Hello. I'm not sure where to post this question, but this seems to be the best place

Bobsmyth said:
Here's how the state department defines the evidence:

(2) A bona fide parent-child relationship exists or has existed while the
child was under the age of 21.
(Such a relationship exists or has existed when the father displays clearly
or has displayed clearly an active concern for the child's support,
instruction, and welfare. Documents to manifest this concern may
include (but are not limited to) the child's birth certificate, local civil
records, affidavits from knowledgeable persons, and evidence of financial
support. DHS may require blood tests from the petitioner, beneficiary,
and the beneficiary's mother.)

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/88018.pdf

If the father never supported the child and wasn't in contact with him all these years it may be impossible to prove a bona vide relationship. From what the OP mentioned, he only recently reconnected and didn't have a relationship with his son all these years.
Click to expand...
Yes, but the very thing you quoted said age 21. His son is only 18 at this time, and is visiting him in the US. So it is not too late to establish the relationship. And it is not clear that there was a complete absence of contact and support during his 18 years growing up.
 
Jackolantern said:
Yes, but the very thing you quoted said age 21. His son is only 18 at this time, and is visiting him in the US. So it is not too late to establish the relationship. And it is not clear that there was a complete absence of contact and support during his 18 years growing up.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what period of time (if any) USCIS considers in the determination of an established relationship. The OP mentioned he only "recently" connected with his son, so that may not be considered long enough if he were to apply now. Of course, without knowing if he ever had a valid relationship with his son all these years, suggestion anything else would be speculative.
 
Bobsmyth said:
It's already been established that the OP's son doesn't qualify for citizenship.
The discussion now is if his son qualifies to be sponsored by his dad for legal permanent status, not for citizenship.
Click to expand...

I like to know where the Supreme Court stands on such issues. I figured others might be interested too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top