Annoying Misconceptions about Visas/Immigration

Yeah, my inlaws think that, still.  Various conversations with them-

FiL:You should have come over here and just applied to stay. X and Y [distant relatives who did this in the 90s] did that. [note: it was legal at the time to switch, but since we were already married, it would have been noted as a lie.]
Me: What visa did X have when she entered the country?
FiL: Oh, I don't know that.

Upon BiL telling us he hired a visa consultant from Ukraine to handle his now wife's fiance visa (which I think was a scam as he ended up shelling out thousands of pounds just for the adviser for both SEPARATE applications for his now wife and her daughter.  They waited to apply for the visa for the daughter after they were married).
Mr A: Oh, you shouldn't do that.  You can do the paperwork yourself.  It's not like she's a criminal.  You're going to have to get all the stuff together yourself anyway.
FiL: Oh, no, they're going to do it right the first time. [implying my ILR was because we screwed things up the first time]

A few weeks ago.  SiL is back in Ukraine.  Long story.  Second lengthy trip back since they married earlier this year.

Mr A: You have to be careful,  or she will have problems getting her ILR. How long can she be out of the country?
Me: I'd have to double check, but I don't think she would have to worry about dates for ILR.  For citizenship, yes.  ILR there might be a problem with it looking weird.
BiL: She's applying for citizenship in [month] 2013.
Mr A: ILR first.
BiL: Permanent residence?
Me: Yeah.
BiL: Same thing.

I didn't have the energy to explain.  I could go into it more, but I wont.

Various things:
MiL (during my wait for citizenship):Why haven't you heard anything yet.
Me: It can take up to 6 months.
MiL: Must be because of how many people apply.  [of course, in a way she was right, but she has no clue of the numbers, the staffing, or that we applied to beat the fee increase, even if it was a relatively minor increase, along with a lot of people.  She just assumes that a multitude of applications overwhelm the poor people of the HO.]

I could go on, but it would just make them look really horrible, and they aren't.  They are a product of a system where there is so much editorial bias in reporting.  In a country which has some of the best news reporting in the Anglophone world, it's a shame that the right wing newspapers dominate the market so much, and the answer in so many people's eyes seems to be just to rely on the papers which are biased in the other direction without addressing the fact that so many people just have their biases and fears confirmed in rags like the Mail and Express.  It's sort of why I support the Indy, although I know it's not totally free from bias and editorial swing, I think it would be a total blow to the British print media if it were to go away and leave just the papers which are so focused on influencing opinion, mostly based on party allegiance. 

I don't think that American journalism is ideal, but sometimes I wish quality journalism from both could come together and produce a source of information which embodied the best from both countries, and banish the "immigrants are flooding here, taking our jerbs, eatin our babies" headlines in both countries.

Mr A: ILR first.
BiL: Permanent residence?
Me: Yeah.
BiL: Same thing.

Ugh! Same here. My answer is the same when i get this very same conversation.  "Still can't vote" and I leave it at that.

I don't think that American journalism is ideal, but sometimes I wish quality journalism from both could come together and produce a source of information which embodied the best from both countries, and banish the "immigrants are flooding here, taking our jerbs, eatin our babies" headlines in both countries.

Every time I come across these types of articles and see the slew of people touting the "They come here and sit on their backsides, spending taxpayer money, having millions of babies" blah blah blah, I (nicely, but with a "Come on, now" attitude) let them have it.

There was a recent article about how Tabloid papers here are distorting and/or making up facts to incite bias against immigrants.  Yes, people don't distinguish between migrant and immigrant and they lump the two together.  The comments included everything from "They are all lazy" to "They suck up our benefits" to "You wouldn't have this if you'd return to Jesus Christ".  Oy.

I let em have it on that one.  These people think that we are all here to leech off them. I said I've started my own business, with plans on starting MORE businesses and contributing to increasing jobs in my town. Why can't *I* get help, simply because I'm an immigrant?

Anywho. Didn't mean to hijack the post.  Read somewhere that you cannot lose your American Citizenship if you don't give it up.   Residency and Citizen are different. I don't plan to give up my American Citizenship if I'm not forced to.

Anywho. Didn't mean to hijack the post.  Read somewhere that you cannot lose your American Citizenship if you don't give it up.   Residency and Citizen are different. I don't plan to give up my American Citizenship if I'm not forced to.

Here are some links from the US State Department about losing citizenship.  I find this stuff interesting (I'm a geek).

Seeking Office in a Foreign State

Foreign Military Service

Advice About Possible Loss of US Citizenship

Seems like the most important part is:

The Department has a uniform administrative standard of evidence based on the premise that U.S. citizens intend to retain United States citizenship when they obtain naturalization in a foreign state, subscribe to a declaration of allegiance to a foreign state, serve in the armed forces of a foreign state not engaged in hostilities with the United States, or accept non-policy level employment with a foreign government.

Later:

In light of the administrative premise discussed above, a person who:

- is naturalized in a foreign country;
- takes a routine oath of allegiance to a foreign state;
- serves in the armed forces of a foreign state not engaged in hostilities with the United States, or
- accepts non-policy level employment with a foreign government,

and in so doing wishes to retain U.S. citizenship need not submit prior to the commission of a potentially expatriating act a statement or evidence of his or her intent to retain U.S. citizenship since such an intent will be presumed.

When, as the result of an individual's inquiry or an individual's application for registration or a passport it comes to the attention of a U.S. consular officer that a U.S. citizen has performed an act made potentially expatriating by Sections 349(a)(1), 349(a)(2), 349(a)(3) or 349(a)(4) as described above, the consular officer will simply ask the applicant if there was intent to relinquish U.S. citizenship when performing the act. If the answer is no, the consular officer will certify that it was not the person's intent to relinquish U.S. citizenship and, consequently, find that the person has retained U.S. citizenship.

So it sounds like for most of us here, the only time anyone might take notice is when you apply to renew your US passport after having gotten UK citizenship, and even then all they'll do is ask if you intended to relinquish your US citizenship when you naturalized in the UK.  Say no.   

I've had endless go-rounds with people trying to explain that our child has no claim to UK citizenship despite the fact that he was born here.  I get so tired of trying to explain that a child with 2 non-UKC parents gets nada "automatically."  My kid has a US passport and is a Tier 2 dependent with a fancy biometric card to prove it!  But Americans and Brits alike want to tell me how wrong I am on a regular basis.

Once upon a time the US did not allow -- or encourage -- dual nationality at all.  When my kids were born (30-34 years ago) in the UK the deal was they could have US passports (as well as UK) until they were 18 (I think it was 18 rather than 21) and then they would have to choose which they wanted to be. I think if they decided on US, they would have had to actually live in the US for something like 5 years. Then that was all changed.

That sounds like what was said of my cousin (he's 38).  Never had his own Irish one though I don't think.  Was in my Aunt's US one as a baby, got his own US one as a teen for school trip.

My ILs-to be are lovely, but....

Me: When we get married we can either mail the application in or do it in person, it will take a few weeks and cost £850 in person or £550 by post.

FIL: Are you sure?  I looked on the internet and it all looks very complicated. It's not as easy as you think.

Me: Thanks so much for your concern, but I spoke to a friend who is an immigration adviser and she assured me that it should be easy peasy to switch visas in country.  I just can't leave the UK after my course finishes and before my new visa is issued.

FIL: Well, I don't know.  (and so on)

Bless.  He's just being caring but I think he's convinced I'll be scooped up and arrested at the wedding.  At least I know they really don't want me to leave!!

That sounds like what was said of my cousin (he's 38).  Never had his own Irish one though I don't think.  Was in my Aunt's US one as a baby, got his own US one as a teen for school trip.

Yes, that's true. At one time you could put babies on the mother's US passport. It was a pain because of having a new photo taken holding squirming baby!

There was a documentary on TV recently about Tunisians fleeing across the Med. to Lampedusa and how the locals were dealing with the influx. One of the young Tunisian men was interviewed and said he wanted to live in Europe -- that he had a "right" to live wherever he wanted! It certainly made it seem that some refugees were taking advantage of the situation to just gain access to Europe.
So you can see where people get the idea that immigrants are trying to move in and take away all their jobs etc. etc.

One of the young Tunisian men was interviewed and said he wanted to live in Europe -- that he had a "right" to live wherever he wanted!

I would argue that since he is a human being, he certainly does have that right, but that's another post on another forum...

Read somewhere that you cannot lose your American Citizenship if you don't give it up. Residency and Citizen are different. I don't plan to give up my American Citizenship if I'm not forced to.

It's actually quite difficult to get rid of US citizenship. The US believes that another entity can't make you give up your US citizenship, so unless you do something extreme or willing go to the US embassy and declare that you want to renounce, no other country can force you to give up your citizenship.

Here are some links from the US State Department about losing citizenship.  I find this stuff interesting (I'm a geek).

Seeking Office in a Foreign State

Foreign Military Service

Advice About Possible Loss of US Citizenship

Seems like the most important part is:

Later:

So it sounds like for most of us here, the only time anyone might take notice is when you apply to renew your US passport after having gotten UK citizenship, and even then all they'll do is ask if you intended to relinquish your US citizenship when you naturalized in the UK.  Say no.   

Yep! I think that's the one I read.  Thanks for the links though! Pays to be informed.

I can't tell you how many times I've surprised someone by telling her/him that I'm not automatically a British citizen since I married one.

People are genuinely surprised to find out that I need several visas to eventually progress to citizenship and it's not an automatic thing when you marry a British citizen.

Oh, wouldn't that be nice though!

ETA:  And conversely, many people think that DH automatically has US citizenship since he married a US citizen.

ETA:  And conversely, many people think that DH automatically has US citizenship since he married a US citizen.

Mine would love that - then he couldn't moan anymore about being the only one without a blue passport in the house!