American Vet And His Filipina Daughter That Need Our Help

[piglett]

American Vet and his Filipina daughter that need our help his name is Jimmy Edwards & he has been a member of another site that he has belonged to since 2006 here is a link to the news storyhttp://www.wcti12.com/video/29515646/index.html and here is a link to the petition https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions/%21/petition/us-citizenship-amerasians-philippines-and-japan/sFtF5qS1?utm_source=wh.gov&utm_medium=shorturl&utm_campaign=shorturl piglett

Edited October 21, 2011 by piglett

[brock]

Links do not seem to work ?

[piglett]

Links do not seem to work ?

sorry about that , they are now workingpig

[Mr Lee]

Something about this sounds fishy. I am not an expert but the news story says "Pinky has had trouble getting a long term visa, her father says she has been denied several times" which sounds to me like he had her file for a visa and not him file for a US passport as his daughter, so if he really wanted to bring his daughter back, then he would have filed for a US passport for her, and then had the necessary DNA tests done to prove she is his daughter, and then I am pretty sure she would have been given a US passport. I do not know all the laws about Amer-Asians from that time period, but a child born to a US citizen should be given US citizenship if proven, so something is not quite right with the story and probably the father has never filed for a US passport for her, so he may not even be her real father. :) It seems to me that he is trying to cut corners by having her apply for a visa and that is not how it works, since a US citizen does not need a visa to go to the US. If there is such a law which would prevent the children of US citizens from getting US citizenship, then yes I feel it needs to be changed, but to me it seems like he is trying to cut corners or cannot qualify in some way as her father.

[Mr Lee]

It appears there already is such a law in place. So once again, something is missing from the puzzle. 9 FAM 42.21 EXHIBIT VII 8 CFR, 204.4 AMERASIAN CHILD OF UNITED STATES CITIZEN 204.4 Amerasian child of a United States citizen.(a) Eligibility. An alien is eligible for benefits under Public Law97-359 as the Amerasian child or son or daughter of a UnitedStates citizen if there is reason to believe that the alien wasborn in Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Kampuchea, or Thailand afterDecember 31, 1950, and before October 22, 1982, and wasfathered by a United States citizen. Such an alien is eligiblefor classification under sections 201(b), 203(a)(1), or203(a)(3) of the Act as the Amerasian child or son ordaughter of a United States citizen, pursuant to section 204(f)of the Act.(b) Filing petition. Any alien claiming to be eligible for benefits asan Amerasian under Public Law 97-359, or any person on thealien’s behalf, may file a petition, Form I-360, Petition forAmerasian, Widow, or Special Immigrant. Any person filingthe petition must either be eighteen years of age or older orbe an emancipated minor. In addition, a corporationincorporated in the United States may file the petition on thealien’s behalf.© Jurisdiction. The petition must be filed with the Service officehaving jurisdiction over the place of the alien’s intendedresidence in the United States or with the overseas Serviceoffice having jurisdiction over the alien’s residence abroad.(d) Two-stage processing—(1) Preliminary processing. Uponinitial submission of a petition with the documentary evidencerequired in paragraph (f)(1) of this section, the director shalladjudicate the petition to determine whether there is reasonto believe the beneficiary was fathered by a United States citizen. If the preliminary processing is completed in asatisfactory manner, the director shall advise the petitioner tosubmit the documentary evidence required in paragraph(f)(1) of this section and shall fingerprint the sponsor inaccordance with Section 103.2(e) of this chapter. Thepetitioner must submit all required documents within one yearof the date of the request or the petition will be considered tohave been abandoned. To reactivate an abandoned petition,the petitioner must submit a new petition, Form I-360,without the previously submitted documentation, to theService office having jurisdiction over the prior petition.More HERE

[Call me bubba]

It seems to me that he is trying to cut corners by having her apply for a visa and that is not how it works, since a US citizen does not need a visa to go to the US. If there is such a law which would prevent the children of US citizens from getting US citizenship, then yes I feel it needs to be changed, but to me it seems like he is trying to cut corners or cannot qualify in some way as her father.

Well. the embassy at times seems to have their head up their anal area.I know of a child who has a hearing at the USCIS to obtain citizenship, The genuises at the embassy states that child must file "certificate of birth abroad" yet all the child needs to do is attend "citizenship" hearing. strange. this country allows thousands of illegals, dark skin people,(posting not permitted) yet will not allow a child to visit the US to attend USCIS for citizenship.this man should contact one of the american organizations that helps others.perhaps if someone can look at "clubs or organizations" their is a organization that does help americans in situations like this

[Jake]

The problem I believe is trying to find the sponsor (the American father) to initiate their US citizenship application. Most have been forgotten as a result of a quick "slam bam, thank you ma'am". It is a sad state of affairs duringWWII, Korean and Vietnam war for the plight of Amerasians from Korea, Japan, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and thePhilippines. But there is hope for some. The link below is one such organization that provides hope and prosperity: http://www.pinoykids.org/americianprogram.php Respectfully -- Jake

[Art2ro]

Something about this sounds fishy. I am not an expert but the news story says "Pinky has had trouble getting a long term visa, her father says she has been denied several times" which sounds to me like he had her file for a visa and not him file for a US passport as his daughter, so if he really wanted to bring his daughter back, then he would have filed for a US passport for her, and then had the necessary DNA tests done to prove she is his daughter, and then I am pretty sure she would have been given a US passport. I do not know all the laws about Amer-Asians from that time period, but a child born to a US citizen should be given US citizenship if proven, so something is not quite right with the story and probably the father has never filed for a US passport for her, so he may not even be her real father. :) It seems to me that he is trying to cut corners by having her apply for a visa and that is not how it works, since a US citizen does not need a visa to go to the US. If there is such a law which would prevent the children of US citizens from getting US citizenship, then yes I feel it needs to be changed, but to me it seems like he is trying to cut corners or cannot qualify in some way as her father.

Yes, sounds fishy to me too, because I know of an unwed Filipina who gave birth to a baby boy and the father was a U.S. Citizen. The father registered the birth with the U.S. Embassy and I'm sure got a DNA test to show proof of paternity, because the boy now has a U.S. passport, but not an RP passport (not a dual citizen) and was 14 yrs old at the time, but has not yet set foot out of the Philippines until he becomes 18 to join the U.S. military or just get out of the country for whatever reason. The mother had to pay for her son's annual fee for his immigration visa extensions! So, who does the Public Law 97-359 pertain to? I just read it briefly and not sure why the reason for the petition to amend said Public Law Amerasian children from the RP & Japan born out of wedlock to U.S. citizens while other Amerasian children are allowed into the U.S.! Edited October 21, 2011 by Art2ro

[piglett]

Something about this sounds fishy. I am not an expert but the news story says "Pinky has had trouble getting a long term visa, her father says she has been denied several times" which sounds to me like he had her file for a visa and not him file for a US passport as his daughter, so if he really wanted to bring his daughter back, then he would have filed for a US passport for her, and then had the necessary DNA tests done to prove she is his daughter, and then I am pretty sure she would have been given a US passport. I do not know all the laws about Amer-Asians from that time period, but a child born to a US citizen should be given US citizenship if proven, so something is not quite right with the story and probably the father has never filed for a US passport for her, so he may not even be her real father. :) It seems to me that he is trying to cut corners by having her apply for a visa and that is not how it works, since a US citizen does not need a visa to go to the US. If there is such a law which would prevent the children of US citizens from getting US citizenship, then yes I feel it needs to be changed, but to me it seems like he is trying to cut corners or cannot qualify in some way as her father.

Yes, sounds fishy to me too,

guys i have sent the admin. a link to the orginal site so it can all be checked out here is some of what was posted on the other site Just to clarify this particular situation....is the daughter unable to obtain citizenship because her father didn't legitimatize his paternity when the daughter was born or before she turned 18? I have done work for the Philippines Children's Fund, based in Angeles City, which works to reunite children with American fathers, and one of that organization's main difficulties is succeeding in obtaining U.S. citizenship for Flipino children when there has been no legal record of the paternity of the U.S. citizen father. My reading of PL 97-359 is that it specifies certain Asian countries in which children of U.S. citizens can claim deferred U.S. citizenship, but does not include the Philippines and Japan. What the legislation does seem to do is provide "special" benefits to children from 5 other Asian countries who were born between December 31, 1950, and before October 22, 1982. It seems to be that the legislation effectively excludes children from the Philippines, Japan, and about 200 other countries from this "special" consideration to obtain U.S. citizenship after they have "aged out." I would recommend that anyone with Fil-Am affinity support an amendment to this legislation to allow Filipino and Japanese children of U.S. fathers an avenue to claim their U.S. citizenship. But let's be honest about PL 97-359. It wasn't designed to show bias against Filipino and Japanese children, but rather to show preference to children from 5 other Asian countries. I am signing the petition, however, in the hope that this Filpina child be given an option for joining her father in the U.S. Anyone care to correct my thinking on this subject? --Ray B ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for all the help everyone,@Rbacon you are basically right .I just don’t understand the politicians reasoning when they excluded this group. They say because Japan and the Philippines weren’t war zones ,true but they were staging areas and medical evacuation areas for the war wounded. To my knowledge we never had troops in Cambodia and we certainly didn’t have troops enjoying the local beauties in Laos. The next reason is that we were committing illegal acts with prostitutes, does that make the child any less of an American citizen’s offspring? Most are not children of prostitutes, when many of our service members were stationed for many months or years at one American military base in Japan or the Philippines.The majority of the children were born out of committed long term relationships Jimmy--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------MrkGrismer, on 19 October 2011 - 02:57 PM, said: Jimmy, was your daughter married and over 21 when you found out about her? I am wondering why you are not able to petition her F1 or F3 (unmarried over 21, married over 21)? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Thanks for signing ,I knew about her, I only got to see her 3 times when she was 7 months old then her mother went into hiding with her. I didn’t see my daughter again until 2005. I found her on the internet the day before she turned 30 years old. When I found her she was married with 5 boys and has since had a little girl. Jimmy-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- thanks guyspiglett Edited October 21, 2011 by piglett

[piglett]

here is a link to the story on youtube (anyone know German)