have to prove the following at a US consulate in India, to ensure the baby's US citizenship will be promptly and properly recognized:

http://travel.state.gov/law/info/info_609.html
Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock: A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) INA provided the citizen parent was physically present in the U.S. for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child's birth. (For birth on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen are required for physical presence in the U.S. to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.
Click to expand...

One problem with delivering outside the US is that your wife is a permanent resident, and permanent residents have limitations on how long they can spend outside the US without jeopardizing their permanent resident status or eligibility for citizenship. The pregnancy and first few months after birth will mean your wife will be in India for several months, possibly over a year depending on how early in the pregnancy she goes to India and how well she is after birth. Over a year outside the US makes loss of the green card almost automatic, unless she applies for a reentry permit before leaving the US. Over 6 months outside the US puts her eligibility for citizenship at risk.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
As someone who has gone thru two child births in the US, I would say that unless your pockets are very deep and can afford a very good hospital in India (or your insurance in the US is none) I'd do it in the US simply for practical, rather than for immigration, reasons.

The last two or three months the mom-to-be (and generally dad) are expected to be doing lots of trips to the doctor, test this and that, even classes (:)) and so on. It's like those never-ending visits to the local ASC or DO :)...

When the baby is born, in US it's probably a 48 hour stay for uncomplicated deliveries, while in India it could be a LOT longer. Family availability and expertise here vs. there are also issues, but again, not decision makers.

I would say look at it from a practical standpoint first (financial, support, quality of care) and then consider the paperwork issues. I know it's overwhelming to have a baby in the US with all the relatives abroad, but it all works out at the end...
 
Unless you want your child to be a US president, it would be affordable in India (only if you don't have any US insurance).

If you want your child to be born in India, it will require you to add your child name on any paperwork in both india (i.e. birth certificate, go to US embassy for your child) and USA (N-600, add another insurance for your child, etc.). There would be a problem for US permanent resident to lose green card if they stay over 6 months like Jackolantern said. Your child won't be a US president unless the law is changed in the future.

If you want your child to be born in USA, it would save you paperwork by not going to US embassy. It would help your child to be a US president. :) If you have an insurance, it will be great.
 
also, US born citizen has more protections ...US citizenship can not be taken away from your future child if he /she is US born.

Yes, although you may save some money on delivery/medicals bills if birth takes place in India, but one day your child will thank you for giving him/her US Citizenship...My 2 cents..
 
Sorry to say this but what kind of immigration question is this? It's a personal preference and every family situation is unique. If your question concerns citizenship/OCI etc.. and their benefits, then it's different. Otherwise, you should be discussing this with your life partner and other wise people in your family.
 
spiderman03 said:
what kind of immigration question is this? [...] you should be discussing this with your life partner and other wise people in your family.
Click to expand...

The thing is that life partner or wise people in the family might not know US immigration intricacies. It is always wise to ask questions. Following the elders' immigration advice can be dangerous to your health and your immigration status.
 
DreamUSA said:
also, US born citizen has more protections ...US citizenship can not be taken away from your future child if he /she is US born.
Click to expand...
Well, the baby will still be considered US citizen at birth. I doubt that the USCIS can initiate revocation of someone's citizenship if it played no role what-so-ever in granting citizenship to that person. So, unless this baby wants to run for US presidency in the future, I don't see any other disadvantages of being born in India as opposed to USA.

Yes, although you may save some money on delivery/medicals bills if birth takes place in India, but one day your child will thank you for giving him/her US Citizenship...My 2 cents..
Click to expand...
As I already mentioned, the baby will acquire the US citizenship at birth. Yes, it needs more paperwork by filing the report of birth abroad, but giving birth in USA without insurance or with limited insurance may be much more costly in the end. We are talking tens of thousands of dollars here.
 
I agree this is ultimately individual and the family decision. We are just sharing our thoughts...we can argue a lot about benefits/advantage of natural born US citizen...

Re- medical costs vs. USCIS application/travel costs...this is something to consider.

Also, many uninsured americans also face similar challanges...but have NOT seen them driving accross the border to Canada or Mexico to give a birth to children.

I think you have to ask: where do you envision your child to reside and leave in future. In the other words, in my humble opinion, this should be not based solely on financial considerations and perhaps even not pure immigration considerations...
 
Hi
Thank you very much for all your responses and time.

I have Helath insurance in US and also re-etry permit.
we are thinking of going back to india after 3 years. So we are looking at the kid education in India. later if they decide they can come back here. So basically looking the flexibility interms of acquiring citizenship.

THanks again.
 
Actually, your child will be eligible to be President whether born in the US or India, since your child will be a USC at birth and NOT a naturalized citizen. For example, John McCain is eligible to be President despite being born outside the US, since he was a USC at birth.
 
I would suggest US if your wife is covered under insurance.

Most important issue here is quality of health care for new born and mother, and in my opinion US is way ahead.
 
Physicist said:
Actually, your child will be eligible to be President whether born in the US or India, since your child will be a USC at birth and NOT a naturalized citizen. For example, John McCain is eligible to be President despite being born outside the US, since he was a USC at birth.
Click to expand...

That's incorrect. You (likely) can't be US president if you were born in a foreign country to US parents. John McCain was born in a US administered possession (Panama Canal) on a US military base, thus some argue making him eligible to become US president although others dispute if he is considered a natural born citizen since no US court has ever ruled that a person born outside the US to US parents is automatically considered a natural born citizen under the definition of the 14th amendment. Had he been born in India to US parents, he would not be eligible to become president (unless the US supreme ruled that persons born in foreign countries to US parents are indeed considered natural born citizens.
Also, being a natural born US citizen is only one of the main eligibility requirements to become US president.
 
kjkc said:
Hi
Thank you very much for all your responses and time.

I have Helath insurance in US and also re-etry permit.
we are thinking of going back to india after 3 years. So we are looking at the kid education in India. later if they decide they can come back here. So basically looking the flexibility interms of acquiring citizenship.

THanks again.
Click to expand...

Education in USA (public school) is free. If you are a US citizen, I am not sure if the school in India is free for your kid.
 
Physicist said:
Actually, your child will be eligible to be President whether born in the US or India, since your child will be a USC at birth and NOT a naturalized citizen. For example, John McCain is eligible to be President despite being born outside the US, since he was a USC at birth.
Click to expand...

It is not correct. John McCain was a natural born US citizen since he was born on US soil (i.e. US military) to his US citizen parents so Its US law allows him to run for US President. so India is not a US soil so the person who was born in India is not eligible to run for US president unless US Congress changes the law.

Question: would he be lucky to run for a US president if he was born on US soil (US embassy in India)? I am not sure about this question. :) Also, check out this link about Arnold Amendment: http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-1479910_ITM.
 
USGC485 said:
Education in USA (public school) is free.
Click to expand...

I strongly disagree with this statement. My kid is not using the public school system and I still need to pay exorbitant school tax. Same for my neighbor who does not even have kids.
 
John McCain (born 1936), who ran for the Republican party nomination in 2000 and was the Republican nominee in 2008, according to his birth certificate, was born of two U.S. citizen parents at Colon Hospital in Colon, Panama. The city of Colon was outside the US administered Canal Zone and remained Panamanian territory throughout the existence of the Panama Canal Zone.

Róger Calero (born 1969) was born in Nicaragua and ran as the Socialist Worker's Party presidential candidate in 2004 and 2008. In 2008, Calero appeared on the ballot in Delaware, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York and Vermont.

George Romney (1907–1995), who ran for the Republican party nomination in 1968, was born in Mexico to U.S. parents. Romney’s grandfather had emigrated to Mexico in 1886 with his three wives and children after Utah outlawed polygamy. Romney's monogamous parents retained their U.S. citizenship and returned to the United States with him in 1912. Romney never received Mexican citizenship, because the country's nationality laws had been restricted to jus-sanguinis statutes due to prevailing politics aimed against American settlers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top