mandpete

We are finally getting round to applying for citizenship and have a question about my 22 year old son's application. He moved in with his girlfriend about 6 months ago but it's not a permanent move. He is not on the apartment lease but has put the cable and electric bill in his name and his car insurance is under the temporary address. Other than those three things all his bank, work, college, health records etc are still at our address. He literally took one suitcase of clothes and his xbox to his girlfriend's apartment so the vast majority of his things are still in his room here.

Is it OK to put our address on his N400 application and also on our applications where it asks for child's address? If I put his temporary address on the forms will he then have to inform uscis about the change of address for his Green Card?

Unrelated, can I also use our address on his 2013 tax return?

Noorah101

How far away did he move? Does it put him in a different location where he'd have his naturalization interview?

Since this is just a temporary thing, he probably doesn't need to do an AR-11. The thing is, though...having his name on utility bills doesn't sound temporary to me. It's already been 6 months...how much longer does he anticipate living there temporarily? His long term plan is to move back in with you guys at some point?

I think that would be OK.

Rene

mandpete

He lives about 5 miles from us in the same county but a different township. His girlfriend did not want cable tv and said if he wanted it he had to put it in his name and he would then be using more electric so that had to be in his name too. She is a few years older than him and tends to move every 12 months so I am not sure how long he will be at that particular address. Reading between the lines he could be back living with us in the not too distant future.

Noorah101

Since he's located that close to you, and you know how to get in touch with him, I'd say he doesn't need to complete an AR-11, and it would be OK to use your address on his N-400 and his 2013 tax return.

Rene

ian-mstm

If he's over 21, he is not considered a child for US immigration purposes.

Ian

mandpete

Part 10 asks for details of all children under 18 years of age or over 18 years of age.

Noorah101

It's actually worded "Children under 18 years of age or older". That's the oddest way I've ever seen it put.

But it does say list ALL children, so yes, list him.

Rene

MarylandNed

He's not a minor but he is still the child of his parents regardless of how old he is. The parents have to list him on their N400 application because the application form asks for details of all children regardless of whether or not they are minors.

The son can't automatically acquire US citizenship when a parent naturalizes because he is not a minor. That's why the OP stated that the son is also filing his own N400 application.

ian-mstm

Under age 21, he's considered a child; over age 21 he's considered a son... and not a child. I didn't write the language... I merely reported a simple statement of fact.

Y'all need to stop trying to read things into my comment that simply aren't there! Unlike many other posters, I have a decent command of the language and rarely say anything that I don't actually mean!

Ian

MarylandNed

The term 'children' includes sons or daughters of any age. Look it up in any dictionary.

The N400 application asks parents to list all their children in section 10 and it specifically states all children under or over 18 years of age. This is so that parents understand that they are not just asking for minor children (under 18). So the use of the word 'children' here is consistent with the dictionary - i.e. the term 'children' is not age dependent for purposes of the N400.

If you think you're still correct, then consider this. By YOUR definition of the word, the parents should NOT be listing sons or daughters who are 21 or over on their N400 applications beacause, according to you, they are not 'children'. But that is clearly incorrect. The N400 form clearly wants all 'children' (yes, it uses this word) listed regardless of age - read it.

S Folinsky

The Immigration & Nationality Act contains a definition of "child" at section 201(c) if memory serves me correct.

The statutory definition is unmarried and under 21 years of age.

So, in my opinion, one cannot be faulted for either including or disregarding "sons and daugthers" who are either married or age 21 or older.

The statutory definition was written in 1952 when the age of majority was still 21 rather than 18.

Of course, I've been amused for years in that the instructions for the I-130 appear to use the dictionary definition you mention.

MarylandNed

The N400 form clearly states that the parent should list all children under or over 18. Now you can take the view that since 'child' means under 21 (based on some other definition elsewhere) then you don't include a 22 year old son on the N400. I definitely wouldn't take that view. If that's what they meant why say "under or over 18" instead of "under 21" on the N400? Remember also that "unmarried sons or daughters over the age of 21" and "married children of any age" can be sponsored for permanent residence via I-130. So you'd better list all of your children regardless of age on your N400 application or you might have problems later with I-130.

Yes, there are inconsistencies when looking at definitions across multiple documents. Even more so when you compare documents produced many years apart. However, forgetting immigration for a moment, a son or daughter of any age is still the child of their parents. That's an acceptable definition of the word 'child' and can be found in the dictionary (child = son or daughter). It seems to be the definition that the N400 is using so use caution and include all children even those over 21 (especially because of the I-130 issue). You can't cause any harm by including them - but you could create problems if you don't.

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encycloped...orm-n-400.html

"If you neglect to mention a child on your citizenship application, and you then come back later with a petition to immigrate that child, USCIS may suspect that you are committing a fraud to help someone else’s child get a green card."

Rete

We listed Jim's son on the N-400 and at the time his son was over 40. The same when it came to the I-824 for PR, we listed ALL the children regardless of where they lived and their ages. It does not hurt an application to do so and in some instances might be what is needed to help prove a relationship in the future if the children is living abroad and want to emigrate.

ian-mstm

Oh, for the love of god... would someone please point out where I said that a child (of any age) should not be included on the form? Hint = I didn't... and it seems just a bit rude of people to try to twist what I wrote into meaning something that I didn't actually write.

Ian

MarylandNed

Ok, then what was the point of post #5? Someone reading that could reasonably imply that you meant not to include the son because he's not a child.