I wrote my senior thesis in college about this case. You can't tell from the NY Times article, but she was subjected to horrific violence on a daily basis. She left her children with a relative when she fled and I'm not sure if she's seen them since.
Each asylum applicant has to prove a certain level of violence/discrimination/etc. to be considered "persecution." If she had been abused by a local officer or a member of the military because of political beliefs or ethnicity, she would have been granted asylum and INS would not have appealed. The fact that it was a domestic situation and the US government is (properly) hesitant to expand asylum law without studying the impact of that change means she was just barely outside of established asylum regulations. In a way, she was lucky-ish because her case was picked up by Karen Musalo, who runs a gender and refugees clinic at Hastings. (There's been a link to Alvaradi's case since as long as I remember and students at the clinic learn about the case.) I'm just happy that DHS, after initially appealing a grant of asylum to someone who clearly deserves it, finally came to its senses and made this recommendation.
I think this makes perfect sense if the asylum seeker is from a country that does not really provide legal protection to victims of domestic abuse, thus making them, as said above, a particular social group facing persecution. Of course, that still leaves a lot of room in our own system for providing better protection for victims of domestic violence, and I'm fairly certain that this unfortunately will not apply equally to male victims of domestic violence, but it's a good start. #asylum
It seems to me the real problem here is the insanely pervasive culture of violence in the countries the women are fleeing. Why don't we spend some money on that? #asylum
@wordinedgewise: Much of U.S. foreign assistance is inefficient and tied to security issues. Aside from all the issues of imposing outside values, the U.S. government simply does not have the capacity to change other cultures in any kind of time frame that would actually help these women now. However, many NGOs are working toward women's rights, and often have local implementers - they would probably be happy for any support. #asylum
@TheocratsForDarwin: Thanks for pointing that out. I should clarify that by "we" I meant American people (read: NGO's), not necessarily government agencies. #asylum
@Kristinkles Ingabogovinanana: But, we have resources and agencies for men and women subjected to domestic violence, whereas these countries, for the most part, do not.
@CurtCole: I know, I know. These resources do fail our women though, and so I was just posing the point that while it's wonderful and very necessary to help elsewhere there is still much to be done here. #asylum
@Kristinkles Ingabogovinanana: I totally agree. My best friend works for Child Protective Services and sees women fall through the cracks all the time. She'll refer them to Adult Services, but after that is is out of her hands. #asylum
I've read the Alvarado case, and it was horrific. Basically, the Court of Appeals based its reversal on the fact that the beatings endured were not given as persecution on the basis of sex, that the sex of the person being beaten had nothing to do with it. It was the same sort of twisted reasoning state supreme courts employ when deciding that state equal rights amendments do not grant gay couples a right to marriage.
Not necessarily. In some countries there are not laws that protect the rights of women, i.e. essentially married women have no rights. For instance, although not explicitly stated, in many countries rape, from a legal perspective, cannot occur within a marriage.
and while the US can push through diplomacy for changes in human rights in a country, we cannot enforce another countries laws for them.
The same argument for asylum was used for many people fleeing legal systems that were the perpetrators of the violence. In the 1980's many people from Guatemala and El Salvador claimed asylum against the government, which was using the military to kill and torture civilians. Of course, since the CIA had trained those soldiers, most of those people were denied asylum, sent back, and captured as they walked off the flight because the CIA TOLD the military who would be arriving and when. I digress..
@Laulau: I think it's also a federal crime (http://www.students.haverford.edu/masar/documents/USRapeLaws.pdf) but I've never heard of it being prosecuted by the U.S. government...
And, oh God, the NYT refers to the woman as having children due to "involuntary sex". Um, where I come from - reality, in case anyone is curious - that's called "rape".
@Laulau: I saw a Live Journal icon once that says "It's not rape, it's surprise sex!" as a joke. I have a hard time believing that people actually use the term "involuntary sex" with a straight face. Christ.
I'm playing devil's advocate here: even if they were subjected to "legal system that could not and did not seek to protect their rights". I'm sure there are laws in those countries that have to be enforced.
Isn't it better that these women are assisted and helped in their own countries, where more could be helped in the long run?
@Ailatan: Fair enough on being the devil's advocate. My impression from the article is that there may not be laws in their own countries to protect them - I mean, my understanding is that there weren't in the US until a generation ago. But even if there are, there's obviously only so much the US can do. Surely the pressing point is to protect these actual women, and then looking more long term, try to improve conditions in their own home countries.
@Ailatan: I'm wondering how that works from a legal standpoint. What if a woman seeks asylum from a country where the law does not protect her, such as an inability to press charges for rape because she is married? If the laws do not protect her there, our laws will? I'm not trying to disprove your thought, I'm just wondering on what grounds we can feasibly offer asylum. How do they actually get to leave?
@Ailatan: you only get asylum if your own country is unwilling or unable to protect you. yes people should organize to change the laws of these countries, but in the meantime individuals need protection.
@undefined: I'm not familiar with the laws of either country, but I'm certain that basic rights are granted to its citizens, and there are courts and magistrates to deal with these cases.
I agree that perhaps these two cases in particular should be addressed since these women have been living for a while in the U.S.
My thoughts on this matter are not just simply to create controversy, but to encourage certain issues that need correcting in other countries to be dealt there, the attitudes have to be changed from within to make any lasting effect.
I don't mean to be insensitive to the horrible situation of these women, these are just my thoughts on the issue.
@Ailatan: What would make you certain of that? Even if rights are technically granted (which they may not be), there's no reason to believe they're being enforced. (I assume this is what DaphneNiobe is addressing.) And a legally granted right without practical availability has no teeth. Of course it would be better if every woman had protection in her own country (as we can see, certainly not universally true in the US) but in the meanwhile, these particular, concrete women need protection. If we can give them that, then I think we owe them that.
@Squirrel-dAway: yes, if a person manages to get themselves to the US and can prove that they have been or will be persecuted by the state or an individual with the backing of the state on the basis of their religion, political opinion, ethnicity, or particular social group than they can go through a very long and arduous process of seeking asylum which basically means we won't deport them to where they came from if they are likely to be persecuted, tortured, etc. more upon return. Most countries have signed the treaty that makes it illegal to return people to these conditions.
@Ailatan: also it has nothing to do with how long they have been in the country. Poor Rodi Alvarado has been here for 13 years fighting deportation the whole time. Technically asylum should be granted swiftly upon entry into the country.
I saw a series on people having sex change operations in Iran. Perhaps rather oddly, such operations are perfectly acceptable and indeed commonplace under Islamic laws. The series revealed that for some gay couples, the only way their relationship could survive was if one of them underwent a complete sex change,
the UK can be pretty cool on the old border front.
My boyfriend is American and I'm English, and we met and live in Ireland right now, and there is NO WAY i am allowed to go to the States unless we get married. If we go to England however he can come as my "unmarried partner" provided we've lived together for more than 2 years (we have). I'm pretty sure this policy is in place mainly to accommodate teh gays, but i'm SO going to use that policy.
is there anything similar in the states? for unmarried gay or straight couples? and seing as how gay marriage isn't allowed in America how would a gay couple immigrate?
@Rummy_McGin: Nope, nothing similar in the U.S. A gay partner would either have to find his or her own way into the country, or the couple would have to move abroad. I think many European countries have similar rules to England's, however.
Executed? Things here are far from perfect but sometimes I feel so sheltered to these things.
I was thinking of organizing a group rally to raise awareness regarding LGBT rights in Union Square soon. Maybe on Obama's 100th day in office to show that though there are pressing matters (the economy, etc etc) we haven't forgotten about the pressing needs of others.
@Shannon: This is making me feel a little petty for getting so worked up over the possible divorce of all the California couples. Which in itself (that it is relatively speaking a smaller deal) also truly sucks.
I work for the Refugee board in Canada. It's possible that she would have been given asylum here, if it hadn't worked out in the UK. I'm happy that it did work out for Pegah, though. Good luck to her.
@kellybean: Possible yes, although I recall a case of a Nigerian man who tried to be granted asylum on the grounds that he fled his country after being persecuted for being homosexual. He was denied and he immediately married a woman from his church who subsequently sponsored him as an immigrant. I have no idea if he lied or was simply doing what was most expedient for him (which seems the more likely scenario to me), but there was apparently great skepticism about his actions. I don't know if this has made applications for asylum for those of different sexual orientations harder...maybe you know more about this case? If so, that would be terribly sad for those who are fleeing such persecution.
10/30/09
Each asylum applicant has to prove a certain level of violence/discrimination/etc. to be considered "persecution." If she had been abused by a local officer or a member of the military because of political beliefs or ethnicity, she would have been granted asylum and INS would not have appealed. The fact that it was a domestic situation and the US government is (properly) hesitant to expand asylum law without studying the impact of that change means she was just barely outside of established asylum regulations. In a way, she was lucky-ish because her case was picked up by Karen Musalo, who runs a gender and refugees clinic at Hastings. (There's been a link to Alvaradi's case since as long as I remember and students at the clinic learn about the case.) I'm just happy that DHS, after initially appealing a grant of asylum to someone who clearly deserves it, finally came to its senses and made this recommendation.
[cgrs.uchastings.edu]
Check out the court filings, they're pretty extraordinary. #asylum
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
10/30/09
07/16/09
07/16/09
and while the US can push through diplomacy for changes in human rights in a country, we cannot enforce another countries laws for them.
The same argument for asylum was used for many people fleeing legal systems that were the perpetrators of the violence. In the 1980's many people from Guatemala and El Salvador claimed asylum against the government, which was using the military to kill and torture civilians. Of course, since the CIA had trained those soldiers, most of those people were denied asylum, sent back, and captured as they walked off the flight because the CIA TOLD the military who would be arriving and when. I digress..
07/16/09
07/16/09
07/16/09
07/16/09
07/16/09
07/16/09
07/16/09
07/16/09
07/16/09
07/16/09
Isn't it better that these women are assisted and helped in their own countries, where more could be helped in the long run?
07/16/09
07/16/09
07/16/09
07/16/09
07/16/09
I agree that perhaps these two cases in particular should be addressed since these women have been living for a while in the U.S.
My thoughts on this matter are not just simply to create controversy, but to encourage certain issues that need correcting in other countries to be dealt there, the attitudes have to be changed from within to make any lasting effect.
I don't mean to be insensitive to the horrible situation of these women, these are just my thoughts on the issue.
07/16/09
07/16/09
07/16/09
Sadly, the right to not be abused by your spouse/significant other/people in general is not considered a "basic right" across the globe.
07/16/09
07/16/09
02/16/09
02/16/09
My boyfriend is American and I'm English, and we met and live in Ireland right now, and there is NO WAY i am allowed to go to the States unless we get married. If we go to England however he can come as my "unmarried partner" provided we've lived together for more than 2 years (we have). I'm pretty sure this policy is in place mainly to accommodate teh gays, but i'm SO going to use that policy.
is there anything similar in the states? for unmarried gay or straight couples? and seing as how gay marriage isn't allowed in America how would a gay couple immigrate?
02/16/09
02/16/09
I was thinking of organizing a group rally to raise awareness regarding LGBT rights in Union Square soon. Maybe on Obama's 100th day in office to show that though there are pressing matters (the economy, etc etc) we haven't forgotten about the pressing needs of others.
02/16/09
02/16/09
02/16/09
02/16/09
02/16/09