Lana

Has anyone here been through the process of filing an I-751 by themselves?
Meaning, after their marriage fell apart?

I would appreciate any advice... also any supporting documents you filed
with the form... I've vacation pictures, joint leases, joint loans,
insurance paperwork, life insurance beneficiary paperwork, pictures of us
with our respective families, wedding invitations addressed to "Mr & Mrs
_____"... probably other things I can't think of right now too.

Also, I am curious about how much information the INS wants about why the
marriage dissolved... Do they want all the details, or just generic
information? My spouse was unfaithful. Can I leave it at that, or do they
want the lowdown, a la National Enquirer... about everything that
happened???

Also what about if your divorce hasn't come through yet and you are just
legally separated? Will they expect your (former?) spouse to file the
paperwork with you and attend the interview or will you just file by
yourself?

Thx.... lana.

AGUILA

Lana,

Do a search on posts written by me, I am in a similar situation and have posted a lot information in the past.

I filed Jointly I-751 but got into divorce proceedings and divorce became final before adjudication of the I-751 therefore I had to re-file I-751 with waivers of the joint filing requirement. It looks that you have plenty of information, it would be great if you could get a divorce decree based on the adultery ground.

You will need affidavits [letters] from a minimum of 2 people that will attest that you were married, that they visisted you at home, and that they learned that your spouse cheated on you or that it did not work but that it never serve the purpose of procuring an immigration benefit.

Have you filed income tax returns jointly!? How long were you married for? how long after getting conditional green card did you get separated?

Lana

    > Lana,
    > Do a search on posts written by me, I am in a similar
    > situation and have posted a lot information in the past.
    > I filed
    > Jointly I-751 but got into divorce proceedings and divorce became final
    > before adjudication of the I-751 therefore I had to re-file I-751 with
    > waivers of the joint filing requirement. It looks that you have plenty
    > of information, it would be great if you could get a divorce decree
    > based on the adultery ground.

Well, we are planning on filing an uncontested divorce, just because we
don't have any assets other than a rather hefty savings account in both our
names... Which we are splitting evenly. It never occured to me before, but
do you think because we aren't squabbling that they'll think "hhmmmm... why
are they splitting so easily, is it all pre-meditated?"... The thought never
occured to me before. I just don't want to go through prolonged legal
proceedings and I don't want lawyers eating up all my money. That's why I'm
not fighting. Rightfully, I should probably take more than half of the
savings since I'm letting him keeping all our stuff, and he just bought a
big fat flat screen tv and entertainment system with our federal tax check,
which if he hadn't would have meant an even bigger savings account to split.
But I will have enough money, theres more to be made and I don't want to
argue. If I didn't have enough I would take more, but I do, so whatever.

    > You will need affidavits [letters] from a
    > minimum of 2 people that will attest that you were married, that they
    > visisted you at home, and that they learned that your spouse cheated on
    > you or that it did not work but that it never serve the purpose of
    > procuring an immigration benefit.

I can get that without any problem... but my understanding was that if you
had enough documents to show that you shared a life together then you didn't
need affidavits from friends? I don't really want to involve outsiders as
much as possible, but if it must be done, then I will.


    > Have you filed income tax returns
    > jointly!? How long were you married for? how long after getting
    > conditional green card did you get separated?

We filed taxes jointly for 2003 and 2004, we've been married two years. I
got my conditional green card last October. I'm not really concerned about
not being approved. From what I understand, all they want to know is that
your marriage was real, they you weren't trying to circumvent immigration
procedures... and we absolutely were not trying to circumvent anything and
our marriage has been 100% bonafide. I don't have anything to hide, so I'm
not too concerned. I just want to be prepared for all the hoops I will be
expected to jump through.

*sigh*

Thanks, I will go search the google for your posts and continue my research.

Lana

I just thought of something else... how useful and/or appropriate would it
be to include copies of personal diaries as "proof" in your I-751 filing?

I have always kept a diary. I have diaries from when we first met and
throughout our entire marriage.

Is this a valid form of proof? Can anyone tell me?


"lana" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > Has anyone here been through the process of filing an I-751 by themselves?
    > Meaning, after their marriage fell apart?
    > I would appreciate any advice... also any supporting documents you filed
    > with the form... I've vacation pictures, joint leases, joint loans,
    > insurance paperwork, life insurance beneficiary paperwork, pictures of us
    > with our respective families, wedding invitations addressed to "Mr & Mrs
    > _____"... probably other things I can't think of right now too.
    > Also, I am curious about how much information the INS wants about why the
    > marriage dissolved... Do they want all the details, or just generic
    > information? My spouse was unfaithful. Can I leave it at that, or do they
    > want the lowdown, a la National Enquirer... about everything that
    > happened???
    > Also what about if your divorce hasn't come through yet and you are just
    > legally separated? Will they expect your (former?) spouse to file the
    > paperwork with you and attend the interview or will you just file by
    > yourself?
    > Thx.... lana.

Folinskyinla

Hi:

You can't file a "good faith" waiver until the divorce is FINAL. If your spouse is willing, you can file a joint petition while the divorce is pending and when its final, file a new I-751.

On a "good faith" waiver, the sole question is whether or not the divorce was in good faith -- the reason for the divorce is not entirely relevant.

You may consider an "abused spouse" I-751 -- and you can even be living together for that one! Perhaps the unfaithfulness would help on that one -- it might also bridge you over until the divorce is final and then you can file the "good faith" I-751.

You may want to see a lawyer on this one.

Lana

    > Hi:
    > You can't file a "good faith" waiver until the divorce
    > is FINAL. If your spouse is willing, you can file a joint petition
    > while the divorce is pending and when its final, file a new I-751.
    > On a
    > "good faith" waiver, the sole question is whether or not the divorce was
    > in good faith -- the reason for the divorce is not entirely relevant.
    > You may consider an "abused spouse" I-751 -- and you can even be
    > living together for that one! Perhaps the unfaithfulness would help on
    > that one -- it might also bridge you over until the divorce is final and
    > then you can file the "good faith" I-751.
    > You may want to see a lawyer
    > on this one.


If I can afford one at the time of filing, I definitely will get one if only
to save myself the headaches! Does infidelity constitute abuse? My husband
has never laid a hand on me, although he is an insufferable nag. I think
that would be kinda hard to prove mental abuse based on incessant nagging,
lol.

I'm glad to hear the reason for the divorce is basically irrelevant, from an
attorney. I can imagine the interview would excruciating explaining all the
personal details of why your marriage failed to a bunch on stone faced
government officials... *shudder*

Folinskyinla

Hi:

I DID say that a legal consultation was in order. Giving the reason for the breakup just might be a good idea. It really does depend upon the facts of each individual case. Also, you are a little too close in to think clearly and without emotion.

Andrew DeFaria

Folinskyinla wrote:

    > You may consider an "abused spouse" I-751 -- and you can even be
    > living together for that one! Perhaps the unfaithfulness would help on
    > that one -- it might also bridge you over until the divorce is final
    > and then you can file the "good faith" I-751.

I'm beginning to think that the reason why it's called an abused spouse
waiver is because it (the waiver) is often abused! No abuse was alleged
by this poster. Why then do you, an immigration attorney, suggest using
an abused spouse waiver? It supposed to be for people who are really
abused (as in put in the hospital because of physical abuse) or severely
abused in a psychological way (we can think of the recent prison abuse
scandal). I don't happen to believe that unfaithfulness in a marriage is
nor should be considered abuse, though I guess it's possible, and I
would hope the USCIS wouldn't either unless it was truly extreme, which
does not appear to be the case here. To suggest that she use it is,
IMHO, an abuse of the abused spouse waiver. Look there are many
legitimate abused spouses who should be allowed to use that waiver and
if it is abused then it will just devalue it and make it harder for
people truly abused to take advantage of it.
--
Do witches run spell checkers?

Andrew DeFaria

lana wrote:

    > If I can afford one at the time of filing, I definitely will get one
    > if only to save myself the headaches! Does infidelity constitute abuse?

IMO no it doesn't. It may constitute an asshole or a jerk and an
inconsiderate person but not abuse. When people cheat rarely do they do
so in an attempt to hurt their spouse rather they do it in an attempt to
help themselves feel better, however misguided they may be as to why the
feel badly. How then can it be considered abuse when they intent to hurt
the other person is not there? Neglect, negligence to the vows -
perhaps. Abuse or an attempt to hurt the other person - I don't think so.

Then again in todays world it seems everything it turned around and the
victim syndrome is so strong that you could probably prove that sending
flowers to your wife is abusing her!

--
Why does your gynecologist leave the room when you get undressed?

Mrtravelkay

Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>ok there are many
    > legitimate abused spouses who should be allowed to use that waiver and
    > if it is abused then it will just devalue it and make it harder for
    > people truly abused to take advantage of it.

I feel the same way about discrimination, such as the Eenie Meenie
Airline Lawsuit, they way I remembered the saying as a child was with
"catch a piggy by his toe". I know there is too much discrimination
against people of certain races, but the more people make false claims
of it, the more the real victims suffer.

Lana

    > > You may consider an "abused spouse" I-751 -- and you can even be
    > > living together for that one! Perhaps the unfaithfulness would help on
    > > that one -- it might also bridge you over until the divorce is final
    > > and then you can file the "good faith" I-751.
    > I'm beginning to think that the reason why it's called an abused spouse
    > waiver is because it (the waiver) is often abused! No abuse was alleged
    > by this poster.

Well, I am perfectly within my rights to file an I-751, and I should be
approved on the basis that my marriage was real, correct? So I don't really
see why I would need to tell the INS I was abused, which to be perfectly
honest I wouldn't feel right doing... Since I don't feel that I was. we had
ugly fights and my husband has a tendency to rant about the same thing over
and over... until I would feel my head would explode... I'm not kidding, he
berated me for five hours once for overdrawing my checking account just for
one example... But... I have the tendency to lose my shit when pushed too
far and throw things at him, and scratch and pinch, and yes PUNCH... and I'm
lucky he doesn't punch back, because he's a marine and he'd kick my ass...
but he has never ever laid a hand on me. Never. I've laid my hands on him
many times, mostly to get him to shut up, but nonetheless, I did what I did.

Also, I do feel entitled to take more of our savings, but I feel sorry for
him because I'm the one leaving him. I view him as kind of pathetic. He
denies cheating on me, and I don't have any proof like photos, or a witness
that saw him or phone records... Just a lot of very incriminating
circumstantial evidence, which pretty much proves that he was cheating or if
not cheating then doing some very shady things behind my back. Plus he's an
incredibly good liar. I've seen him tell bald faced lies to everyone from
his parents to insurance companies, he should write a book about lying with
a straight face. Have you heard that Seinfeldism, "if you believe it, then
it's not a lie"... Thats my husband!!!There is no trust and although I don't
have solid proof, I would be stupid knowing all I know, to assume that he
hasn't cheated on me.

Anyway, the point was if I can be approved without claiming abuse, why would
I want to go that route? I don't understand at all why claiming abuse would
be necessary. Not to mention my husband is the military and that could have
ramifications in his command. I don't want that, I don't want his veterans
benefits, I don't want to ruin his life, I just want to extricate myself
from it cleanly and swiftly.

Thats all.

-Lana.

Folinskyinla

Hi Andrew:

I farm these out to be honest. An I used very "soft" language on eligibility -- neither you nor I have the entire facts about her marriage. You may be right -- or you may be wrong. But it is in NEITHER one of our purviews to make that suggestion.

Andrew DeFaria

"lana" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > > > You may consider an "abused spouse" I-751 -- and you can even be
    > > > living together for that one! Perhaps the unfaithfulness would help on
    > > > that one -- it might also bridge you over until the divorce is final
    > > > and then you can file the "good faith" I-751.
    > >
    > > I'm beginning to think that the reason why it's called an abused spouse
    > > waiver is because it (the waiver) is often abused! No abuse was alleged
    > > by this poster.
    > Well, I am perfectly within my rights to file an I-751, and I should be
    > approved on the basis that my marriage was real, correct?

Apparently there are many I-751. There's the one you file jointly, i.e. the
"normal" one. Then there's the one you can file as a "self-petitioner". This
is what you would file after your divorce is finalized. Then there's the, as
Folinskyinla put it, "abused spouse" I-751...

    > So I don't really
    > see why I would need to tell the INS I was abused, which to be perfectly
    > honest I wouldn't feel right doing... Since I don't feel that I was.

Exactly! And good for you. That was my point. If you weren't really abused
then to use an "abused spouse" I-751 just ain't right.

    > we had
    > ugly fights and my husband has a tendency to rant about the same thing
over
    > and over... until I would feel my head would explode... I'm not kidding,
he
    > berated me for five hours once for overdrawing my checking account just
for
    > one example...

I'd venture to guess that many, most, if not all marriage have such
arguments. (though 5 hours seems extreme).

    > But... I have the tendency to lose my shit when pushed too
    > far and throw things at him, and scratch and pinch, and yes PUNCH...

Well if you throw things and punch him then you are the abuser not him!

    > and I'm
    > lucky he doesn't punch back, because he's a marine and he'd kick my ass...
    > but he has never ever laid a hand on me. Never. I've laid my hands on him

    > many times, mostly to get him to shut up, but nonetheless, I did what I
did.

Yes and do you realize the injustice here? If he did punch you, slap you or
hit you in a manner similar to how you hit him (i.e. to get you to shut up -
I'm not talking about a full out punch intended to get you to more than shut
up) and you called the cops he would be summarily thrown in jail, charged
with domestic violence, spend time in jail, have an automatic restraining
order against him, basically no questions ask and be forced to attend
domestic violence courses at considerable cost. Conversely if he called the
police because of you hitting him the chances are high that he, yet he not
you, would still be assumed to be the agressor and locked up in jail and
everything else. He knows this. This is why he didn't hit you back. The
system is inherently unfair here.

    > Also, I do feel entitled to take more of our savings, but I feel sorry for
    > him because I'm the one leaving him.

He is probably banking on you feeling sorry for him.

    > I view him as kind of pathetic. He
    > denies cheating on me, and I don't have any proof like photos, or a
witness
    > that saw him or phone records... Just a lot of very incriminating
    > circumstantial evidence, which pretty much proves that he was cheating or
if
    > not cheating then doing some very shady things behind my back. Plus he's
an
    > incredibly good liar. I've seen him tell bald faced lies to everyone from
    > his parents to insurance companies, he should write a book about lying
with
    > a straight face. Have you heard that Seinfeldism, "if you believe it, then
    > it's not a lie"... Thats my husband!!!There is no trust and although I
don't
    > have solid proof, I would be stupid knowing all I know, to assume that he
    > hasn't cheated on me.

Sounds iffy to me in a sense but you are closer to the situation than I and
sometimes our senses know way before any proof comes to light. In any event
you don't need to have infidelity to get divorced. Most states are no fault
states and you can divorce for any reason - you don't like the color of his
hair - and that's OK with them. And while it sounds iffy to me it also
sounds to me like you are probably right for ending it.

    > Anyway, the point was if I can be approved without claiming abuse, why
would
    > I want to go that route?

That's not how I see it. I see it as if you were not abused then why would
you used an abused spouse waiver?

    > I don't understand at all why claiming abuse would
    > be necessary.

I don't think we are talking about necessary here. We are (or at least I am)
talking about the truth. If you weren't abused then the abused spouse waiver
isn't for you. It's a lie.

    > Not to mention my husband is the military and that could have
    > ramifications in his command. I don't want that, I don't want his veterans
    > benefits, I don't want to ruin his life, I just want to extricate myself
    > from it cleanly and swiftly.
    > Thats all.

Exactly. All I was saying was that I thought it wrong for an immigration
attorney to suggest that you use an abused spouse waiver when there was no
real indication of any abuse. If there is no abuse then an abused spouse
waiver is the wrong thing to use and, IMHO, people who use an abused spouse
waiver when there was no abuse are abusing the waiver itself. I did not say
that you were abusing that waiver as indeed you have cleared up here that
you were not abused and did not intend to use such a waiver.

Lana

    > I'd venture to guess that many, most, if not all marriage have such
    > arguments. (though 5 hours seems extreme).
    > > But... I have the tendency to lose my shit when pushed too
    > > far and throw things at him, and scratch and pinch, and yes PUNCH...
    > Well if you throw things and punch him then you are the abuser not him!

Well Andrew that's kind of my point. Who is the abuser when a marriage
disintegrates? Both sides get ugly. A lot of the things he has put me
through have been borderline or outright abusive, but what about what I have
done also?

    > Yes and do you realize the injustice here? If he did punch you, slap you
or
    > hit you in a manner similar to how you hit him (i.e. to get you to shut
up -
    > I'm not talking about a full out punch intended to get you to more than
shut
    > up) and you called the cops he would be summarily thrown in jail, charged
    > with domestic violence, spend time in jail, have an automatic restraining
    > order against him, basically no questions ask and be forced to attend
    > domestic violence courses at considerable cost. Conversely if he called
the
    > police because of you hitting him the chances are high that he, yet he not
    > you, would still be assumed to be the agressor and locked up in jail and
    > everything else. He knows this. This is why he didn't hit you back. The
    > system is inherently unfair here.

Ha! I beg to differ. If he wanted to get a lawyer and collected evidence,
why couldn't he say he was a battered spouse? He could do it. On what basis
would he be denied if he had evidence? Outsiders may snicker, but so what! A
court of law couldn't deny him if he has evidence of spousal abuse. He isn't
a battered spouse anyway. I don't think he's ever been bruised before. I
throw things and miss. He is the one that won't let me leave sometimes and
he blocks the door way, which makes me feel like a caged animal...
Nonetheless, I wouldn't say either of us has been abused. We're just grossly
incompatible!

    > Sounds iffy to me in a sense but you are closer to the situation than I
and
    > sometimes our senses know way before any proof comes to light. In any
event
    > you don't need to have infidelity to get divorced. Most states are no
fault
    > states and you can divorce for any reason - you don't like the color of
his
    > hair - and that's OK with them. And while it sounds iffy to me it also
    > sounds to me like you are probably right for ending it.

Exactly. I know what is true. Among other things, I find stupid crap on the
computer all the time. Yahoo profiles of local slutty women... LOCAL... not
across the country. He doesn't talk to anyone across the country, why not?
And they are all older trampy women, obviously online looking for sex...
they are all local and fit the same profile. We are in our twenties and he
has severe mother issues. Of course he denies it all. He says they contact
him and he just chats to them. He obviously thinks I'm stupid. Now he just
covers his tracks better. And there are other things.

    > > Anyway, the point was if I can be approved without claiming abuse, why
    > would
    > > I want to go that route?
    > That's not how I see it. I see it as if you were not abused then why would
    > you used an abused spouse waiver?
    > > I don't understand at all why claiming abuse would
    > > be necessary.
    > I don't think we are talking about necessary here. We are (or at least I
am)
    > talking about the truth. If you weren't abused then the abused spouse
waiver
    > isn't for you. It's a lie.

I've been agreeing with you the whole time.

Andrew DeFaria

"lana" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > > I'd venture to guess that many, most, if not all marriage have such
    > > arguments. (though 5 hours seems extreme).
    > >
    > > > But... I have the tendency to lose my shit when pushed too
    > > > far and throw things at him, and scratch and pinch, and yes PUNCH...
    > >
    > > Well if you throw things and punch him then you are the abuser not him!
    > Well Andrew that's kind of my point. Who is the abuser when a marriage
    > disintegrates?

As always, the actual person who commits the abuse. If you were punching him
and he was not punching you then look in the mirror for the abuser.

    > Both sides get ugly.

Ugly is one thing. Arguing is another, But abuse is yet another thing.

    > A lot of the things he has put me
    > through have been borderline or outright abusive,

Perhaps, I was not there so I cannot say for sure. But borderline is not
abuse - over the border is.

    > but what about what I have
    > done also?
    > > Yes and do you realize the injustice here? If he did punch you, slap you
    > or
    > > hit you in a manner similar to how you hit him (i.e. to get you to shut
    > up -
    > > I'm not talking about a full out punch intended to get you to more than
    > shut
    > > up) and you called the cops he would be summarily thrown in jail,
charged
    > > with domestic violence, spend time in jail, have an automatic
restraining
    > > order against him, basically no questions ask and be forced to attend
    > > domestic violence courses at considerable cost. Conversely if he called
    > the
    > > police because of you hitting him the chances are high that he, yet he
not
    > > you, would still be assumed to be the agressor and locked up in jail and
    > > everything else. He knows this. This is why he didn't hit you back. The
    > > system is inherently unfair here.
    > Ha! I beg to differ. If he wanted to get a lawyer and collected evidence,
    > why couldn't he say he was a battered spouse? He could do it.

I didn't say he couldn't try. Whether he would be successful is another
story.

    > On what basis
    > would he be denied if he had evidence?

How about this: "Officer, the reason why I hit him over the head with that
flower pot was because he was comming at me with a knife", or "He was
choking me". Say that and they'll probably believe you and arrest him.

    > Outsiders may snicker, but so what! A
    > court of law couldn't deny him if he has evidence of spousal abuse.

See above.

    > He isn't a battered spouse anyway.

Sure he is! You hit him. That's really enough.

    > I don't think he's ever been bruised before.

Bruising is not required.

    > I
    > throw things and miss.

Emotional abuse. Physical threats. Attempts. You see people can (and do)
manipulate the system.

    > He is the one that won't let me leave sometimes and
    > he blocks the door way, which makes me feel like a caged animal...

How you feel is under your control and really not under his control at all.
Now if he were blocking you as you said he was then that can be construed as
abuse.

    > Nonetheless, I wouldn't say either of us has been abused. We're just
grossly
    > incompatible!

Probably.

My point here is that many can and do abuse the system and simple arguments,
etc are blown into a story of horrible abuse that is often taken at face
value by cops and the system. Given that I applaud you for admitting what
you have admitted and not going the abused route.


    > > Sounds iffy to me in a sense but you are closer to the situation than I
    > and
    > > sometimes our senses know way before any proof comes to light. In any
    > event
    > > you don't need to have infidelity to get divorced. Most states are no
    > fault
    > > states and you can divorce for any reason - you don't like the color of
    > his
    > > hair - and that's OK with them. And while it sounds iffy to me it also
    > > sounds to me like you are probably right for ending it.
    > Exactly. I know what is true. Among other things, I find stupid crap on
the
    > computer all the time. Yahoo profiles of local slutty women... LOCAL...
not
    > across the country. He doesn't talk to anyone across the country, why not?

Do you want him to? ;-)

    > And they are all older trampy women, obviously online looking for sex...
    > they are all local and fit the same profile. We are in our twenties and he
    > has severe mother issues. Of course he denies it all. He says they contact
    > him and he just chats to them. He obviously thinks I'm stupid. Now he just
    > covers his tracks better. And there are other things.
    > > > Anyway, the point was if I can be approved without claiming abuse, why
    > > would
    > > > I want to go that route?
    > >
    > > That's not how I see it. I see it as if you were not abused then why
would
    > > you used an abused spouse waiver?
    > >
    > > > I don't understand at all why claiming abuse would
    > > > be necessary.
    > >
    > > I don't think we are talking about necessary here. We are (or at least I
    > am)
    > > talking about the truth. If you weren't abused then the abused spouse
    > waiver
    > > isn't for you. It's a lie.
    > I've been agreeing with you the whole time.

Yes. I was speaking of the general you, not the specify you.