Uk Spouse Visa Minimum Age To Rise

[melonf]

From the Times (UK)

THE minimum age at which foreign nationals can receive marriage visas to enter Britain is to be raised from 18 to 21 in an attempt to crack down on forced marriages, writes David Cracknell.

It will mean that about 3,000 people a year, mainly women from India, will be prevented from coming to the UK. Their intended spouse will also have to be at least 21 for them to be allowed into the country.

The government also intends to introduce confidential interviews for people entering the country who might have been forced into marriage.

Tony Blair will make the announcement as he publishes a 10-year plan this week on crime, security and justice — part of his “legacy” package that he hopes will bind his successor.

The move to raise the minimum age comes after a long campaign by Ann Cryer, Labour MP for Keighley. The government has previously raised the minimum age requirement from 16 to 18, but will now go further.

[mr_hippo]

Why aren't the whingers and moaners about the LITUK test complaining about this increase in age regulation? Oh, I forgot, you are all too selfish bleating about your problem and as your wife/partner is presumably over 21, you don't care about this or any new regulation that does not affect you.

[atlastaname]

Unbelievable!! Why stop at 21 , why not 31?.

In this day and age with all the advances in technology , children stop being children long before they are even 16 , so to pretend that people are not fully fledged adults after this age is just political . Bears no relation to the real situation.

[the gent]

Unbelievable!! Why stop at 21 , why not 31?.

In this day and age with all the advances in technology , children stop being children long before they are even 16 , so to pretend that people are not fully fledged adults after this age is just political . Bears no relation to the real situation.

Quite what technology has to do with maturation in homo sapiens I'm not sure but the rise in the proposed age limit is in response to the increasingly difficult issue of forced marriage and bogus settlement applications in the sub continent.

Because the Immigration rules cannot be seen to be discriminatory the new age limit will have to apply to all applications worldwide.

Fully fledged or otherwise, I wouldn't have thought that many applications to the Be Bankok will be affected.

[atlastaname]

Unbelievable!! Why stop at 21 , why not 31?.

In this day and age with all the advances in technology , children stop being children long before they are even 16 , so to pretend that people are not fully fledged adults after this age is just political . Bears no relation to the real situation.

Quite what technology has to do with maturation in homo sapiens I'm not sure but the rise in the proposed age limit is in response to the increasingly difficult issue of forced marriage and bogus settlement applications in the sub continent.

Because the Immigration rules cannot be seen to be discriminatory the new age limit will have to apply to all applications worldwide.

Fully fledged or otherwise, I wouldn't have thought that many applications to the Be Bankok will be affected.

I thought it was clear but just to clarify one point ...re technology , advances in that mean that so-called children (16-18) who , back in the 1950's would have most definately been children in mental outlook, now grow up so much quicker. The advent of the internet means that they are exposed (because they expose themselves by searching for it deliberately) to pornography at a early age , they are mentally more advanced because advances in computer games , internet , mobile phones , tv, dvd, videos mean they now learn things in much more depth than their parents did. The all night openings of pubs mean they party like adults , and the free availability of drugs and everything else that money can buy mean they can live like adults can. In a nut shell , they grow up quciker.AND they all seem to have the money to do it unlike the "children" in the 1950's for example. However instead of LOWERING the ages at which various things are legal to reflect the real world, the govt seems obsessed by RAISING the legal age of just about everything to , for some reason , perpetuate the myth that in the year 2007 young adults aged 16-21 are actually children. Hope that makes it clearer

[mrbojangles]

Why aren't the whingers and moaners about the LITUK test complaining about this increase in age regulation? Oh, I forgot, you are all too selfish bleating about your problem and as your wife/partner is presumably over 21, you don't care about this or any new regulation that does not affect you.

Give us a chance Hippo, this only got posted today and i hadn't heard of it before. For what it's worth, this new regulation sucks.

And if you think i am a bleater and a moaner, fine. But personally, i don't think i am. The government changed the goal posts about the LITUK, since my mrs came and so she hasn't got the time left to do it before her SV expires. Add to the fact they have more than doubled the fees, i would suggest we have a right to air our disgust, without the likes of you referring to us bleaters and moaners.

[buriramboy]

Unbelievable!! Why stop at 21 , why not 31?.

In this day and age with all the advances in technology , children stop being children long before they are even 16 , so to pretend that people are not fully fledged adults after this age is just political . Bears no relation to the real situation.

Quite what technology has to do with maturation in homo sapiens I'm not sure but the rise in the proposed age limit is in response to the increasingly difficult issue of forced marriage and bogus settlement applications in the sub continent.

Because the Immigration rules cannot be seen to be discriminatory the new age limit will have to apply to all applications worldwide.

Fully fledged or otherwise, I wouldn't have thought that many applications to the Be Bankok will be affected.

I thought it was clear but just to clarify one point ...re technology , advances in that mean that so-called children (16-18) who , back in the 1950's would have most definately been children in mental outlook, now grow up so much quicker. The advent of the internet means that they are exposed (because they expose themselves by searching for it deliberately) to pornography at a early age , they are mentally more advanced because advances in computer games , internet , mobile phones , tv, dvd, videos mean they now learn things in much more depth than their parents did. The all night openings of pubs mean they party like adults , and the free availability of drugs and everything else that money can buy mean they can live like adults can. In a nut shell , they grow up quciker.AND they all seem to have the money to do it unlike the "children" in the 1950's for example. However instead of LOWERING the ages at which various things are legal to reflect the real world, the govt seems obsessed by RAISING the legal age of just about everything to , for some reason , perpetuate the myth that in the year 2007 young adults aged 16-21 are actually children. Hope that makes it clearer

i don't know what you are reading that no-one else is, you can still get married at 16 in the uk, the age limit is being raised for foreign nationals applying for marriage visas. How many 18 year old Thai girls do you know who are mature enough to get married to a UK national and re-locate to a new country???

BB

[the gent]

How bizarre, Atlastaname.

Maturity into adulthood was generally marked, I thought, by the application of knowledge ( whether it be emotional or otherwise ) which we know as wisdom.

Perhaps your catalogue of modernity, loathsome though it seems to me, may well be an explanation for the proliferation in the UK of alleged adults who display all the maturity of an average 13year old from circa 1950s. But I suspect we are not necessarily talking about the same thing.

Unfortunately, class does intrude which bears heavily upon education, by which I mean formal instruction on subjects of note and not that silly list of ephemera of yours, which is of course the most important determinant of real maturity.

[atlastaname]

Unbelievable!! Why stop at 21 , why not 31?.

In this day and age with all the advances in technology , children stop being children long before they are even 16 , so to pretend that people are not fully fledged adults after this age is just political . Bears no relation to the real situation.

Quite what technology has to do with maturation in homo sapiens I'm not sure but the rise in the proposed age limit is in response to the increasingly difficult issue of forced marriage and bogus settlement applications in the sub continent.

Because the Immigration rules cannot be seen to be discriminatory the new age limit will have to apply to all applications worldwide.

Fully fledged or otherwise, I wouldn't have thought that many applications to the Be Bankok will be affected.

I thought it was clear but just to clarify one point ...re technology , advances in that mean that so-called children (16-18) who , back in the 1950's would have most definately been children in mental outlook, now grow up so much quicker. The advent of the internet means that they are exposed (because they expose themselves by searching for it deliberately) to pornography at a early age , they are mentally more advanced because advances in computer games , internet , mobile phones , tv, dvd, videos mean they now learn things in much more depth than their parents did. The all night openings of pubs mean they party like adults , and the free availability of drugs and everything else that money can buy mean they can live like adults can. In a nut shell , they grow up quciker.AND they all seem to have the money to do it unlike the "children" in the 1950's for example. However instead of LOWERING the ages at which various things are legal to reflect the real world, the govt seems obsessed by RAISING the legal age of just about everything to , for some reason , perpetuate the myth that in the year 2007 young adults aged 16-21 are actually children. Hope that makes it clearer

i don't know what you are reading that no-one else is, you can still get married at 16 in the uk, the age limit is being raised for foreign nationals applying for marriage visas. How many 18 year old Thai girls do you know who are mature enough to get married to a UK national and re-locate to a new country???

BB

BB what has YOUR idea of maturity got to do with it ? Mature or not , they should have the FREEDOM to marry if they want . If it all goes wrong thats their outlook. My aunt and uncle married at 16 during WW11 and they are still together. I know they are British but what differance does race make? Could equally apply to Thais.

As for the gents post , if someone would care to translate into English i might reply. (this language problem is often apparent in the gents posts so not unusual)

[atlastaname]

Atlastanumb,

I'm terribly sorry but try as I might I could never quite master the knack of talking down to folk less privileged than myself.

Nevertheless, in your case I shall make a special effort in future but one is always in a quandary as to how small one should make the words.

I note of late there has been an increase in the number of posters who I like to categorise as ' lumpen estuarine neanderthal '. Should I regard you in that light or would you prefer something less basic?

Toodle pip!

Well at least i understood that post !! See you can post in English when you try.

Honestly "gent" i didn't mean this to become an arguement between us . And i will let you have the last word as i know from observing other spats you've had with other prominent posters that you will have it anyway. And we do both share the same cynicism about the BE Bangkok. So lets leave it at that shall we?

I genuinely believe young adults aged 16-21 are , in 2007 , mature enough to be allowed the same freedoms as adults , and the freedom to make the same mistakes if need be. I think its wrong to treat overseas people as too immature to commit to marriage at 20 years and 11 months . Seems insane to me.

[the scouser]

Quite simply, people's freedom to marry is not an issue here. As BB pointed out, you will still be able to marry at 16, the only difference is that if your spouse is a foreign national, s/he won't get a settlement visa until both parties are 21. As the gent pointed out, this is specifically to do with forced marriage on the sub-continent, and will, I would suggest, have minimal bearing upon Thai applicants.

It's got naff all to do with the age at which one supposedly matures.

Scouse.