Integrity Legal

United States Citizenship is a substantial benefit for many foreign nationals and naturalization is something that many Immigrants in the United States take very seriously. This author recently came upon a publication promulgated by the US Army in which information is provided regarding US Citizenship for Lawful Permanent Residents and Conditional Lawful Permanent Residents who opt to enlist in the Army. The following is a direct quote from that publication.

“Welcome to the United States Army! You are either a Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) or a Conditional Lawful Permanent Resident (CPR) who has enlisted in the US Army. As a non-US citizen enlisting in wartime, you are eligible to apply for naturalization under Immigration & Nationality Act Section 329 on your first day of active duty, if you so desire. The Army wants you to obtain your U.S. citizenship so that you can use your skills to achieve the Army mission. Obtaining US citizenship will allow you to move into more responsible jobs, open up new career fields, and even allow you to become an officer.”

Although the US Immigration and Nationality Act provides expedited naturalization for those in the military, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) is still required to adjudicate Naturalization applications. To quote the aforementioned publication further:

“The Army does not decide, however, whether you can become a US citizen. You must file Form N-400, Application for Naturalization (citizenship) with United States Citizenship & Immigration Services (USCIS), part of the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS). USCIS must process your application and decide whether it can be approved.”

This being said, all organizations concerned will strive to see that an enlisted lawful permanent resident’s application for naturalization is processed as quickly as possible.

“United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) works with the Army to process citizenship applications during Basic Combat Training (BCT). USCIS and the Army will try to ensure that all non-citizen Soldiers take their oath of citizenship prior to or concurrent with graduation from BCT. USCIS officers are present at each of the five BCT sites on a weekly basis to collect citizenship packets, interview and test Soldiers, and administer oaths. Soldiers should bring a completed citizenship packet to BCT and be prepared to take the citizenship test there. Please note that neither USCIS nor the Army guarantees any Soldier US Citizenship, or that the Soldier will receive citizenship prior to graduation from BCT.”

Although military service does not guarantee United States Citizenship it is admirable that the United States military as well as the USCIS go to great lengths to see that naturalization applications for enlisted personnel are processed in an efficient and timely manner.

For more on American Immigration please see: US Visa Thailand.

Tags: Conditional Lawful Permanent Resident, Lawful Permanent Resident, Naturalization, US Immigration, US Military naturalization, US Visa, US Visa Thailand, USCIS
Posted in CR1 Visa, IR1 Visa, Legal Opinion, Miscellaneous, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, USCIS | No Comments »

Naturalization is the process of obtaining American Citizenship for a foreign national. In some cases, the US naturalization process can be very time consuming, but those who marry a United States Citizen and obtain immigrant status based upon that marriage are subjected to fewer requirements when it comes to US naturalization. This could be of interest to those who enter the United States on a K1 visa or K3 visa as either of these travel documents could put the beneficiary on track for eventual US Citizenship.

The US naturalization process can be relatively different for those who are in the United States military. About 2 years prior to the posting of this article, Congress enacted legislation to make the US naturalization process easier for those in the military. To quote a recent publications from the Department of Homeland Security:

“In June 2008, Congress passed the Kendell Frederick Citizenship Assistance Act to streamline the process for U.S. military service members seeking to become U.S. citizens. The act directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to accept fingerprints submitted by military citizenship applicants at the time of their enlistment or from prior submissions to the Department of Homeland Security, expedite the processing of citizenship applications, and implement procedures to ensure rapid electronic transmission of biometric information and safeguarding of privacy.”

Although Congress has enacted the aforementioned legislation, it is incumbent upon the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) to implement the new policy. The above quoted DHS publication is an overview of the current status of the ongoing implementation of the Kendell Frederick Citizenship Assistance Act. To further quote DHS:

“USCIS has taken actions to meet the act’s requirements. Specifically, USCIS has implemented a process to use previously submitted fingerprints for military naturalizations, and it tracks and reports processing time to ensure that it completes adjudication of applications timely. USCIS has also undertaken several information technology initiatives to improve the military naturalization process. However, USCIS’ information technology systems, such as the application processing system and background check support systems, do not meet all user requirements. As a result, personnel must devote resources to work around system limitations. Further, USCIS had not yet completed a privacy assessment for its process to obtain enlistment fingerprints from partner agencies. Without such an assessment, we were unable to assess whether that process was properly safeguarded.”

A streamlined naturalization process for those serving in the US military is a “win-win” situation for both the newly naturalized Citizen as well as the USA as a whole. Although the above privacy issues must be further investigated hopefully the implementation of this act will prove to be an overall success.

Tags: K-1 Visa, K-3 Visa, K1 Visa, K3 Visa, Kendell Frederick Citizenship Assistance Act, Naturalization Process, US Citizenship, US Naturalization, US Visa, USCIS
Posted in K-3 Visa Thailand, K1 Visa, K1 Visa Thailand, K3 Visa, Legal Opinion, Miscellaneous, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, USCIS | No Comments »

Recently, one of the administrators of this blog came across an article on the Telegraph’s website. The article reported on the recently announced future legalization of same-sex marriage in the country of Nepal. To quote the article directly:

“Nepal’s homosexual community, which is led by Asia’s only openly gay member of parliament, will next month host a tourism conference to explore how to attract wealthy gay visitors to boost the country’s war-ravaged economy. The country’s new constitution will legalise homosexual marriage in May this year, when “Pink Mountain” will begin offering luxury honeymoon and wedding packages.”

This is a rather stunning announcement as few countries in Asia have legalized marriage between individual’s of the same sex. The article went further:

“Sunil Babu Pant, a Communist legislator and leader of the country’s homosexual rights movement, has launched a travel company dedicated to promoting the former Hindu kingdom to gay tourists in an effort to tap the so-called “Pink Pound” and dollar…Mr Pant is hoping to build on the government’s new determination to maximise income from tourism by targeting all potential markets…’The government is hoping to increase the number of tourists from 400,000 to one million next year and has taken a positive attitude to welcoming gay and lesbian visitors to help meet their ambitious target,’ he told The Daily Telegraph on Tuesday.”

This move should be applauded not only because many feel that it is the morally correct thing to do, but also because it will likely result in a major economic boon for Nepal.  A question on the minds of many who are interested in the issue of same-sex marriage and US Immigration is: how will this impact rights of gay couples who wish to immigrate to the United States of America?

In the short term, movements such as this will not have a direct impact on US Federal Immigration policy as the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) still precludes the promulgation of US Immigration benefits based solely upon a same-sex marriage. However, as more countries begin to legalize marriage between people of the same sex it becomes more apparent that the movement has gained something of a critical mass internationally. Further, the legality of DOMA is likely to eventually be taken up by the United States Supreme Court as there is currently a pending Federal Court Case in Massachusetts as well as a challenge in California Federal District Court to the provisions of “Prop 8″ in California.

It would seem that if the US Supreme Court overturns DOMA, then a valid same sex marriage in a country such as Nepal could be used as a basis for applying for US Immigration benefits. That being said, if DOMA were repealed then same-sex partners could possibly be entitled to file for such US Immigration benefits as a K1 visa or a K3 Visa at a US diplomatic post abroad (such as the US Embassy in Nepal). However, these issues have not been fully resolved and current US same-sex family immigration policy remains as an insurmountable obstacle to re-uniting many same-sex couples in the USA.

Another issue to remember on this topic is the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) which would provide US Immigration benefits to the “Permanent Partners” of US Citizens or lawful permanent residents. A valid marriage would probably be seen as a strong piece of evidence supporting a claim of “permanent partnership.”

Tags: Defense of Marriage Act, DOMA, K1 Visa, K1 visa gay marriage, K1 visa same sex marriage massachusetts, K3 Visa, K3 visa gay marriage, Same Sex Marriage, same sex us immigration, uafa, Uniting American Families Act, US visa gay marriage
Posted in CR1 Visa, Fiance Visa Thailand, IR1 Visa, K-3 Visa Thailand, K1 Visa, K1 Visa Thailand, K3 Visa, Legal Opinion, Miscellaneous, US Embassy Kathmandu, US Embassy Nepal, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand | No Comments »

One of the co-authors of this blog has recently discovered that the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) has added a new web log (blog) to their official website. This blog is apparently designed to provide more up to date information as well as insights regarding United States Immigration and Department of Homeland Security policy. The new blog can be found at this link.  We at Integrity Legal wish to welcome USCIS to the blogosphere as we are anxious to read about current the news in United States Immigration policy.

In the initial posting on the new blog, USCIS took the opportunity to discuss the measures that have been taken to accord Haitian Nationals with Temporary Protected Status (TPS). This status allows those of Haitian Nationality who are present in the United States to file for protected status so as to avoid being placed into removal proceedings and sent back to Haiti. The reason that the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service has taken this measure is to avoid sending Haitians back to their home country as the Republic of Haiti has recently been the victim of incredibly damaging hurricanes and as a result the conditions in the country are tragic, if not, downright abysmal.

To quote directly from the USCIS blog:

The devastating earthquakes in Haiti have made it both dangerous and virtually impossible for most Haitian nationals living in the U.S. to return to their country in the near future. To help protect those who might otherwise be repatriated to a nation struggling to recover, the Secretary of Homeland Security announced the designation of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Haitian nationals who were in the United States as of January 12, 2010.

In this situation, USCIS has shown a very high level of efficiency, decisiveness, and compassion as TPS status was quickly granted to Haitians. It would appear that the decision to grant this status is based almost entirely upon humanitarian grounds and it is hard for anyone to disagree with the idea that sending Haitians back to Haiti at this time would be morally wrong, to say the least. That being said, the ultimate fate of Haitian nationals in the United States remains to be seen, but for now those present in the US do not need to fear the specter of being forcibly returned to their devastated homeland.

Hopefully, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service will continue to provide relevant and important information through its website, press releases, and blog posts.

Tags: American Immigration blog, American visa blog, United States Citizenship and Immigration Service, US Immigration blog, US Visa blog, USCIS, USCIS blog
Posted in CR1 Visa, F1 Visa Thailand, Fiance Visa Thailand, General Legal Information, IR1 Visa, J1 Visa Thailand, K-3 Visa Thailand, K1 Visa, K1 Visa Thailand, K3 Visa, Legal Opinion, Miscellaneous, US Tourist Visa, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, USCIS, Visa Waiver | No Comments »

On this blog, we frequently take the time to point out the fact that only a US licensed attorney or other accredited representative can represent clients before the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS), the National Visa Center (NVC), or the US Embassy in Bangkok. Recently, USCIS has promulgated a brochure for consumers regarding US Immigration and fraud perpetrated against unwitting immigrants. Unfortunately, there are those who claim to be US Immigration experts when they are in fact unlicensed to practice United States law. These people claim all sorts of titles in order to sound as though they have a right to practice American Immigration law. The fact of the matter is that there are only two types of representatives that USCIS or the Department of State recognizes as legally able to represent clients.

The first category of authorized representatives is Attorneys. To quote directly from the brochure, USCIS requires the following in order for an attorney to act as a representative for clients in an Immigration matter:

An attorney must be in good standing with a U.S. state bar association (or U.S. possession, territory, Commonwealth, or the District of Columbia) and may not be under any court order restricting their practice of law. The best way to protect yourself is to ask the attorney to show you their current attorney license document. Write down the information and contact the state bar admission office to verify the accuracy of the information.

In a further quote from this brochure, USCIS explains what an individual or organization needs in order to be recognized as an accredited representative in immigration matters:

An accredited representative must work for an organization that has permission from the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) to provide legal advice on immigration matters. The organization will have an order from the BIA that gives the accredited representative permission to assist individuals with their immigration applications and petitions. The best way to protect yourself is to ask the accredited representative to show you the BIA order. Write down the information and contact the BIA to verify the accuracy of the information.

There it is, from USCIS itself, there are only two ways to verify that one calling himself an attorney is actually certified or licensed to practice Immigration law. Those seeking Immigration advice would be wise to undertake the above measures in order to be certain that their representative is able to effectively represent their interests. So-called visa agents, Immigration Consultants, legal advisors, and/or anyone calling themselves a “lawyer” should be able to provide either a license to practice law in a US state or territory, a US bar membership card, or a letter of permission from the Board of Immigration Appeals, anyone who cannot produce one of these documents is not authorized under US law to practice in the area of United States Immigration. This brochure went on to note that only an American attorney or an accredited representative is entitled to submit a form G-28 to the USCIS service center. Anyone who prepares an application without including this G-28 document should be asked why they are not submitting it.

Tags: American Visa Thailand, Immigration attorney, Immigration Consultants, immigration law, Immigration Lawyer, us visa bangkok, US Visa Thailand, visa agents, visa consultants
Posted in Legal Opinion, Miscellaneous, US Consulate HCMC, us embassy bangkok, US Embassy Burma, US Embassy Cambodia, US Embassy Hanoi, US Embassy Kuala Lumpur, US Embassy Malaysia, US Embassy Myanmar, US Embassy Phnom Phen, US Embassy Rangoon, US Embassy Vietnam, US Embassy Yangon, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, USCIS | 29 Comments »

This author recently came across another blog post in which the blog’s author was discussing the role of the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA). The TSA is an agency under the jurisdiction of the Department of Homeland Security tasked with providing security to the aviation sector. The following is a direct quote from the Transportation Safety Administration website regarding the Administration’s mission and tactics:

“We use layers of security to ensure the security of the traveling public and the Nation’s transportation system. Because of their visibility to the public, we are most associated with the airport checkpoints that our Transportation Security Officers operate. These checkpoints, however, constitute only one security layer of the many in place to protect aviation. Others include intelligence gathering and analysis, checking passenger manifests against watch lists, random canine team searches at airports, federal air marshals, federal flight deck officers and more security measures both visible and invisible to the public. Each one of these layers alone is capable of stopping a terrorist attack. In combination their security value is multiplied, creating a much stronger, formidable system.  A terrorist who has to overcome multiple security layers in order to carry out an attack is more likely to be pre-empted, deterred, or to fail during the attempt.”

Most Americans agree that security is a major issue and should be dealt with in a serious and professional manner. However some argue that the TSA is not effectively dealing with terrorism and security issues plaguing the United States. To quote the aforementioned blog post:

“The TSA isn’t saving lives. We, the passengers, are saving our own. Since its inception, the TSA has been structured in such a way as to prevent specific terror scenarios, attempting to disrupt a handful of insanely specific tactics, while continuing to disenfranchise and demoralize the citizens who are actually doing the work that a billion-dollar government agency—an agency that received an additional $128 million just this year for new checkpoint explosive screening technology—has failed to do.”

There is little doubt that no government agency can foresee and forestall any and all terror plots, but the effectiveness of the TSA brings up many questions regarding the efficient use of taxpayer funds in prosecuting the “War on Terror.” In many ways, these fundamental questions must continually be asked, if for no other reason than, to provide an opportunity for Americans Citizens and policymakers to periodically reassess the anti-terrorism measures being undertaken by the US government. The debate over the TSA is only just beginning, but hopefully a communal discourse on these issues will provide benefits to all Americans in the form of a safer and more efficient aviation environment.

For more on traveling to the USA, please see US Visa Thailand.

Tags: Department of Homeland Security, DHS, Transportation Safety Administration, TSA, US Visa Thailand, US War on Terror, War on Terror
Posted in General Legal Information, Legal Opinion, Miscellaneous, US Visa Thailand | No Comments »

In a recent blog posting the former President of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), Mr. Charles Kuck, praised Congressman Luis Gutierrez for proposing an Immigration Reform Bill in the United States House of Representatives. Currently, some members of AILA feel that the American Immigration system is highly flawed and, to quote Mr. Kuck’s blog posting:

“The results are tragically similar, children separated from their parents, husbands separated from their wives, businesses unable to secure their future because of a lack of talent and skilled employment, and an economy unable to nimbly shift from the 19th and 20th century into the 21st century. As a country, we can no longer tolerate what has become a human disaster.“

The human perspective of United States Immigration policy is an aspect that some lawmakers fail to consider, but one that they probably should not overlook because America is a nation founded by immigrants and it is our immigrant heritage that makes America a vibrant and innovative nation. The most disturbing facet of the current United States Immigration infrastructure is the fact that it does have a tendency to keep family members separated for, what can turn out to be, a substantially long period of time. For those couple who follow the proper immigration procedures it could still take longer than one year to re-unite a couple.

Of further importance is the need to rectify the US Immigration apparatus with regard to same-sex couples. Unfortunately, due to provisions in the Defense of Marriage Act, it is not possible for same-sex married couples to obtain US Immigration benefits based upon a lawfully executed marriage. There are advocates in the House of Representatives and Senate who wish to change this unfortunate state of affairs, but it seems that they have an uphill battle ahead of them.

Another critical aspect of US Immigration that is desperately in need of an overhaul is the area of employment based visas. Although America is only slowly coming out of “The Great Recession” and is still reluctant to allow more foreign workers into the American labor force, this is a necessity as foreign highly-skilled workers keep the US economy on the cutting edge of both innovation and technology. The United States does itself a disservice by prohibiting foreign skilled workers from entering the country. Hopefully Congressman Gutierrez will be able to get this much needed bill passed and usher in a modern era in US Immigration.

Tags: American Visa, Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Congressman Luis Gutierrez, Same Sex Immigration, same sex visa, US Immigration, US Immigration Thailand, US Visa Thailand, US Visas
Posted in General Legal Information, Legal Opinion, Miscellaneous, Upcoming Legislation, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand | No Comments »

After the tragedy of 9/11 many changes were made with regard to Homeland Security. Specifically, a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was created and many tasks previously undertaken by other agencies were brought under the jurisdiction of DHS. One example is the United States Customs Service which was reincorporated into the Department of Homeland Security as the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Service. This agency is responsible for patrolling the borders and ports of entry to the United States of America. They are also responsible for screening those who enter the United States of America either on a US passport, US visa, or US visa waiver. CBP plays an integral part in the US Immigration process.

Prior to this publication, there has been a rumor circulating that those who wish to enter the United States of America must fist obtain a vaccination for the H1N1 influenza vaccination. As a matter of fact, this is not true. Apparently this rumor is unfounded. AILA has provided a quote from a statement from the Customs and Border Protection Service:

“[United States] Customs and Border Protection would like to address rumors regarding U.S. entry requirements and the H1N1 virus: Travelers do NOT need to present proof that they received the H1N1 flu vaccine in order to enter the United States. No such vaccination requirement exists. Travelers are encouraged to visit the Department of Health and Human Services Flu Web site for current information on seasonal flu prevention, and the “Know Before You Go” section under the Travel tab of the CBP Web site for helpful traveler tips.”

For those seeking entry to the United States a flu vaccination is not required at this time.

In recent years CBP has been granted more and more authority to deal with real time situations. This leads many to wonder just how much authority CBP has. This is an interesting question as they are given major discretionary powers with regard to those seeking entry to the United States. For example, CBP is authorized to place foreign nationals into expedited removal (deportation) proceedings if they deem it necessary. One who has been removed through expedited removal could be barred from reentering the USA for as long as five years. That being said, this only seems to come up in the context of US Family Immigration when the loved one of a US Citizen is improperly using a US tourist visa for undisclosed immigration purposes. In situations such as this, CBP may feel it necessary to use expedited removal to send the subject back to their home country. Therefore it is usually wise to process things correctly and utilize the proper visa for a loved one traveling to the United States.

Tags: B2 Visa, CBP, Customs and Border Protection, Flu Vaccine, H1N1, Tourist Visa, US Immigration, US Immigration Thailand, US Tourist Visa, US Visa, US Visa Thailand, Visa Waiver
Posted in Legal Opinion, Miscellaneous, US Tourist Visa, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, Visa Waiver | No Comments »

In a recent article disseminated by AILA, Mr. Brent Renison discussed issues involving the so-called “widow’s penalty” (or “Widow Penalty”) and how recent legislation has been enacted to end the imposition of penalties imposed upon foreign spouses in the event that their US Citizen or Lawful Permanent Resident spouse should pass away before the adjudication of an adjustment application or an application for a lift of conditions of lawful permanent residence. To quote the article:

“The “widow penalty”, whereby spouses of U.S. citizens and their children faced automatic denial of a visa petition if the death of the spouse occurred prior to adjudication and prior to two years of marriage, effectively ended upon the passage of § 568(c).2 That section removes the two-year marriage requirement from the current law that permits widows and widowers (“widow(er)s”) of U.S. citizens to file a self-petition for themselves and their children.”

It is still required that the American’s widow demonstrate that the marriage was bona fide when it was entered into:

“By removing the two-year precondition to a current statutory program, Congress retained the widow(er) self-petition procedure including the requirement to show a good faith marriage. The law does not alter the rights of widow(er)s who were married two years or more, who have been able to self-petition since 1990.”

The end of the Widow Penalty hopefully marks the beginning of more compassionate treatment of foreign widows of American Citizens. The aforementioned article goes further in its analysis of the new law and the impact it will likely have upon fiancees and spouses of US Citizens:

“The deletion of the two-year marriage requirement will allow a widow(er) who was married less than two years at the time of the citizen spouse’s death to file a Form I-360 self-petition within two years of the law’s passage, or within two years of the spouse’s death, whichever is later.”

It is interesting that this will likely have an impact upon those who enter the United States upon a K1 fiancee visa:

“This self-petition can be filed concurrently with an Application for Adjustment of Status to Lawful Permanent Resident (Form I-485) if the widow(er) is in the United States pursuant to a lawful entry.”

Therefore, if the fiance of a US Citizen enters the USA on a K1 visa, marries the US Citizen, and the US Citizen dies before the adjustment application is either filed or adjudicated, then it would now be possible for the fiance visa holder to self petition for adjustment in these circumstances. In this author’s opinion, this is an equitable and effective way of dealing with what is already a difficult issue.

If a lawful entry is all that is necessary, then the question must be posed: if an alien enters the USA on a valid tourist visa, marries an American who subsequently dies, would that alien be eligible to submit a self petition for adjustment of status? Hopefully these issues will be handled as the new law is brought into effect.

Tags: American Visa Thailand, CR-1 Visa, CR1 Visa, Fiance Visa Thai, Fiance Visa Thailand, Fiancee Visa Thai, K-1 Visa, K1 Visa, K1 Visa Thailand, Lift of Conditions, Thai Fiance Visa, Thai Fiancee Visa, US Visa Thailand, Widow Penalty, Widow's Penalty
Posted in Adjustment of Status, CR1 Visa, Fiance Visa Thailand, K1 Visa, K1 Visa Thailand, Legal Opinion, Miscellaneous, Upcoming Legislation, US Tourist Visa, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, USCIS | No Comments »

Wills are testamentary instruments used to state one’s intentions after one’s death. Generally Wills come up in the context of property distribution following an individual’s death. In Thailand, both foreign nationals and Thai Citizens die, leaving Thai property in the form of Thai Real Estate and/or assets. In many cases, the family of the deceased will read the Will, have it process through probate, and have the assets distributed in the manner set forth in the codicils of the Will.

A Living Will is a slightly different instrument. To quote Wikipedia:

“[The Living Will] was first proposed by an Illinois attorney, Louis Kutner, in a law journal in 1969^. Kutner drew from existing estate law, by which an individual can control property affairs after death (i.e., when no longer available to speak for themselves) and devised a way for an individual to speak to his or her health care desires when no longer able to express current health care wishes. Because this form of ‘will’ was to be used while an individual was still alive (but no longer able to make decisions) it was dubbed the ‘living will.’

A Living Will usually provides specific directives about the course of treatment that is to be followed by health care providers and caregivers. In some cases a living will may forbid the use of various kinds of burdensome medical treatment. It may also be used to express wishes about the use or foregoing of food and water, if supplied via tubes or other medical devices. The living will is only used if the individual has become unable to give informed consent or refusal due to incapacity. A living will can be very specific or very general. An example of a statement sometimes found in a living will is: ‘If I suffer an incurable, irreversible illness, disease, or condition and my attending physician determines that my condition is terminal, I direct that life-sustaining measures that would serve only to prolong my dying be withheld or discontinued.’”

The website Thaivisa.com, in conjunction with The Nation Newspaper, are reporting that the Thai government has preliminarily approved a proposal to allow living wills in Thailand:

“The Cabinet Tuesday gave the green light to living wills. Under the draft decree, health professionals will honour a dying patient’s wish to forego treatment during the terminal stage if it can only prolong life. The draft prepared by the National Health Commission Office will now go to the Council of State for review.”

It will be interesting to see how this legislation progresses through the various official agencies. Living Wills can provide a means and method for transmitting one’s wishes in the event of misfortune. This author hopes that this legislation will receive positive treatment by those with authority to change the law.

Tags: Living Will Thailand, Living Wills Thailand, Thai Living Will, Thai Living Wills, Thai Property, Thai Real Estate, Thai Will, Thai Wills, Thailand Living Will, Thailand Living Wills, Thailand Probate, Thailand Will, Thailand Wills
Posted in General Legal Information, Legal Opinion, Miscellaneous, Thai Family Law, Thailand Business, Thailand Property, Thailand Real Estate, Upcoming Legislation | 6 Comments »