British families live in forced isolation due to the laws of immigration

Three weeks ago, British Prime Minister Kiir Starmer said that the United Kingdom is facing a danger to turn into a “island of strangers”, but this description does not seem strange to many British citizens who are already living forced isolation due to immigration laws, which compel them to differentiate between living in their homeland or staying with their families.

At the heart of this crisis, the minimum income policy, which requires British citizens to achieve income of at least 18 thousand and 600 pounds annually, is allowed to allow them to bring their non -British (foreign) husbands to live with them in the United Kingdom.

The previous conservative government announced the intention of raising this limit to 38 thousand and 700 pounds, before it declined due to popular anger, contented with a gradual elevation plan starting from 29 thousand pounds.

With the Labor Party assumed power, this minimum income was temporarily provided, and the government asked the Consultative Committee for Immigration to review this policy expected to be issued soon.

However, temporary freezing does not change the fact that thousands of families suffer from the consequences of this decision, as their entire family future is commented on the outcome of a review that has not yet been announced.

This policy only limits the freedom of the British to live with their loved ones and their families, but also affects the health of psychological and physical families as well, and some may prohibit the opportunity to have children or live next to their children.

Painful stories

Among the painful stories as a result of this policy is the story of the British Camille Older, and its Mexican husband, Moesz Alvarez Jiminies, who met in Mexico in 2017 and married two years later.

Their goal was to move to live in the United Kingdom, but the disease changed their plans, as Older was ill in the pelvis and weak immunity, and later suffered from early ovarian palaces, which accelerated the need to return to the homeland to be closer to her family, and to receive fertility treatment, which is at the age of 28.

However, she was shocked when she learned that her husband did not have the right to treat through the British National Health Authority, as he was not resident, forcing her to think about using an unknown donor to form a family.

Although she tried to reach the minimum income, which was 18 thousand and 600 pounds, suddenly raising the ceiling to 29 thousand pounds broke the hopes of Oakler in having a child with her husband inside the United Kingdom.

By the time you will earn enough money, the pregnancy will be very difficult.

Terrifying feeling

“Can you imagine a woman in the twenties that she cannot have children because she only does not have enough money for the British government to agree to bring her husband?”

She added, “I was said mainly: If you want to have children, you may have to facilitate this through fertility care.”

The couple considered that “the minimum income required for accepting the husband in the United Kingdom is another example of discrimination in Britain’s policy based on race and class», noting that the recognition of this was painful.

“In fact, it is frustrating, inhumane, it makes me feel sad,” Jiminiz said. “

Another tragedy

There are other confusing features, as many people assume that bringing their life partner to the United Kingdom is an inherent right, and they do not realize the existence of the financial limit until after they are linked to a person and the formation of a family, as another tragedy emerges here in the story of Lisa Young (31 years old) in its fifth month, which discovered the financial limit late, when she lived in Japan.

When he rose to 29 thousand pounds, she was eighth month, and she had to make a bitter decision: either raising her child in the United Kingdom alone dependent on the subsidies, or staying in Japan with her husband.

Her husband was sadly looked at her as she was forced to her choice, which could not be tolerated. “My husband told me to stay here (in Japan), but I said: I cannot, just as I cannot do this without you, and I do not want to do this originally without you.”

Young chose to stay in Japan, but isolation negatively affected her psychological health, especially in a remote town inhabited by the workers of one of the factory, where her husband was working.

Hostile policies

Despite alienation, Young found in Japan more welcoming than she found in her homeland (UK), she said.

She said that she had contacted online support groups for other British citizens who do not earn enough to bring their partners to the United Kingdom, and their separation has increased in pain because the income of their partners is not initially counted within the minimum required.

She added that “the overwhelming majority who are unable to return to the United Kingdom of women, and the main reason for their inability to fulfill the minimum income is the presence of children with them.”

“Sometimes I feel that I do not want to live in Britain, because its policies are hostile to the family, a biased, and a racist, but I want to change this reality,” she added. I want to only return to my country and live with my family. ” On the “Guardian”

---

Children and parents are also affected

David Lewis and his son Maxine. From the source

Women are not only those who feel the UK laws of immigration, but also children and parents.

When the British, David Lewis, was forced to return to the United Kingdom due to the deterioration of his mother’s health, he found himself facing the experience of single motherhood, as his four -year -old son Maxine accompanied him, leaving his wife Lucy in Kenya.

By virtue of his work in providing care for the needy, Louis received assurances that he would be exempted from the income condition, and he can sponsor his wife’s visa to join him and their son, and he expected that he would take three or four months at most.

Instead, it spanned 28 months, after the Ministry of Interior informed him that whoever provides care must do this for two years, before he became eligible to bring his partner to the United Kingdom. Lucy eventually joined her husband and son, but the two spouses believed that their separation for a long time had a bad impact on their son Maxine. In the beginning, he was angry and cautious after his mother’s absence, but he became involved in himself and emotionally isolated.

Lewis said: “The mother is the most important in the child’s life during his growth period, which is something I miss, and for this everything around me has changed,” Louis said.

The right of the family’s life in the United Kingdom is protected by Article (8) in the European Charter on Human Rights, which states that people who are not eligible to bring their life partner can submit a request for exceptional circumstances, although such requests are usually rejected even in cases where people meet the required standards, which is what happened to Jessica and Sanas.

Sanas managed, from Sri Lanka, to join his family after and Jessica announced their separation, and the Ministry of Interior’s decision to reject their request at the beginning, and at that time the UK government issued a warning to the British not to travel to Sri Lanka due to its economic collapse and the severe shortage of necessities such as fuel, food and medicine.

Jessica and Sanas spent 11 separate months, which had a permanent impact on their son (Tariq – 10 years), in addition to the family’s feeling of instability.

---

discrimination

Human rights organizations that carry out campaigns to end the threshold of the amount required to establish families in Britain, such as “family reunification” and “Carm”, says that one of the most anxious things in that policy is how to distinguish them against women, colored people, and working class families.

She adds that falling into love and forming a family with a person, a spontaneous experience, and people have a rare for control, but the policy of the British Ministry of the Interior is actually demanding that the matter be different, and imposes on him incapacitated financial conditions.

---

Narrowing the screws

In his 2017 electoral statement, the British Labor Party pledged to cancel the minimum financial limit required to allow British citizens to bring their foreign husbands to live with them, and suggested that it be replaced on a condition obliged families to prove their ability to live without the need for public financing.

However, the government announced in its recent report on immigration plans to tighten the screws on legal immigration paths, while targeting families despite their previous pledges.

The British, Roxanna Ong, has been living without her husband in an isolated house in Cardiff, since 2017, with her only son, Iskandar (eight years).

Ong cannot work because she has chronic muscle pain, post -traumatic disorder, and receives subsidies and support for care.

And her husband, Nay Lin Ong, an illegitimate immigrant from Myanmar, and met while they were working together in Thailand, and after the expiration of the Ung Thai visa, he went to Malaysia while Roxanana returned to the United Kingdom, and despite the fulfillment of the exceptional conditions of circumstances, Nay was unable to enter the United Kingdom. Even if he joins his family, aid will be cut off from his wife.

• British citizens are required to achieve an income of at least 18.6 thousand pounds annually to bring their foreign husbands to live with them.