robuzo

the question is: why is thailand ingnoring the international human rights to be with your children... all that paper work ... every year you have to go begg to an extention for another year... my wife and I are married in my home country and she got a visa for 5 years, but after 3 she applied for citizenship.... no 90 days report, no proof of income and all other papers every year .... and why ? what is there to gain for farang in this country? no unemployment, no social security, no pension... yeah, we have to right to spend all our money here and get lost, if you have none anymore ... even you have a wife and children here ...

and somebody mentioned it... what if your THAI WIFE DIES ?

they will kick you out of the country ? what happens to your children? have to take them out of their school and move back to your home country, even they don't speak a word of your native language ?

The non-Imm O for the purpose of staying with family is just short of meaningless. It just makes it easier to stay a bit longer on each visit, but like marrying a Thai confers no other rights. Thailand is still something of an outlier in this regard, compared not only to developed countries in Asia such as Japan, but also Malaysia and now even Indonesia. It's a good example of the exclusionary and xenophobic attitude of the Thai authorities, but there isn't much point in getting upset about it. After briefly taking a leadership position in SE Asia about nine years ago Thailand has been making a strong effort to get left in the dust by its regional rivals. This new length of red tape is another example of that. It will pose an inconvenience only to farangs who care about their kids but don't work or haven't "retired" here.

In any case, from what I have seen so far (a slightly vague email from the Hull consulate) all that will be required is that paternity be legally recognized in Thailand.

Maybe I am reading a different letter..

Where does it say, in this new information from Hull, that legally registered paternity is exempted from this restriction ??

That's why it seems vague to me. Obviously there are contingencies that could occur- death of Thai spouse, divorce, etc.- so as Jayman and others have pointed out, it would seem the issue is legal paternity. Don't think there is reason to worry too much.

The other slightly less ideal alternative from the child's POV, but much more ideal for the Thai family, is for the father to stay back home where he belongs and just send over the money for the Thai relatives to raise the child.

How is that "much more ideal for the Thai family"? Why would you assume the Thai family don't want the father around?

you created the problem and it's up to you to jump through their hoops; IOW you don't have rights, only obligations.

Created what "problem"? Some farang/Thai couples with kids make a deliberate, mutual decision not to marry in Thailand. There are legitimate, practical reasons for not marrying here. Some of you holier-than-thou farangs really do assume too much.

In any case, from what I have seen so far (a slightly vague email from the Hull consulate) all that will be required is that paternity be legally recognized in Thailand. The father's name on the Thai birth certificate, while it may be enough for the US or other foreign embassies in the process of applying for citizenship, is not sufficient to establish legal paternity in Thailand (no, it doesn't really make sense, but that's beside the point, as is whether or not this is indicative of anti-farang bias; I think it is, but whether or not it is is beside the point). A Thai lawyer can handle that procedure very easily provided the mother consents.

Petitioning the courts for recognition of paternity is not difficult provided the mother consents. If the option is consent or lose child support any woman knowing which side her bread is buttered on, so to speak, would do so.

Hmmm... my wife and I were due to fly on the 1st of December. I'm fully expecting to fly out on the 6th from U-Tapao as we were told by our airline.

Do you know something I don't?

Perhaps airlines still not wanting to use Suvh on the 6th will have the option of using U-Tapao. Just guessing.

yes right wing, and all the ex-communist support it????? Thats propaganda. Samak is right wing.

Yes, he clearly is, but at the same time the message being spouted by the PAD can't be described as much other than right-wing, or at least authoritarian/anti-democracy (they certainly aren't leftists, so. . .). The politicians in this country are, I think it is fair to say, a bunch of corrupt gangsters and thugs; the real political power at any rate lies in patronage (i.e., vestigial feudalism). It seems to me that this is why those (beginning with the King) seeking reform and a peaceful path to a functioning government with Asian-style democratic trappings had put their faith in the judiciary rather than in the politicians, and in my opinion with the conviction of Madame Thaksin the judiciary more or less came through. The Thaksins are on the lam, and there have been rumors that Samak may be considering ditching Thaksin and eventually forming an alliance with the Democrats, so why has the PAD chosen to take such drastic measures now? Are they afraid Samak might throw Thaksin under the bus and deny them a raison d'etre? I don't see how anyone can avoid questioning the motives of the PAD leadership, irrespective of the probably misguided sincerity of some of its followers. This affair strikes me as nothing so much as the opening salvos in a power struggle between two (or more) sets of elites seeking to gain positioning in what may turn out to be an increasingly intense situation as the inevitable succession problem nears. I see no reason to believe that either group has the interests of the common people at heart, and I expect that most clear-headed regular folk in Thailand understand that.