My mother was born in Canada in 1924. She served in the Canadian Army during Korea. She married an American and moved to the US. My mother always remained Canadian. I was born in the US in 1965. I lived in Canada for a year in the late 1960's, and have been back for vacations and a summer school. I became a Canadian citizen in 1986 at the age of 21; I had to take an oath and make a formal application - I have a citizenship certificate card. In early 2010, I had a child born in the US. Can this child now become Canadian? Technically the child is the second generation born outside of Canada, but I took an affirmative step in 1986 to become Canadian and have remained Canadian (even though I haven't lived here for long periods). Thanks for your help and insight.
Is My Child a Canadian Citizen by Descent?
- Thread starter Snoozin
- Start date
The second generation exception only applies if you were born while your mother was still serving in the army, so that does not apply to your child. However, since you went through the naturalization process, technically your child would be deemed to be the first generation born abroad and would be eligible for citizenship by descent through you.
The only concern that I could think of is that your citizenship may have been converted to be by descent under the 2015 Act, which extended citizenship to those born before 1949 and their children as 'Lost Canadians', that it would have prohibited your child as a second generation. However, since your child was born before those changes, he/she should have been eligible for citizenship by descent when he/she was born in 2010; and because the 2015 Act did not take away citizenship to those that already had it or were eligible before its commencement, your child should still be eligible today, even if your citizenship was converted to be by descent.
The only concern that I could think of is that your citizenship may have been converted to be by descent under the 2015 Act, which extended citizenship to those born before 1949 and their children as 'Lost Canadians', that it would have prohibited your child as a second generation. However, since your child was born before those changes, he/she should have been eligible for citizenship by descent when he/she was born in 2010; and because the 2015 Act did not take away citizenship to those that already had it or were eligible before its commencement, your child should still be eligible today, even if your citizenship was converted to be by descent.
My child born in 2010 applied in 2010 for citizenship but was denied. Didn't Canada have a rough rule that children of Canadian fathers were Canadian automatically, but the children of Canadian mothers had to apply and take an oath? I thought the Supreme Court overruled that requirement (discrimination against mothers) maybe in the 1990's, but it didn't help me. If my father were Canadian, I don't think I would have had to make an application or take an oath at the time. I was only able to become a Canadian citizen because of my mother (I wasn't living in Canada).
Since I was born in 1965, became at citizen at the age of 21 in 1986 through application and oath at a consulate in US, am I a Canadian citizen by naturalization or by descent? I'm asking because that seems critical for my child as to whether there's a second generation problem.
BTW, my oldest child born in 2008 is a citizen by making application and then getting a citizenship card. Maybe I have a 2009 law change problem were the 2008 child is in but the 2010 child is out?
Thanks for your help.
Ah I see, your second post contained particular details that you did not include in your first post, so that changes the situation for you and your child.
Yes, this was known as 5(2)(b) of the 1977 Act, which was a special grant of citizenship for those born from a wedded Canadian mother or an unwedded Canadian father before 1977. Based on your second post, it seems that this is what you applied for. The ability to apply for this grant ended in 2004.
Those that had applied for the grant (a.k.a. naturalization) under 5(2)(b) of the 1977 Act had their citizenship converted to be by descent with the 2009 Act, so since then, you would be considered a citizen by descent under 3(1)(h) of the current Citizenship Act. Under the first generation limit, your child born in 2010 would now be considered second generation by descent to you, and he/she is not eligible.
You're essentially correct in that there was change in the law. Your oldest child was able to claim citizenship because, prior to the 2009 Act, there was no generational limit; as long as the parent was a Canadian citizen (by any way) when the child was born, the child was eligible for citizenship. The generational limit was implemented in 2009, so any child born outside of Canada from a first generation citizen parent by descent after the commencement of the 2009 Act (such as your 2010 child) would be ineligible for citizenship by descent (with the exception to Crown servant grandparents I described in my first post). The 2009 and 2015 Acts did not revoke citizenship for second and subsequent generations if they were eligible for it when they were born, so that's why your oldest child is still a citizen despite being in the second generation.
Last edited:
Thanks hawk39 for your explanations; they help a lot. The 2009 law to me as a matter of policy seems to be nonsensical where within a single family some children are citizens and others aren't. The conversion of previously naturalized citizens to passive "descent" status doesn't seem fair, especially when to do so limits rights. I hope the Parliament revisits this at some point so that naturalized citizens aren't relegated to the same status of those who made no affirmative acts to acquire citizenship (and don't seem to care one way or another).
Naturalized citizens can still pass their citizenship on to their children born abroad, so I'm not sure what you means about them being "converted" to descent status.
hawk39 stated, "Those that had applied for the grant (a.k.a. naturalization) under 5(2)(b) of the 1977 Act had their citizenship converted to be by descent with the 2009 Act, so since then, you would be considered a citizen by descent under 3(1)(h) of the current Citizenship Act. Under the first generation limit, your child born in 2010 would now be considered second generation by descent to you, and he/she is not eligible."
The above was in response to my question: "Since I was born in 1965, became at citizen at the age of 21 in 1986 through application and oath at a consulate in US, am I a Canadian citizen by naturalization or by descent?" My mother was a Canadian citizen (born 1924) and I was born in the States in 1965.
Not sure you have much to complain about. Although you obtained citizenship by descent since the age of 21 it seems like you have never lived in Canada. Even though you have never lived in Canada one of your children has obtained Canadian citizenship. Citizenship comes with access to things like subsidized education, healthcare for life, etc. There were too many people passing down citizenship for generations who never plan to actually live in Canada except if they need to access things like medical care or wanted to attend school abroad but pay domestic fees or they need help like during evacuation. The evacuation of Canadians from Lebanon started many conversations and changes, It creates huge liabilities for Canada while families are not contributing in various ways to the Canadian economy.
Well, I got one child who's Canadian and the other who's not - that doesn't seem like rational policy. There's also a big difference between my affirmative steps in the 1980's to become Canadian with an oath at a consulate, and someone who passively became Canadian and doesn't even know or care. Anyhow, if I was naturalized in 1986 then that being converted to descent doesn't seem appropriate, if that's in fact what happened with the law change in 2009. I get the health insurance issue: I had to prove insurance for my eldest.
The naturalization process is when a person immigrates as a PR and then becomes a citizen. Naturalized citizens can pass on their citizenship. The application under 5(2)(b) of the 1977 Act doesn't appear to be naturalization but actually citizenship by descent, as citizenship was granted based on being the child of a Canadian.
When 5(2)(b) was implemented with the 1977 Act, it was done as naturalization because unlike citizenship by descent, it was not retroactive to the applicant's date of birth. Prior to 1977, married Canadian mothers or unmarried Canadian fathers could not pass down citizenship to their children; 5(2)(b) was introduced in the 1977 Act to correct that oversight. When the 2009 Act came about, those that had acquired citizenship through 5(2)(b) had it converted to be by descent under 3(1)(h), so now they would be deemed citizens since birth instead of the date they were naturalized.
If you would like to follow up on my research, click here:
https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/publications-manuals/operational-bulletins-manuals/canadian-citizenship/acquisition-loss/acquisition.html
If you were to go to the note under 3(1)(c), it states:
"Persons who were born outside Canada between January 1, 1947, and February 14, 1977, to a Canadian mother (in wedlock) or to a Canadian father (out of wedlock) and who were granted citizenship under paragraph 5(2)(b) of the 1977 Act are described under paragraph 3(1)(h) as a result of the 2009 legislative amendments."
Then if you were to follow that to 3(1)(h), it states:"Paragraph 3(1)(h) recognizes as Canadian citizens persons born outside Canada to a Canadian parent between January 1, 1947, and February 14, 1977, and who did not become citizens by descent, but who were granted citizenship under section 5 of the 1977 Act before April 17, 2009. Under this paragraph, such persons are recognized as citizens by descent as a result of the legislative amendments on April 17, 2009, instead of citizens by way of grant [pursuant to subsection 3(6)], and their citizenship is retroactive to their date of birth [pursuant to paragraph 3(7)(e)]."
So it was essentially a correction, as those people should have been citizens by descent from birth anyways.
Yup, but it's pretty shameful that it only happened recently (post-2000s) and that gender inequality still exists today.
Not quite sure how this really is a disadvantage for your children. You have not chosen to live in Canada in your whole adult life and only spent 1 year as a very small child living in Canada as the 60s. You haven’t set up any roots in Canada. It seems like your whole family has not shown any desire to relocate to Canada. Honestly nothing you can do about it so your child can immigrate to Canada if they are interested in moving.