Children of British Mothers born pre 1983... useful info

OK, you are still confusing HAVING citizenship with PROVING citizenship. Citizenship is something you have or do not have, and your passport has nothing to do with it. If your children showed up at the border without a passport, like anyone else they would not be able to get it. Same would go for you. Passports are essential for travel outside the country. HOWEVER, if they were in the UK and could produce their birth certificates and yours, thus showing that they have British citizenship by descent, they WOULD be allowed to live and work, and a passport is not necessary for this. Passports are TRAVEL documents. That is completely different to actually working and living in the UK. Passports are often the easiest way to prove citizenship, as you cannot get a passport without proving citizenship, but they are not the ONLY way.

An expired passport in my childrens case to me does not mean they still retain British citizenship - & I stick by that

Stick by it all you want, but you are still wrong! An expired passport is just an expired passport, it is not the magical giver of citizenship.

The BCI does not change the 1983 date stamp. All it changes is the 1961 date stamp. Children born before 1961 to British mothers were previously not allowed even to register with form UKM for British citizenship. Now they can, which makes them like all the children born between 1961 and 1983 to British mothers. In summary:

Child born overseas before 1961 to a British father married to the mother: automatic British citizen by descent
Child born overseas between 1961 and 1983 to a British father married to the mother: automatic British citizen by descent
Child born overseas after 1983 to a British father married to the mother: automatic British citizen by descent
Child born overseas before 1961 to a British mother married to the father: prior to BCI could not register as a British citizen at all (had to go through immigration process); after BCI can register
Child born overseas between 1961 and 1983 to a British mother married to the father: can register as a British citizen
Child born overseas after 1983 to a British mother married to the father: automatic British citizen by descent

superl99, just a quick clarification

Child born overseas before 1961 to a British father married to the mother: automatic British citizen by descent
Child born overseas between 1961 and 1983 to a British father married to the mother: automatic British citizen by descent
Child born overseas between 1961 and 1983 to a British father married to the mother: automatic British citizen by descent
Child born overseas before 1961 to a British mother married to the father: prior to BCI could not register as a British citizen at all (had to go through immigration process); after BCI can register
Child born overseas between 1961 and 1983 to a British mother married to the father: can register as a British citizen
Child born overseas between 1961 and 1983 to a British mother married to the father: automatic British citizen by descent

I'm guessing that for lines 3 and 6, you meant "Child born overseas after 1983", not 1961-1983 listed a second time.

Otherwise, awesome post, very clear.

Yes, thanks equesterianerd! Fixed it.

Not to nitpick, but line 3 needs to be fixed as well as line 6.

The change in the law will not remove the need for registration, NUTS - we kids of British moms will still need to register, pay a fee, attend a ceremony, and then we can apply for a passport if we'd like, and that's what we've been talking about - it's a good change because the birth date cut off has been removed.  But bad, because the children of British men born during those years were automatically citizens (as long as they married the moms).

Thanks for your posts, super199, you've got it right and explained it well.

Getting back to this citizenship thing for a moment, my 46 year old British husband didn't apply for his first passport until around 4 years ago! Proving once again that, if you're British, you're British, and you don't need a passport to prove it - he just never went anywhere before that and didn't need a passport...(actually he did travel around Europe years ago when you could get a temporary passport...)

I am still arguing that the change may (should lead) to letting kids of Brit born mums to get passports (like the male line) without registering as citizens

Does that not make any sense

Registering to me on the UKM is for those that want to pass it down

In julileow & my wifes situation why go register?

As for my kids without or with expired passports - nope , and to mention that it was tried already - they together entered the UK 2-years ago with foreign passports (UK passport tucked in backpacks) intent was vacation only. As usual border control asked the bunch of dumb questions why they were there. Kids said we are here to live we have a Brit dad - proof by full blown certificates mine & theirs, my NI number, our marriage certificate, my UK drivers license even my old 1949 identity card (proof enough)

They weren't even considered - passport stamp 'right to stay 6-months must not work'

Kids responded & gave all the arguments - to no avail

I've been at this on my wifes side for 42 years watching, waiting for the moment & trying to get her a passport or citizenship without spending wasted time living in the UK to meet the requirement.

One last comment and post from me on all of this and I apologise for boring you ... we were married in 1968 outside the UK, We returned in September 1971 - she with her foreign passport me with the Brit one - we zipped through passport control & within 2-days we were both working legally paying our dues. We stayed 12-months. Never ever did the police coming knocking.

How times change in a global electronic world

The New Zealand residency was even more interesting 1981 - 1983

NUTS, those proofs don't work for entering the country, as I have said repeatedly. But if while outside the country you had applied for passports for them, they would have breezed through no problem. The same thing would have happened if YOU had entered without a UK passport. It doesn't make them not citizens.

I am still arguing that the change may (should lead) to letting kids of Brit born mums to get passports (like the male line) without registering as citizens

I understand what you are saying, but unfortunately that is not the case. The BCI only allows for registration. If you are eligible to register, you must register if you want to be a citizen. If you are automatically a citizen, I don't think you are allowed to register- you are already a citizen. It has nothing to do with wanting to pass it down. In fact, it even says on the information for UKM:

If your application for registration is successful you will become a British citizen by descent. You will not normally be able to pass your British citizenship to any children born outside the United Kingdom.

It is exactly the same type of citizenship as that acquired at birth for free by children of male British citizens, just with an extra step and cost!

Due to their birth they HAVE UK citizenship; by producing your birth certificate proving you are British and theirs proving they are your children, they can PROVE UK citizenship. I don't know how to make it clearer!

wicked as it may be & not to push it home you said above

But that did not work when they entered the UK two years ago with all docs & their foreign passports, even though they had Brit passports tucked away which they did not disclose to border control

BTW, is a passport even an expired one proof of citizenship?

I'm done on this & thanks everyone

It's a step in the right direction, but really there shouldn't be that inequality where the children of British mothers have to go through extra cost and paperwork.  Then again this government loves fees and forms don't they?

Why the heck didn't they disclose their British passports to Border Control?? That doesn't make the least bit of sense! I'm done arguing with you, your arguments don't make any sense at all and you seem to be wilfully ignoring and disagreeing with mine contrary to all the evidence. I've never heard of such a silly thing as trying to get into a country when you have a passport but hiding it from the immigration officers! Madness.

It's a step in the right direction, but really there shouldn't be that inequality where the children of British mothers have to go through extra cost and paperwork.  Then again this government loves fees and forms don't they?

Of course, this government does, but registration has been around since the early '80's, so why change a good thing?    Although I'm not certain they were charging for registration back then...it's just slowly creeped up through the years...

Super to respond, since I am from the 60's generation, we do not trust anyone & question everything.

That said, it was done as a test of the system

I am as pi$$ed off as the next person that my wife cannot get a passport without living in the UK for 3-years accompanied by me

The rule of children having passports is as old as the dinosaurs and the challenge to passport control was just that in the children trying to prove they are Brits by descent even without passports, and that just having a $150 10-year passport (acquired outside the UK) does not make them citizens

My wife lived as a child in the UK from 1956 - 1966 was back then entitled to citizenship under the old rules which changed in 1971

and even though we were married in 1968 she could have applied back then for a passport without registering

The changes with the BCI as smooth & as tricky (politically) as they have been for the past 60 years (1949 act) a total botch up

My or our own case with my wife has gone the gamut & proves the UK do not like giving citizenship to those that really deserve it

I have to stop this now, because - if I continue, I will blow a fuse

The changes from here on in will be in my mind and can be argued that children of brit mothers going back to 1908 will be allowed to get passports without registering

Am I wrong in thinking that IO's don't even have the authority to determine someone's citizenship based on anything other the passport presented to them?  If so, then that "test" at an airport's passport control was doomed to fail anyway, since they would have no grounds for determining British citizenship if some person with a foreign passport and bunch of papers walks in claiming British.

cg731, that was my point, however should a person have a proper genuine valid UK citizenship certificate (whatever one of those looks like) and a foreign non EU passport, that enters the UK & shows border control the certificate & the foreign passport, then in all likelihood they will go with the passport & ignore the certificate even if you have other back-up.

My kids proved that point having my birth certificate +++ other docs to show they indeed by descent from me were in fact non-registered British citizens

and I do not believe that my kids with their british passports are registered British citizens, as I say quasi citizens as long as they keep on paying the passport renewal every 10-years

All of this does not matter since  changes in the BCI & form UKM is now for us a wait & see over the next 12-months

cg731, that was my point, however should a person have a proper genuine valid UK citizenship certificate (whatever one of those looks like) and a foreign non EU passport, that enters the UK & shows border control the certificate & the foreign passport, then in all likelihood they will go with the passport & ignore the certificate even if you have other back-up.

That would happen anywhere, though.  I'm a US citizen by birth, but I'm sure if I traveled outside the country carrying only my US birth certificate, the immigration folks at whatever US airport I returned to would process me as a visitor and not just assume that I'm a citizen because I happen to have a birth certificate.  (It could have been forged, I could be a terrorist and have had my citizenship revoked, etc.)

My kids proved that point having my birth certificate +++ other docs to show they indeed by descent from me were in fact non-registered British citizens

It's not immigration's job to know the rules for being British by descent, or to give people the benefit of the doubt.  Their job is to process people into the country based on their purpose of visit.  Your kids did not provide valid citizenship-based travel documentation (i.e. a non-expired UK passport), so therefore they were treated as if they didn't have citizenship, because they couldn't prove the citizenship that they did (and do) have.  That's not immigration's fault.

and I do not believe that my kids with their british passports are registered British citizens, as I say quasi citizens as long as they keep on paying the passport renewal every 10-years

I will just refer you back to superl99's posts, which are clear and to the point.  I'm not sure why you're adamantly convinced that your children are sub-par citizens, but that's your choice.