The unnamed sponsor

My good friend married their Peruvian girlfriend in May 2012 and applied for a visa in the summer as they had lived previously together in Peru.

He had to take a second job in order to make the minimum income criteria. He was initially happy to do this until the tragic consequences became clear.

Earlier this year his wife fell pregnant. Knowing that even with 2 jobs he could not meet the minimum income criteria for a wife and child his wife was forced to terminate the pregnancy.

She is now back in Peru awaiting the next visa application and has no support as she is unable to discuss the tragedy with her catholic family, and her husband and UK friends are not with her.

I want to petition to end this disgusting infringement of pur basic human right. What kind of government would force women to have abortions to possibly save only pennies.

These laws are aimed at the wrong type of migrant and should be fought against.


9 Comments on “The unnamed sponsor”

  1. Lilly Eaton says:

    While I agree that the rules are draconian. This woman allowed herself to become pregnant, knowing the situation she and her husband were in. Becoming pregnant is a personal responsibility and she should have taken contraceptive precautions.instead of putting herself through a termination. As for her family, she simply has to say she miscarried, if its sympathy she wants. Sorry but adults are responsible for their own actions.

  2. Accidents happen, and even having to lie about the action you’re forced to take to deal with it, is an overstep in the interference these rules make in people’s personal affairs.

    “This woman allowed herself to become pregnant” is as cruel a statement as the rules themselves, now described as a discriminatory towards women.

  3. david says:

    the story is also untrue. as the child of a uk national the minimum income requirement would have remained at £18,600. The first comment was also correct people have to take responsibility for their own actions. While i do feel pity for certain individuals £18,600 is not very much money, a trainee bin man for example earns £25k more than enough to sponser

    • 47% of the working UK population earns under £18600. It is way above the minimum wage. It may not be much money to you, but it’s enough to prevent a family life being fairly enjoyed by British citizens. I’m impressed by the allegedly lucrative salaries of trainee bin men. But salaries differ hugely across the country. It’s not your pity sponsors want, it’s a equal and proportionate right to a family life.

      • david says:

        I think the other thing that should be taken into account is that even on the minimum wage of £6.31 by working a 58 hour week it is possible to make £18,600 and still have 2 weeks holiday so it is by no means unobtainable. I notice you also ignored the comment about the minimum earnings not increasing for the child of a British national, which is what made me sceptical as to the authenticity of the story.

  4. How would you authenticate this story?
    This blog doesn’t operate to scrutinise people’s history – rather to cite sponsor’s experiences, as anonymously as desired. It’s valid at least in a context of similar stories concerning the family immigration rules and abortion:

    Whether or not the increase in threshold for the child is valid, it should be noted that sponsors are not immigration professionals and are struggling to navigate increasingly complex rules – rules that were even described by the ILPA as too complex for solicitors. Should this contributor’s description of their situation under the rules be inaccurate, this is a place to help clarify them, not pass judgement on their personal responsibility.

    • david says:

      There is no whether or not about it, it is not applicable. People need to take responsibility for themselves in life and read up on the relevant details. the stories you highlighted differed in that the women had problems working due to children.

      I would think as the person running the blog you should look into what people say, it was a second hand anonymous story containing factual errors. I would have asked follow up questions to the person submitting the story as it does not ring true.

      • As I said, this blog doesn’t operate to scrutinise people’s history – rather to cite sponsor’s experiences, as anonymously as desired. If you doubt the truth of this story, you are welcome, as you have done, to say why – but I must insist that comments refrain from judging the individuals in these stories – this is not a news website.

  5. Lilly Eaton says:

    I agree completely with David. Individuals are responsible for the choices they make and it never ceases to amaze me the decisions people make which prejudice their immigration status.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s