Deportation.

[Doodlebug]

We have an interesting situation here in Chicago.

There is a woman who is an illegal immigrant from Mexico. She has been here 9 years. At one point she commited a minor crime way back and was deported once, but came back in illegally.

Here's the twist. She has a 7 year old son who was born here and is a US citizen. The bureau of Immigration has a court order to deport her again. She naturally does not want to leave her son. The autorities still want to deport her. Right now she has been given refuge in a local church and says she will stay there indefinately.

She does have the option of taking her child with her to Mexico. I can't see her living in the church for the rest of her life. If she goes back she probably cannot apply for legal status as she has a criminal record however small. She is here illegally.

Thoughts??? Should she be deported? Should she be granted residency? I'm not sure how I feel. Part of me feels that we have bigger issues to worry about than this woman and she should be left alone. She has not gotten into any trouble with the law for 7 years. Part of me feels that she is illegal and can take her son with her and has family in Mexico. She does not have to be separated from her child.

[historyteach]

She has not gotten into any trouble with the law for 7 years.

Quite the contrary. The fact that she's illegal means she IS in constant trouble with the law.
And it flys in the face of all who come legally.
And it lowers American standards of living.
And....
Personally, I want to scream at Bush, "What part of "illegal" don't you understand?"
I know it's a tough situation. But, she put herself in it with her actions. Her choices got her where she is. Now, she's got to live with the consequences of her actions -- something she doesn't want to do.
Can we say, "GROW UP!"

We are a land of immigrants. The key here is illegal. It's simple, in my perspective!

Shalom!

[GreenTea]

I have to respectfully disagree...

I don't see how it lowers anyone's standard of living. I do see how it flies in the face of those who've gone through the hassle of immigrating legally.

However, if I'm reading your post correctly, she's been here seven years without incident. It seems to me that the naturalization provisions should take precedence.

In ANY case, she has a son who was born here and IS a citizen... As a citizen, what is in this child's best interest? To deport him for the sins of his mother to some strange faraway (practically third world) land? To separate him from his natural mother, make him a ward of the State and send him to an orphanage or a series of foster homes? Or is it in the child's best interest to keep him here where he belongs, with his mother to care for him?

You're a citizen. If you were this child, which choice would YOU want?

[GreenTea]

Also, since the child is a natural born citizen, deporting him along with his mother would be working a "corruption of blood", (punishing him for something his mother did), which is prohibited in the U.S.

[PlanoTexican]

Just because a cat has kittens in the oven doesn't make 'em biscuits.

[Doodlebug]

Here over 7 years and still does not speak one word of English. She has an interpreter for her press conferences. I bet when asked, she will state that she is Mexican. I bet she refers to her son as Mexican also. But then again I wouldn't know because she does not speak English.

So my question is.... IS Mexico a fate worse than death to her and her child?

[margo]

I think that's a question we can't answer because we don't know all the details. If she's been in the States that long then she has built a life for her and her son - naturally she doesn't want to leave. Her son has rights as he was born in the United States - where would you want to raise your child if there was a choice to be made. I assume as she is illegal she has been supporting herself and her son without the State's help.

So what if she doesn't speak English?

As she is from Mexico, she would be truthful by saying she is Mexican.

[Doodlebug]

Originally Posted by margo

So what if she doesn't speak English?

Actually, it matters a great deal. Millions of tax dollars are spent on bilingual signs and telephone answering systems. When is the last time you called a utility and didn't get the instruction "For English press 1"

Our already overburdened public school systems are struggling to provide classes in Spanish for the 5 and 6 year olds that were born here and still do not speak a word of English.

Local colleges and community centers provide free classes for English as a second language. There are few takers. Why should they when we have spent millions to ensure that it is possible to NOT speak English here and still manage. What is the impetus to assimilate into this culture when you do not need English to survive?

On a personal note, my grandmother immigrated from Germany at age 9. She first stepped foot on Ellis Island in May 1911 not speaking one word of English. By September, she started school and could speak English well enough to not only succeed, but to go on and eventually earn a college degree. My Great Grandfather did not allow his 5 children to speak German in the house. Only in case of a dire emergency. All learned the language and went on to be successful. This was not a wealthy family either. My great grandfather was a blacksmith.

So yes.. it matters quite a lot that a person does not have the need or desire to learn the language after over 7 years in this country.

[Cindi R]

I'm a nurse...one of my co-workers was on the elevators with a couple of spanish speaking fellows...
they asked if she spoke spanish...
She said "no"...
They told her that she'd better learn it because they are here to stay...

My feelings on this are in conflict...I can see both sides...I do understand that parents want to bring their children here to give them a better life...
What I have a problem with is exactly what Doodlebug speaks of.....our tax dollars and education dollars being spent on illegal's who show no interest in learning the language on their own and feeling that we "owe" them.
In addition to the fact that they do the work of many for considerably less than our workers will....then send the money back to Mexico to support their families there instead of spending it here in our communities...
Then you add the Mexican drug trade in on top of everything else.....
Just yesterday they made the biggest drug bust of methamphetamines ever...somewhere in GA...
Have you kept up on what's going on in Mexico?
Drug lords are killing their police...
beheading and shooting people...
even in tourist destinations such as Cancun....
I think there should be a process...
That they should have to learn to speak the language...

[GreenTea]

I think the language thing is a separate, although related, issue.

For the record, I am STRONGLY in favor of codifying American English as the official language of our great country. I would be glad to see a stop put to spending my tax dollars (and yours too) on "bi-lingualism". If you want to be a citizen, learn the friggin' language of the country.

Meth and Georgia... Yeah, I hear that Georgia gets a lot smuggling in from Mexico, (by way of Texas, Mississippi, Alabama and across the Gulf through Florida). C'mon now, what does that have to do with anything?

The fact remains that the kid is a native of the U.S. and that makes him a citizen, (biscuit or not). You can't "deport" him for something that his mom has done.

[Doodlebug]

My question is WHY does being born here make automatically make you a citizen if your parents are illegal? Shouldn't that be changed? It opens to doors for these sorts of dilemas. Now the kid is entitled to all the education, welfare, healthcare and so on. His illegal parents benifit from this also and our tax dollar is paying for it.

Illegals come hear to have their babies for this reason. I think a child should only be naturalized by going through the same process as is required by the parents, whether they are born here or not. That child should be a Mexican citizen only. I don't mean to sound hard A$$ed but we cannot even provide for our own citizens (look at New Orleans) let alone foot the bill for health care and education children of illegals. The kid should go to Mexico with his mother.

[equus]

Article 9
1. States Parties shall ensure that a child shall not be separated from his or her parents against their will, except when competent authorities subject to judicial review determine, in accordance with applicable law and procedures, that such separation is necessary for the best interests of the child. Such determination may be necessary in a particular case such as one involving abuse or neglect of the child by the parents, or one where the parents are living separately and a decision must be made as to the child's place of residence.

Article 10
1. In accordance with the obligation of States Parties under article 9, paragraph 1, applications by a child or his or her parents to enter or leave a State Party for the purpose of family reunification shall be dealt with by States Parties in a positive, humane and expeditious manner. States Parties shall further ensure that the submission of such a request shall entail no adverse consequences for the applicants and for the members of their family.
2. A child whose parents reside in different States shall have the right to maintain on a regular basis, save in exceptional circumstances personal relations and direct contacts with both parents. Towards that end and in accordance with the obligation of States Parties under article 9, paragraph 1, States Parties shall respect the right of the child and his or her parents to leave any country, including their own, and to enter their own country. The right to leave any country shall be subject only to such restrictions as are prescribed by law and which are necessary to protect the national security, public order (ordre public), public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others and are consistent with the other rights recognized in the present Convention.

From The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Somalia (a collapsed state - therefore no-one there able to ratify) and the USA are the only two countries which haven't ratified The Rights of the child formed by the UN.

The USA has signed that it intends to ratify in the future.

Actions will always speak louder than words.

[Doodlebug]

Interesting , but that does not answer my question. Why do we make children of illegals automatic citizens?

No one is forcing this child to be separated from his mother. He can go with her. His best interests are served by staying with her. She is illegal and breaking the law. He can always return when he is of age and has the right to choose which country he wants citizenship in. I believe at present he has dual citizenship.

[equus]

Originally Posted by Doodlebug

Interesting , but that does not answer my question. Why do we make children of illegals automatic citizens?

No one is forcing this child to be separated from his mother. He can go with her. His best interests are served by staying with her. She is illegal and breaking the law. He can always return when he is of age and has the right to choose which country he wants citizenship in. I believe at present he has dual citizenship.

Because each state accepts a duty to care for children within that state. At least I'm 90% sure it's the crux of it.

I'm going to bow out now because this isn't the place for me - 'Illegals' are people, they are mostly people seeking a better life. I don't know about anyone else but I personally didn't do anything to deserve my good fortune to be born in a developed country.

As for interpreting UN rights of the child - there's a rule of thumb that sums it up, what is in the best interests of the child? (unless that puts others at risk). To be forced either out your home country or to lose your mother is in the best interests of very few children.

[Doodlebug]

I do not advocate forcing a child out of his home or separating him from his mother either. Unfortunately this child was put into this situation by an irresponsible parent who is breaking the law.

I can certainly understand the Department of Imigrations and governments position in this case. Allowing an illegal to stay simply because she gave birth to a US citizen sets the precident for all Illegals to be naturalized because they have had a child here. We then will have uncontrolled immigration and open boarders. They cannot let this case set the precident.

I am not against immigrants... I, as most of us, am a product of immigration. But LEGAL is the operartive word here. I would be more inclined to side with this mother if our country was doing a good job with providing for all US citizens, but we are not. Returning veterans cannot get healthcare coverage as that was stopped due to expense. My son served 6 years in the military with 2 tours in the middle east. He does not have healthcare as he is going to college full time and working full time also in a job that does not provide healthcare benifits but provides flexibility with his school hours.

Illegals simply go to a hospital ER and obtain healthcare, which by law cannot be refused and then disappear into the underground never to be billed. The system must absorb the cost and pass it on to the rest of us, who will be badgered by collection agencies should our bills not be paid. Should my son try this stunt, his wages would be garnished and his credit destroyed. I see this all the time as a healthcare provider. US citizens lose their houses and savings and illegals go on to have more US citizens.

Edited to add: I am not angry or upset with anyone who may have opposing views on this subject. I just like a debate now and then and welcome the rebuttals. I get so fed up with focusing on addiction, sobriety and woe is meeeeee..... wahhh... There is more to life and a good debate is stimulating provided it can stick to the points being made and not taken personal. OK???

[historyteach]

Ya gotta read the Constitution of the United States of America to get the answer to your question.

Shalom!

[Doodlebug]

I realize that Teach. I know where this comes from. However, our Forefathers could not have forseen the problems facing society today some 200+ years later. The social issues involved in this day an age could not have been accounted for and covered under the constitution.

I also know that constitional ammendments are generally not tackled. So how do you propose this issue resolved?

[nevergivingup]

I had written a long response to this thread, but I chose to erase it. The only thing I can really say is that I'm insulted, I'm disheartened, I'm ashamed, and only that I believe this thread is disgraceful!!! I'm disgusted!

[Doodlebug]

Gosh.... I'm sorry. I never intened to get anyone so "disgusted". Only to have a discussion. I will never post another topic unless it's a game. I just thought "cafe central" would be a place for that. Lesson learned. This is not the place for intellegent conversation. I'll just go elsewhere for that. There's lots of forums on other sites where adults can debate topics. Again. Sorry. Not another thought from me... I promise.

[margo]

Originally Posted by Doodlebug

Gosh.... I'm sorry. I never intened to get anyone so "disgusted". Only to have a discussion. I will never post another topic unless it's a game. I just thought "cafe central" would be a place for that. Lesson learned. This is not the place for intellegent conversation. I'll just go elsewhere for that. There's lots of forums on other sites where adults can debate topics. Again. Sorry. Not another thought from me... I promise.

Doodlebug - sorry to hear you feel that way, but you must have known that this is a controversial topic when you started the thread. Quite frankly, given some of the content of this thread I'm amazed that more people haven't objected, but perhaps the Cafe has been a bit slow lately. I have to admit that I also found some of this offensive - we Canadians have a reputation for being a rather tolerant lot for the most part. You're welcome to post threads in the Cafe, but keep in mind that when you ask for opinions on controversial issues not everyone is going to agree with you or like what you have to say.

And on that note, I'm closing this thread. It's time to move on...