Immigration Forum / Canada / December 2005

Thank you all for your help and comments.
We have sent a letter to the embassy explaining the points dilemma to see if
they can make an exception in our case, and if they can't, we're just going
to have to do it the long way, and live together for a year to qualify as
common-law.
I don't understand this way of doing things, since it makes it incredibly
hard for people like us that love each other, and want to live together for
a while before getting married.
We believe that marriage is not a thing you do out of convenience, and is
something that should be done only once and for life. So even though we've
been in a relationship for many years, we haven't lived together for longer
than 5 weeks, and many things change once you live together, so we believe
this to be a prudent way of doing things. (And there's also a thing with her
family, but that's another story)
Right now We're lucky that my job allows us to live together even if she
can't work for this year, however this is a principle thing, more than
anything.
I believe she will get tired of doing nothing for a year, like not being
able to help economically, or do anything like work or study, and add to
this leaving all her friends and family. It will be extremely tough, and in
my opinion shouldn't have to be.
I'm aware of the commitment of sponsoring her as my partner, and my decision
will not change. The main reason cic should understand is that she's coming
here for ME, not for healthcare, not for a job, not for Canada, but for ME,
and that will not change, and that's the reason I will sponsor her no matter
what, since if things don't work out, she's not staying here, she's very
close to her family and friends and she would go back to Mexico in a
heartbeat. To stay in touch with family and friends will be a lifelong
challenge for the both of us, and all these cic obstacles will make it just
that much harder. But we're willing to make some sacrifices so we can live
together.
I know why cic makes it hard for people to get their PR status, and I agree
with most of their policies, however I do believe this to be an exception to
the rule. The main point would be those adaptability points in the
evaluation system.

-Why can't my girlfriend use them, or why not being able to use them counts
against her?-

In the current system, the points only apply if you're married or common-law
which I understand could make it easier to adapt, however it makes no sense
to me why in our case she can't use the points, since she will come here for
me. Once again she will come to live here for ME, and the visa is just to
make it that much easier for both of us to live together, so we were hoping
to go the most logical way and apply as a skilled worker, since if she can
use the points for adaptability, she would qualify even with the old score
of 75 points. But the very same thing we want to fix which is stop being
apart from each other, is the same thing which doesn't let us be together,
do I make sense?
In our case, not being able to use those points should theoretically lower
the score to qualify by 10, because the reason behind getting the PR visa
(which is to live with me) is the very same thing that is hurting her
application because of total points needed.
The score system would apply if she were to come here by herself in which
case I do agree with cic, could make it harder to adapt (albeit not
impossible) and therefore those points should then hurt her application. But
in this case it's illogical.

Anyways, I know this is more rant than anything, and I don't think I'll get
anywhere no matter how logic or how right we may be, so there's no point in
fighting the system. We will just wait for the embassy's answer, and if it's
negative, we'll just live together for the year it takes and then we'll get
her PR either way (skilled or partner whichever is faster). The economic
burden of this could actually delay our possible wedding and will definitely
make it harder to visit friends and family as we would like, but in the end
it's worth it.

Hugo