楼主mm，即使你有精神疾病，也是可以转公民的。请问你申请绿卡的时候，还没有发现这个病吗？绿卡申请好像就有问到是否有精神疾病的问题了。 这个nolo的分析，应该也适用于绿卡转公民。 https://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/us-immigration/mental-illness-barrier.html 里面提到： What is most important to note about the law is that the mental/physical disorder bar is two-part; it applies only when the immigrant has both 1) a disorder and 2) some kind of behavior stemming from that disorder that poses a threat to persons or property. 你的病情是可控的，并没有对个人或者财产造成威胁，如果没有发作时候被警察备案的案底，估计美国移民局也不知道。 还有个官方的解释，应该更有说服力： https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-8-part-b-chapter-7 Chapter 7 - Physical or Mental Disorder with Associated Harmful Behavior GuidanceResources (8)Appendices (0)Updates (5) A. Physical or Mental Disorders with Associated Harmful Behavior[1] Applicants who have physical or mental disorders and harmful behavior associated with those disorders are inadmissible.[2]The inadmissibility ground is divided into two subcategories: Current physical or mental disorders, with associated harmful behavior. Past physical or mental disorders, with associated harmful behavior that is likely to recur or lead to other harmful behavior. There must be both a physical or mental disorder and harmful behavior to make an applicant inadmissible based on this ground. Neither harmful behavior nor a physical or mental disorder alone renders an applicant inadmissible on this ground. Harmful behavior is defined as behavior that may pose, or has posed, a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the applicant or others. A physical disorder is a currently accepted medical diagnosis as defined by the current edition of the Manual of International Classification of Diseases, Injuries, and Causes of Death published by the World Health Organization or by another authoritative source as determined by the Director.[3]Officers should consult the Technical Instructions for additional information, if needed. A mental disorder is a currently accepted psychiatric diagnosis, as defined by the current edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders published by the American Psychiatric Association or by another authoritative source as determined by the Director.[4] Officers should consult the Technical Instructions for additional information, if needed. Under the Technical Instructions, a diagnosis of substance abuse/addiction for a substance that is not listed in Section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (with current associated harmful behavior or a history of associated harmful behavior judged likely to recur) is classified as a mental disorder.[5] Under prior Technical Instructions and the July 20, 2010 or older versions of the form, these conditions were summarized under the drug abuse/addiction part of the form. An officer, however, should not find an applicant inadmissible for “drug abuse/addiction” if a non-controlled substance is involved. B. Relevance of Alcohol-Related Driving Arrests or Convictions 1. Alcohol Use and Driving Alcohol is not listed in Section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act.[6]Therefore, alcohol use disorders are treated as a physical or mental disorder for purposes of determining inadmissibility. As a result, an applicant with an alcohol use disorder will not be deemed inadmissible unless there is current associated harmful behavior or past associated harmful behavior likely to recur. The harmful behavior must be such that it poses, has posed, or is likely to pose a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the applicant or others. In the course of adjudicating benefit applications, officers frequently encounter criminal histories that include arrests and/or convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents, such as DUI (driving under the influence) and DWI (driving while intoxicated). These histories may or may not rise to the level of a criminal ground of inadmissibility.[7]A record of criminal arrests and/or convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents may constitute evidence of a health-related inadmissibility as a physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior. Operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol is clearly an associated harmful behavior that poses a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the applicant or others. Where a civil surgeon’s mental status evaluation diagnoses the presence of an alcohol use disorder (abuse or dependence), and where there is evidence of harmful behavior associated with the disorder, a Class A medical condition should be certified on Form I-693. 2. Re-Examinations Requesting Re-Examinations Some applicants may fail to report, or may underreport, alcohol-related driving incidents in response to the civil surgeon’s queries. Where these incidents resulted in an arrest, they may be subsequently revealed in the criminal history record resulting from a routine fingerprint check. Consequently, a criminal record printout revealing a significant history of alcohol-related driving arrests may conflict with the medical examination report that indicates no alcohol-related driving incidents were reported to or evaluated by the civil surgeon. In such an instance, an officer may require the applicant to be re-examined. The re-examination would be limited to a mental status evaluation specifically considering the record of alcohol-related driving incidents. On the Request for Evidence (RFE), officers should use the following language: “Please return to the civil surgeon for purposes of conducting a mental status evaluation specifically considering the record of alcohol-related driving incidents.” Upon re-examination, the civil surgeon may refer the applicant for further evaluation to a psychiatrist or to a specialist in substance-abuse disorders as provided for under the Technical Instructions. After such referral, the civil surgeon will determine whether a Class A medical condition exists and amend the Form I-693 accordingly. The determination of a Class A condition is wholly dependent on the medical diagnosis of a designated civil surgeon. Re-Examination for Significant Criminal Record of Alcohol-Related Driving Incidents Only applicants with a significant criminal record of alcohol-related driving incidents that were not considered by the civil surgeon during the original medical examination should be referred for re-examination. The actual criminal charges for alcohol-related driving incidents vary among the different states. A significant criminal record of alcohol-related driving incidents includes: One or more arrests/convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents (DUI/DWI) while the driver’s license was suspended, revoked, or restricted at the time of the arrest due to a previous alcohol-related driving incident(s); One or more arrests/convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents where personal injury or death resulted from the incident(s); One or more convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents where the conviction was a felony in the jurisdiction in which it occurred or where a sentence of incarceration was actually imposed; One arrest/conviction for alcohol-related driving incidents within the preceding 5 years[8] ; or Two or more arrests/convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents within the preceding 10 years.[9] If the officer finds that the criminal record appears to contradict the civil surgeon’s finding in the medical examination report, then the officer should request a re-examination. Example: An applicant’s criminal record shows that she was convicted for DWI-related vehicular manslaughter. However, the medical examination report reflects that no Class A or B physical or mental disorder was found. In this case, the officer should request a re-examination because the medical examination report finding should have reflected that the applicant has a history relating to an alcohol-related driving incident that could indicate a physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior. 3. Determination Based on Re-Examination Upon completion of the re-examination, the officer should determine whether the applicant is inadmissible. If the civil surgeon annotated a Class A condition, the applicant is inadmissible. If no Class A condition is certified by the civil surgeon, the officer may not determine that the applicant is inadmissible. In exceptional cases, the officer may seek review of the civil surgeon’s determination from CDC. If the applicant is inadmissible, he or she may file an application for waiver of inadmissibility.[10] C. Relevance of Other Evidence The guidance relating to alcohol-related driving arrests or convictions described above applies to any similar scenario where the record of proceeding contains evidence that may indicate inadmissibility due to a mental or physical disorder with associated harmful behavior that was not considered by the civil surgeon in the original medical examination. Such evidence includes, but is not limited to: A prior finding of inadmissibility due to a mental disorder; A history of institutionalization for a mental disorder; A criminal history other than drunk driving arrests/convictions, such as assaults and domestic violence, in which alcohol or a psychoactive substance was a contributing factor; Any other evidence that suggests an alcohol problem; or Other criminal arrests where there is a reasonable possibility of a mental disorder as a contributing factor. Accordingly, where the record of proceeding available to the officer contains evidence suggestive of a mental disorder, and the Form I-693 medical report does not reflect that the evidence was considered by the civil surgeon, the applicant must be required to undergo a mental status re-examination by a civil surgeon specifically addressing the adverse evidence that may not have initially been revealed to the civil surgeon. D. Parts of Form I-693 Addressing Physical or Mental Disorders The civil surgeon must check the appropriate findings box on the medical examination report. The civil surgeon should also either annotate the findings in the remarks section or attach a report, if the space provided is not sufficient. However, the officer should not RFE simply because the civil surgeon has omitted the remarks or failed to attach a report.
楼主mm，即使你有精神疾病，也是可以转公民的。请问你申请绿卡的时候，还没有发现这个病吗？绿卡申请好像就有问到是否有精神疾病的问题了。 这个nolo的分析，应该也适用于绿卡转公民。 https://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/us-immigration/mental-illness-barrier.html 里面提到： What is most important to note about the law is that the mental/physical disorder bar is two-part; it applies only when the immigrant has both 1) a disorder and 2) some kind of behavior stemming from that disorder that poses a threat to persons or property. 你的病情是可控的，并没有对个人或者财产造成威胁，如果没有发作时候被警察备案的案底，估计美国移民局也不知道。 还有个官方的解释，应该更有说服力： https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-8-part-b-chapter-7 Chapter 7 - Physical or Mental Disorder with Associated Harmful Behavior GuidanceResources (8)Appendices (0)Updates (5) A. Physical or Mental Disorders with Associated Harmful Behavior [1] Applicants who have physical or mental disorders and harmful behavior associated with those disorders are inadmissible.[2]The inadmissibility ground is divided into two subcategories: Current physical or mental disorders, with associated harmful behavior. Past physical or mental disorders, with associated harmful behavior that is likely to recur or lead to other harmful behavior. There must be both a physical or mental disorder and harmful behavior to make an applicant inadmissible based on this ground. Neither harmful behavior nor a physical or mental disorder alone renders an applicant inadmissible on this ground. Harmful behavior is defined as behavior that may pose, or has posed, a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the applicant or others. A physical disorder is a currently accepted medical diagnosis as defined by the current edition of the Manual of International Classification of Diseases, Injuries, and Causes of Death published by the World Health Organization or by another authoritative source as determined by the Director.[3]Officers should consult the Technical Instructions for additional information, if needed. A mental disorder is a currently accepted psychiatric diagnosis, as defined by the current edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders published by the American Psychiatric Association or by another authoritative source as determined by the Director.[4] Officers should consult the Technical Instructions for additional information, if needed. Under the Technical Instructions, a diagnosis of substance abuse/addiction for a substance that is not listed in Section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (with current associated harmful behavior or a history of associated harmful behavior judged likely to recur) is classified as a mental disorder.[5] Under prior Technical Instructions and the July 20, 2010 or older versions of the form, these conditions were summarized under the drug abuse/addiction part of the form. An officer, however, should not find an applicant inadmissible for “drug abuse/addiction” if a non-controlled substance is involved. B. Relevance of Alcohol-Related Driving Arrests or Convictions 1. Alcohol Use and Driving Alcohol is not listed in Section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act.[6]Therefore, alcohol use disorders are treated as a physical or mental disorder for purposes of determining inadmissibility. As a result, an applicant with an alcohol use disorder will not be deemed inadmissible unless there is current associated harmful behavior or past associated harmful behavior likely to recur. The harmful behavior must be such that it poses, has posed, or is likely to pose a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the applicant or others. In the course of adjudicating benefit applications, officers frequently encounter criminal histories that include arrests and/or convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents, such as DUI (driving under the influence) and DWI (driving while intoxicated). These histories may or may not rise to the level of a criminal ground of inadmissibility.[7]A record of criminal arrests and/or convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents may constitute evidence of a health-related inadmissibility as a physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior. Operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol is clearly an associated harmful behavior that poses a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the applicant or others. Where a civil surgeon’s mental status evaluation diagnoses the presence of an alcohol use disorder (abuse or dependence), and where there is evidence of harmful behavior associated with the disorder, a Class A medical condition should be certified on Form I-693. 2. Re-Examinations Requesting Re-Examinations Some applicants may fail to report, or may underreport, alcohol-related driving incidents in response to the civil surgeon’s queries. Where these incidents resulted in an arrest, they may be subsequently revealed in the criminal history record resulting from a routine fingerprint check. Consequently, a criminal record printout revealing a significant history of alcohol-related driving arrests may conflict with the medical examination report that indicates no alcohol-related driving incidents were reported to or evaluated by the civil surgeon. In such an instance, an officer may require the applicant to be re-examined. The re-examination would be limited to a mental status evaluation specifically considering the record of alcohol-related driving incidents. On the Request for Evidence (RFE), officers should use the following language: “Please return to the civil surgeon for purposes of conducting a mental status evaluation specifically considering the record of alcohol-related driving incidents.” Upon re-examination, the civil surgeon may refer the applicant for further evaluation to a psychiatrist or to a specialist in substance-abuse disorders as provided for under the Technical Instructions. After such referral, the civil surgeon will determine whether a Class A medical condition exists and amend the Form I-693 accordingly. The determination of a Class A condition is wholly dependent on the medical diagnosis of a designated civil surgeon. Re-Examination for Significant Criminal Record of Alcohol-Related Driving Incidents Only applicants with a significant criminal record of alcohol-related driving incidents that were not considered by the civil surgeon during the original medical examination should be referred for re-examination. The actual criminal charges for alcohol-related driving incidents vary among the different states. A significant criminal record of alcohol-related driving incidents includes: One or more arrests/convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents (DUI/DWI) while the driver’s license was suspended, revoked, or restricted at the time of the arrest due to a previous alcohol-related driving incident(s); One or more arrests/convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents where personal injury or death resulted from the incident(s); One or more convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents where the conviction was a felony in the jurisdiction in which it occurred or where a sentence of incarceration was actually imposed; One arrest/conviction for alcohol-related driving incidents within the preceding 5 years[8] ; or Two or more arrests/convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents within the preceding 10 years.[9] If the officer finds that the criminal record appears to contradict the civil surgeon’s finding in the medical examination report, then the officer should request a re-examination. Example: An applicant’s criminal record shows that she was convicted for DWI-related vehicular manslaughter. However, the medical examination report reflects that no Class A or B physical or mental disorder was found. In this case, the officer should request a re-examination because the medical examination report finding should have reflected that the applicant has a history relating to an alcohol-related driving incident that could indicate a physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior. 3. Determination Based on Re-Examination Upon completion of the re-examination, the officer should determine whether the applicant is inadmissible. If the civil surgeon annotated a Class A condition, the applicant is inadmissible. If no Class A condition is certified by the civil surgeon, the officer may not determine that the applicant is inadmissible. In exceptional cases, the officer may seek review of the civil surgeon’s determination from CDC. If the applicant is inadmissible, he or she may file an application for waiver of inadmissibility.[10] C. Relevance of Other Evidence The guidance relating to alcohol-related driving arrests or convictions described above applies to any similar scenario where the record of proceeding contains evidence that may indicate inadmissibility due to a mental or physical disorder with associated harmful behavior that was not considered by the civil surgeon in the original medical examination. Such evidence includes, but is not limited to: A prior finding of inadmissibility due to a mental disorder; A history of institutionalization for a mental disorder; A criminal history other than drunk driving arrests/convictions, such as assaults and domestic violence, in which alcohol or a psychoactive substance was a contributing factor; Any other evidence that suggests an alcohol problem; or Other criminal arrests where there is a reasonable possibility of a mental disorder as a contributing factor. Accordingly, where the record of proceeding available to the officer contains evidence suggestive of a mental disorder, and the Form I-693 medical report does not reflect that the evidence was considered by the civil surgeon, the applicant must be required to undergo a mental status re-examination by a civil surgeon specifically addressing the adverse evidence that may not have initially been revealed to the civil surgeon. D. Parts of Form I-693 Addressing Physical or Mental Disorders The civil surgeon must check the appropriate findings box on the medical examination report. The civil surgeon should also either annotate the findings in the remarks section or attach a report, if the space provided is not sufficient. However, the officer should not RFE simply because the civil surgeon has omitted the remarks or failed to attach a report.
对啊 lz一直说爸爸不爱孩子 对孩子不好了？ 亲爹如此，难道那些亲戚或者后爸会对孩子会更好？孩子爸爸一个月还能拿出来2000美金呢 那些亲戚一百人民币一个月给不给 说点风凉话而已
Re
不要说 心里不健康的单亲穷妈妈带俩娃了 白富美官二代一线有两套房带一个娃都非常艰辛啊 那个苦绝对不仅仅是物质上的 还有精神上的叠加 孩子没有爸爸 别人会不会歧视他 下班所有时间都在接送孩子各种辅导班了 也根本就找不到什么下家结婚了 可能一辈子就单身这样了 对心里不强大的lz来说 能坚持多久
如果前夫有钱，学费低不了。
排队挂号付款？你国内翻墙过来的？
re
江浙地区的小县级市，也就是所谓的四线城市，收入挺高的。你可以网上随便搜一下，比如昆山，常熟，吴江，张家港，江阴啥的，赚个万儿八千真的不难的。送快递，送外卖都收入过万了。
在美国，我能一个人带两娃看病，绰绰有余。在国内，我试过一次，两个大人带一个娃才搞得过来，老人根本搞不清楚医院的各种事情。说到support，其实美国对单亲妈妈的support有很多，只是需要楼主自己走出去，去寻找。国内除了嘲讽看不起，还有啥？
lz在国内更适合生存 娃在美国更适合生存 不懂为啥非要绑在一起
楼主如果健康状况不好，留在美国得到的医疗比国内应该好很多，娃在美国公立学校读书免费，没准还能按家庭情况拿到奖学金和助学金。比在国内四线小地方好多了。劝你一定慎重，为你自己和孩子考虑留美都是上策。
你说的是癌症之类的当然留美国存活率高 但是lz是精神问题 明显美国治疗精神问题就很差劲啊 一方面需要亲人安慰
lz应该是在美国生存不下去了 根本没心力钻营各种福利了 那些福利也不是一般人能算计的过来的 所以回国歇歇 治病 也是一个好办法 但是千万别坑孩子
看了后面的回复，原来两个女儿而且都是teenager了。这种情况就更要在美国了 回去中国那种教育孩子估计难适应。
而且你回国之后 大概率发现年迈的父母不但不能支持你 还需要你全力照顾 俩孩子适应不了环境各种问题。国内人又充满戾气，到处都需要人情关系才能办成事，你那会估计精神状态会更不好吧。美国的生存环境好太多了。
你没有在美国生活过吧？在美国看病很容易的 真的耶不需要社会资源
说的太对了，回国绝对是下策。在美国至少还可以找律师对付渣男，你带着孩子回国了，渣男要是不复抚养费，改个名搬个家换个电话 你怎么办到哪抓他去。
美国对中年失婚女性和有精神方面疾病的人相对宽容和善多了。希望楼主一定三思后行。
完全同意，留在美国绝对比回中国要好。
大家劝lz不要回去
是这样的，楼主的情况，回中国，将面对各式的嘲讽鄙视，精神压力比这里大多了。失去了工作，没了赡养费，经济压力也大多了。
楼主如果觉得现在的日子不好过，去中国只会更难。
这个回复真不错，关键是楼主自己回到原点，还要搭上两个孩子的未来，重走老路
楼主的情况是两难啊。可以咨询律师吗？看能不能小孩先让娃爸照顾一年，你回国修养一段时间，也实地考察和计划自己和孩子的将来。你有绿卡，一年后回来。美国这边如果有要好的朋友，也请他们做孩子的紧急联络人。孩子打了，可以跟她们多聊聊分析情况。你自己得健康坚强才能成为孩子的依靠。 大大的 bless, 太不容易了。
一年几个月都行，就是打个比方，楼主可以照自己和孩子们的情形决定。
lz有绿卡啊 回去治病 找工作 不顺心随时回来啊 带孩子回去探险是什么鬼啊
就是 我感觉有时候 不是孩子离不开父母 是父母离不开孩子 哭着喊着找妈妈 没妈的孩子照样活着呢 人家孩子撒娇还当真了....孩子撒娇是为了换取更多抚养资源 而不是更差 不然狗狗卖萌是为啥呢...不就为了吃吗
楼主的病明明就已经好了，就是每天吃药而已。 就是以病为借口想逃避到以前小时候无忧无虑的生活罢了 岂不知人已经长大了，回不去无忧无虑的童年了
呵呵！层主生活在国内吧！压根不知道美国如何看病也压根不知道美国的福利制度吧
是的。楼主如果回国面临的精神压力可能对她的病是雪上加霜。国内的人特别势力，也喜欢攀比歧视。楼主这样的，大龄离异，带着俩娃，也没钱，基本上就是歧视链的底层了。邻居朋友的碎嘴都够你和你父母受的了。不像在美国，大家都关起门过日子，不怎么打交道。然后对病人，弱势群体会人文关怀。楼主还是在美国过的好日子过久了，失去理智判断了。 国内那是丛林法则。如果你是官二代富二代，就算一辈子不工作，都能让孩子读最好的学校，参加最好的课外活动，祝最好的房子，那自然可以回去。普通百姓家庭，还指望着自己打工赚钱养孩子，还指望着前夫那点赡养费，真的回国是最差的选择了。
楼主也是真的可怜，本来其实是很不错的小康家庭，可惜身体不好，又有渣男
楼主有个回帖说，孩子挺大的了，上公立学校跟不上，必须得上国际学校。所以我们猜测应该是小学高年级或者初中的娃了。具体多大楼主没说清楚。
这里的mm只是把最坏的可能和最优的可能都摆在你面前。把那层你不想仔细扒开的皮替你扒开了而已。
单亲妈妈带小孩当然是在美国好啊，至少看病读书都方便。更不用说马上败灯要发child credit，一个月$600呢。
其实楼主现在挺好的了。 两个孩子都大了， 渣男也不在眼前闹心了， 在美国的生活也稳定下来了， 把四线城市的父母带来美国， 又不用操心公婆， 一家人乐呵呵的。 税后4500，在普通美国人家庭里也算不错的了， 不要眼高手低，知足常乐就好了。 怎么都比回四线城市强。 不要不珍惜自己有的东西 老觉得另一边的草更绿。
10岁和13岁俩女儿
退一步说，真是钱不够还有一线城市一套房可以卖呀
说的好像回国建立各种关系跟吹气一样容易！
多好啊 两小棉袄 再一年，大的能单独带小的留在家里了， 楼主出去约会都没问题。
是啊，俩女儿不管读书念大学还是就业婚恋都是在美国要容易些
接下來
美刁這麼一鬧
回國不要被當成
美蔡特反華勢力
就好了
楼主还在正常上班呢，也不一定就是精神病，真要是精神病公司同事都看不出吗？孩子愿意跟她呀，不愿跟爸爸，再说了，把孩子丢下不是对每个人来说都是解脱，有的反而不利于精神稳定。如果这个婚姻是对她toxic的，离婚也许才是活路。
你以为把孩子丢给男的，男的就只能把孩子留在身边无法再婚？
同感，想回到还为自己打拼的父母身边，过她自以为比较舒服的生活。。。说实在的，父母年纪肯定不小了，还能依靠多久？
两个teenanger女儿摊上父不要，母拎不清。。。
看那个人说的话，才真像个精神病，楼主说话正常的很，情绪也平稳
男的当然想啊 但是下一个接盘女会看不上他带俩拖油瓶啊 难道让他光溜溜一身轻松做好切割 骗下一个妹子说 前妻孩子回国了 一份抚养费也不用付 以后再不会跟他们联系的 你跟我就是俩人甜蜜蜜吗？
我看你是站着说话不腰疼！拿不到赡养费还抓紧回国？？LZ的年纪和精神状态，回国了能适应压力大的工作吗？ 回去喝西北风啊。再说凭什么不让渣男出赡养费！
在美国免费读完高中 18岁女儿可以出去打工了 半工半读 美国孩子也不会歧视 反正都是学生贷款 没准女儿长得美 还能遇到高富帅解救一下 不行大学毕业再回国 当个新东方英语老师也不错 现在回国根本考不上211 不过211硕士都内卷去当房产中介了吧
我也是醉了 说点实话就被说mean 不mean光说好听的 社会会毒打lz的 顺口说好话的是准备看lz回去家破人亡吗
哈，我们当年有同学叫曾纽约的。是他爷爷49年从纽约不顾一切回国去了，临终前嘱咐孙子名字要叫纽约，将来一定要尽全力去纽约。
是啊，回国拿大包裹的还能争议一下， 楼主这种留在美国完全没争议。 摆着容易的路不走，非得去hard模式。
想想這兩女兒要是爭氣
十年後回華人來 又是一堆故事
lz应该庆幸 还好是女儿 还有被道明寺解救的机会哈哈 她耽误之急就是不管去哪 先治好自己的病 别变成女儿以后结婚的负担 自己也才能回归正常生活 找个工作和老伴 过上有俩小棉袄的生活 而不是带俩小棉袄回国 恨死自己 老年生活也完蛋了
我能理解lz想回国治病 因为美国治病 首先要有好的医疗保险 lz这中低收入 想必没有保险 或者是最烂的 每次去看病保险乱扣费 还要去跟保险公司argue 这不是一个心理不健康的人能handle的了的 如果不离婚 至少还能用老公的医疗保险... 国内就算自费看病 也是能看得起的
女儿要是够牛，回国也没什么问题，在国内也能创出一片天出来，和小小的台湾岛不一样。 但是无法预测女儿是不是够牛，还是先默认普通比较好。
咋可能孩子平白无故自己牛啊 现在都阶层分化这么严重了 要是90年代 那可能 现在父母混的瞎 做梦孩子出人头地是完全没戏的 你让那些官二代富二代 码二代 清北二代 花巨资和父母心血培养的怎么混 中产跌落阶层就是因为教育了
当然要理了 渣男还要给钱啊 不理网友给钱吗
哈哈 网友和lz国内的亲戚都不会给一毛钱的 到时候还得靠人家亲爹啊 lz自己支棱不起来的时候 一定要情感绑架死这个爹 别瞧不起这个爹 也不要挑拨孩子和爹的关系 老婆可以换 但是孩子毕竟是亲生的 虎毒不食子 尤其在他也没有其他后代之前
分析到最后我竟然觉得 这个爹再渣 也比这个拎不清的妈强是怎么个情况 竟然同情不起来了哈哈
四線小縣城的 單親媽媽養大
還沒啥錢
媽媽光是要到 一線城市去 都去不了了
兩個女兒再牛 也不姓孟啊
小小台灣島
薯片吃了 還有晶片
不須 app 但看刁皇翻覆
男方让她去国内一线城市，她那边有亲人吗？我再说一遍“ 情况紧急的时候是需要家人帮一把手的。孩子生病，去医院排队挂号付款等等，各种意外情况都需要家人的帮忙。” 如果在一线城市有个什么紧急情况，就她一个人，怎么能顾得上？国内医院难道已经不用挂号了吗？？？
楼主是单亲妈妈，如果回国一定要在离自己资源最好的地方。不要听网友或者老公的，你一个人在陌生的城市，你老公和网友会帮你吗？
楼主mm，即使你有精神疾病，也是可以转公民的。请问你申请绿卡的时候，还没有发现这个病吗？绿卡申请好像就有问到是否有精神疾病的问题了。 这个nolo的分析，应该也适用于绿卡转公民。 https://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/us-immigration/mental-illness-barrier.html 里面提到： What is most important to note about the law is that the mental/physical disorder bar is two-part; it applies only when the immigrant has both 1) a disorder and 2) some kind of behavior stemming from that disorder that poses a threat to persons or property. 你的病情是可控的，并没有对个人或者财产造成威胁，如果没有发作时候被警察备案的案底，估计美国移民局也不知道。
还有个官方的解释，应该更有说服力： https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-8-part-b-chapter-7
Chapter 7 - Physical or Mental Disorder with Associated Harmful Behavior Guidance Resources (8) Appendices (0) Updates (5)
A. Physical or Mental Disorders with Associated Harmful Behavior [1] Applicants who have physical or mental disorders and harmful behavior associated with those disorders are inadmissible. [2] The inadmissibility ground is divided into two subcategories: Current physical or mental disorders, with associated harmful behavior. Past physical or mental disorders, with associated harmful behavior that is likely to recur or lead to other harmful behavior. There must be both a physical or mental disorder and harmful behavior to make an applicant inadmissible based on this ground. Neither harmful behavior nor a physical or mental disorder alone renders an applicant inadmissible on this ground. Harmful behavior is defined as behavior that may pose, or has posed, a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the applicant or others. A physical disorder is a currently accepted medical diagnosis as defined by the current edition of the Manual of International Classification of Diseases, Injuries, and Causes of Death published by the World Health Organization or by another authoritative source as determined by the Director. [3] Officers should consult the Technical Instructions for additional information, if needed. A mental disorder is a currently accepted psychiatric diagnosis, as defined by the current edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders published by the American Psychiatric Association or by another authoritative source as determined by the Director. [4] Officers should consult the Technical Instructions for additional information, if needed. Under the Technical Instructions, a diagnosis of substance abuse/addiction for a substance that is not listed in Section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (with current associated harmful behavior or a history of associated harmful behavior judged likely to recur) is classified as a mental disorder. [5] Under prior Technical Instructions and the July 20, 2010 or older versions of the form, these conditions were summarized under the drug abuse/addiction part of the form. An officer, however, should not find an applicant inadmissible for “drug abuse/addiction” if a non-controlled substance is involved. B. Relevance of Alcohol-Related Driving Arrests or Convictions 1. Alcohol Use and Driving Alcohol is not listed in Section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act. [6] Therefore, alcohol use disorders are treated as a physical or mental disorder for purposes of determining inadmissibility. As a result, an applicant with an alcohol use disorder will not be deemed inadmissible unless there is current associated harmful behavior or past associated harmful behavior likely to recur. The harmful behavior must be such that it poses, has posed, or is likely to pose a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the applicant or others. In the course of adjudicating benefit applications, officers frequently encounter criminal histories that include arrests and/or convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents, such as DUI (driving under the influence) and DWI (driving while intoxicated). These histories may or may not rise to the level of a criminal ground of inadmissibility. [7] A record of criminal arrests and/or convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents may constitute evidence of a health-related inadmissibility as a physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior. Operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol is clearly an associated harmful behavior that poses a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the applicant or others. Where a civil surgeon’s mental status evaluation diagnoses the presence of an alcohol use disorder (abuse or dependence), and where there is evidence of harmful behavior associated with the disorder, a Class A medical condition should be certified on Form I-693. 2. Re-Examinations Requesting Re-Examinations Some applicants may fail to report, or may underreport, alcohol-related driving incidents in response to the civil surgeon’s queries. Where these incidents resulted in an arrest, they may be subsequently revealed in the criminal history record resulting from a routine fingerprint check. Consequently, a criminal record printout revealing a significant history of alcohol-related driving arrests may conflict with the medical examination report that indicates no alcohol-related driving incidents were reported to or evaluated by the civil surgeon. In such an instance, an officer may require the applicant to be re-examined. The re-examination would be limited to a mental status evaluation specifically considering the record of alcohol-related driving incidents. On the Request for Evidence (RFE), officers should use the following language: “Please return to the civil surgeon for purposes of conducting a mental status evaluation specifically considering the record of alcohol-related driving incidents.” Upon re-examination, the civil surgeon may refer the applicant for further evaluation to a psychiatrist or to a specialist in substance-abuse disorders as provided for under the Technical Instructions. After such referral, the civil surgeon will determine whether a Class A medical condition exists and amend the Form I-693 accordingly. The determination of a Class A condition is wholly dependent on the medical diagnosis of a designated civil surgeon. Re-Examination for Significant Criminal Record of Alcohol-Related Driving Incidents Only applicants with a significant criminal record of alcohol-related driving incidents that were not considered by the civil surgeon during the original medical examination should be referred for re-examination. The actual criminal charges for alcohol-related driving incidents vary among the different states. A significant criminal record of alcohol-related driving incidents includes: One or more arrests/convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents (DUI/DWI) while the driver’s license was suspended, revoked, or restricted at the time of the arrest due to a previous alcohol-related driving incident(s); One or more arrests/convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents where personal injury or death resulted from the incident(s); One or more convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents where the conviction was a felony in the jurisdiction in which it occurred or where a sentence of incarceration was actually imposed; One arrest/conviction for alcohol-related driving incidents within the preceding 5 years[8] ; or Two or more arrests/convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents within the preceding 10 years. [9] If the officer finds that the criminal record appears to contradict the civil surgeon’s finding in the medical examination report, then the officer should request a re-examination. Example: An applicant’s criminal record shows that she was convicted for DWI-related vehicular manslaughter. However, the medical examination report reflects that no Class A or B physical or mental disorder was found. In this case, the officer should request a re-examination because the medical examination report finding should have reflected that the applicant has a history relating to an alcohol-related driving incident that could indicate a physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior. 3. Determination Based on Re-Examination Upon completion of the re-examination, the officer should determine whether the applicant is inadmissible. If the civil surgeon annotated a Class A condition, the applicant is inadmissible. If no Class A condition is certified by the civil surgeon, the officer may not determine that the applicant is inadmissible. In exceptional cases, the officer may seek review of the civil surgeon’s determination from CDC. If the applicant is inadmissible, he or she may file an application for waiver of inadmissibility. [10] C. Relevance of Other Evidence The guidance relating to alcohol-related driving arrests or convictions described above applies to any similar scenario where the record of proceeding contains evidence that may indicate inadmissibility due to a mental or physical disorder with associated harmful behavior that was not considered by the civil surgeon in the original medical examination. Such evidence includes, but is not limited to: A prior finding of inadmissibility due to a mental disorder; A history of institutionalization for a mental disorder; A criminal history other than drunk driving arrests/convictions, such as assaults and domestic violence, in which alcohol or a psychoactive substance was a contributing factor; Any other evidence that suggests an alcohol problem; or Other criminal arrests where there is a reasonable possibility of a mental disorder as a contributing factor. Accordingly, where the record of proceeding available to the officer contains evidence suggestive of a mental disorder, and the Form I-693 medical report does not reflect that the evidence was considered by the civil surgeon, the applicant must be required to undergo a mental status re-examination by a civil surgeon specifically addressing the adverse evidence that may not have initially been revealed to the civil surgeon. D. Parts of Form I-693 Addressing Physical or Mental Disorders The civil surgeon must check the appropriate findings box on the medical examination report. The civil surgeon should also either annotate the findings in the remarks section or attach a report, if the space provided is not sufficient. However, the officer should not RFE simply because the civil surgeon has omitted the remarks or failed to attach a report.
楼主mm，即使你有精神疾病，也是可以转公民的。请问你申请绿卡的时候，还没有发现这个病吗？绿卡申请好像就有问到是否有精神疾病的问题了。 这个nolo的分析，应该也适用于绿卡转公民。 https://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/us-immigration/mental-illness-barrier.html 里面提到： What is most important to note about the law is that the mental/physical disorder bar is two-part; it applies only when the immigrant has both 1) a disorder and 2) some kind of behavior stemming from that disorder that poses a threat to persons or property. 你的病情是可控的，并没有对个人或者财产造成威胁，如果没有发作时候被警察备案的案底，估计美国移民局也不知道。
还有个官方的解释，应该更有说服力： https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-8-part-b-chapter-7
Chapter 7 - Physical or Mental Disorder with Associated Harmful Behavior Guidance Resources (8) Appendices (0) Updates (5)
A. Physical or Mental Disorders with Associated Harmful Behavior [1] Applicants who have physical or mental disorders and harmful behavior associated with those disorders are inadmissible. [2] The inadmissibility ground is divided into two subcategories: Current physical or mental disorders, with associated harmful behavior. Past physical or mental disorders, with associated harmful behavior that is likely to recur or lead to other harmful behavior. There must be both a physical or mental disorder and harmful behavior to make an applicant inadmissible based on this ground. Neither harmful behavior nor a physical or mental disorder alone renders an applicant inadmissible on this ground. Harmful behavior is defined as behavior that may pose, or has posed, a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the applicant or others. A physical disorder is a currently accepted medical diagnosis as defined by the current edition of the Manual of International Classification of Diseases, Injuries, and Causes of Death published by the World Health Organization or by another authoritative source as determined by the Director. [3] Officers should consult the Technical Instructions for additional information, if needed. A mental disorder is a currently accepted psychiatric diagnosis, as defined by the current edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders published by the American Psychiatric Association or by another authoritative source as determined by the Director. [4] Officers should consult the Technical Instructions for additional information, if needed. Under the Technical Instructions, a diagnosis of substance abuse/addiction for a substance that is not listed in Section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act (with current associated harmful behavior or a history of associated harmful behavior judged likely to recur) is classified as a mental disorder. [5] Under prior Technical Instructions and the July 20, 2010 or older versions of the form, these conditions were summarized under the drug abuse/addiction part of the form. An officer, however, should not find an applicant inadmissible for “drug abuse/addiction” if a non-controlled substance is involved. B. Relevance of Alcohol-Related Driving Arrests or Convictions 1. Alcohol Use and Driving Alcohol is not listed in Section 202 of the Controlled Substances Act. [6] Therefore, alcohol use disorders are treated as a physical or mental disorder for purposes of determining inadmissibility. As a result, an applicant with an alcohol use disorder will not be deemed inadmissible unless there is current associated harmful behavior or past associated harmful behavior likely to recur. The harmful behavior must be such that it poses, has posed, or is likely to pose a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the applicant or others. In the course of adjudicating benefit applications, officers frequently encounter criminal histories that include arrests and/or convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents, such as DUI (driving under the influence) and DWI (driving while intoxicated). These histories may or may not rise to the level of a criminal ground of inadmissibility. [7] A record of criminal arrests and/or convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents may constitute evidence of a health-related inadmissibility as a physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior. Operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol is clearly an associated harmful behavior that poses a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the applicant or others. Where a civil surgeon’s mental status evaluation diagnoses the presence of an alcohol use disorder (abuse or dependence), and where there is evidence of harmful behavior associated with the disorder, a Class A medical condition should be certified on Form I-693. 2. Re-Examinations Requesting Re-Examinations Some applicants may fail to report, or may underreport, alcohol-related driving incidents in response to the civil surgeon’s queries. Where these incidents resulted in an arrest, they may be subsequently revealed in the criminal history record resulting from a routine fingerprint check. Consequently, a criminal record printout revealing a significant history of alcohol-related driving arrests may conflict with the medical examination report that indicates no alcohol-related driving incidents were reported to or evaluated by the civil surgeon. In such an instance, an officer may require the applicant to be re-examined. The re-examination would be limited to a mental status evaluation specifically considering the record of alcohol-related driving incidents. On the Request for Evidence (RFE), officers should use the following language: “Please return to the civil surgeon for purposes of conducting a mental status evaluation specifically considering the record of alcohol-related driving incidents.” Upon re-examination, the civil surgeon may refer the applicant for further evaluation to a psychiatrist or to a specialist in substance-abuse disorders as provided for under the Technical Instructions. After such referral, the civil surgeon will determine whether a Class A medical condition exists and amend the Form I-693 accordingly. The determination of a Class A condition is wholly dependent on the medical diagnosis of a designated civil surgeon. Re-Examination for Significant Criminal Record of Alcohol-Related Driving Incidents Only applicants with a significant criminal record of alcohol-related driving incidents that were not considered by the civil surgeon during the original medical examination should be referred for re-examination. The actual criminal charges for alcohol-related driving incidents vary among the different states. A significant criminal record of alcohol-related driving incidents includes: One or more arrests/convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents (DUI/DWI) while the driver’s license was suspended, revoked, or restricted at the time of the arrest due to a previous alcohol-related driving incident(s); One or more arrests/convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents where personal injury or death resulted from the incident(s); One or more convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents where the conviction was a felony in the jurisdiction in which it occurred or where a sentence of incarceration was actually imposed; One arrest/conviction for alcohol-related driving incidents within the preceding 5 years[8] ; or Two or more arrests/convictions for alcohol-related driving incidents within the preceding 10 years. [9] If the officer finds that the criminal record appears to contradict the civil surgeon’s finding in the medical examination report, then the officer should request a re-examination. Example: An applicant’s criminal record shows that she was convicted for DWI-related vehicular manslaughter. However, the medical examination report reflects that no Class A or B physical or mental disorder was found. In this case, the officer should request a re-examination because the medical examination report finding should have reflected that the applicant has a history relating to an alcohol-related driving incident that could indicate a physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior. 3. Determination Based on Re-Examination Upon completion of the re-examination, the officer should determine whether the applicant is inadmissible. If the civil surgeon annotated a Class A condition, the applicant is inadmissible. If no Class A condition is certified by the civil surgeon, the officer may not determine that the applicant is inadmissible. In exceptional cases, the officer may seek review of the civil surgeon’s determination from CDC. If the applicant is inadmissible, he or she may file an application for waiver of inadmissibility. [10] C. Relevance of Other Evidence The guidance relating to alcohol-related driving arrests or convictions described above applies to any similar scenario where the record of proceeding contains evidence that may indicate inadmissibility due to a mental or physical disorder with associated harmful behavior that was not considered by the civil surgeon in the original medical examination. Such evidence includes, but is not limited to: A prior finding of inadmissibility due to a mental disorder; A history of institutionalization for a mental disorder; A criminal history other than drunk driving arrests/convictions, such as assaults and domestic violence, in which alcohol or a psychoactive substance was a contributing factor; Any other evidence that suggests an alcohol problem; or Other criminal arrests where there is a reasonable possibility of a mental disorder as a contributing factor. Accordingly, where the record of proceeding available to the officer contains evidence suggestive of a mental disorder, and the Form I-693 medical report does not reflect that the evidence was considered by the civil surgeon, the applicant must be required to undergo a mental status re-examination by a civil surgeon specifically addressing the adverse evidence that may not have initially been revealed to the civil surgeon. D. Parts of Form I-693 Addressing Physical or Mental Disorders The civil surgeon must check the appropriate findings box on the medical examination report. The civil surgeon should also either annotate the findings in the remarks section or attach a report, if the space provided is not sufficient. However, the officer should not RFE simply because the civil surgeon has omitted the remarks or failed to attach a report.
强烈建议你留在美国 疫情好一点就把父母接过来一起生活 这样你就不会孤单了！ 你老公就想甩开你们，他自己在这边好快活。回国了什么抚养费他以后不会付的 ，唉
美国 vs 回国 一条条列出来比较，就清楚该如何决定了
楼主有住房不假，但是每年的房产税她也要付不少吧，像她这种情况单身母亲不知道房产税上是否有减免？
而且她国内社保都没交过.... 最后养老金都没有... 以后女儿找对象 对方家里一问 没养老金的单亲家庭...
她要回国被现实打脸才会发现大家说的是对的。国内歧视大龄女性，小城市更是。都不知道她回去能干嘛
还不如去一线城市超级富豪家庭 当孩子英文保姆 但是精神病也没人要啊... 所以第一位就是治病啊 隐瞒病情先找个高薪工作 ...
整个帖子没有一个网友建议她去准一线城市啊，这个根本不是争议的问题。大部分人建议压根就不回去，留在美国。小部分人支持她回父母的四线家乡
四线城市有没有好的重点公立学校不好说，小孩都13岁了，就是能进去也很难跟上。
没户口上不了公立学校。但是估计可以使钱办个假的。四线城市皇帝管不着
送快递，送外卖都是体力活！风里来雨里去的。收入过万有什么可希奇的。我外甥女宁大毕业在本地宁波上班文职会计。好几年了也没有万儿八千。幸好家里不靠她挣钱！
当然有了，英达，张丰毅，现成的。。。
在国内，她儿女婚嫁要被歧视死了。。。