- FAQ
- Login
- Register
- Call Workpermit.com for a paid service +44 (0)344-991-9222
ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, Amber, archigabe, batleykhan, ca.funke, ChetanOjha, EUsmileWEallsmile, JAJ, John, Obie, push, geriatrix, vinny, CR001, zimba, meself2, Administrator
No! honestly - last thing I want is an argument! I think it's a heinous crime but I don't understand why the victim is rewarded with ILR. Damages yes, prison for the perp. yes, but why ILR? Seems to me the victim is rewarded for a poor choice of partner. Yes I know people hide these tendencies well but really, I know my partner well enough to know that she won't ever beat me up and vice-versa.jei2 wrote:I don't know Wanderer but thank you for giving me this timely opportunity to indulge with this message to my politics lecturer:
When you gave out an assignment of being a government minister who would introduce new legislation that would make a difference and I introduced the Civil Partnership Act 1995 with extensive research on why it would be feasible, you said it would never happen. er.. hello? :lol:
Okaay..Back from Iwasrightandyouwerewrongsville.. :lol: :lol:
Maybe streetwalking is more of a choice than domestic violence? (I'm not saying it is) - Or maybe streetwalking pays but domestic violence costs? Or maybe individuals like Erin Pizzey and agencies like Southall Black Sisters fought tirelessly for change in this area? The damage caused by domestic violence is easier to record than from the causative factors created by abandonment..?
Butterfly effects? Or are you just looking for an argument? :twisted:
Because when it comes to renew the visa, what basis is s/he going to renew on? It can't be a spouse if she has sent her spouse to jail.Wanderer wrote:I know I've asked this before on another forum but I'd like to know why DV is a valid route to ILR?
Before I go on, I know DV is an insidious act, and anyone guilty of it deserves to be hung, drawn and quartered, and the victims deserve protection but I do wonder why that includes a favourable route to ILR, as distinct to say, someone who is just abandoned by her husband or is a victim of a mugging?
Let's use two couples as an example, one male is abusing his wife, she reports it, DV charges are pressed, they split, she gets ILR.
The other, he merely abandons her, she is destitute, maybe she turns to streetwalking, she is raped, abused, but no ILR for her.
Now I know I'm wrong on this so no flamewar please! I just need a logical explanation of how I'm wrong, like John did a while back when I felt the prospective CP visa was unfair to heterosexuals (which I now know it isn't!).
You have to draw a line somewheree. Everything is arbitrary.Wanderer wrote:Thanks for the responses so far, but I'm still not aligned with the consensus!
@Joe777, I see the point you make but it seems to me that the HO has to mop up for the act of an individual.
@republic, I see your point too but again what is the difference between a spouse abandoned and a spouse victim of DV? It's the act of violence I know. I suppose what I am saying is the question the other way round, why does the spouse who is just as much the dependent on her partner who merely abandons her get nothing? She has invested just as much.
Just seems to be an imbalance.