Risky Business

[ambach123]

Scott, the number of back ups would be greatly reduced to about eight or ten at the most. I would meet them first and the chosen one the last. Many of them are with an agency I am working with.

Steve, thanks for the comments, it is difficult for us not to fall in love with a beautiful soft spoken young slavic woman. She is different from AW.  I would try to hold off any K-1 for now.

My selected one I found on one of the internet dating sites; she only wanted " Europeans Only" something I did not notice at first. ( I guess American men don't have such good reputation or something). When I meet with her I will ask her why she wanted Europeans only.

This also shows that what they write on their profiles is not etched on stone.

There is a latin phrase " Abundans cautela non mocet " that means " abundans of caution does no harm "

As the title of this thread states this is a risky business; I have tried to mitigate the risks by avoiding the riskier sub groups, ( divorced, with child, parents divorced, physicians, too much skin showing on profiles etc) and providing the parties a graceful exit (pre nup) if it does not work out. But these things are no more than like wearing a helmet while riding a bike.

That does not mean that one can't find the love his life among the riskier sub groups, I just exercised caution based on statistics.

Ken C love is a pre requisite, that goes without saying; 100% of marriages start out with parties deeply in love and less than 50% survive. I should know I am in the wedding business.

I have a question, what about using the 90 days period while she is here before the marriage, as the more face to face time before tying the knot?  Why filing the K-1 should be the final decision.

[BC]

I have a question, what about using the 90 days period while she is here before the marriage, as the more face to face time before tying the knot?  Why filing the K-1 should be the final decision.

This has been discussed many times before on the board.

To sum it up IMHO:

Nonimmigrant visa for fiancé(e) (K-1)- To travel to the United States for marriage. An I-129F fiancé(e) petition is required.

http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/types/types_1315.html

fi·an·cée  (fän-s, f-äns)
n.
A woman to whom a man is engaged to be married.
[French, feminine of fiancé, fiancé; see fiancé.]
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/fiancee

In other words a woman to whom you have proposed.

I believe you must also provide a statement of your intentions to marry with the K1 application.

If the visa was intended as a 'try before buy' deal, they would have called it such.

Using it in the manner as you described would theoretically imply misuse of the Visa.

I wonder if a woman has ever screamed DV during the 90 day period...  With the new pamphlets she will certainly be informed as to the possibilities.. http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?topic=7986.0

[BC]

My selected one I found on one of the internet dating sites; she only wanted " Europeans Only" something I did not notice at first. ( I guess American men don't have such good reputation or something). When I meet with her I will ask her why she wanted Europeans only.

This also shows that what they write on their profiles is not etched on stone.

Several reasons:

Quicker immigration/residency permit (took us about 3 weeks)

Ability to travel back home almost immediately instead of waiting an extended period of time, maybe even a year before being able to visit friends and relatives.

Easier / less expensive for friends and family to come visit.

Visa free travel within EU.

Marriage may not be required (cohabitation type).

Marriage and overstay on a tourist visa possible.

Women may already know a language used in EU, or have friends there already.

Good social system 'safety nets' and healthcare.

are probably others...

I highlighted the first couple in bold.  You should make her aware of these aspects.

[Blues Fairy]

There is a latin phrase " Abundans cautela non mocet"

..."non nocet", actually. 

I have a question, what about using the 90 days period while she is here before the marriage, as the more face to face time before tying the knot?  Why filing the K-1 should be the final decision.

To understand the reason, you'll have to put yourself in the woman's shoes, which I think is a concept completely alien to you.  Just for your information: before I left for the U.S., I had to quit my job, sell my car and most of my stuff, vacate my rented apartment, sort out and pack all my worldly possessions (except those three suitcases of books which were already given to my fiance during my two trips to Europe to meet him); said my good-byes and received lots of good wishes for happy marriage and new life. 

Now suppose my man had only planned to use the K-1 period to get to know me and had not made the final decision.  Suppose by the end of the 90 days, he were still unsure and sent me back to Russia.  I would have to rebuild my life absolutely from scratch.  Can you imagine what stress and humiliation this would cause? 

But why would you care indeed.  It will be the woman's problem, after all, you're just taking abundant precautions which cannot hurt (you).

[steviej]

You should not use the 90 days and K-1 as a "try before you buy". That is completely unfair to the woman. I object !!! You are talking about asking a woman to MARRY YOU!! She must leave her family, her job, her city, her social safety net, and everything else behind ... for you!! Before you start the K-1, be sure your feelings are very strong about wanting to marry this woman. She deserves that, IMO. It's like an American couple that gets engaged. The period of time between the engagement and marriage is NOT the time when they are deciding if they really want to get married. That has been decided. The engagement period is basically just logistics.

[ScottinCrimea]

Scott, the number of back ups would be greatly reduced to about eight or ten at the most. I would meet them first and the chosen one the last. Many of them are with an agency I am working with.

Even with a "greatly reduced" number of only 8-10, my questions still stand.  Do these women know the situation under which they are coming to meet you? It will be difficult not to compare these women with the idealic image you have of the chosen one (who you won't have met yet,) and this could negatively impact your meetings with them.  I assume you will list them in order of preference, then if the last one you meet doesn't work out, you will go down the list to try to arrange more time with one of the plan B's.  Hopefully they won't have been offended by the conditions of your first meeting and won't have figured out the situation.  Hopefully also, if things go well with your first choice, you won't run into one of these women during your time together or they won't bump into each other at the agency.

Steve, thanks for the comments, it is difficult for us not to fall in love with a beautiful soft spoken young slavic woman. She is different from AW.  I would try to hold off any K-1 for now.

In many ways FSUW are different than AW, but in many ways they are the same.  You still, as we all did, need to sort that out.

My selected one I found on one of the internet dating sites; she only wanted " Europeans Only" something I did not notice at first. ( I guess American men don't have such good reputation or something). When I meet with her I will ask her why she wanted Europeans only.

This also shows that what they write on their profiles is not etched on stone.

This can also hold true for those qualities in her profile that attracted her to you.

There is a latin phrase " Abundans cautela non mocet " that means " abundans of caution does no harm "

As the title of this thread states this is a risky business; I have tried to mitigate the risks by avoiding the riskier sub groups, ( divorced, with child, parents divorced, physicians, too much skin showing on profiles etc) and providing the parties a graceful exit (pre nup) if it does not work out. But these things are no more than like wearing a helmet while riding a bike.

Since you have previously stated that FSUW are different from AW, do your statistics still apply?  Where the studies you've seen based on RW, AW or intercultural marriages?  Many of us have tried to tell you that some of the risky subgroups you have mentioned are not so and many subgroups you haven't considered are even more risky.  You may be working with the wrong statistics.

That does not mean that one can't find the love his life among the riskier sub groups, I just exercised caution based on statistics.

Ken C love is a pre requisite, that goes without saying; 100% of marriages start out with parties deeply in love and less than 50% survive. I should know I am in the wedding business.

I have a question, what about using the 90 days period while she is here before the marriage, as the more face to face time before tying the knot?  Why filing the K-1 should be the final decision.

This question shows your true character, as BF as already noted.  In none of your discussions has the risk to the woman, her feelings, etc. been mentioned.  I think you would be smart to go through with the k-1 and marry as quickly as possible before she can see this utterly selfish aspect.

[BC]

Blues, Steve,

It is also possible that a RW can use the 90 days as a trial period.  Putting myself into other shoes, If I have no career type or easily reacquired job, live with parents, and no kids then why not?  A three month paid vacation with a little fun on top. - why not?

There were a few incidents in the past with members relationships that *might* qualify as such.  They had no GCG intentions as they did return to their origin.

In this scenario however it seems the parties did deserve one another for the short period they are together so little harm done in the end.

Not condoning, just showing another facet.

Scott,

How does the above align with ambach's target group?

[Ronnie]

I think the 90 days is probably a good number.  Some countries have longer periods and some here have argued you should be already totally ready to marry when she touches down.  It' difficult to argue against any opinion, that's why I think 90 is fine.

First, it's true, as Blues Fairy has illustrated first hand, some women burns a lot of bridges in some cases before getting on the airplane.  Others, risk virtually nothing.  It should be the first concern of the man, to find out what her particular risks are and plan every step with those in mind...not so much his own risks.   His risks can be substantial but often hers are greater.

I will give Ambach credit for coming here before his first trip, floating his ideas and plans and letting those with experience comment.  He seems to have an open mind...if he didn't he wouldn't be here.

The concern that remains in my mind, is that he will paint himself into a corner but he appears to recognize that possibility.

[ConnerVT]

It is also possible that a RW can use the 90 days as a trial period.  Putting myself into other shoes, If I have no career type or easily reacquired job, live with parents, and no kids then why not?  A three month paid vacation with a little fun on top. - why not?

Or I can put another spin on it --

When I proposed to my wife, her resonse was a quick, "Yes.........maybe."

In more detail, she said if she only had to think of herself, her answer would of been an unqualified 'Yes'.  But she first wanted to see the situation she would be bringing her (then) 5 y.o. son into.  To see our home, our city, the American way of life, is this something she wished for the future of her son?

Honestly, it made me love her more, and increased my confidence that I had found the right woman.

[BC]

Or I can put another spin on it --

When I proposed to my wife, her resonse was a quick, "Yes.........maybe."

In more detail, she said if she only had to think of herself, her answer would of been an unqualified 'Yes'.  But she first wanted to see the situation she would be bringing her (then) 5 y.o. son into.  To see our home, our city, the American way of life, is this something she wished for the future of her son?

Honestly, it made me love her more, and increased my confidence that I had found the right woman.

Conner,

Our daughter at that time was 8 and we decided it was best to let her finish the school year in RU before coming here.  It was a joint decision IIRC. Even though we were already married. I am sure the future of our daughter was at the top of the list of things to 'check out'.   

The ability to put priorities before emotion was indeed noteworthy.

[Gator]

I have a question, what about using the 90 days period while she is here before the marriage, as the more face to face time before tying the knot?  Why filing the K-1 should be the final decision.

If you are thinking this way after spending time with your woman, you have not found the best woman for you.  Find a woman who removes such doubt before she arrives here. 

The adjustment period after a RW arrives in America is not a fair test.  She needs a man who is committed, patient, supportive and attentive, not a man willing to discard her.

[ambach123]

I read somewhere in the archives; about half of all K-1 never consummate a marriage and go back.

I believe it was a guy by the name of Bruno who had a link to the INS website, where this information was posted. You can do a search.

I don't know how true that is, but one immigration attorney who handles K- 1 told me that this number is about right.

[Jumper]

ambach-

that data bruno posted ,
i "believe " to be flawed.. to use as a statistic as you are here?

as if my memory serves it reflected ANY K1 that returned  to the home country , for any reason. ( i think it also included K3's returning etc)
 
it was merely data of those who had a return trip to thier country.
this doesnt not mean a permenant return?
as anyone just visiting family for a week ,
 were also included in this data.

i could be wrong, its been awhile ?
but i believe the data relflected all visa applicants return travel,
not the "whys" ? or if the  trips were indeed roubd trips with final destination in the US

(my wife returned to visit family  twice in the first year,,as i recall that data included her trips)
   


as far as the 90 days..
as i mentioned i married in Ukraine-


but yes,
many, man and women, both do use the K1's 90 days  as a trial period,
but it isn't the visa's  intent..
(and is fraudulent use of it , even though many migh debate that  the visas intent is
outdated perhaps,since it was wriiten basically for US GI's returning home from overseas whom had met /engaged to someone )


it is also incredibly unfair ,used this way ,  if its a *one way street* , (from either side)

[Maxx2]

Remember to keep one thing in mind. Another K visa cannot be filled for 2 years after the first one is used. So a "send back" will require a wait of 2 years before the next visa is filed. Also there is a good chance that the next woman will be a bit suspicious of the man who disrupted a woman's life so and then decided to pass. The same could happen to her. Also there is a "two K visa lifetime limit" to concern one's self with. It is better to do it right the first time and find a really solid woman that meets all the conditions.

Maxx

[KenC]

Remember to keep one thing in mind. Another K visa cannot be filled for 2 years after the first one is used. So a "send back" will require a wait of 2 years before the next visa is filed. Also there is a good chance that the next woman will be a bit suspicious of the man who disrupted a woman's life so and then decided to pass. The same could happen to her. Also there is a "two K visa lifetime limit" to concern one's self with. It is better to do it right the first time and find a really solid woman that meets all the conditions.

Maxx

Very good points, Maxx!
KenC

[ambach123]

Being careful with K-1 and making sure before you file is always a good idea.

For the second K-1 there is an 18 months waiting period.

There is no lifetime limit on K-1. There are several people on this board who have filed three or four K-1.

[BC]

Being careful with K-1 and making sure before you file is always a good idea.

For the second K-1 there is an 18 months waiting period.

There is no lifetime limit on K-1. There are several people on this board who have filed three or four K-1.

Counting chickens before they hatch?

I feel kinda bad for your first one.

Really, get with the program..  - either you are ready for a commitment or you are not.

Huge difference.. - and it will remain so until the time that you begin to place others before yourself, something that is obviously missing in your posts here.

A FedEx man showing up at your door with a 5'8'' box with holes and 'Handle with care - Live RW Prenupt attached' would suit you just fine me thinks..

'Nouveau riche' reeks from your posts. Go pick a puppy and desist from claiming bragging rights around here.

[ScottinCrimea]

Being careful with K-1 and making sure before you file is always a good idea.

For the second K-1 there is an 18 months waiting period.

There is no lifetime limit on K-1. There are several people on this board who have filed three or four K-1.

This is just another example of the just plain wrong information that you are using and shows that you haven't even read the requirements for a k-1 visa yet.

[ambach123]

Scott whether I am wrong  or not, what is it to you?

Why don't you spend your time getting yourself out of abject poverty, than criticizing me. I do just fine and don't need your  opinions.

[BC]

I don't know why, but often reading this thread brings music to mind.

Here's what popped up.  Lyrics added below..  Listening to Zappa can be tedious but follow it along karaoke style...  Remember folks it's just a song..

[youtube=425,350]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/pdFFynVtWr4&hl=it&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/pdFFynVtWr4&hl=it&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]

Frank Zappa (lead guitar, vocals)
Adrian Belew (rhythm guitar, vocals)
Tommy Mars (keyboards, vocals)
Peter Wolf (keyboards)
Patrick O'Hearn (bass, vocals)
Terry Bozzio (drums, vocals)
Ed Mann (percussion, vocals)
Napoleon Murphy Brock (background vocals)
Andre Lewis (background vocals)
Randy Thornton (background vocals)
Davey Moire (background vocals)

Hey! Do you know what you are?
You're an asshole! An ASSHOLE!

Some of you might not agree
'Cause you probably likes a lot of misery
But think a while and you will see...
Broken hearts are for assholes
Broken hearts are for assholes
Are you an asshole?
Broken hearts are for assholes
Are you an asshole too?
Whatcha gonna do, 'cause you're an asshole...

Maybe you think you're a lonely guy
Maybe you think you're too tough to cry
So you went to The Grape,
Just to give it a try
And Dagmar
Without a doubt, the ugliest
sonofabitch I ever saw in my
life
Was his name...
One Two Three Four!
The whiskers sticking out
from underneath of his
Pancake make-up
And yet he was a beautiful lady
Nearly drove you insane
Let's talk about Leather: LEATHERRRRRR
And so you kissed a little sailor
Tex Abel, starring in the latest
Shepperton Production:
Who had just blew in from Spain
Sir Richard Pump-A-Loaf
You sniffed the reeking buns of Angel
The story of a demented bread-boffer
And acted like it was cocaine
Cucumber pud annexed to a
fine whole-wheat loaf
You were dazzled by the
exciting new costume of Ko-Ko
Then on Tuesday night, Ceasar's back in town
In a way you can't explain
Facing off in a no-holds-barred
tag team grudge match
With Kona.
And so you worked the wall with Michael
Three-hundred-seventy-nine
pounds of Samoan dynamite
Which gave your back an awful strain
Volcanic Hell
But you came back on Sunday for the gong show
Next Thursday, teen town's finest...
But you forgot what I was sayin'
'Cause you're an asshole, You're an asshole
That's right
You're an asshole, you're an asshole
Yes, yes
You're an asshole, you're an asshole
That's right
You're an asshole, you're an asshole

Now you been to The Grape 'n'
you been to The Chest
'N' now I think you know what you
are: you're an asshole

You say you can't live with
what you been through
Well, ladies you can be an asshole too
You might pretend you ain't got
one on the bottom of you,
But don't fool yerself girl
It's lookin' at you
Don't fool yerself girl
It's winkin' at you
Don't fool yerself girl
It's blinkin' at you
That's why I say
I'm gonna ram it, ram it, ram it
Ram it up yer poop chute
Corn hole
Ram it, ram it, ram it
Ram it up yer poop chute
Fist fuck
Ram it, ram it, ram it
Ram it up yer poop chute
Wrist-watch; Crisco
Ram it, ram it, ram it
Ram it up yer poop chute
Pud!

Don't fool yerself, girl
It's goin' right up yer poop chute
Don't fool yerself, girl
It's goin' right up yer poop chute
(etc., repeats)

Aw, I knew you'd be surprised...

[catzenmouse]

That's from the "Sheik Yerbouti" <SP> album! One of my favorites of his stuff.

Too funny BC (and sadly enough too appropriate) and I do appreciate the "blast from the past!"

Now we need to start up a collection for poor Scott to help him out of his "abject poverty."

It just boggles the mind...

[groovlstk]

Scott whether I am wrong  or not, what is it to you?

Why don't you spend your time getting yourself out of abject poverty, than criticizing me. I do just fine and don't need your  opinions.

You still don't get it, do you? If you post something that's factually incorrect, as in this instance, it's absolutely in Scott's interest (as well as any other member who values the integrity of this forum and the information it provides) to point it out.

Don't like it? Solly sir, here's a tissue!

[SANDRO43]

That's from the "Sheik Yerbouti" album! ... Now we need to start up a collection for poor Scott to help him out of his "abject poverty."

In consideration of all the above, something by the Dire Straits would be most appropriate, then  

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LB3b1W6rEDw[/youtube]

[ambach123]

The right way to correct is first to leave any personal attack out of it. Second post a link where the correct information can be found.

There are a lot of people on this board like AJ and Steve, Gator, BC who have a lot of information and are willing to share it in proper manner; but alas that can't be said for everyone here.

[Ronnie]

I'm not up on the IMBRA rules.  I know the USCIS interprets them differently from what the law says due to it's abiguity but the hard and fast limit on 2 is not so hard and fast from what many have posted here.  Yes, a waiver is required but they seem to be granted with no problem where there is no history of violence.

So Scott, it would be helpful to the rest of us, if rather than say Ambach was wrong, to tell us what was wrong with this statement.