New PR rule

[qwerty999]

Hello everyone.

You may have heard about the new rule which suggests if the couple is separated within two years of the immigrant spouse coming to Canada then his/her PR status will be revoked and he/she will have to go back home unless there was complaints of abuse and despite that the (most of the time) wife doesn't want separation because she fears she'll have to leave Canada.

My question is, does the abuse have to be physical or it can be psychological too?

 

[computergeek]

I assume you are referring to: http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2012/2012-03-10/html/reg1-eng.html

Note first, that this has not yet become law. While the proposed new rule will likely create a greater burden for those in an abusive relationship, there is absolutely no reason for a spouse to remain in an abusive relationship given current law - there is no duty/obligation to prove any reason for breaking off a relationship at the present time. Note that the five year ban for sponsoring a new foreign spouse is already effective, though, so the primary purpose of these two rule changes (to prevent MOCs) has already been largely achieved.

From the Gazette:

Guidelines to assist officers in processing cases involving claims of abuse or neglect, and in handling sensitive information related to them, would be developed through consultations with various groups, including non-governmental organizations with expertise in domestic violence and law enforcement agencies, and would be publicly available prior to the final publication of this regulatory proposal. The condition would cease to apply where an officer determines, based on evidence, that (1) such abuse or neglect, or failure by the sponsor to protect from abuse or neglect, has occurred during the conditional period; and (2) the sponsored spouse or partner cohabited in a conjugal relationship with the sponsor until the cohabitation ceased as a result of abuse or neglect.

Thus, there is no standard yet determined as to what will constitute an abusive relationship. Anyone answering you at this point can do nothing more than speculate.

 

[truesmile]

Let's just suppose that in your hypothetical scenario you are the 'applicant' (who obtained PR) and the sponsor is the abusive one. As stated previously this is NOT a rule yet, and I'd say FAR from ever being one. Currently, your 'PR status' CANNOT be cancelled, and you will NOT have to leave Canada.

 

[Jamgirl]

may I also suggest...

If the applicant is female and is in fact being abused mentally, physically, sexually, emotionally, etc. then she can contact her local women's shelter. She can contact her local Department of Social Services for contact information as most women's shelters are confidential so that abusive males cannot find the women. Once there, the shelter can lodge her for a pre-determined amount of time. While there, they can also assist her with finding new lodging, counseling services, aid her in her search of legal services if need be, and usually help her acquire furniture and clothing also. Women's shelters are free and are available for these exact circumstances. Also, this can be a good way to document the abuse, which they can guide her for that. Good luck.

 

[toby]

What hasn't been addressed yet on this thread is WHY would the PR want to remain in Canada if the major reason for coming in the first place was to be with his/her Canadian spouse? Supportive family and friends are still in the home country, presumably, after only two years of immigration in Canada.

Now that the relationship seems to be failing, the reason for being in Canada has vanished, has it not?

To stay in Canada despite without the (former) spouse suggests that the PR visa -- and the life in Canada it made possible -- was a more important factor than was admitted during the PR application process.

Sorry to seem like a lawyer here, but one can see why visa officers are so "careful" at times.

 

[computergeek]

What hasn't been addressed yet on this thread is WHY would the PR want to remain in Canada if the major reason for coming in the first place was to be with his/her Canadian spouse? Supportive family and friends are still in the home country, presumably, after only two years of immigration in Canada.

There are a variety of reasons that I can see:

(1) Children
(2) The reality that some people cannot return home after a divorce - for whatever reason - without bringing shame upon themselves and/or their families
(3) The fact that they may not have the means to return home. While we might take the ability to just purchase an airplane ticket and fly home as a given, that is not always within the means of a recent immigrant living in Canada with a spouse who has turned abusive and they've had to leave home under difficult circumstances.

Marrying to improve one's position in life is an age-old reason to marry. Canadian law and social custom do not require that a spouse remain in an abusive relationship simply because their economic opportunities have improved in Canada. Doing otherwise sounds very close to slavery.

Of the two rules here, it would seem the five year bar to sponsorship is a far better limit to the MOC issue than the two year relationship, since it seems the possibility of using the conditional PR as a weapon against the immigrant is unfortunately quite high.

It reminds me of another case I just read on here earlier today - a husband and wife. The husband is a US citizen, the wife a Canadian PR. They have a child together, but after a recent fight the wife withdrew her sponsorship of his PR, thinking that this was not an irrevocable decision apparently. He doesn't even HAVE PR, but the very threat that he might be forced to return to the US and effectively have his parental rights terminated via immigration is repugnant. The husband didn't come to Canada for the economic benefit, he came because he had a child with this woman. Further, from his description the fact that they were 18 months into the OUTLAND PR process (which takes 15 months or less for 80% of cases) had put an incredible financial strain on them and is likely one factor in the trouble within their relationship.

As for the OP, no matter why this question is being posted, rest assured that NOTHING in Canadian law requires you remain in an abusive relationship, whether physical, financial, or emotional abuse.

 

[Jamgirl]

There are a variety of reasons that I can see:

(1) Children
(2) The reality that some people cannot return home after a divorce - for whatever reason - without bringing shame upon themselves and/or their families
(3) The fact that they may not have the means to return home. While we might take the ability to just purchase an airplane ticket and fly home as a given, that is not always within the means of a recent immigrant living in Canada with a spouse who has turned abusive and they've had to leave home under difficult circumstances.

Marrying to improve one's position in life is an age-old reason to marry. Canadian law and social custom do not require that a spouse remain in an abusive relationship simply because their economic opportunities have improved in Canada. Doing otherwise sounds very close to slavery.

Of the two rules here, it would seem the five year bar to sponsorship is a far better limit to the MOC issue than the two year relationship, since it seems the possibility of using the conditional PR as a weapon against the immigrant is unfortunately quite high.

It reminds me of another case I just read on here earlier today - a husband and wife. The husband is a US citizen, the wife a Canadian PR. They have a child together, but after a recent fight the wife withdrew her sponsorship of his PR, thinking that this was not an irrevocable decision apparently. He doesn't even HAVE PR, but the very threat that he might be forced to return to the US and effectively have his parental rights terminated via immigration is repugnant. The husband didn't come to Canada for the economic benefit, he came because he had a child with this woman. Further, from his description the fact that they were 18 months into the OUTLAND PR process (which takes 15 months or less for 80% of cases) had put an incredible financial strain on them and is likely one factor in the trouble within their relationship.

As for the OP, no matter why this question is being posted, rest assured that NOTHING in Canadian law requires you remain in an abusive relationship, whether physical, financial, or emotional abuse.

+1

 

[truesmile]

The OP stated the reason (more than once). She has a "fear of leaving Canada". For sure everyone's curious about everything but simply put, she is AFRAID to leave and at this time has also chosen not to share the details concerning that fear.

 

[qwerty999]

Thanks a lot Computergeek,truesmile,jamgirl for understanding the situation. The 3 reasons that computergeek stated are very true indeed. In many countries sons/daughters are married off with the foreigners so that he/she can live there for rest of his/her life and not be a burden even if his/her marriage doesn't work out in future.

Anyways, the scenario could be only hypothetical.

I assume you are referring to: [Edit link : doesn't allow links]

Note first, that this has not yet become law. While the proposed new rule will likely create a greater burden for those in an abusive relationship, there is absolutely no reason for a spouse to remain in an abusive relationship given current law - there is no duty/obligation to prove any reason for breaking off a relationship at the present time. Note that the five year ban for sponsoring a new foreign spouse is already effective, though, so the primary purpose of these two rule changes (to prevent MOCs) has already been largely achieved.

From the Gazette:

Thus, there is no standard yet determined as to what will constitute an abusive relationship. Anyone answering you at this point can do nothing more than speculate.

When it can become a law? Is there any possibility that it can be made a new law in future?

Where can I find out about it if it becomes a law and start being in action? Thank you.

 

[SenoritaBella]

Keep checking www.gazette.gc.ca and www.cic.gc.ca , as proposed rules/laws are first posted in the gazette and then when they become law, also posted on cic's website in the "news/notices" section. I've noticed new laws passed in June/July, like this year for instance, so who knows?

 

[qwerty999]

Is it about to become a law or is there any possibility that it can be scrapped in future?

 

[CharlieD10]

It is not known when or even if this conditional PR status will become effective. Certainly nothing will happen until Parliament returns from its summer break and takes up the business of the country again later this month. Whether or not the Conservative government will continue to pursue its "tough on crime" and "clean up our immigration mess" agenda is anyone's guess.

 

[JimM]

The OP stated the reason (more than once). She has a "fear of leaving Canada". For sure everyone's curious about everything but simply put, she is AFRAID to leave and at this time has also chosen not to share the details concerning that fear.

That would make me think of reason #2, they'd be going back to a place where she'd have a stigma on her as a divorced woman.

But you also don't need that to fear going back. She may well have burned her bridges by leaving if her family disproved, (something that can happen to just about anyone in any country really), and have nothing to go back to, (no job, nowhere to stay, etc). If she has a job and made a life in Canada why should she be deported because he's abusive? Deport him for domestic violence instead.

 

[toby]

There are a variety of reasons that I can see:

(1) Children
(2) The reality that some people cannot return home after a divorce - for whatever reason - without bringing shame upon themselves and/or their families
(3) The fact that they may not have the means to return home. While we might take the ability to just purchase an airplane ticket and fly home as a given, that is not always within the means of a recent immigrant living in Canada with a spouse who has turned abusive and they've had to leave home under difficult circumstances.

Marrying to improve one's position in life is an age-old reason to marry. Canadian law and social custom do not require that a spouse remain in an abusive relationship simply because their economic opportunities have improved in Canada. Doing otherwise sounds very close to slavery.

Of the two rules here, it would seem the five year bar to sponsorship is a far better limit to the MOC issue than the two year relationship, since it seems the possibility of using the conditional PR as a weapon against the immigrant is unfortunately quite high.

It reminds me of another case I just read on here earlier today - a husband and wife. The husband is a US citizen, the wife a Canadian PR. They have a child together, but after a recent fight the wife withdrew her sponsorship of his PR, thinking that this was not an irrevocable decision apparently. He doesn't even HAVE PR, but the very threat that he might be forced to return to the US and effectively have his parental rights terminated via immigration is repugnant. The husband didn't come to Canada for the economic benefit, he came because he had a child with this woman. Further, from his description the fact that they were 18 months into the OUTLAND PR process (which takes 15 months or less for 80% of cases) had put an incredible financial strain on them and is likely one factor in the trouble within their relationship.

As for the OP, no matter why this question is being posted, rest assured that NOTHING in Canadian law requires you remain in an abusive relationship, whether physical, financial, or emotional abuse.

Good points.

I hope that nothing in my question suggested that I think anyone should be forced to stay in an abusive relationship.