Australian Deports Thai Wife "Maybe"

[fishhooks]

I have a friend, not close friend, but a chap married to a Thai lady living in Australia. She, a friend of my Thai wife and I.

She is on a 309 Visa, about 4 months in.

The marriage has never been great, mainly due lot's of problems with the family of the guy, 2 young daughters who weren't in any way prepared by their father for the arrival of his new Thai wife.

Last week male friend, took wife back to Thailand.

After a few days, he announced to TW that he had emailed Immigration (in Australia I believe) that the marriage had broken down and that he was not prepared to sponsor her further and as such her Visa "WAS" cancelled.

TW has contacted Australian Embassy in Bangkok who say they know nothing at this stage, but she should contact them next week to see if they have been contacted by the Australian end.

I want to stay in the middle of this in such a way not to become involved too much.

My question to anybody with knowledge of a situation such as this:

Can an Australian take his TW back to Thailand, contact Immigration himself without any involvement of her and have her Visa CANCELLED without any contact between herself and Immigration.

Seems quite harsh and complete with her not at this stage having no input whatsoever!

Perhaps the marriage is to all intents finished and perhaps her Visa will be cancelled in the end, but the transition so-far (with what he is saying) seems very much wrong to me.

She is a close friend of my wife and I and we have been in touch with her over the last few days. She is quite devastated as I can imagine.

She is staying with friends in Bangkok, he is somewhere there.

My topic title I think sums up what has in affect happened.

[Eff1n2ret]

Given the lady's distress at finding herself in this situation, it is perhaps relevant to ask whether she actually wants to continue living in Australia? If so, I would recommend that she gets herself back there as soon as possible.

I don't know Australian law, but in a similar situation in the UK her "visa" would not be "cancelled" immediately just on the husband's say-so - if he wrote to the UK Border Agency withdrawing his sponsorship, they might in due course curtail her permission to stay, but it would take a few months and, most importantly, she would have a right of appeal against the decision. If he informed the British Embassy in BKK that he was dumping her, they might pass the info back to UK, but she'd still have a valid visa in her passport and would be able to board a plane. If she was held up on arival in UK, she would, again, have a right of appeal against any decision to remove her. I suspect that the Australian system is much the same, hence my suggestion that she should return to Australia as soon as possible, and argue from a position of relative strength, having taken legal advice there. Trying to sort things out from Bangkok would be much more difficult IMHO.

It's a very cruel way of dealing with someone. I once met a lady in Bangkok in an almost identical situation, except that her husband had absconded from their hotel without warning, taking with him her passport, so she really was stuck. I hope your friend can get a better result.

[moe666]

Seems like he has decided his daughters are more important than the Thai wife. She probaly better off without this loser.

[Old Croc]

OP, despite your last sentence, I think the thread title is very misleading. Australia did not deport this lady. In your own words the husband took his wife back to Thailand.

As to whether she can return, it all depends on what sort of a visa she now holds.

The 309 (fiance visa) is usually for single entry and has the condition the marriage takes place within a certain period (apparently done), and the next step is to apply for a conditional spouse visa (perhaps not done?), which would be valid for 2 years stay following which the marriage is re examined to ensure it is ongoing. If an applicant departs before this process is complete they should first apply for a return visa (bridging visa). She may hold such a visa.

However, if a marriage is irretrivably broken down somewhere during the process, and the sponsorship withdrawn, the lady's options are very limited.

She should approach the embassy, or an agent, to discuss her options.

Edited August 5, 2010 by Old Croc

[fishhooks]

With due respect, the topic is titled "Australian" deports Thai Wife.

I'm not implicating in any way that "my" country (as far as I know) is in any way in the picture at present. Perhaps a re-focus of the spectacles is warranted here?

I'm sorry if the title is not 100% politically correct, a little licence please?

She holds a 309 first stage of Spouse 100 Visa, they were married in Thailand prior to her arrival here.

I agree totally that if the marriage has irretrivably broken down, her options are very limited.

I think the flavour of my post begs the question; Can the guy decide in his own right that his partners Visa contained within her Thai Passport and issued by a government authority is cancelled, as he has informed her? (After taking her back for a supposed holiday)

This is what he has told her, but surely at this particular stage, it's not a done deal. She has approached the original Case Officer at the Embassy in Bangkok, at this stage they can not advise her.

Yes, an unfortunate matter and probably quite common in the case of young Step Children not accepting that dad has a new partner!

I don't think I have been 'misleading' in any way!

Edited August 5, 2010 by fishhooks

[scorecard]

With due respect, the topic is titled "Australian" deports Thai Wife.

I'm not implicating in any way that "my" country (as far as I know) is in any way in the picture at present. Perhaps a re-focus of the spectacles is warranted here?

I'm sorry if the title is not 100% politically correct, a little licence please?

She holds a 309 first stage of Spouse 100 Visa, they were married in Thailand prior to her arrival here.

I agree totally that if the marriage has irretrivably broken down, her options are very limited.

I think the flavour of my post begs the question; Can the guy decide in his own right that his partners Visa contained within her Thai Passport and issued by a government authority is cancelled, as he has informed her? (After taking her back for a supposed holiday)

This is what he has told her, but surely at this particular stage, it's not a done deal. She has approached the original Case Officer at the Embassy in Bangkok, at this stage they can not advise her.

Yes, an unfortunate matter and probably quite common in the case of young Step Children not accepting that dad has a new partner!

I don't think I have been 'misleading' in any way!

1. Why not ring the consular section at the Australian embassy and ask them the question. But ensure that you speak to an Australian staff member. They won't bite you, they are quite friendly, focused, and in my experience good at offering surrounding policies etc., which is probably valuable information, and I'm quite sure they won't ask you to divulge names etc.

2. Don't listen to airmchair experst who quote the policies etc of other countries, this is not relevant.

[jackdawson]

hmmm...my thinking would be that what goes on between a man and his wife is NONE of my business

i mean , we're all adults here right ?

but that's just me

Edited August 5, 2010 by jackdawson

[jayinoz]

:huh:I have had a similar experience years ago- where I needed to cancel a Thai defacto's Residency due to her violence. She stabbed me in the hip after she went in a rage. Then police took her away and charged her. I withdrew my application of sponsorship and never seen her again. She was only a couple of months from being a resident, after a 2 year wait.

As she had the police report she had ruined her chances, due to character issues.

Yet basically an Aussie partner can withdraw their application at any time. Then the former partner has 30 days to exit the country or they are illegal. Then can appeal on certain grounds like partner abuse, etc. They need knowledge of the system or legal assistance to do all this however- most will not.

I can see how some may take advantage of the situation, yet not in my case. She must have been bipolar or something. As the rage events started to become more serious as she could not adapt to my family and the culture. No friends and family and basically in hindsight see that she was begging to get away.

I have friends whom have broken down after the Residency has gone through, then dislike the fact all there X's do is live off the govenment and will for the rest of their lives. Having children with multiple men to gain extra single Mum pensions- it a joke in Aussie. Naturally a certain segment of Aussie women do this also- most do not... One has 5 kids and gets $4000 pm. More than she made in a year or 2 of working in Thai- no wonder a certain type are attracted to the relative ease of giveaway money in Farang countries.

[Thanyaburi Mac]

Do wonder if the guy has realized that he is MARRIED to the Thai woman, and even if he's cancelled her status in Oz, he's still married to her. He can not get married to anyone until he's divorced from this wife. And that action could be costly.

Mac

[Old Croc]

Fishhooks we could argue about your title of the thread and the meaning of the word deport, but I can't see the point.

If you chose to ignore the advice I gave in the rest of my post about how this sort of sponsorship works, that is your perogative.

To Scorecard who said:

" Don't listen to airmchair experst who quote the policies etc of other countries, this is not relevant."

As this gobbledygook seemed to be directed at me, I should point out that in my 20 years working in Australian Immigration I deported scores of nasty characters and can certainly offer relevant advice on questions such as this.

[bridge]

The Applicants circumstances seem to have changed since the grant of the s/c 309 visa. The Applicant has obligations to notify DIAC pursuant to section 104 of the Migration Act 1958. Regardless of what the Sponsor has allegedly said/threatened/done etc, the Applicant needs to seek professional advice ASAP.

Regards

Bridge

Edited August 5, 2010 by bridge

[lightstar]

Fishooks, Old Croc is right, you used a VERY misleading title for you topic. And it seems to me that you are already involved too much...

Australia isn't deporting this lady at all... not even maybe... Her stay in oz was dependent upon her relationship with this guy. The guy has decided it isn't working out and therefore, she is no longer entitled to stay there. Not knowing anything about the couple how can anyone "moe 666" cast judgement on the situation. Get off your barstool Moe!

I believe the term in 'Som Nom Nah'... or is it 'Mai Pen Rai'...

:jap:

Edited August 5, 2010 by lightstar

[fishhooks]

We could go backward and forward arguing about the title which it seems is the main point of discussion.

Again I say if it stated Australia rather than Australian I would take the criticism gracefully. However the text of my post makes it very clear that the thrust of the question is aimed at anyone with genuine knowledge of the "VISA" ramifications is what is asked........ Bridge has fulfilled this adequately without emotion, this is what I was after and I believe is what "Visa and Migration to other countries" is all about.

I am not involved in any way with the actual marriage issue, which is implied in the previous post, just the fact that a lady is in a situation in a big city, even though her own country, and not knowing if she has any rights 'at this stage' as regards her Visa to Australia.

O'croc; I believe Scorecard may be referring to a much earlier post, not yours!

Edited August 5, 2010 by fishhooks

[bridge]

OP, despite your last sentence, I think the thread title is very misleading. Australia did not deport this lady. In your own words the husband took his wife back to Thailand.

As to whether she can return, it all depends on what sort of a visa she now holds.

The 309 (fiance visa) is usually for single entry and has the condition the marriage takes place within a certain period (apparently done), and the next step is to apply for a conditional spouse visa (perhaps not done?), which would be valid for 2 years stay following which the marriage is re examined to ensure it is ongoing. If an applicant departs before this process is complete they should first apply for a return visa (bridging visa). She may hold such a visa.

However, if a marriage is irretrivably broken down somewhere during the process, and the sponsorship withdrawn, the lady's options are very limited.

She should approach the embassy, or an agent, to discuss her options.

On a side issue, you have got your subclasses a bit muddled, a fiance visa is a subclass 300 (Prospective Marriage Visa).

She currently holds a subclass 309 which is a partner visa (provisional).

Regards

Bridge

[Old Croc]

OP, despite your last sentence, I think the thread title is very misleading. Australia did not deport this lady. In your own words the husband took his wife back to Thailand.

As to whether she can return, it all depends on what sort of a visa she now holds.

The 309 (fiance visa) is usually for single entry and has the condition the marriage takes place within a certain period (apparently done), and the next step is to apply for a conditional spouse visa (perhaps not done?), which would be valid for 2 years stay following which the marriage is re examined to ensure it is ongoing. If an applicant departs before this process is complete they should first apply for a return visa (bridging visa). She may hold such a visa.

However, if a marriage is irretrivably broken down somewhere during the process, and the sponsorship withdrawn, the lady's options are very limited.

She should approach the embassy, or an agent, to discuss her options.

On a side issue, you have got your subclasses a bit muddled, a fiance visa is a subclass 300 (Prospective Marriage Visa).

She currently holds a subclass 309 which is a partner visa (provisional).

Regards

Bridge

Fair cop Bridge. I did know that! I've been retired for a while and the visa sub classes can become mixed up.

As virtually the only one of my group of mates who didn't become an agent after leaving the Department, I became adept at closing my ears when the lunch sessions turned into immigration regulations discussions. I had to move to Thailand to get away from it all.

Just found out today an old workmate has been posted to the Embassy in Bangkok, presumably at a fairly high level.

An interesting character!

Edited August 5, 2010 by Old Croc

[bridge]

OP, despite your last sentence, I think the thread title is very misleading. Australia did not deport this lady. In your own words the husband took his wife back to Thailand.

As to whether she can return, it all depends on what sort of a visa she now holds.

The 309 (fiance visa) is usually for single entry and has the condition the marriage takes place within a certain period (apparently done), and the next step is to apply for a conditional spouse visa (perhaps not done?), which would be valid for 2 years stay following which the marriage is re examined to ensure it is ongoing. If an applicant departs before this process is complete they should first apply for a return visa (bridging visa). She may hold such a visa.

However, if a marriage is irretrivably broken down somewhere during the process, and the sponsorship withdrawn, the lady's options are very limited.

She should approach the embassy, or an agent, to discuss her options.

On a side issue, you have got your subclasses a bit muddled, a fiance visa is a subclass 300 (Prospective Marriage Visa).

She currently holds a subclass 309 which is a partner visa (provisional).

Regards

Bridge

Fair cop Bridge. I did know that! I've been retired for a while and the visa sub classes can become mixed up.

As virtually the only one of my group of mates who didn't become an agent after leaving the Department, I became adept at closing my ears when the lunch sessions turned into immigration regulations discussions. I had to move to Thailand to get away from it all.

Just found out today an old workmate has been posted to the Embassy in Bangkok, presumably at a fairly high level.

An interesting character!

Smart move Old Croc

[Eff1n2ret]

To Scorecard who said:

" Don't listen to airmchair experst who quote the policies etc of other countries, this is not relevant."

As this gobbledygook seemed to be directed at me, I should point out that in my 20 years working in Australian Immigration I deported scores of nasty characters and can certainly offer relevant advice on questions such as this.

It was probably directed at me, as I commented on UK regs on the basis of 20 years experience as a British IO and ECO. Acknowledging that I don't know the Oz regulations, my advice would still be that if she has an uncancelled visa in her passport she should get herself back to Australia as soon as possible, and as Bridge has suggested, seek legal advice there. Hanging about in Bangkok won't help her case.

[Lumumba]

Why would she want to go back without any sponsor, or is she a brain surgeon or a nuclear scientist? Or has the OP arranged a new sponsor for her?

Edited August 6, 2010 by 7by7
Stereotypical, misogynistic anti Thai comment removed.

[aussimike]

Seems like he has decided his daughters are more important than the Thai wife. She probaly better off without this loser.

sure sounds like a normal case of blood being thicker than water -- not really clear as to what the problem with the thai wife is either - did she accept the daughters ??? or the other way around - but when crunch comes to crunch - guess he decided that who was going to be better to care for him in his old age -- or what ever --

what ever way - if she does need to get back to oz asap and let immigration sort out the problem -- it is not necessary that she will be deported as i know of other thais who have divorced here and not been deported - and since remarried - some years later

[senor123]

I was married (in Colombia) to a Colombian women who I sponsored to Australia on a temporary spouse visa. After about 3 weeks of her arrival in Australia I realised she had just used me to get an Australian visa. I informed the immigration dept that the marriage had broken down and that I had withdwarn my sponsorship. They told me that that was the end of my involvement in the affair and that they would deal directly with my wife. I resisted the urge to make any negative comments as I reckoned it was as much my fault for being fooled as it was hers for scamming me. They informed me that I would also not be informed of any decisions they made or to the status of their investigations. After that I just forgot about it and got an uncontested divorce a few years later (about 2 years ago now).

[bridge]

Seems like he has decided his daughters are more important than the Thai wife. She probaly better off without this loser.

sure sounds like a normal case of blood being thicker than water -- not really clear as to what the problem with the thai wife is either - did she accept the daughters ??? or the other way around - but when crunch comes to crunch - guess he decided that who was going to be better to care for him in his old age -- or what ever --

what ever way - if she does need to get back to oz asap and let immigration sort out the problem -- it is not necessary that she will be deported as i know of other thais who have divorced here and not been deported - and since remarried - some years later

From the limited information from the OP it appears that the relationship between applicant and sponsor has now broken down.

The applicant has a partner visa (temporary), that is, a determination has not yet been made on the permanent partner visa. She has an obligation to notify DIAC under Section 104 of the Migration Act of the change in circumstances from when she lodged her partner visa application. When an applicant applies for the temporary visa, they also apply for the permanent visa at the same time, but there is generally a 'two-year wait out period' before a determination is made on the permanent visa.

The applicants obligation is to inform DIAC in writing, as soon as practicable, of the new circumstances. Relevant circumstances include, amongst other things, the relationship ending.

As previously stated the applicant needs to seek professional advice ASAP. If the applicant does not inform DIAC of a change in circumstances and the permanent visa it may later be canceled for failure to comply with section 104.

Bridge

[thequick7]

:huh:I have had a similar experience years ago- where I needed to cancel a Thai defacto's Residency due to her violence. She stabbed me in the hip after she went in a rage. Then police took her away and charged her. I withdrew my application of sponsorship and never seen her again. She was only a couple of months from being a resident, after a 2 year wait.

As she had the police report she had ruined her chances, due to character issues.

Yet basically an Aussie partner can withdraw their application at any time. Then the former partner has 30 days to exit the country or they are illegal. Then can appeal on certain grounds like partner abuse, etc. They need knowledge of the system or legal assistance to do all this however- most will not.

I can see how some may take advantage of the situation, yet not in my case. She must have been bipolar or something. As the rage events started to become more serious as she could not adapt to my family and the culture. No friends and family and basically in hindsight see that she was begging to get away.

I have friends whom have broken down after the Residency has gone through, then dislike the fact all there X's do is live off the govenment and will for the rest of their lives. Having children with multiple men to gain extra single Mum pensions- it a joke in Aussie. Naturally a certain segment of Aussie women do this also- most do not... One has 5 kids and gets $4000 pm. More than she made in a year or 2 of working in Thai- no wonder a certain type are attracted to the relative ease of giveaway money in Farang countries.

it is not a joke!! Australia needs to increase its population... there are only two ways of doing this. Increase immigration, or the current population has to procreate. With the Increased standard of living in australia comes a higher cost of living and many families cannot live on a single wage, and less people are having babies. The government is only creating an incentive to have babies...

[gburns57au]

sure sounds like a normal case of blood being thicker than water -- not really clear as to what the problem with the thai wife is either - did she accept the daughters ??? or the other way around - but when crunch comes to crunch - guess he decided that who was going to be better to care for him in his old age -- or what ever --

what ever way - if she does need to get back to oz asap and let immigration sort out the problem -- it is not necessary that she will be deported as i know of other thais who have divorced here and not been deported - and since remarried - some years later

There are circumstamces where the applicant will not have to leave after the breakdown of the relationship.

Domestic violence, proven physical and/or mental abuse are some such circumstances....By proven I mean, there needs to be police reports, medical reports, witnesses etc...

[SirDougless]

A sub class 309 visa means they applied for a Partner Visa outside Australia. It usually means you are married, but a defacto relationship is OK if it has been going for a year. Either way the relationship must be genuine and continuing. A 309 visa is a 2 year temporary multiple entry visa so if she has the means she should hop on a plane back to Aus (see below). The Dept of Immi will not cancel a visa without making reasonable attempts to contact her as it was she, not him, that applied for the visa. As sponsor, he is within his rights, and is obliged, to inform Dept of Immi of any changes in their relationship (she is also obliged).

It is beneficial to her If she is in Australia (compared to being in Thailand) and applies for another type of visa, which she can do.

It is beneficial to her if she is in Australia for any Family Court / Child Support etc issues.

Personally I wouldn't want to get involved but I understand the injustice you see and that the woman is a friend of your wife.

[markt7081]

:huh:I have had a similar experience years ago- where I needed to cancel a Thai defacto's Residency due to her violence. She stabbed me in the hip after she went in a rage. Then police took her away and charged her. I withdrew my application of sponsorship and never seen her again. She was only a couple of months from being a resident, after a 2 year wait.

As she had the police report she had ruined her chances, due to character issues.

Yet basically an Aussie partner can withdraw their application at any time. Then the former partner has 30 days to exit the country or they are illegal. Then can appeal on certain grounds like partner abuse, etc. They need knowledge of the system or legal assistance to do all this however- most will not.

I can see how some may take advantage of the situation, yet not in my case. She must have been bipolar or something. As the rage events started to become more serious as she could not adapt to my family and the culture. No friends and family and basically in hindsight see that she was begging to get away.

I have friends whom have broken down after the Residency has gone through, then dislike the fact all there X's do is live off the govenment and will for the rest of their lives. Having children with multiple men to gain extra single Mum pensions- it a joke in Aussie. Naturally a certain segment of Aussie women do this also- most do not... One has 5 kids and gets $4000 pm. More than she made in a year or 2 of working in Thai- no wonder a certain type are attracted to the relative ease of giveaway money in Farang countries.

it is not a joke!! Australia needs to increase its population... there are only two ways of doing this. Increase immigration, or the current population has to procreate. With the Increased standard of living in australia comes a higher cost of living and many families cannot live on a single wage, and less people are having babies. The government is only creating an incentive to have babies...

[markt7081]

Australia needs to increase its population... Who says so (apart from the economists?)

I quite like living in an unpolluted, open countryside environment.

If Australia does "need" to increase the population, it should be done through the skilled migration, with people who will work hard and assimilate, not just go on the dole & produce many kids, which I have to pay for.

Part of the reason that both partners have to work, is to pay for the procreators on the dole (both Australian & Immigrants)

[thequick7]

Australia needs to increase its population... Who says so (apart from the economists?)

I quite like living in an unpolluted, open countryside environment.

If Australia does "need" to increase the population, it should be done through the skilled migration, with people who will work hard and assimilate, not just go on the dole & produce many kids, which I have to pay for.

Part of the reason that both partners have to work, is to pay for the procreators on the dole (both Australian & Immigrants)

yes the economists say so, and the australian government. A population of around 30 million would be more sustainable and help australian owned companies that rely on the australian market stay australian owned and not sell out to overseas companies that want to increase their assets... australia is easily big enough to have another 10 million people and be able to keep it the way it already is.

yes its true that a small percentage of tax payers money goes towards the government incentives to have babies, but the reason the government is paying australians that are already assimilated to the australian way is because they are trying to keep the people who are against immigration happy... im sure if you ever have a child you will gladly take the $4000 check too (which other tax payers have to pay for).

[bridge]

Well this post has now gone completely 'off topic'. Now it has gone to the sustainability of Australian immigration numbers. I was sent this link last week, would be very interested in what others think, and please do not 'shoot the messenger', I am NOT the author.

Regards

Bridge

Source Rense

The Tragedy Of Mass Asian Immigration Into Australia

By Frosty Wooldridge

8-2-10

Little discussed, little appreciated and more overlooked by Australia's most ardent 'growthists': the futility and ultimate civilization-collapsing aspect of mass immigration from countries that add tens of millions of new babies annually without end. Specifically, China, India and Bangladesh! No matter how many Australia or any first world nations immigrate desperate refugees to their shores, the line not only does not end, it grows exponentially. How much? Try 77 million added third world citizens annually! The third world adds 1.0 billion every 13 years. Illiteracy explodes as the norm. They cannot 'grab hold' of their predicament. Yet, few will discuss its harsh final predicament. In 2010, 18 million humans shall die from starvation or starvation related diseases worldwide. (Source: World Health Organization) Yet, leaders of Asian nations refuse to deal with reality. For a firsthand look, read: Overloading Australia by O'Connor and Lines.

Cultures and their religions produce overpopulation in the 21st century. Hindus, Muslims, Catholics, Buddhists and other religions refuse to tear themselves away from 2,000 and 3,000 year anachronistic doctrines that dictate unlimited growth. They choose human misery on an unimaginable scale rather than sensible birth control and family planning. While India, at 1.16 billion continues to add 12 million annually net gain on its way to surpassing China by mid century at 1.55 billion, it refuses to engage birth control to bring its population to live within its carrying capacity. Even with millions unable to procure a simple toilet for their daily needs and water treatment plants for communities and personal hygiene, that 12 million additional Indians makes it impossible to ever catch up to their numbers or engage solutions. Result: 1,000 children under 12 die of diarrhea, dysentery and other water borne diseases DAILY in India. (Source:www.populationmedia.org)

Bangladesh, at a mind bending 157 million people struggling in a landmass the size of the U.S. State of Iowa (very small), continue adding population without end. They endure disease, filthy water, little food, no sanitation and no education. They live on a flood plain that kills 100,000 of them during monsoons or other disasters from nature. Yet, they explode their population beyond imagination. They love exporting their human exhaust in the form of immigrants to any country that will take them. At no time will that Muslim nation engage birth control. Thus, and you can Google this figure, they expect to add another 100 million within this century. The ultimate result? Australia and other countries transform their own countries into third world nations that manifest the same illiteracy rates, overcrowding and unsustainability.

What stupefies my mind: Australia cannot sustain further growth because it features 96 percent desert with scant arable land and water.

"As we go from this happy hydrocarbon bubble we have reached now to a renewable energy resource economy, which we do this century, will the "civil" part of civilization survive? As we both know there is no way that alternative energy sources can supply the amount of per capita energy we enjoy now, much less for the 9 billion expected by 2050. And energy is what keeps this game going. We are involved in a Faustian bargain-selling our economic souls for the luxurious life of the moment, but sooner or later the price has to be paid." Walter Youngquist

One look at China and its 'one-child' birth policy, you cannot help but realize that they took action 50 years too late. Even with one child per family, they add eight million annually, net gain. It's called 'population momentum', which resembles a brakeless train that cannot be stopped. Even at one child per woman, with 1.3 billion people, they continue exploding their population beyond sustainability. Thus, their citizens race to leave their mother country to immigrate to Canada, America and Australia.

For anyone that may like to see the BEST explanation of the futility of immigration into Australia or any first world country: visit www.numbersusa.com and watch "Immigration by the Numbers" by Roy Beck. This 'gumball and glass' demonstration illustrates graphically the futility of continued immigration. Citizens of the world must deal with their own civilizations and bring about population stability in their own arenas by their own actions. Their religions must advance into 21st century realities or Mother Nature will do it for them-rather brutally.

Immigration cannot and will not be available in the near future as first world countries live beyond their carrying capacity and begin to collapse via lack of water, food, energy and resources. Not mentioned by Australian growthists: water scarcity, quality of life, standard of living, literacy, resource depletion, species extinction, environmental degradation worldwide.

"We must alert and organize the world's people to pressure world leaders to take specific steps to solve the two root causes of our environmental crises - exploding population growth and wasteful consumption of irreplaceable resources. Over-consumption and overpopulation underlie every environmental problem we face today." --Jacques-Yves Cousteau

Frosty Wooldridge has bicycled across six continents - from the Arctic to the South Pole - as well as six times across the USA, coast to coast and border to border. In 2005, he bicycled from the Arctic Circle, Norway to Athens, Greece. He presents "The Coming Population Crisis in America: and what you can do about it" to civic clubs, church groups, high schools and colleges. He works to bring about sensible world population balance at www.frostywooldridge.com He is the author of: America on the Brink: The Next Added 100 Mil

[fishhooks]

Sincere thanks to the members who have helped with info re this topic.

As said from the outset, both the applicant and sponsor are friends of my wife and I and we are in contact with both.

The comments making a bigger deal about the topic title, rather than the thrust of the issue which was made abundantly clear in my first post were not helpful and only added to our concerns at the time.

Also comments of a personal nature, some which were later officially edited, only go to show that some, thankfully in a minority, continue to post only to make a 'Side Show' of the forum.

As it stands and I hope this will be of 'some' interest, the applicant on contacting the embassy in Bangkok, as advised here, was told that on the word of the sponsor her visa had already been cancelled from the Australian end.

Thus it was a done deal without her being involved during this procedure and I don't think she to date has any official notification about this. The word came from her original Thai Case Officer.

So without taking any side in this matter, it seems that a Sponsor can take this action and get a result without the Applicant's involvement at all.

I bring this point up as I'm sure in some cases, people can go through a period of turmoil or normal family crisis which either side may regret in the short term, but in the case of Spouse Visa (Australian anyway) it's thrown to the wind very quickly.

My wife and I remain committed and understanding to both sides and I would respectively request no more personal attacks. Thai Visa usually doesn't in the main drop to this level.

We are both deeply upset about the happening here between two great friends.

Edited August 15, 2010 by fishhooks

[Will27]

Sincere thanks to the members who have helped with info re this topic.

As said from the outset, both the applicant and sponsor are friends of my wife and I and we are in contact with both.

The comments making a bigger deal about the topic title, rather than the thrust of the issue which was made abundantly clear in my first post were not helpful and only added to our concerns at the time.

Also comments of a personal nature, some which were later officially edited, only go to show that some, thankfully in a minority, continue to post only to make a 'Side Show' of the forum.

As it stands and I hope this will be of 'some' interest, the applicant on contacting the embassy in Bangkok, as advised here, was told that on the word of the sponsor her visa had already been cancelled from the Australian end.

Thus it was a done deal without her being involved during this procedure and I don't think she to date has any official notification about this. The word came from her original Thai Case Officer.

So without taking any side in this matter, it seems that a Sponsor can take this action and get a result without the Applicant's involvement at all.

I bring this point up as I'm sure in some cases, people can go through a period of turmoil or normal family crisis which either side may regret in the short term, but in the case of Spouse Visa (Australian anyway) it's thrown to the wind very quickly.

My wife and I remain committed and understanding to both sides and I would respectively request no more personal attacks. Thai Visa usually doesn't in the main drop to this level.

We are both deeply upset about the happening here between two great friends.

Hi Fishhooks

Your first question was

"Can an Australian take his TW back to Thailand, contact Immigration himself without any involvement of her and have her Visa CANCELLED

without any contact between herself and Immigration. Seems quite harsh and complete with her not at this stage having no input whatsoever!

This was answered by a few posters several times. The applicant has an obligation, not only to advise of any changes, but just as importantly

any change of address. This is where I think the problem lies.

As previously mentioned, DIAC will make a reasonable attempt to contact the applicant after receiving advice from the sponsor,

either by post or email. Now if they went back to Thailand and DIAC were not advised, then in all probablity correspondence was

sent to the address in Australia. After a specified waiting time, if they do not hear from the applicant, the 100 visa will be refused

which in effect means that the 309 visa will cease. There is a big difference.

I'm sure the sponsor knew what he was doing when he took her back to Thailand

and what ramifications it would have..

Either way, it's a sad thing.

Hope this clears everything up for you.

Regards

Will