J White

My wife and I are US citizens sponsoring her daughter's husband's
immigration process from Sweden. They have retained an immigration lawyer
and we, as sponsors, have filled out our portion of the forms, but we have
some concerns:
1) If she ever needs government assistance for higher education, food stamps
etc. that she won't qualify because we are sponsoring her husband with both
of our incomes.
2) What happens to us if they divorce before their 10 year commitment to the
sponsorship has ended; does that our commitment has ended as well?
3) If they do divorce, does he have to return to Sweden?

Oliver Costich

On Sun, 18 Apr 2004 15:28:00 -0600, "J White" <> wrote:

    >My wife and I are US citizens sponsoring her daughter's husband's
    >immigration process from Sweden. They have retained an immigration lawyer
    >and we, as sponsors, have filled out our portion of the forms, but we have
    >some concerns:
    >1) If she ever needs government assistance for higher education, food stamps
    >etc. that she won't qualify because we are sponsoring her husband with both
    >of our incomes.

That's a concern for us US taxpayers that foot the bill for those
kinds of assistance. Why would she ever need such assistance when you
are SPONORING her? What do you think SPONSOR is about? How about that
it doesn't place a burden on the existing taxpayers?


    >2) What happens to us if they divorce before their 10 year commitment to the
    >sponsorship has ended; does that our commitment has ended as well?
    >3) If they do divorce, does he have to return to Sweden?

Lucy

"Oliver Costich" <olc-> wrote in message
news:...
    > On Sun, 18 Apr 2004 15:28:00 -0600, "J White" <> wrote:
    > >My wife and I are US citizens sponsoring her daughter's husband's
    > >immigration process from Sweden. They have retained an immigration lawyer
    > >and we, as sponsors, have filled out our portion of the forms, but we
have
    > >some concerns:
    > >1) If she ever needs government assistance for higher education, food
stamps
    > >etc. that she won't qualify because we are sponsoring her husband with
both
    > >of our incomes.
    > That's a concern for us US taxpayers that foot the bill for those
    > kinds of assistance. Why would she ever need such assistance when you
    > are SPONORING her? What do you think SPONSOR is about? How about that
    > it doesn't place a burden on the existing taxpayers?

OP stated that he and his wife are sponsoring the daughter's husband, not
the daughter. The daughter is presumably a US citizen.

Why should she be denied government assistance based solely on the fact that
she is married to a non-US citizen?

To the OP, as I understand it, your 10 year commitment will continue even if
they divorce, as long as he is still in the US.

If they divorce, he may or may not have to leave, depending on whether he is
able to remove conditions from his green card. If they have been married
less than two years when he gets the green card, it will have conditions for
two years. After that, he will be able to stay in the US. Even if they
divorce before the conditions have been removed, he may still be able to get
the green card with no conditions.

My gut feeling to your query is that you don't expect the marriage to last
and if that's the case, I would think long and hard before agreeing to this
sponsorship.

Lucy

Meauxna

Originally posted by J White
    > My wife and I are US
citizens sponsoring her daughter's husband's
    > immigration process
from Sweden. They have retained an immigration lawyer
    > and we, as
sponsors, have filled out our portion of the forms, but we have
    > some
concerns:
    > 1) If she ever needs government assistance for higher
education, food stamps
    > etc. that she won't qualify because we are
sponsoring her husband with both
    > of our incomes.
    > 2) What happens
to us if they divorce before their 10 year commitment to the
sponsorship has ended; does that our commitment has ended as well?
    > 3)
If they do divorce, does he have to return to Sweden?

Have
you carefully read the I-864? The 2nd para lays out the terms of your
obligation:
"A sponsor's obligation continues until the sponsored
immigrant
becomes a U.S. citizen,
can be credited with 40 qualifying
quarters of work,
departs the United States permanently,
or dies.


Divorce does not terminate the obligation. By signing this form, you,
the sponsor, agree to support the intending immigrant and any spouse
and/or children immigrating with him or her and to reimburse any
government agency or private entity that provides these sponsored
immigrants with Federal, State, or local means-tested public benefits."


Many ppl make the mistake of "10 year" because that is the length of
40 working quarters. I'm sure you'll agree that turning in 40 quarters
of work is different than simply allowing 10 years to pass.

Also stay
clear that you are the secondary sponsors; your daughter will always be
the primary sponsor and she will be first in line to reimburse any
*means tested* benefits he receives. Welfare and Medicare are the top 2
means tested benes. Higher Ed financing is not, don't recall off the
top if food stamps are.

If they divorce, he does not necessarily have
to leave the US. Yes, potentially, they could be divorced and your
daughter and then yourself are still responsible under the contract.


FWIW, my parents completed a co-sponsor doc for my husband, My
rationale to them included:
First, I would need to be in a postition to
need means-tested assistance. Knowing that this was unlikely for me,
and should it ever happen I would likely first go to family for help,
this seems a fair risk (in our family). Additionally, if it came to
this for my family, *I* would take the benes rather than my husband.


Second, they are second in line for repayment. See above. We would
handle financial hardship w/in our family before getting benes, but
that's us.
The length of the contract and the spectre of divorce become
items of faith. 2 years into our marriage and learning what I've
learned, I think they took a huge risk *based on what they knew then*.
I can not see divorce in this relationship's future and am satisfied
with my husband's desire to naturalize at his earliest opportunity
(lifting the obligation of the I-864).

There were a couple of parent
posts in the past year or so at the marriage-based visa group. One
fellow even had his lawyer check it out. I will look up the link for
you later.
best!

Oliver Costich

On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 10:41:48 -0500, "Lucy" <>
wrote:

    >"Oliver Costich" <olc-> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> On Sun, 18 Apr 2004 15:28:00 -0600, "J White" <> wrote:
    >> >My wife and I are US citizens sponsoring her daughter's husband's
    >> >immigration process from Sweden. They have retained an immigration lawyer
    >> >and we, as sponsors, have filled out our portion of the forms, but we
    >have
    >> >some concerns:
    >> >1) If she ever needs government assistance for higher education, food
    >stamps
    >> >etc. that she won't qualify because we are sponsoring her husband with
    >both
    >> >of our incomes.
    >> That's a concern for us US taxpayers that foot the bill for those
    >> kinds of assistance. Why would she ever need such assistance when you
    >> are SPONORING her? What do you think SPONSOR is about? How about that
    >> it doesn't place a burden on the existing taxpayers?
    >OP stated that he and his wife are sponsoring the daughter's husband, not
    >the daughter. The daughter is presumably a US citizen.
    >Why should she be denied government assistance based solely on the fact that
    >she is married to a non-US citizen?

Yes. The daughter and her husband are responsible for caring for
themselves. The sponsor has guaranteed to pay for the husband, and
should pay sufficiently that the daughter doesn't use welfare. If both
were US citizens, would the wife be able to claim government
assistance if the husband could pay?

    >To the OP, as I understand it, your 10 year commitment will continue even if
    >they divorce, as long as he is still in the US.
    >If they divorce, he may or may not have to leave, depending on whether he is
    >able to remove conditions from his green card. If they have been married
    >less than two years when he gets the green card, it will have conditions for
    >two years. After that, he will be able to stay in the US. Even if they
    >divorce before the conditions have been removed, he may still be able to get
    >the green card with no conditions.
    >My gut feeling to your query is that you don't expect the marriage to last
    >and if that's the case, I would think long and hard before agreeing to this
    >sponsorship.
    >Lucy

Meauxna

Originally posted by meauxna There were a couple of parent
posts in the past year or so at the marriage-based visa group. One
fellow even had his lawyer check it out. I will look up the link for you
later.
    >
http://tinyurl.com/2b9ap

Amanda

I don't understand that "10 year commitment to the sponsorship"? in

<< 2) What happens to us if they divorce before their 10 year commitment to
the sponsorship has ended; does that our commitment has ended as well?
>>

Is it something related to marriage based sponsor only? And, why 10 years?

Hnchoksi

    >Subject: Re: immigration sponsorship
    >From: (Amanda)
    >Date: 4/21/04 6:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time
    >Message-id: <>
    >I don't understand that "10 year commitment to the sponsorship"? in
    > << 2) What happens to us if they divorce before their 10 year commitment to
    > the sponsorship has ended; does that our commitment has ended as well?
    > >>
    >Is it something related to marriage based sponsor only? And, why 10 years?
    > It is not 10 years. It is 40 quarters of credited work. i.e., you can take
say, 15 years to work those 40 quarters. 10 years is assumed if you work for
ten straight years (which is 40 quarters)

jeni

Oliver said:

    > That's a concern for us US taxpayers that foot the bill for those
    > kinds of assistance. Why would she ever need such assistance when you
    > are SPONORING her? What do you think SPONSOR is about? How about that

If it was about what you think it was about then the gov't should have
some checks in place and enforced that assure that the sponsor is really
paying the person's bills, etc. What sponsoring is ABOUT is if the
beneficiary receives any means tested public assistance, they have to
pay back the gov't. Sponsoring in this context does not mean the sponsor
should be able to pay for the beneficiary's wife's schooling.

    >it doesn't place a burden on the existing taxpayers?

Sounds like you have more of a problem with the laws of the land and may
be blaming it on people using the system legally. You should be lobbying
in D.C. instead of here. What would solve the problem is if the gov't
didn't ALLOW a non US citizen to receive any benefits as described in
the sponsor application directions.

jeni

Lucy said:
    > My gut feeling to your query is that you don't expect the marriage to last
    > and if that's the case, I would think long and hard before agreeing to this
    > sponsorship.

I disagree very much. I would think long and hard before you decide NOT
to do it. My parents would not cosponsor my husband. I am 5 months
pregnant. They don't trust me or my husband, even though they have in
the past just because they don't agree with our decisions lately (we
haven't commited any crimes). I was devastated my parents abandoned me
and my new family. Now I am happy to know they are assholes so I don't
have to worry about changing them anymore. I hope those people don't
listen to the sarcastic remarks made on this newsgroup and stick with
what is important, family.