"PMM" wrote in message news:...
> Hi Fat
>
> "FAT" wrote in message
> news:ciquf9$fak$1@reader01.singnet.com.sg...
> > HI PMM
> >
> > Thanks for your reply.
> >
> > I doubt if he has mentioned her in the application forms, but all of his
> > documents including his education from primary school up to university
> > has her name and address. His adddress in the forms would have indicated
> > her address.
> >
> > He has been living with her since primary schools days, her name and
> > address appears in all records where required parents signature.
> >
> > She has been supporting him almost whole life. (these all facts could be
> > proven by documentary evidence). In my opinion this could certainly
> > prove most important factor of any adoption which is "Parent Child
> > relationship" .
> >
> > Is there anyway we could win this case on base of factual evidence
> > (which is extensive) rather then technical issue of legality of adoption?
> >
> > Second things.
> >
> > I saw something like adoption a close relative if you are willing of
> > accept to support them for 10 years, would that solve his problem?
> >
> > Best regards.
>
>
> No such thing as an "adopted parent" nor is there sponsorship of aunts. He
> is going to have a very tough time convincing CIC that there was a
> child/parent bond with no formal adoption, especially if she was not
> mentioned as parent on his application. If he has sponsored his natural
> parents or they are in Canada, they he is definitely going to be out of
> luck. He should contact a very well consultant or Immigration lawyer if
> want to go farther with this.
Dear PMM
I am not talking about "adopted parent", he was indeed adopted by them
although no legal process has been done, it is very common in our
society and I know few case of such kind of adoption without legal
process. Legal process only done if it they are adopting someone from
outside, but if adoption to close relation it always done without
legal processes (we just could not bring ourselves to talk about legal
documentations for agreements and understanding done between brothers
and sisters). It is culturally not acceptable at our side.
He stayed with them almost whole of his life, receive all love
compassion. They provided him best of everything they could and
support him till he came to Canada, we are talking here about genuine
relationship, This could be proven by documentary evidence.
I do not know what happen to his biological parents, but I am sure
that they are not in Canada.
I have just come across an Interesting recent decision by IMMIGRATION
AND REFUGEE BOARD (IMMIGRATION APPEAL DIISION where it was said
following :-
[20] In my view, the failure to give a specific definition of the
term in IRPA was done for a reason. It seems to me that this is an
acknowledgement that, as we move into the 21st century, the term
"mother," for the purposes of the family class, should be given a
broad and liberal interpretation. There are two reason for this.
<>
[21] First, the traditional view of a mother as the person who
brings life into the world has changed dramatically in recent years
with advances in reproductive technologies. Secondly, Canadian
society is comprised of varied family arrangements that have become
more commonplace and accepted..
<>[25] To begin with, the term "mother" must be interpreted
according to Canadian law and not according to the country of origin.
Secondly, apart from biological and adoptive mothers, people claiming
membership in the family class as the mother of a sponsor, should be
able to demonstrate a nurturing relationship that is recognized in the
community as one of parent and child. This might be evidenced by
factors such as economic support and having lived as a family unit in
which social and emotional bonds have been forged over a period of
time. In the case before me, I find that there is such a
relationship. <>
[27] In any event, the evidence as to the appellant's
relationship with the applicant all points to a close family where the
applicant showed a settled intention from the beginning to treat the
appellant as her son and he reciprocated by treating her as his
mother. Throughout his years in Hong Kong including after the death
of the appellant's father, the appellant and the applicant stayed in
contact. When he returned to Vietnam in 1996, he lived with her and
his stepsiblings for a further three years until he came to Canada.
His stepmother played an important parental role at his marriage and
they remained in regular contact after he left Vietnam the second
time. She clearly views the appellant's child as her grand daughter.
[29] In summary, I find that the legislators intended that the
term "mother" be given a liberal interpretation and that this could,
in the appropriate circumstances, include a stepmother. The appellant
and the applicant have enjoyed a mother and son relationship for 14
years. They resided in the same house for many years and cared for
each other. When the appellant came back from Hong Kong, surely a
period of great disappointment for him, his stepmother supported him
emotionally and financially until he found employment. When she fell
on hard times in recent years, he provided and continues to provide
financial help for her. Theirs is a relationship of mutual benefits
and dependencies. In my view, it also constitutes a genuine parent
and child relationship.
Although this is refers to stepmother, but I believe same principle
would be applicable in this case. Unless this decision would overtrun
in subsequent appeal. It has open a big window for us on this.
I look forward to hearing your and other experts comments on this
forum on this. |