Immigrationboards.com

Hi All,
I am on my second lap of spouse visa and my husband is a British citizen. I am pregnant and will like to give birth in America.

A little background information..

My husband got his british citizenship from his dad. His dad for his british citizenship in the 60s by naturalisation. My husband was not born in the uk but his dad applied for him to get the ul passport. I am very confused as to if he is british by desent because his dad got his citizenship in the 60s and my husband was born in 1976. If we have our child in the America. Will our child be british ? How do we go about registering the child?


Thanks in advance.

Amy

Your husband is British by Descent. If any of his children are born outside the UK, they are NOT automatically British.

The baby will only be automatically British Otherwise than Descent if born in the UK and entitled to apply directly for a passport.

It will be easier, cheaper and less complicated to have the baby in the UK if you want the baby to have British Citizenship automatically.

No, because as your husband was born outside of the UK he is British by descent.
"A British citizen by descent is a person born outside the UK and is acquired if one or both parents are British citizens. This means that you cannot automatically pass on British citizenship to any child who is born abroad."

Char, you beat me to it as usual, while I was 'multi-tasking'!

CR001 wrote:Your husband is British by Descent. If any of his children are born outside the UK, they are NOT automatically British.

The baby will only be automatically British Otherwise than Descent if born in the UK and entitled to apply directly for a passport.

It will be easier, cheaper and less complicated to have the baby in the UK if you want the baby to have British Citizenship automatically.

Bear in mind that if your baby is born in the UK while you are there as a visitor, you would have to pay substantial NHS costs for the birth and any pre-natal or post-natal treatment.

Casa, no worry on that front!

Amiii wrote:I am on my second lap of spouse visa

CR001 wrote:Your husband is British by Descent. If any of his children are born outside the UK, they are NOT automatically British.

The baby will only be automatically British Otherwise than Descent if born in the UK and entitled to apply directly for a passport.

It will be easier, cheaper and less complicated to have the baby in the UK if you want the baby to have British Citizenship automatically.

Thanks for the response... but I am still not sure if my husband is british by descent. The rule for British by descent came into play in 1983. So anyone born after that date outside is british by descent. My husband was born in 1976 and got his certificate of entitlement to the right of abode 2 (1) (B) IN 1999. I am not here on a visit visa. I have got a uk spouse visa. On the second half of my five years qualifying period. The rules are soooo confusing. I want my child to have the American passport hence my preference to give birth in America.

To give you an example why I say your husband is British by Descent. My husband was born abroad in 1970 to a British born father. He is therefore British by Descent and his daughter (now adult) born abroad, is not British and has not right or entitlement to a British passport.

Are you an American citizen? If so, both countries allow dual nationality so if the baby is born in the UK and your are an American citizen, the baby can have both passports/citizenships.

CR001 wrote:To give you an example why I say your husband is British by Descent. My husband was born abroad in 1970 to a British born father. He is therefore British by Descent and his daughter (now adult) born abroad, is not British and has not right or entitlement to a British passport.

Are you an American citizen? If so, both countries allow dual nationality so if the baby is born in the UK and your are an American citizen, the baby can have both passports/citizenships.

No I am Nigerian. But my siblings are us citizens and I would love my children to go to school with their cousins. Have you tried applying for your daughter ?

It is not my daughter but my husbands daughter and yes he did look into it but there were issues with his ex wife giving permission to register her etc. so he left it. His daughter still qualifies for an Ancestral visa so all is not lost.

If you have the child in the USA, you will have to pay the medical costs associated with the birth, which would be free if born in the UK. Your child will also require a settlement visa to come back to the UK.

It is your choice, but my personal opinion is that a British passport is far better.

Seems a bit tortuous not to say awkward since American Citizenship would mean when the child is older being taxed by the IRS on all his/hers worldwide income.

Plus I'm not sure giving birth in USA would confer any rights to reside but I'd leave that for others. Plus have you considered the cost of giving birth in the US?

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... structions

For instance when I read the rules, it doesn't seem like he is. : :

CR001 wrote:It is not my daughter but my husbands daughter and yes he did look into it but there were issues with his ex wife giving permission to register her etc. so he left it. His daughter still qualifies for an Ancestral visa so all is not lost.

If you have the child in the USA, you will have to pay the medical costs associated with the birth, which would be free if born in the UK. Your child will also require a settlement visa to come back to the UK.

It is your choice, but my personal opinion is that a British passport is far better.

Yeah! You are right. It is so much headache! I tried reading the rules but I got sick of the hassle so I forgot about it . I only started thinking about it again when my sister found me a hospital that is good and I can afford.

Wanderer wrote:Seems a bit tortuous not to say awkward since American Citizenship would mean when the child is older being taxed by the IRS on all his/hers worldwide income.

Plus I'm not sure giving birth in USA would confer any rights to reside but I'd leave that for others. Plus have you considered the cost of giving birth in the US?

Giving birth in the US gives my child automatic US citizenship. My siblings have filed for me but that takes forever! And yes I have found an affordable hospital I can give birth in. I may not go ahead with it cos it's too much hassle but I just want to make sure I have all the information then I can decide if it's worth all the hassle

Amiii wrote:

Wanderer wrote:Seems a bit tortuous not to say awkward since American Citizenship would mean when the child is older being taxed by the IRS on all his/hers worldwide income.

Plus I'm not sure giving birth in USA would confer any rights to reside but I'd leave that for others. Plus have you considered the cost of giving birth in the US?

Giving birth in the US gives my child automatic US citizenship. My siblings have filed for me but that takes forever! And yes I have found an affordable hospital I can give birth in. I may not go ahead with it cos it's too much hassle but I just want to make sure I have all the information then I can decide if it's worth all the hassle

Yes I know that but that again may not necessarily accord the right to reside.

The 1983 change of rules you are referring to is for children born abroad to British Mothers. British fathers have ALWAYS been the line through which children born abroad gained citizenship by descent.

CR001 wrote:The 1983 change of rules you are referring to is for children born abroad to British Mothers. British fathers have ALWAYS been the line through which children born abroad gained citizenship by descent.

Thanks a lot! Looks my baby is coming into this world in the UK. Because like you said, I will have to apply for settlement then after 3 years apply for registration for my baby. I will probably have to do that in America. I don't want to be stuck with an American baby with no idea of how to bring the child in. The second way is I can apply to register my child as a British citizen but I will have to pay and the child will also be british by descent. We would have to prove that we have been residing in the uk for 3 years which we can do. However I dont think it's worth the stress.

To register as British also costs £749 currently and a settlement visa is the same visa that you are currently on, so yes, you would be stuck in the USA for however long things take and it could be months.

sushdmehta wrote:Casa, no worry on that front!

Amiii wrote:I am on my second lap of spouse visa

Thanks sushdmehta...I should have gone to Specsavers!

Casa wrote:

sushdmehta wrote:Casa, no worry on that front!

Amiii wrote:I am on my second lap of spouse visa

Thanks sushdmehta...I should have gone to Specsavers!

Lol!

CR001 wrote:To register as British also costs £749 currently and a settlement visa is the same visa that you are currently on, so yes, you would be stuck in the USA for however long things take and it could be months.

I think the UK government has taken enough of my money!

No need to give them more!

Wanderer wrote:Yes I know that but that again may not necessarily accord the right to reside.

All American citizens have the right to reside in their own country. Or am I misunderstanding you???

ouflak1 wrote:

Wanderer wrote:Yes I know that but that again may not necessarily accord the right to reside.

All American citizens have the right to reside in their own country. Or am I misunderstanding you???

Well I was wondering that. If say one gave birth to a child in USA would that entitle the child (and the parents) to reside in the USA? Assuming both parents are not US citizens as in this case.

Wanderer wrote:If say one gave birth to a child in USA would that entitle the child (and the parents) to reside in the USA? Assuming both parents are not US citizens as in this case.

Children born this way are called anchor babies or anchor children for that very reason.

Because of the Fourteenth Amendment, the US provides unconditional jus soli and all children born in the US, even to "illegal aliens" (I presume not to extraterrestrial aliens) are US citizens if born in the US. As US citizens, they have the right to live in the US themselves.

It is worth remembering that the US does not have the equivalent of the Human Rights Act (and some parts of the US do not seem to have any concept of human rights. They will fight a war to impose human rights on the rest of the world, but not in their own backyard. But that's by the bye). So the parents do not get that many rights. I am not aware of the rights that the parents do get, but they are very limited in number.

Also, given the cost of medical treatment in the US, getting admission to a hospital to give birth could be challenging to an illegal alien as also getting the birth registered. The county clerks in the US seem to have a wide range of discretion as to what kind of births and marriages they register (witness the recent furor about clerks not registering any marriages in response to the Obergefell vs Hodges decision).

The cultural affinity of Ireland to the US led to the same unconditional jus soli provision being implemented in Ireland. That of course led to the Chen ruling. Ireland amended its constitution subsequently and now the only countries that allow unconsitinal jus soli, to my knowledge, are the US, Pakistan and Cambodia.

secret.simon wrote:

Wanderer wrote:If say one gave birth to a child in USA would that entitle the child (and the parents) to reside in the USA? Assuming both parents are not US citizens as in this case.

Children born this way are called anchor babies or anchor children for that very reason.

Because of the Fourteenth Amendment, the US provides unconditional jus soli and all children born in the US, even to "illegal aliens" (I presume not to extraterrestrial aliens) are US citizens if born in the US. As US citizens, they have the right to live in the US themselves.

Just to point out that there is no specified legal restriction against extraterrestrial aliens. As silly as it may seem, if an extraterrestrial give birth to offspring on the soil of the United States, those offspring would be U.S. citizens.

secret.simon wrote:It is worth remembering that the US does not have the equivalent of the Human Rights Act (and some parts of the US do not seem to have any concept of human rights. They will fight a war to impose human rights on the rest of the world, but not in their own backyard.

Susan B Anthony and Martin Luther King might disagree with you on this point. By the way, is the country of your birth an initial draftee and signatory of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? Because the country of my birth is. You can check here.

secret.simon wrote:So the parents do not get that many rights. I am not aware of the rights that the parents do get, but they are very limited in number.

Not that different from those of parents in the UK. Whatever visa status they had before the child was born is the same as after the child was bron. The day before my first daughter was born, I was in the UK on a work permit and my wife was here on a student visa. The day after my daughter was born, I was in the UK on a work permit and my wife was here on a student visa. Nothing changed. This is not a matter of human rights. This is just basic law.

secret.simon wrote:Also, given the cost of medical treatment in the US, getting admission to a hospital to give birth could be challenging to an illegal alien as also getting the birth registered.

I would be interested if you could provide a link describing even one example of a pregnant mother being turned away from a hospital to give birth due to cost.

secret.simon wrote:The county clerks in the US seem to have a wide range of discretion as to what kind of births and marriages they register (witness the recent furor about clerks not registering any marriages in response to the Obergefell vs Hodges decision).

This is admittedly a worrisome occurrence. Recently, some clerks in Texas have actually refused to provide birth certificates to mother who could not provide legal evidence of their stay in America. The children are ofcourse still citizens, but this does put an extra burden on those citizens that other citizens have not had to endure. I know my mom and dad were certainly never asked to provide proof of their legal stay in the country. And I'm not sure how they could have done that without applying for passports (would the clerks accept just birth certificates?). This seems preposterous. It's an awkward situation that must be sorted out quickly.

secret.simon wrote:The cultural affinity of Ireland to the US led to the same unconditional jus soli provision being implemented in Ireland. That of course led to the Chen ruling. Ireland amended its constitution subsequently and now the only countries that allow unconsitinal jus soli, to my knowledge, are the US, Pakistan and Cambodia.

Here is the list of countries that currently have jus soli. 30 of them to date.

@ouflak1
Thank you for your detailed response to my post. It helps me in improving my knowledge and any argument is only improved by being tested by a reasoned rebuttal.

From your robust defence of the US, I construe that you are (or were) a US citizen.

ouflak1 wrote:if an extraterrestrial give birth to offspring on the soil of the United States, those offspring would be U.S. citizens.

What if the birth took place on an American spaceship? Would the analogy of a ship flying the American flag count and would the children be US citizens?

ouflak1 wrote:Susan B Anthony and Martin Luther King might disagree with you on this point.

I respect and applaud the two people you listed above for fighting for their rights. However, I am sure even you will acknowledge that firstly, the groups that they fought for were specific and secondly, while they did win rights, some states and counties did their best to obstruct them. Due to the dysfunctional (some people proudly call it limited; in my opinion, a limited government is an impotent government) structure of US oligarchy (where you have to be a millionaire to stand for office), civil rights depend on the wish and whim of the politicians of each area. Even a Supreme Court judgment (segregation is the other major decision that comes to mind) is not respected or obeyed universally.

ouflak1 wrote:By the way, is the country of your birth an initial draftee and signatory of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? Because the country of my birth is.

My country of birth is also listed as an initial draftee and signatory. I'm also of (distant) Iranian descent. The Cyrus Cylinder is also called the first charter of human rights, though it predates the UN by a few millennia.

Conversely, the US did not ratify the treaty establishing the League of Nations (the forerunner of the UN) and some people still perceive the UN as a world government trying to take over the US.

ouflak1 wrote:Not that different from those of parents in the UK.

With respect, you are comparing apples and oranges. The non-EEA parents of a British citizen child get rights based on their relationship to the British child. The non-US parents of an American citizen child do not. That was the contrast that I was alluding to.

ouflak1 wrote:(would the clerks accept just birth certificates?).

If they were born in the US, surely a birth certificate would be sufficient proof of citizenship. Unless you are the first black President of the US in which case it is a global conspiracy to force a black person into the White House by means of a forged birth certificate. Unbelievably, Donald Trump is standing for the Republican nomination again!!!

I find it strange that the people from the same country who pledge "One nation, under God" are also the ones to quibble about state or even individual sovereignty and who are selective about implementing the "Full Faith and Credit" clause of their own Constitution. Indeed, when the US was founded, some people even held onto the notion of states being able to selectively nullify federal laws.

As regards the list of countries with unrestricted jus soli, thank you for the list. It is interesting to see that it seems to be an almost exclusively American concept, with only Lesotho, Pakistan and Cambodia applying jus soli in the rest of the world. I would guess that that is due to the cultural impact of the US, though I must say that I was very surprised at seeing Canada in the list. I even double-checked the references at the bottom of the article. I have always regarded Canada as being more European than American culturally.