Marriage of convenience

[cowtown gal]

I just want to make a point here:

I have no problem about strict immigration laws, etc and fully support the fact that although unfortunate, people who end up sponsoring someone who commits fraud should accept responsibility and not blame the government (I do realise it must really suck for them to realise they've been fooled). But in response to the people who would like to see a 'conditional' PR given so that marriages have to last 1-2 years before the sponsored spouse gets 'full' PR:

1. I think others have already addressed the potential for spousal abuse in a scenario like this. Could be very dangerous.

2. But also - what about those marriages where the couple have already been married for years and perhaps living together in a different country. Should that sponsored spouse have to be denied full PR for a longer time, too? Just a thought...


Aside from the 'stupid canadian women' generalisation (which I won't comment on because I feel my fellow intelligent Canadian women on here have already addressed this issue) can I just say that I found the 'I don't mind Canadians marrying Americans' comment particularly ridiculous. An individual may have a lot more in common with someone from a 'more' foreign country than they ever would with an American (no offense to Americans - I'm just making the point that everyone has different taste and different interests). Why should geography have anything to do with selecting a life-partner?

Oh. One more thing. I also resent the fact that because I did not marry someone I met in a bar in Canada that I am 'desperate'. That is an utterly ridiculous and offensive statement.

I don't often comment on the heated thread but I just couldn't help myself this time. I think that's all from me.

 

[minna]

I don't like the idea of "conditional" PR either.

I, for one, would much rather everyone who can prove a genuine relationship be approved, no matter where in the world they may be from. This PR process doesn't need to get any *more* difficult for those of us who are in genuine relationships, who love our spouses, partners and family members and who just want to be able to live with them. I think the process is generally fair right now, although, obviously, mistakes are made -- as they are in any system regulated and run by humans, applied for by humans etc..

I just think that it is unfortunate that the tone of the article becomes 'look how simple it is for these frauds to get PR" and not "Wow - I decided to be a sponsor and was defrauded, and this situation is really terrible". That first statement affects ALL of us in process applying to bring our spouses and loved ones back to Canada -- it casts doubt on EVERYONE's application and the entire process itself - the other is a more personal story, interesting, sure, but doesn't attempt to paint immigrants as frauds or sponsors as stupid people who got conned.

 

[lonelycanadianwifey]

Minna i like ur post .....I agree

Wording is at its core SOOOO IMPORTANT.....Decided to be a sponsor...Definatly worded with the intent to make other resposible for actions by both parties...When in fact the sponsoer made the CHOICE to engage with a person from another country ...in the end soley sponsoring that person to canada...

There was NO gun to the sponsorers head ...Its so sad yes ...But forcing the governemnt to be resposible for a choice you made is completly wrong...

I beleive if someone has been a victim the immigration authorities should investigate on resonbale complaints...And if the person if guilty ...have them get out ...Like never spending 1 single night with your spouse since you landed as a PR is enough reason for me for that person to face criminal charges for lying in the sposorship application...

As a spouse you are in a loving committed relationship with that person outside or within canada.. So dodging your husband or wife the day of PR seems enough reason to me that the government should possibly looked to have the new PR removed from canada pending a investigation...

At least those specific cases where the spouse has failed to even begin life with there spouse when there PR was granted not falling into my opinion of man and wife for sure because at anytime your situation changes during the process for PR you are to notify CIC and if it was a woman or man was being mistreated by there canadian sposue then at that point they should notify CIC they do not want to be with the sposorer any more ...either way its misrepresentation LIE LIE LIE ....

So many gaps in the sytem because of the equal RIGHTS of all ...But in the end we have to give the sole credit to our selves the choices we make...in the end because we signed on that dotted line stating this person is my husband/wife I love him/her i trust him/her and i will be resposible for him/her for 3 years .....So until the governemnt makes changes to this immigration process the rules are the way they are ....All blame on us ..!!!the sponsorers

 

[toby]

I think there are a few misconceptions about the two-year waiting period.

Cowtowngal said:
1. I think others have already addressed the potential for spousal abuse in a scenario like this. Could be very dangerous.

Comment: Why wouldn’t the spouse immigrant remove herself/himself to the mother country to escape the danger? Where is it written that he/she must stay in Canada at all costs? If the Canadian spouse has turned abusive, it is likely that immigrant spouse no longer feels much love or affection. If he/she stays despite the abuse, this suggests that getting a Canada visa is stronger motive than being with the formerly-loved spouse, and that’s not what Family Class PR is supposed to be based on. It is supposed to allow two loving spouses to be together. If they no longer love each other, then the PR becomes an inappropriate visa for the immigrant spouse to be applying for.

Conclusion: returning to the mother country is a decent, acceptable solution – in exchange for streamlining the PR process. Again, if CIC doesn’t have to worry so much about false marriages, then they can process applications much more quickly, knowing that the two-year rule will separate the authentic relationships from many of the false ones.

Cowgirl said:
2. But also - what about those marriages where the couple have already been married for years and perhaps living together in a different country. Should that sponsored spouse have to be denied full PR for a longer time, too? Just a thought...

Comment: That’s a good point, and deserves further consideration. But this should be solved by creative thinking, not used as a reason to stick with a PR process that is unwieldy.


minna said:
This PR process doesn't need to get any *more* difficult for those of us who are in genuine relationships ….

Comment:
If you mean that the two-year waiting period would complicate the PR process, I haven’t been clear. I think it is obvious it would liberate CIC to allow quicker approvals.

minna said:,
I think the process is generally fair right now, although, obviously, mistakes are made -- as they are in any system regulated and run by humans, applied for by humans etc..

Comment: True enough, but if improvements can be made, why not? Why stick with a procedure that is much longer and arduous than the procedure used in many countries, including the USA (which reportedly has a much bigger problem with illegal or fraudulent immigrants).

 

[cowtown gal]

Toby: I totally agree - there are many ways that all bureaucratic systems can be improved. I was not suggesting that it was perfect by any means.

I am all for improvements but I think improving the system and making it less 'arduous', as you say, is very different to the original debate, which was about people feeling that it was the government's fault that they were 'duped'. I can't really speak for finding the process arduous. Although putting together the application was lengthy, the process for us was very straight-forward. I realise that we have been very fortunate in that way and that many, many people go through a much longer and much more protracted procedure.

Although I don't have many issues with the original article posted and really have no issues with changing a system, etc, etc to make it better, I felt I needed to respond to some of the generalisations on here about why people marry people from other countries. We are all on here for a reason and are all likely either sponsoring/sponsored someone or being sponsored/have been sponsored, so I find it astounding that there are people implying where they think it is 'acceptable' to sponsor people from.

Just my two cents.

 

[GTWifey]

And so what if its the Principal applicant that becomes abusive towards the Sponsor? Leaves her after approx 1 year after being landed. Moves out & starts his own life with another woman. A woman he brought to Canada shortly after his PR. In this situation the Sponsor was even told to pay for the divorce or he would go on welfare and pay for it himself. These are some of the cases that we never hear about because the Sponsor is left embarrassed, ashamed, & humiliated. But its real story.

When I first learned of their quick union I sounded a lot like Joe (MINUS the stupid Canadian woman part) & my warnings left a huge gap in our friendship. I stayed away for awhile to allow their union to blossom without my interference. Her husband didnt like me at all but that was OK. . .I just stated the obvious. I encouraged her to TALK with his family, visit his extended family, call his friends. . .LEARN more about HIM. He didnt think it was necessary. He introduced her to his friends & family but seemed discouraged when she made efforts to get close to them. Too me, it was common sense. To her, she was in love & the bond she shared with him was all that mattered. :-*
Sure he was prince charming AT FIRST and promised to take her all around the world, love her children, let her stay with his family, & couldnt stop telling her how beautiful she was as a + size woman, etc. etc. Why wouldnt he? Any smart con artist would. Today she has to work her tail off to pay for the divorce, also maintaining a friendship with him to ensure he is employed for the next 3 years. . .

Sure one can go into any bar and meet a no good man in Canada , but when you sponsor a foreign man, you sign an Undertaking with the Canadian government. You can drop the worthless man from the bar in a heartbeat, no strings attached. BUT, when you sponsor, you are STILL financially responsible for that foreign man for 3 years if he divorces you, re-marries, and is living happily ever after with someone else. Thats the difference!

So there are many cases like my freinds that are never reported to authorities. . .

 

[Lois Lane]

And so what if its the Principal applicant that becomes abusive towards the Sponsor? Leaves her after approx 1 year after being landed. Moves out & starts his own life with another woman. A woman he brought to Canada shortly after his PR. In this situation the Sponsor was even told to pay for the divorce or he would go on welfare and pay for it himself. These are some of the cases that we never hear about because the Sponsor is left embarrassed, ashamed, & humiliated. But its real story.

how did he bring the woman over if he wasn't divorced? she must just be visiting, in which case she wont have ohip or be able to work.....if he goes welfare he wouldn't be able to sponsor the woman, ...maybe things should be amended not to allow an applicant to sponsor a spouse for five years...
its a huge problem that when sponsored marriages fail the sponsor more often then not blames the applicant as only having come to be with them to gain PR, that of course is true in some cases but not in MOST...that makes immigration having to follow up on wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too many cases where the sponsor wants revenge and is also concerned about the applicant going on welfare...but it is a HUGE burden...on immigration ...in every failed marriage regardless of how the couple met, he was prince charming and at the end is ******** good for nothing

 

[rjessome]

I think there are a few misconceptions about the two-year waiting period.

Cowtowngal said:
1. I think others have already addressed the potential for spousal abuse in a scenario like this. Could be very dangerous.

Comment: Why wouldn't the spouse immigrant remove herself/himself to the mother country to escape the danger? Where is it written that he/she must stay in Canada at all costs? If the Canadian spouse has turned abusive, it is likely that immigrant spouse no longer feels much love or affection. If he/she stays despite the abuse, this suggests that getting a Canada visa is stronger motive than being with the formerly-loved spouse, and that's not what Family Class PR is supposed to be based on. It is supposed to allow two loving spouses to be together. If they no longer love each other, then the PR becomes an inappropriate visa for the immigrant spouse to be applying for.

Conclusion: returning to the mother country is a decent, acceptable solution – in exchange for streamlining the PR process. Again, if CIC doesn't have to worry so much about false marriages, then they can process applications much more quickly, knowing that the two-year rule will separate the authentic relationships from many of the false ones.

You make some interesting points toby. However, I can see one flaw regarding the above. What about money, shame and banishment from community/family not to mention a lack of knowledge about the law?

I will give you a real story that happened a few years ago when I was working in family law but it's tied to immigration. A young woman was brought to our office by a social worker and a translator. She was sponsored by her spouse in an arranged marriage and had been in Canada for about a year as a PR. She did not speak English at all, was barely 20 years old and she was terrified. I'll never forget the bruises on her face and how she walked slowly and sat gingerly because of her injuries. This was just a few days AFTER she had been released from the hospital. At the time I met her, she was living in a shelter. Since arriving in Canada she had been pretty much treated as a slave by her husband and his family. She was beaten regularly and was almost never allowed to leave the house. She became pregnant and this last beating that ended up with her in the hospital resulted in a miscarriage. I think it was the bleeding and her not being able to regain consciousness that finally made the family call an ambulance. Upon seeing her, the hospital called the police and social services and assault charges were filed as well as a restraining order. We learned her story (through a very kind and patient translator) and she told us that she WANTED to go home to her country but that she had no money and her family didn't want her because it would bring shame to them. THEY told her to stay with her husband, this was her lot in life, and that if she learned how to behave "properly" that these things wouldn't happen to her. This poor girl was so scared. She was all alone in Canada except for her husband and his family. Her family didn't want her. She did not speak the language, was poorly educated and had no job skills. She knew nothing of her rights and believed everything her husband and family told her. Now she was living in a shelter where she couldn't communicate with anyone and lived in fear of the anger she imagined her husband and his family must have for her because she wasn't cooking and cleaning in their house. I think the saddest part was that she really believed that it was HER fault that she was treated so poorly.

Obviously, we (staff, translator and social worker) were encouraging her to get a divorce and start a new life. Of course we didn't want her to continue to live that way! But a divorce was just so shameful for her to imagine. Over time, she continued to communicate with her family in her home country. They were adamant that she return to her husband. Apparently the families were warring over what had happened and there were all kinds of threats and accusations flying over the phone lines and via the internet. Ultimately, she refused to give any statement to the police regarding the abuse she suffered and she went back to her husband.

I often wonder what happened to her. I hope she is still alive.

Now this story is extreme but this scenario is not rare. This girl wanted to go home but her family wouldn't accept her and she had no money for a plane ticket anyway. The husband knew he couldn't have her deported although she said he threatened that over and over and she wished he would just put her on a plane. But he wasn't about to shell out any money for a ticket either. So what were her choices? So yes, while I agree that going back "home" is not necessarily a bad thing, there are all kinds of cases like this where it is just not an option.

We have to accept that much of the world thinks of Canada as a "prize". That might sound absurd but it's the truth. There are only a handful of countries that enjoy parallel standards of living with Canada with a healthy economy, minimal corruption in government, reliable public and social services, and equality of rights no matter your gender, race, religion or colour. It's far from perfect of course but it's pretty darn good. And the world knows it.

 

[plumosa]

You make some interesting points toby. However, I can see one flaw regarding the above. What about money, shame and banishment from community/family not to mention a lack of knowledge about the law?

I will give you a real story that happened a few years ago when I was working in family law but it's tied to immigration. A young woman was brought to our office by a social worker and a translator. She was sponsored by her spouse in an arranged marriage and had been in Canada for about a year as a PR. She did not speak English at all, was barely 20 years old and she was terrified. I'll never forget the bruises on her face and how she walked slowly and sat gingerly because of her injuries. This was just a few days AFTER she had been released from the hospital. At the time I met her, she was living in a shelter. Since arriving in Canada she had been pretty much treated as a slave by her husband and his family. She was beaten regularly and was almost never allowed to leave the house. She became pregnant and this last beating that ended up with her in the hospital resulted in a miscarriage. I think it was the bleeding and her not being able to regain consciousness that finally made the family call an ambulance. Upon seeing her, the hospital called the police and social services and assault charges were filed as well as a restraining order. We learned her story (through a very kind and patient translator) and she told us that she WANTED to go home to her country but that she had no money and her family didn't want her because it would bring shame to them. THEY told her to stay with her husband, this was her lot in life, and that if she learned how to behave "properly" that these things wouldn't happen to her. This poor girl was so scared. She was all alone in Canada except for her husband and his family. Her family didn't want her. She did not speak the language, was poorly educated and had no job skills. She knew nothing of her rights and believed everything her husband and family told her. Now she was living in a shelter where she couldn't communicate with anyone and lived in fear of the anger she imagined her husband and his family must have for her because she wasn't cooking and cleaning in their house. I think the saddest part was that she really believed that it was HER fault that she was treated so poorly.

Obviously, we (staff, translator and social worker) were encouraging her to get a divorce and start a new life. Of course we didn't want her to continue to live that way! But a divorce was just so shameful for her to imagine. Over time, she continued to communicate with her family in her home country. They were adamant that she return to her husband. Apparently the families were warring over what had happened and there were all kinds of threats and accusations flying over the phone lines and via the internet. Ultimately, she refused to give any statement to the police regarding the abuse she suffered and she went back to her husband.

I often wonder what happened to her. I hope she is still alive.

Now this story is extreme but this scenario is not rare. This girl wanted to go home but her family wouldn't accept her and she had no money for a plane ticket anyway. The husband knew he couldn't have her deported although she said he threatened that over and over and she wished he would just put her on a plane. But he wasn't about to shell out any money for a ticket either. So what were her choices? So yes, while I agree that going back "home" is not necessarily a bad thing, there are all kinds of cases like this where it is just not an option.

We have to accept that much of the world thinks of Canada as a "prize". That might sound absurd but it's the truth. There are only a handful of countries that enjoy parallel standards of living with Canada with a healthy economy, minimal corruption in government, reliable public and social services, and equality of rights no matter your gender, race, religion or colour. It's far from perfect of course but it's pretty darn good. And the world knows it.

thank you SO much for writing this all out...I was trying to come up with a response and was failing miserably!

 

[GTWifey]

how did he bring the woman over if he wasn't divorced? she must just be visiting, in which case she wont have ohip or be able to work.....if he goes welfare he wouldn't be able to sponsor the woman, ...maybe things should be amended not to allow an applicant to sponsor a spouse for five years...
its a huge problem that when sponsored marriages fail the sponsor more often then not blames the applicant as only having come to be with them to gain PR, that of course is true in some cases but not in MOST...that makes immigration having to follow up on wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too many cases where the sponsor wants revenge and is also concerned about the applicant going on welfare...but it is a HUGE burden...on immigration ...in every failed marriage regardless of how the couple met, he was prince charming and at the end is ******** good for nothing

His mistress got through on a Visitors Visa. He decided to move out of his marital home to help her financially once she landed in Canada. . .we dont know what happened after that. The sponsor is just happpppy that he is working. She's counting down the days to when her 3 year commitment will be over. . . :-[

 

[Lois Lane]

he moved out of his matrimonial home to support his mistress who is here on a visitor's visa for six months....hmmmm
he cannot divorce until a year has passed
he cannot sponsor his mistress while on welfare

anything is possible
that being said....his wife has little to worry about...since he needs to support himself and his mistress so unlikely he will go on welfare ....lucky for his wife!

 

[toby]

Rjesssome said:
You make some interesting points toby. However, I can see one flaw regarding the above. What about money, shame and banishment from community/family not to mention a lack of knowledge about the law?


That's a sad and impossible situation she found herself in, Rjessome. This case would certainly be one of the exceptions to the two-year rule. There are humanitarian grounds for giving a PR in the first place, so why not similar grounds for allowing a PR who has not met the two-year requirement, but really cannot return to the home country? I think the concept makes sense -- but then no one has asked me to be King of the Universe, so perhaps my opinions don't appeal to the majority.

Perhaps a one-person tribunal could decide such cases. But the essential difference is that under the current PR system, once a PR lands he/she has carte blanche to do almost anything short of a criminal act, whereas under the two-year rule Canada has some recourse against the offenders, those who scam the system (and a Canadian sponsor) to land in Canada. Not perfect, but better (and more efficient) than we have now.

 

[locolynn]

Rjesssome said:
You make some interesting points toby. However, I can see one flaw regarding the above. What about money, shame and banishment from community/family not to mention a lack of knowledge about the law?


That's a sad and impossible situation she found herself in, Rjessome. This case would certainly be one of the exceptions to the two-year rule. There are humanitarian grounds for giving a PR in the first place, so why not similar grounds for allowing a PR who has not met the two-year requirement, but really cannot return to the home country? I think the concept makes sense -- but then no one has asked me to be King of the Universe, so perhaps my opinions don't appeal to the majority.

Perhaps a one-person tribunal could decide such cases. But the essential difference is that under the current PR system, once a PR lands he/she has carte blanche to do almost anything short of a criminal act, whereas under the two-year rule Canada has some recourse against the offenders, those who scam the system (and a Canadian sponsor) to land in Canada. Not perfect, but better (and more efficient) than we have now.

Just want to throw my two cents in.

While I certainly don't think it's the rule, I think the situations like the one rjessome described happen a lot more that people want to acknowledge. For as many people there are that are desperate to leave their home countries for a "better life", there are as many here in Canada willing to take advantage of that desperation, and in fact probably seek those very people out.

I like the idea of a tribunal, but that would likely prove really difficult for the people who need it to access it (because of language, reliance on sponsor, etc...). To me it makes more sense to have a one to address the scammers. To avoid having people trying to get their spouses deported out of anger, make the process difficult for the sponsors to undertake (for the most part we already have a good understanding of English/French, and the Canadian system).

In the end, however the system is structured, people will find a way to scam it.

Lynn

 

[JimM]

I certainly wouldn't object to having a 2 year probationary period as long as I could work and have healthcare during it. I'm sure people would still find a way to scam the system but it should cut down greatly on the number of them.

 

[iarblue]

Rjessome well put.