The Thai Government Says I Must Go Away.

[AndyCanfield]

no reply yet:

From: Andy Canfield <...@...>

To: "Pol. Lt. Gen. Suwat Thumrongsrisakul" <[email protected]>

Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2007 21:09:28 +0700

The Thai government says I must go away.

Ning is nine years old, she doing well in Catholic school, she danced in the Christmas pageant. I am the only father she has ever known. She runs to me and jumps into my arms. She will miss me when I leave; The Thai government says I must go away.

Lon is also nine years old; he is not doing so well in that school. He is a boy struggling to become a man. He has his pride. He calls me "Papa". He'll miss my care and respect; The Thai government says I must go away.

Richard is three years old, loves to jump and run and bonk people with balloons and swords. Richard has my chromosomes. His mother Aw divorced me so that she could go dance in a gogo bar. She's glad I am taking care of our children. Later Richard will ask "Where is Daddy?", and mommy will answer "The Thai government said he must go away."

Grandma Loy is over sixty years old, but inside she is a sweet sixteen year old girl. She likes to be hugged. She runs the household and watches over the children. She smiles when she sees me, but she will see me no more; The Thai government says I must go away.

Grandpa Noopy is over sixty years old. He lives in the village near his sons. If I gave him money once a month he'd spend it on whiskey, so I send him a bit every week to buy food. He'll be hungry; The Thai government says I must go away.

Chaliew is twenty-nine years old, finding new friends in Roiet. Chaliew is "smart on the inside, not smart on the outside". She is fat and has a very good heart. Chaliew loves me. She will cry when I am gone; The Thai government says I must go away.

These are my family. I support them, I feed them, I live with them. But I am a foreigner, I am a tourist; The Thai government says I must go away.

Shy is three years old; a sweet little girl. She comes to our shophouse and sits by my side and studies what she can do with a roll of tissue and a pair of dice and a box and a stick. She also likes to play with the balloons I have for the children. Everyone loves her. Shy will hardly notice when I'm not here any more; The Thai government says I must go away.

Ironically, although I feed six Thai people, I am not legally obligated to feed any of them, so The Thai government says I must go away.

I am Richard's father, but his mother and I are divorced. The immigration police officer says that the mother, not the father, has the 'right' to support Richard. I support him, but I am not required to support him, so the Thai government says I must go away.

I live with Chaliew. If we were married, I would be required to take care of her, and I could get a visa to allow me to take care of her. But we are not married, so I am not required to take care of her. Although I do indeed take care of her, the Thai government says I must go away.

I do not have hundreds of thousands of baht in the bank. I am not an employee; my money comes from overseas and goes out again as quickly as possible to buy food and toys and happiness for my family. My income is not guaranteed; my capital is the minds and hearts of my family. I do not know what will happen to them after I leave; The Thai government says I must go away.

I have no legal right to be in Thailand; I have never had any legal right to be in Thailand. But the past seventeen years I have been allowed to live in Thailand and love the Thai people. I learned to sing the nation anthem because the government allowed me to live here with the people I love. Now I must find a new song to sing; The Thai government says I must go away.

I am not a Thai citizen. My passport is blue, not brown; The Thai government says I must go away.

Please take care of my family after I'm gone.

- Andy Canfield

(Andrew Jay Canfield, US passport # **personal details edited out***

[Mid]

feel your pain Andy ,

but

I'll be very surprised if you get much sympathy here .............

[PattayaXpat]

Andy, What is stopping you from getting a visa??

[cashe]

feel your pain Andy ,

but

I'll be very surprised if you get much sympathy here .............

i feel the same for you andy...

and true...

sometimes i felt like this forum has more criticism than sympathy but they still give advice .

sorry mods just telling what i sometimes notice in some threads....

[farangsay]

feel your pain Andy ,

but

I'll be very surprised if you get much sympathy here .............

Well he'll get some , from me atleast.

Hope the "get legal or get out" brigade are taking a day off.

Good luck Andy.

[Dupont]

Get all the friendly family etc. the press, and camp out on his doorstep.

Thais do it quite effectively and the press love it.

Good luck as well bye the way.

[Simmo]

Hmm ..

What's stopping you getting a non-O visa in your home country?

[Mid]

Andy, What is stopping you from getting a visa??

What's stopping you getting a non-O visa in your home country?

I do not have hundreds of thousands of baht in the bank. I am not an employee; my money comes from overseas and goes out again as quickly as possible to buy food and toys and happiness for my family. My income is not guaranteed; my capital is the minds and hearts of my family. I do not know what will happen to them after I leave; The Thai government says I must go away.

I have no legal right to be in Thailand; I have never had any legal right to be in Thailand. But the past seventeen years I have been allowed to live in Thailand and love the Thai people. I learned to sing the nation anthem because the government allowed me to live here with the people I love. Now I must find a new song to sing; The Thai government says I must go away.

do people not read the whole post ??

[thai_narak]

No Andy, Thai government says WE MUST GO AWAY... Which I will also do very soon but with my family as well. cheers!

[Rickman]

Many foreigners are aware of the laws and also the intent of the laws yet they seem to think that because Thai's haven't been that good at upholding the law this situation will continue. Unfortunately what they fail to realise is that Thailand is a developing country and one day it will be fully developed along with full implementation of the laws, as they are written now, intended now, or not written now but likely to be written in the future, as Thailand gets up to speed with other countries. If you are prepared to accept this situation and risk the eventual problems you may face if living outside these conditions then be it on your own head. The smart thing to do 17 years ago would have been to consider that the day may come and not have done what you did. That said, now you and your child are in this situation you should get yourself a good lawyer and fight to stay or take your child with you. I only say this for your child and not for you. The reason is the law says you shouldn't be here and so be it.

[Mid]

here we go .............

[papakapbaan]

Andy, What is stopping you from getting a visa??

--Maybe the fact that since 01/10/2006, they are no more issued in neigbouring countries to umarried parents of Thai nationals??

FYI!!

(At least the multiple entry version of NON-O Visa)

--Maybe the fact Andy relies on Visa Free entries for 17 years (YES! Because the Oyster System here never had anything better for him) and does not want -or is financially unable- to travel abroad every three months to get a new single entry NON-O?

--Or Maybe Andy just means that, being under 50 and unmarried, he is unable to get any sort of annual extension of stay since the new rules of 01/10/2006!!

(And that sooner or later he may VERY WELL be shown the door. The day they stop issuing "back to back" NON-O visas. As simple as that!)

FYI!!

(BTW of course, I'm one of the unlucky single/ummarried Farang parents the Thai Governement does not recognize anymore since 01/10/2007)

It seems some people really have no clue about our situation!!

---

I would like to write much more here and something nice to Andy.

But I'm very tired (and now depressed) by all this.

Maybe I'll try later today. Now I'll see my daughter.

I feel I need to hug her every day more and more....................

Edited January 8, 2007 by papakapbaan

[Mahout Angrit]

These current restrictions wont last forever, things always change in Thailand. Cut back on Pa's whiskey allowance and go and get yourself a tourist Visa nearby a couple of times extend them in country, go on 30 day trips 3 times again and you are already a year down the line.if nothing has eased by then get Chaliew to marry you. Good luck

[JR Texas]

no reply yet:

From: Andy Canfield <...@...>

To: "Pol. Lt. Gen. Suwat Thumrongsrisakul" <[email protected]>

Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2007 21:09:28 +0700

The Thai government says I must go away.

Ning is nine years old, she doing well in Catholic school, she danced in the Christmas pageant. I am the only father she has ever known. She runs to me and jumps into my arms. She will miss me when I leave; The Thai government says I must go away.

Lon is also nine years old; he is not doing so well in that school. He is a boy struggling to become a man. He has his pride. He calls me "Papa". He'll miss my care and respect; The Thai government says I must go away.

Richard is three years old, loves to jump and run and bonk people with balloons and swords. Richard has my chromosomes. His mother Aw divorced me so that she could go dance in a gogo bar. She's glad I am taking care of our children. Later Richard will ask "Where is Daddy?", and mommy will answer "The Thai government said he must go away."

Grandma Loy is over sixty years old, but inside she is a sweet sixteen year old girl. She likes to be hugged. She runs the household and watches over the children. She smiles when she sees me, but she will see me no more; The Thai government says I must go away.

Grandpa Noopy is over sixty years old. He lives in the village near his sons. If I gave him money once a month he'd spend it on whiskey, so I send him a bit every week to buy food. He'll be hungry; The Thai government says I must go away.

Chaliew is twenty-nine years old, finding new friends in Roiet. Chaliew is "smart on the inside, not smart on the outside". She is fat and has a very good heart. Chaliew loves me. She will cry when I am gone; The Thai government says I must go away.

These are my family. I support them, I feed them, I live with them. But I am a foreigner, I am a tourist; The Thai government says I must go away.

Shy is three years old; a sweet little girl. She comes to our shophouse and sits by my side and studies what she can do with a roll of tissue and a pair of dice and a box and a stick. She also likes to play with the balloons I have for the children. Everyone loves her. Shy will hardly notice when I'm not here any more; The Thai government says I must go away.

Ironically, although I feed six Thai people, I am not legally obligated to feed any of them, so The Thai government says I must go away.

I am Richard's father, but his mother and I are divorced. The immigration police officer says that the mother, not the father, has the 'right' to support Richard. I support him, but I am not required to support him, so the Thai government says I must go away.

I live with Chaliew. If we were married, I would be required to take care of her, and I could get a visa to allow me to take care of her. But we are not married, so I am not required to take care of her. Although I do indeed take care of her, the Thai government says I must go away.

I do not have hundreds of thousands of baht in the bank. I am not an employee; my money comes from overseas and goes out again as quickly as possible to buy food and toys and happiness for my family. My income is not guaranteed; my capital is the minds and hearts of my family. I do not know what will happen to them after I leave; The Thai government says I must go away.

I have no legal right to be in Thailand; I have never had any legal right to be in Thailand. But the past seventeen years I have been allowed to live in Thailand and love the Thai people. I learned to sing the nation anthem because the government allowed me to live here with the people I love. Now I must find a new song to sing; The Thai government says I must go away.

I am not a Thai citizen. My passport is blue, not brown; The Thai government says I must go away.

Please take care of my family after I'm gone.

- Andy Canfield

(Andrew Jay Canfield, US passport # **personal details edited out***

JR Texas to Andy: I am sorry for what you are going through. Too many good and decent human beings--both farang and Thai--are being hurt by Thailand's new (xenophobic) visa rules and regulations.

They don't want us to work.......they don't want us to start small-scaled businesses.....they don't want us to take care of those we love and to help those in need.......THEY DON'T WANT US!

Good luck to you and your loved ones. I hope you find a solution.

[Robski]

I live with Chaliew. If we were married, I would be required to take care of her, and I could get a visa to allow me to take care of her. But we are not married, so I am not required to take care of her. Although I do indeed take care of her, the Thai government says I must go away.

So why don't you get married and get legal? You've said that you lived here for the last seventeen years illegally, so why is it the Thai authorities fault that you have to leave? Can you answer those two questions for me please? I cant really take this seriously.

Edited January 8, 2007 by Robski

[Mahout Angrit]

So why don't you get married and get legal? You've said that you lived here for the last seventeen years illegally, so why is it the Thai authorities fault that you have to leave? Can you answer those two questions for me please? I cant really take this seriously.

As far as I read he is legal and always has been legal, he has stayed here within the law, a law that allowed him to stay as a tourist.

The smart thing to do 17 years ago would have been to consider that the day may come and not have done what you did. That said, now you and your child are in this situation you should get yourself a good lawyer and fight to stay or take your child with you. I only say this for your child and not for you. The reason is the law says you shouldn't be here and so be it.

Easy to say, how can anyone predict what is going to happen 17 years from now, there have been numerous goverments and half a dozen coups in the last 17 years. He did even get married at one point although as another contributer has said with the recent changes even that doesn't help much. If I'd have known what was happening now 17 years ago I'd be a millionaire now.

[Robski]

I have no legal right to be in Thailand; I have never had any legal right to be in Thailand. But the past seventeen years I have been allowed to live in Thailand and love the Thai people. I learned to sing the nation anthem because the government allowed me to live here with the people I love. Now I must find a new song to sing; The Thai government says I must go away.

So why don't you get married and get legal? You've said that you lived here for the last seventeen years illegally, so why is it the Thai authorities fault that you have to leave? Can you answer those two questions for me please? I cant really take this seriously.

As far as I read he is legal and always has been legal, he has stayed here within the law, a law that allowed him to stay as a tourist.

The smart thing to do 17 years ago would have been to consider that the day may come and not have done what you did. That said, now you and your child are in this situation you should get yourself a good lawyer and fight to stay or take your child with you. I only say this for your child and not for you. The reason is the law says you shouldn't be here and so be it.

Easy to say, how can anyone predict what is going to happen 17 years from now, there have been numerous goverments and half a dozen coups in the last 17 years. He did even get married at one point although as another contributer has said with the recent changes even that doesn't help much. If I'd have known what was happening now 17 years ago I'd be a millionaire now.

The guy was online when I posted my question, now he's not. Why are you answering it for him? There's more to this than meets the eye. He has started a debate that really has only two possible viewpoints and one inevitable conclusion.

[toptuan]

"The way of the transgressor is hard."

--ancient Jewish proverb--

[bkkandrew]

I have no legal right to be in Thailand; I have never had any legal right to be in Thailand. But the past seventeen years I have been allowed to live in Thailand and love the Thai people. I learned to sing the nation anthem because the government allowed me to live here with the people I love. Now I must find a new song to sing; The Thai government says I must go away.

So why don't you get married and get legal? You've said that you lived here for the last seventeen years illegally, so why is it the Thai authorities fault that you have to leave? Can you answer those two questions for me please? I cant really take this seriously.

As far as I read he is legal and always has been legal, he has stayed here within the law, a law that allowed him to stay as a tourist.

The smart thing to do 17 years ago would have been to consider that the day may come and not have done what you did. That said, now you and your child are in this situation you should get yourself a good lawyer and fight to stay or take your child with you. I only say this for your child and not for you. The reason is the law says you shouldn't be here and so be it.

Easy to say, how can anyone predict what is going to happen 17 years from now, there have been numerous goverments and half a dozen coups in the last 17 years. He did even get married at one point although as another contributer has said with the recent changes even that doesn't help much. If I'd have known what was happening now 17 years ago I'd be a millionaire now.

The guy was online when I posted my question, now he's not. Why are you answering it for him? There's more to this than meets the eye. He has started a debate that really has only two possible viewpoints and one inevitable conclusion.

Looks like you are picking a fight for no good reason. Its a shame you pick on someone who obviously is not feeling his best...

[Lon]

For those of you were saying the requirements were not effective for a required 90 day stay on a Temporary Visa you were wrong. My Visa was stamped with an authorization to return to Bangkok, but I would have to leave the country for 6 months following about 16 days in January. Must be lotsa leaving my wife and our business for 6 months!! What's everyone think, let me know....Lon

[Robski]

Looks like you are picking a fight for no good reason. Its a shame you pick on someone who obviously is not feeling his best...

Certainly not picking a fight. I'm not the most sympathetic guy that's for sure. Emotive language does not make a good case on it's own.

He posts. He leaves. Or in Thai Visa parlance; light the blue touch paper and stand back.

Two possible veiwpoints, one certain outcome and it's starting already.

[mouse]

I have known Any since coming to Thailand many many years ago. I always found him and his partners to be very hospitable and friendly people. I must admit though, that when the rules were first released, I immmediately thought of the problems that he would encounter. I wish you well Andy!

[Mid]

Looks like you are picking a fight for no good reason. Its a shame you pick on someone who obviously is not feeling his best...

Certainly not picking a fight. I'm not the most sympathetic guy that's for sure. Emotive language does not make a good case on it's own.

He posts. He leaves. Or in Thai Visa parlance; light the blue touch paper and stand back.

Two possible veiwpoints, one certain outcome and it's starting already.

maybe the guys genuine and felling like &lt;deleted&gt; ..............

suspect that he's just one of many ,

and as i predicted there isn't too much sympathy here , wonder why ?

[papakapbaan]

Many foreigners are aware of the laws and also the intent of the laws yet they seem to think that because Thai's haven't been that good at upholding the law this situation will continue. Unfortunately what they fail to realise is that Thailand is a developing country and one day it will be fully developed along with full implementation of the laws, as they are written now, intended now, or not written now but likely to be written in the future, as Thailand gets up to speed with other countries. If you are prepared to accept this situation and risk the eventual problems you may face if living outside these conditions then be it on your own head. The smart thing to do 17 years ago would have been to consider that the day may come and not have done what you did. That said, now you and your child are in this situation you should get yourself a good lawyer and fight to stay or take your child with you. I only say this for your child and not for you. The reason is the law says you shouldn't be here and so be it.

Amazing. Truly amazing.

"The Law is the Law."

PFFF... Anyway...

The new regulations of 01/10/2006 have little to do with progress. At least: surely not if progress means Thailand getting "up to speed with other countries" of the developed world.

(Possibly: Except for the fact they suppress the notion of "support" and actually allow Thai wifes to support foreign husbands...)

The Immigration laws in Western countries and in Thailand are DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED.

In a nutshell: in Western countries: it is a very EASY and an almost NATURAL process to establish permanent residency for SPOUSES and RELATIVES of established citizens, while it is a rather DIFFICULT process to obtain a mere TOURIST visa for people of MOST nationalities.

In Thailand: it is a very easy process to obtain a mere TOURIST VISA for most people but it is a very PAINFUL process in most cases to be allowed to stay even for 1 year at a time. Permanent residency is virtually unattainable (on the grounds of being spouse only: for sure unattainable).

So please be factual.

I don't know the OP story (some here seem to know). But I really wonder what you, Rickman, mean when you write: "The smart thing to do 17 years ago would have been to consider that the day may come and not have done what you did."

What?? Really??

Please consider my situation very quickly just for example?

Belgian, married, separated, 36 years old, income from abroad, living in Thailand with my Thai daughter 2.5 years old and her mother (working), unable to marry the mother because unable to divorce my wife. Unable to bring my daughter to Belgium because I need my wife's approval to recognize the child!

I lived here for 3 years on multiple entry NON-O visa (and other types of visa for several years earlier but it is not relevant here) with the knowlegde that the Thai governement would somehow integrate and recognize me if I was granted child custody: I would receive annual extensions of stay.

Since 01/10/2006, the rules say I must be 50 years old to be recognized as a father :-0

Since 01/10/2006, neighbouring Thai embassies stopped issuing multiple entry NON-O to parents of Thai nationals.

I have to get ready for the possibility the day will come they will stop issuing back to back NON-O visas: the day I WILL be separated from my daughter.

(details upon request: or if interested, please review: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=97178).

Are you still saying: The Law is the Law?

I say: The Law of the Land is now written by a bunch of Generals anyway...

(Was it Thaksin behind the new rules? Maybe. Anyway the Police Order and the implementation of the new regulations came very quickly under the military rule!)

I say: OK for the nationalistic rant: "Up to them. Thailand to Thai people" and so on.

BUT PLEASE DONT SPEAK ABOUT PROGRESS!

(Yes, Sir, integration and even assimilation of foreign populations is the way of the future. Culturally and economically)

Edited January 8, 2007 by papakapbaan

[Alf Witt]

I cannot believe how self-satisfied and "I'm all right Jack" some people are. Especially the one with the moto "Sometimes I sit and think and sometimes I just sit." It seems also that sometimes you think with the part of your anatomy that you should be sitting on!!

The original post is obviously not about the rights of and consequences to the OP. It is about the rights and reasonable human expectations of the people he supports all of whom are Thai.

It doesn't matter a toss whether he is married or not etc. You don't have to be married to have a family and dependants. Those persons around him whom he has bonded with over many years are entitled to continue to share that bond (some admittedly more than others). But it is a Human Right that under International treaties cannot be taken away at the whim of politicians. It was the policies of successive Thai governments who permitted that to develop. He has a strong case.

I read in this week's Phuket Gazette about a Thai named Vasant Panich who is one of Thailands 11 National Human Rights Commissioners taking up the case of villagers who obect to alleged threats to their livelihood caused by the construction by developers of a pier and breakwater. Why don't you contact him Andy, or one of his colleagues. Don't argue on the basis of your right to stay but on the basis of your dependants' right to have you here. And good luck.

Also, I don't think that you have any obligation to stay on-line so that the poster with the anatomical function confusion can flame you.

[papakapbaan]

"The way of the transgressor is hard."

--ancient Jewish proverb--

Not in this context. Please not in this context!

An otherwise splendid saying!

[jeebusjones]

It is a sad story and I have some pity for the OP. But really the new rules (even if fully enforced) are not that difficult to get around. Tourist visas are easy to get and not that expensive. I think a trip to Laos including all visa costs could be done for under 4,000 baht, if one really stretched their cash.

Unless the OP is a wanted criminal he should be able to find a way to stay.

[AndyCanfield]

I have no legal right to be in Thailand; I have never had any legal right to be in Thailand. But the past seventeen years I have been allowed to live in Thailand and love the Thai people. I learned to sing the nation anthem because the government allowed me to live here with the people I love. Now I must find a new song to sing; The Thai government says I must go away.

So why don't you get married and get legal? You've said that you lived here for the last seventeen years illegally, so why is it the Thai authorities fault that you have to leave? Can you answer those two questions for me please? I cant really take this seriously.

The guy was online when I posted my question, now he's not. Why are you answering it for him? There's more to this than meets the eye. He has started a debate that really has only two possible viewpoints and one inevitable conclusion.

I was online a few minutes ago and typing my reply when the page disappeared. To err is human, to really screw up is computer.

I have been a tourist, legally, for most of the seventeen years. But I know that, even as a tourist, I have no **right** to be here. They say "go", I have to go, and I will go.

If you speak of the letter of the law, then I was a legal tourist according to the letter of the law. If you speak of the spirit of the law, then supporting a Thai family counts to the spirit of the law.

I posted here for two reasons. First, I think that there are a lot of farangs in Thailand in similar situations. The blanket concept that all permanent tourists are bad is incorrect.

The second reason is that I suspect the immigration police monitor this web site. I'm not asking for help for me. I'm asking for help for all the families of the "permanent tourists". How many farang men support a lady and her parents and maybe a leftover child from her earlier mistake? How many Thai citizens are directly and immediately benefitting from a "permanent tourist" living here?

There is no question in my mind that my presence here in Thailand has been and is of benefit to the Thai people and to the Thai nation. I would be ashamed if that were not true. But the immigration police do not seem to consider that factor at all. I could probably come up with a petition signed by every policeman in my Thai home town, asking that I be allowed to stay, but that too is irrelevant.

I hope that this post will cause some thinking in the right places. The law does not apply to my situation. WHY NOT? If I am bad, throw me out - please. If I am good, then the law is flawed. For the sake of our in-laws and girlfriends and children and friends, please fix it.

[papakapbaan]

It is a sad story and I have some pity for the OP. But really the new rules (even if fully enforced) are not that difficult to get around. Tourist visas are easy to get and not that expensive. I think a trip to Laos including all visa costs could be done for under 4,000 baht, if one really stretched their cash.

Unless the OP is a wanted criminal he should be able to find a way to stay.

With a Thai child (and a birth certificate with his name on it), OP should actually be able to get a NON-O in Laos (and other neighbouring countries). It's a little better than Tourist (3 months without extension instead of 2+1)

BUT!! FOR HOW LONG??

Maybe it's fine for perpetual tourists to slowly get ready for the possibility they will get kicked out one day when embassies (worldwide?) receive clear instructions against the issuance of back to back visas.

(Next step for sure. Who does not see it? A bit of foresight please!)

But what about people with families here???

Who for various reasons:

-are not able to bring their families to their home country (my case absolutely)

-or at least would suffer from a very sharp decline in their standard of living if they brought their families to live in their home country??

FYI: A bunch of nationalistic and now militaristic (miltary actually!) rulers decided they must be at least 50 years old to reside here permanently if not married.

(Check this board if you can not believe it!)

The only thing you can say is "Up to them."

Please don't say "No problem".

It's not realistic.

Edited January 8, 2007 by papakapbaan

[AndyCanfield]

Also, I don't think that you have any obligation to stay on-line so that the poster with the anatomical function confusion can flame you.

I have no intention of staying on line, but I will check in once in a while.

For your information, a few years ago Aw and I were married and the immigration police told us that I could get an annual renewable visa. I had to take her to Vientiane; even though she was pregnant, I did so. Got the ninety day non-O.

When we got back, they sprung it on us: "Oh, by the way, it's also going to cost you three hundred thousand baht." I told them that I did not have three hundred thousand baht, and if I did, I would give it to her and she'd buy rice fields. Freaked out the immigration police.

I don't mind flames, as long as you don't have a gun.