"IMB-T" : International Marriage Broker-Trafficker

[Admin]

Attached is a publication from the Virginia Journal of International Law entitled; "Trafficked: Domestic Violence, Exploitation in Marriage, and the Foreign Bride Industry".

It seems the author has decided to brand all IMBs (agencies) as "international marriage broker-traffickers" and states:

the foreign-bride industry constitutes trafficking under international law and should therefore be criminalized and prosecuted.

While there are clearly some DISreputable agencies (IMBs) out there - AND - I suspect there are some who engage or 'front' for trafficking activities - this sort of blanket vilification of ALL organizations, companies and individuals that participate in facilitating cross-cultural introductions seems a gross over-reaction at least.

Comments?

- Dan

[I/O]

Dan: Haven't read the article in detail (of course) but a quick scan rasies "North Korea" rather often.  Is there a wider agenda?

[Admin]

Dan: Haven't read the article in detail (of course) but a quick scan rasies "North Korea" rather often.  Is there a wider agenda?

I/O,

From the opening pages:

the transfer of North Korean refugee women as brides to men in China and the brokering of foreign women as brides to men in the United States through IMB-Ts constitute trafficking under the Palermo Protocol. Second, foreign-bride enslavement, conducted under the guise of marriage, often results in domestic violence, abuse, and exploitation in marriage, and it is facilitated by the abuse of power differentials that exist between foreign brides and receiving grooms and between sending and receiving countries.

While mentioning North Korea by name, the broader implications seem clear and the reference to the US is undeniable.

- Dan

[Boethius]

That is an interesting paper Dan, though I didn't read it to its conclusion.

I think she is correct about North Korean women.  I happened to hear an interview of a Korean-American who sold his business, established an NGO, and worked on the border in China to help North Koreans who escaped to China.  One of the issues he touched on was the trafficking of North Korean women.  Apparently, the Chinese all have dogs, and when the dog barks, they will come out to see who has crossed the border.  If it is men, they go back into their homes.  If women are in the group, the Chinese take them, and sell them to the highest bidding Chinese man.  So, it is a pervasive form of human trafficking.

I think she makes some good points about the so called "MOB" industry, but she comes to fairly bold conclusions without any supporting evidence.  Here is one example, a conclusion, which had no supporting evidence -

Post-IMBRA, there has been no evidence that IMB-Ts are respecting their legal obligations,
suggesting that IMB-Ts continue to pair brides with violent men.

This caught my  attention as well -

Motivated by concerns about fraudulent marriage, Congress enacted the two-year conditional residency period to protect U.S. citizens — more precisely, U.S. husbands — from sham marriages.  The two-year conditional residency period is highly problematic because it allows the IMB-T husband to withdraw his supporting petition, “stripping the immigrant spouse of her legal status,” which gives the IMB-T husband additional power and control over his IMB-T bride. Moreover, the spirit of the conditional residency period acknowledges suspicion regarding IMB-T marriages without acknowledging the purposes of foreign-bride exploitation within the marriage and the power differentials inherently
produced by the foreign bride’s immigration and isolation from her support networks.  Rather than investigating both parties, the circumstances through which the marriage was established, and the validity of the marriage, the conditional residency period questions only the intentions of the trafficked foreign bride, placing the blame or burden of suspicion regarding IMB-T marriages on the trafficked person and protecting the IMB-T husband. In effect, the two-year conditional period creates a consumer warranty that protects IMB-T husbands (the consumer-exploiters) and legally authorizes the power of IMB-T husbands
over their IMB-T wives (their merchandise).

Ignoring the inflammatory language (such as "merchandise"), Ms Kim has a point about the two year waiting period.  As I stated on Maxx's thread, it would be preferable to give spouses permanent resident status on landing, not contingent on the citizen spouse.

Can you invite Ms Kim here to present/debate her views (assuming we can all be civil and polite)?

[tim 360]

Didn't read and digest all of Jane Kim's theory but China does have a big problem of too many men and too few Chinese women.  Something like a ratio of 10-1 at marriage age.  Goes back to the China-1-child-per-family program and the Chinese parents only wanted male offspring.  Female babies were discarded.  So there are far less Chinese women to go around today for marriage minded men.  Thus with their new wealth--they import; with NK being their poor next door neighbor with willing women ready to flee the craziness and poverty of NK.  As with anything trafficking and prostitution enter the picture.  Either way there is money to be made.

This Jane Kim definitely has an axe to grind but she wields it willy-nilly.  Plenty of kids both male and female from the USA forced into prostitution right here in the good old US of A and I don't see her squawking about that.  Maybe she should stop it here before moving on China. 

[Maxx2]

What they say must be done.

IMB-Ts and IMB-T grooms should be held criminally and civilly
liable for fraudulent claims regarding IMB-T marriages,
criminal records, past histories of domestic violence, and repeated
use of IMB-Ts.

IMB-Ts and IMB-T grooms should be civilly and criminally
liable for exploitation in marriage as such exploitation is fore-
seeable given the high rates of domestic violence among IMBT
marriage

IMB-Ts and IMB-T grooms should be heavily taxed through
corporate tax mandates or when IMB-T grooms apply for foreign
fiancée and spouse visas.

IMB-T grooms should be required to set aside a trust for their
foreign brides in the event that their marriages result in exploitation
or divorce. As a result, IMB-T brides would not have to
fear poverty or starvation if they try to leave the marriage.

It's going to be wide open hunting season for those of us who use Dan's agency or any of the agencies that pay the advertising here. Heck this whole site might be considered something to prosecute. You give them an inch (IMBRA) and they will take a mile.Too bad some of the people here didn't understand this when they said they favored IMBRA.

[I/O]

Cuppla questions.

1) If IMBRA requires a man to have not more than 2 international shots in his lifetime, why does he get more than two on the domesitic front? You'd think you'd roll that one on discrimination grounds.

2) IMBRA requires his disclosure of any previous international fiance' petitions, yet domestically, an American can marry him having no idea how many former fiance's (domestic or international) he's had, could be dozens yet there is no legal obligation to reveal this?

[Maxx2]

Cuppla questions.

1) If IMBRA requires a man to have not more than 2 international shots in his lifetime, why does he get more than two on the domesitic front? You'd think you'd roll that one on discrimination grounds.

2) IMBRA requires his disclosure of any previous international fiance' petitions, yet domestically, an American can marry him having no idea how many former fiance's (domestic or international) he's had, could be dozens yet there is no legal obligation to reveal this?

I read in there that "IMBRA is constitutional".

[Admin]

Can you invite Ms Kim here to present/debate her views (assuming we can all be civil and polite)?

My suspicion is that she will decline, but I will make an effort to reach out and make the invitation.

- Dan

[GQBlues]

Attached is a publication from the Virginia Journal of International Law entitled; "Trafficked: Domestic Violence, Exploitation in Marriage, and the Foreign Bride Industry".

It seems the author has decided to brand all IMBs (agencies) as "international marriage broker-traffickers" and states:

While there are clearly some DISreputable agencies (IMBs) out there - AND - I suspect there are some who engage or 'front' for trafficking activities - this sort of blanket vilification of ALL organizations, companies and individuals that participate in facilitating cross-cultural introductions seems a gross over-reaction at least.

Comments?

Unfortunately very true. Regulations have unfortunate consequences.

A good example how a few bad apples can impact the majority as whole...no different to airport securities.

Cuppla questions.

1) If IMBRA requires a man to have not more than 2 international shots in his lifetime, why does he get more than two on the domesitic front? You'd think you'd roll that one on discrimination grounds.

2) IMBRA requires his disclosure of any previous international fiance' petitions, yet domestically, an American can marry him having no idea how many former fiance's (domestic or international) he's had, could be dozens yet there is no legal obligation to reveal this?

Because local femmes have natural civil priviledges as common citizens not afforded newly arrived beneficiaries. For your basic 'or else'starters...a local femme cannot be threatened with deportation and/or a short ride to the nearest airport...

[Rubicon]

My suspicion is that she will decline, but I will make an effort to reach out and make the invitation.

- Dan

let's hope she declines.  her views are ridiculous.
she would like to lump all men seeking foreign relationships as being abusers and all marriage agencies as being criminal.

[Boethius]

Quite the generalization.  Did you read the entire paper?

[Admin]

let's hope she declines.  her views are ridiculous.
she would like to lump all men seeking foreign relationships as being abusers and all marriage agencies as being criminal.

And it is unlikely she will ever change her views in a vacuum. If there is to be any change, it will only result from being exposed to a different perspective providing a compelling alternate view. At least, that is my 'take' on it.

And BTW - "compelling" does NOT mean a contest to see who is able to 'SHOUT' the loudest (in internet parlance). It means providing a logic and well-reasoned argument that is meritorious. The author of the work is a J.D. candidate in her third year at Columbia Law School. The problem all too often with a highly controversial publication is that the author is met with all manner of criticism that has little, or nothing, to do with the substance of the publication. I'd be willing to bet Ms. Kim has already 'felt' some fallout over this publication and it will be quite the feat to convince her that our members are prepared to engage in a civil discourse on the topic.

Do y'all *REALLY* think it is possible to engage the author in civil discourse here at RWD designed to educate ALL parties? I'd like to give it a shot, but I don't want to invite someone here believing they are going to be skewered for their perspectives.

- Dan

[Boethius]

I agree, Dan.  I suggested it because, like you, I believe it would be of value for Ms Kim to hear the views of both men and women involved in international marriages.  It would be especially useful, I believe, for the  RW on the forum to share their experiences, both good and bad.  I think they, more than anyone, could persuade her that there are at least as many (if not more) women in equal partnerships as there are in relationships she describes as abusive.

I think we can engage in civil discourse, and if we designate a time when she posts, we can ensure moderators are present to ensure the debate is respectful.

[Misha]

As I stated on Maxx's thread, it would be preferable to give spouses permanent resident status on landing, not contingent on the citizen spouse.

I agree. In other words, the United States would pretty much adopt the existing Canadian model.

[I/O]

it would be preferable to give spouses permanent resident status on landing, not contingent on the citizen spouse.

I agree. In other words, the United States would pretty much adopt the existing Canadian model.

That wouldn't increase the number of sham marriages?

[Maxx2]

That wouldn't increase the number of sham marriages?

The big problem in Canada is that the newly arrived immigrant spouse just takes off on the first day. The Canadian proposal by the marriage victims is to institute a two year conditional status just like they have in the US. However if they do that you can bet that suddenly the Canadian men will be perceived to be as abusive as American men are from all the reports of abuse from the self petition process.

[Boethius]

As I posted previously, most victims of fraudulent marriage in Canada are Southeast Asian, usually brides in arranged marriages, duped by men who would not qualify to emigrate on their own.  There have been cases where Immigration officials in India deemed the marriage fraudulent, and the Canadian bride took the matter to her MP, only to later cry "foul".  There are close to 50,000 international marriages annually in Canada, most Asian, and about 1,500 cases of marriage fraud.

What is even more common is fake marriages, and that is an even bigger concern to the Canadian government.  The Canadian government estimates there are about 10,000 such marriages annually.  Again, these are usually within the Southeast Asian or Chinese communities.

There are very few cases of RW duping Canadian men.

[Misha]

That wouldn't increase the number of sham marriages?

Canada's immigration laws also make it more difficult for a spouse to achieve permanent residence: you have to demonstrate that you don't have a marriage of convenience in the application for permanent residence. Sure, it does not filter out all the less than genuine marriages, but I would say that the number of sham marriages is certainly no worse than the USA IMHO based on what I read in forums.

[Misha]

What is even more common is fake marriages, and that is an even bigger concern to the Canadian government.  The Canadian government estimates there are about 10,000 such marriages annually.  Again, these are usually within the Southeast Asian or Chinese communities.

There are very few cases of RW duping Canadian men.

The main difference: CIC has different criteria for evaluating some marriages as opposed to others: arranged marriages of course do not require proof that there was a relationship prior to the wedding...

[Misha]

The big problem in Canada is that the newly arrived immigrant spouse just takes off on the first day.

The only cases that I have heard this happening was with spouses from India married to immigrants of their children from India.

[Boethius]

I've known Filipinas who were paid to marry Chinese men.  The going rate was $50,000.  In at least two cases I know of, Chinese gangsters were involved, and the woman was not paid, and threatened with death if she tried to do anything.  

The only cases that I have heard this happening was with spouses from India married to immigrants of their children from India.

http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/10/12/15666791.html

http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2010/10/13/15676206.html

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/Runaway+Grooms+Indian+brides+abandoned+expat+husbands/4038788/story.html#ixzz19cN9zNY2

[Admin]

The big problem in Canada is that the newly arrived immigrant spouse just takes off on the first day. The Canadian proposal by the marriage victims is to institute a two year conditional status just like they have in the US. However if they do that you can bet that suddenly the Canadian men will be perceived to be as abusive as American men are from all the reports of abuse from the self petition process.

Dave,

Your post motivated me to do a quick check on your hypothesis that the US laws allowing self-petition is the 'driver' behind Abuse claims in the US.

Do you recall the Survey of Cross-Cultural Marriage and Divorce we commissioned a couple of years back? (ref -- http://www.goodwife.com/survey/xcultural_p01.html)

In that survey we asked about the primary factors leading to divorce with "Abuse" being cited most frequently by women. (ref -- http://www.goodwife.com/survey/xcultural_p19.html)

The survey attracted participants from around the globe - including Latin America and Asia. (ref -- http://www.goodwife.com/survey/xcultural_p10.html)

A quick review of the stats and looking ONLY at the number of female respondents claiming "Abuse" as among the most significant factors in their divorce, I was able to discern the following:

* When the former (now divorced) spouse is from the US, the percentage of female respondents citing Abuse among the primary causal factors of their divorce is 38%.

* When the former (now divorced) spouse is NOT from the US, the percentage of female respondents citing Abuse among the primary causal factors of their divorce is again, 38%.

Candidly, I was not expecting the results to be identical, but they are - just with different numerators and denominators. Turns out we have more divorced female respondents whose ex-spouse is NOT from the US in the survey than we have US-based ex-spouses - which also surprised me a bit.

Anyway - it does NOT appear that your hypothesis is accurate.

FWIW

- Dan

[Admin]

It's going to be wide open hunting season for those of us who use Dan's agency or any of the agencies that pay the advertising here. Heck this whole site might be considered something to prosecute. You give them an inch (IMBRA) and they will take a mile.Too bad some of the people here didn't understand this when they said they favored IMBRA.

Not sure how I missed THIS earlier - but WHAT agency are you talking about?!? I neither own an agency nor plan to own an agency nor would I consider owning an agency.

- Dan

[Maxx2]

Not sure how I missed THIS earlier - but WHAT agency are you talking about?!? I neither own an agency nor plan to own an agency nor would I consider owning an agency.

- Dan

Big mistake on my part. Sorry Dan. I thought you owned "The Good Wife" agency. The one with the cheese cake artwork of sexy 50's housewives. Owning an agency and offering advertising to competing agencies like EM would be a conflict of interest but one I thought you were living with. It is not unethical if you did.