This is an interesting, very well written, and somewhat humorous newstory about how a 69 year-old US citizen (former US military officer) who married a 24 year-old Panamanian woman was allegedly discriminated against (denied a Visa) because of their 45-year age difference.

Don Winner did a great job piecing this story together right down the middle of the road. I think he nailed it right on the head...older women resent older men hooking up with younger women.


Age Discrimination in Issues of Immigration to the United States
Friday, August 01 2008 @ 01:34 PM EST
Contributed by: Don Winner
Views: 289

By DON WINNER for Panama-Guide.com - You know, there's one thing I hear all the time from people. It basically goes like this - "Don, I read your website all the time, and what I like best is your ability to cut right to the heart of an issue, to get to the point in plain language, and with no pussy-footing around." Yeah, that's how I like to write. But sometimes I hear from the other side - "That's unbelievably unprofessional of you to say that in that way..." Yeah, alright, whatever. The topic for today is age discrimination - specifically, old white gringos who come down to Panama and marry hot, young 20-something's. It's a topic that's relatively taboo - not too many people like to talk about it. But, it's a reality on the ground here in Panama, and in fact it happens all the time. (more)



Remember Anna Nicole Smith? The most famous gold-digger of our time. She met and married Texas oil billionaire J. Howard Marshall where she was working as a stripper. At the age of 89 he married Anna Nicole Smith who was 26 years old at the time (63 year age difference), and he died 14 months later. His most famous quote - "I think she married me for my money... Like I care!" Go figure.

One Pissed-Off Geezer: (Just kidding about the geezer thing, Dix) This morning in my email inbox I had a rant waiting for me from Dix Roper, a longtime reader and fan of Panama-Guide. He's also a member of the Americans in Panama Yahoo! email group, and he forwarded to the group members a letter regarding a recent experience he had at the offices of the US Consulate. To make a long story short, Dix is 69 and his wife is 24, and he was alleging that the person who interviewed him at the consulate discriminated against him and his wife based on the age difference between them. In short, since he's 69 and she's 24, there's no way that theirs can be a "real" relationship. And of course, when Dix wrote his email and letter he was exceptionally pissed, livid, fit to be tied, etc. Well, here - you read the letter and email and make up your own mind:

Greetings; I thought I would share a horrible experience at the Consulate yesterday and I am filing a formal complaint of prejudice against the employee that was supposed to interview us for a visa for my Panamanian wife. Since I am not sure where to file the complaint I would appreciate any email addresses of the ICS, the visa dept, the immigration dept or the ambassador's office. Any other suggestions as to what more to say or how to proceed would be greatly appreciated. The formal complaint is attached, if this is possible. With thousands of ILLEGAL people coming the US every week, I would think that Homeland Security would not try to obfuscate the LEGAL process to such a degree that it would become almost impossible for a citizen to comply. Beware to those of us that are trying to do something that was at one time a simple process--marry and get a visa for your foreign spouse. Feel free to contact me with any advice. Regards, "Dix" Roper


FORMAL COMPLAINT OF PREJUDICE FILED AGAINST CONSULAR EMPLOYEE


I, Noel R. Roper, a US citizen, do hereby file a formal complaint of Prejudice and incompetence against the older woman, name unknown, who was the interviewer for my wife and I, yesterday, July 30, 2008 , regarding the request for a visa for my wife. The prejudice of this employee was so powerful and obvious that it made it impossible for her to act in a professional, fair and responsible manner. She let her own personal values interfere with both her professional conduct and the completion of her mission statement. I hear by request an immediate and valid interview with an unprejudiced official, preferably her supervisor and preferably a male.


About me and the basis of this formal complaint: I am a 69 year old, American, born in the U.S., a distinguished military graduate of UCLA, a former US Army Officer, a very successful investment advisor in California for many years that allowed me to retire early. I am a family man, never in trouble with the law, in great shape, and in the last ten years have become well known for my stories and pictures of my spearfishing exploits around the world.


Spearfishing brought me to Panama about 4 years ago where I was fortunate to meet my wife and we started living together in Dec of 2005 As a mentor for my wife in this sport since Dec. 2005, I have taken her from a non swimmer to becoming a world renowned and respected woman spearfisher with a recent pending world record. Most of the last two years we have concentrated our spearfishing efforts in Panama and our internationally published stories and photos attest to our success.


In terms of background, as stated, we have lived together since December 2005, continually, except when she could not be with me on my trips to the US as she had no visa. We then applied for and were approved for a K-I, fiancée visa, which was good for 90 days ending 3, October 2007. We then were officially married at the County Clerk’s office in Los Angeles, about a year ago, Aug 17th, 2007. We then returned to Panama 3 Oct 2007, before the expiration date of the visa. We have continued to live together the entire time, almost three years, here at my house in Diablo in an open, public manner before all our friends and neighbors in an exemplary marriage relationship.


Our request for a visa for my wife is simply to enable her to travel with me to and from the US and I feel this is a reasonable request within my rights as a US citizen in good standing for 69 years.


About yesterday’s miscarriage of justice and the prejudice of our middle age female interviewer-- From the moment we started the interview it was clear from her demeanor and attitude that she had issues with our age differences, me at 69 and my wife at 24. It is common knowledge that many older women automatically pre- judge and disapprove of a relationship when there is a big age difference between an older husband and a younger wife. I have also felt this prejudice several times in the last two years in contact with older women. This prejudice could result from their personal negative experiences with men over many years or a current relationship problem, but in most cases their attitude does not create a problem. However if you put a person prejudiced against blacks, in the position of judging the validity of a mixed marriage, the results are forsworn. Or if the person appointed to decide on the validity of my marriage is prejudiced against old men with young women, and I happen to be 69 and my wife 24, her personal values will decide that my marriage cannot possibly be valid, regardless of the facts. Under State Dept rules, a marriage cannot be discriminated against because of age differences. This is a powerful prejudice with some women, and though seldom spoken of, or admitted to, can be as destructive as any other prejudice.


From the beginning of the interview it was clear that she had personal issues with our age difference. From her over attention to our age difference, and the total lack of attention to the basic facts of our relationship it was clear that her prejudice was interfering with her professional conduct. To reach her totally false conclusion that we don’t have a valid marriage can only be the result of two things, prejudice or incompetence or maybe both.


For our 10 AM personal interview appointment, we sat and waited two hours before she could see us. Unprofessional. Then with her decision already made based on our “unacceptable” age differences she would ask me a question while my wife was out of the room—For example--Did you go to bed at the same time last night? Since I lay down 5 or ten minutes before my wife, my answer is No. Then she called in my wife and asked the same question. In her mind, because she takes more time to get ready before going to bed, if she is within 5 or 10 minutes of when I lay down, she considered it the same time, so she said Yes. Any explanation allowed- - of course not. In the mind of the prejudiced interviewer it was a clear lie and to be expected from such an unacceptable couple, and another justification for her prejudiced decision. This sham interview she concluded with a harsh “ I have had enough of this” and stepped away from her desk and slammed her door in our faces. This is clearly a case of Personal issues and Prejudice, leading to unprofessional conduct and Miscarriage of Justice.


I file this formal complaint stating that all acceptable methods used by a competent interviewer to determine a valid marriage were totally ignored, because of her prejudicial personal views. I hear by request a valid visa interview as soon as possible with a senior unprejudiced officer, preferably a man, to determine if my wife and I should be entitled to a visa that will enable her to travel with me as my wife. Here is hoping that the wheels of the consulate do not become so mired in minutiae that the intent and the mission is lost.


Regards, Noel R. Roper
Worthy Of Discussion: I know there have been several cases among the members of the English speaking expatriate community here in Panama in which couples have moved to Panama, and then upon arriving and getting settled in, the hubby realizes he's now living in a virtual "chick heaven" and that hot chicks in short skirts will basically throw themselves at any dude with both a pulse and a checkbook. Eventually, hubby drops the grouchy old broad (a.k.a. former life partner and mother to his six kids) and scoops up a raft of Colombian hard-bodies with substantial surgical enhancements. Life is good...

The Stuff of Mid-Life Crisis: Some guys buy a Mustang, or a boat, or something like that. Women out there need to know that in the Republic of Panama there are hot chicks running around all over the place, so if there might be some cracks in the foundations of the pillar of marriage, better stay in Des Moines. But, I digress. The topic for this article is age discrimination, and specifically how the rest of the world views old guy - young chick couples.

Nunya' Damn Business: In venues such as an official interview with regards to the application for a visitor's visa in the offices of the US Consulate in the Republic of Panama, the interview is conducted by a screener who works for the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). You see, these agencies have representatives who are assigned all over the world, and they are trained to screen through and filter these kinds of applications. Dix Roper alleges that the interviewer (a woman) made it known from the start of the interview that she had a serious and significant problem with the issue of the 45-year age difference between them. Roper alleges that the interviewer asked some perfunctory questions and then found a reason to deny his application. He was livid, certain that the "real" reason was plain and simple age discrimination.

The Other Side of the Story: I contacted the Public Affairs office at the US Embassy and spoke to their official spokesman Gavin Sundwall. He informed me that first of all, he really could not discuss any details of the case because there were issues and elements of Privacy Act information, and the details of the application and process had to be protected and that he could not talk about that stuff. Ok, fine. I pressed and what I really wanted to know was this - "If someone feels they have not been given a fair shake, then is there an appeals process, or how do they go about asking for someone else to look at the application." Gavin explained that Dix Roper had already been into the Consulate again this morning, and that they had explained his options and potential alternative recourses to him directly, and that if I wanted to know anything about the content of those discussions then I should speak to Mr. Roper.

What Happened, Dix? I called back to speak to Dix Roper again in the afternoon. I had called him in the morning but got an answering machine because they were at the consulate office at the time. Dix explained that he met with the Chief of the US Consulate in Panama. As it turns out, the person who reviewed their application will report her decision back to the head office of the Department of Homeland Security Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in the US. They will then send him via US mail an official rejection letter which will state the reason for the rejection as well as explaining his recourses or routes for a potential appeal. The problem is that (of course, as with anything having to do with the US government) the entire process is now going to be done through the US mail, and it could take months or years to be resolved. In the meantime, Dix Roper and his wife can not visit the United States.

Potential for a Formal Criminal Complaint: Dix Roper is alleging that his application was denied based on an illegal act of age discrimination against his person and his much younger wife. I asked him if he intended to pursue the possibility of filing an official or formal criminal complaint against the person (ICE inspection and filtering official) who reviewed his application, and he said that at this point his intention was to first continue to pursue an appeal, to get a visa for his (legitimate) wife, and then potentially to follow up with some legal action, depending on the outcome. At least when I spoke to him he had calmed down to the point of being calm enough to discuss the issue rationally. When he wrote his letter, he was visibly upset and shaken. Mad. Livid.

"We're Not The Marriage Police: I called and spoke to the Public Affairs office of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Of course, they don't know anything about this specific case but they did outline official policy. Their screening practices are designed and built to detect marriage fraud - those people whose only reason for getting married is to fraudulently obtain a visa or travel permission for a spouse to enter the United States, in a marriage that is not legitimate. I explained that I was focusing specifically on the issue of the difference in their ages or the potential for age discrimination on the part of the interviewer, and was told that any difference in age between a husband and wife, even if it's a 45 year difference, should not be an issue if all other aspects of the marriage are legitimate. In other words, a significant difference in age is not, by itself, a determining factor.

Throwing The System Curve Balls: One of the things Dix Roper did that was "weird" or unusual was to obtain a K-I Fiancé visa, go back to the United States, get married, and then return to Panama. In speaking to another customer service official at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, I was told that it's considered "normal" for a man to get engaged, return to the United States with a K-I Fiancé visa, get married within 90 days, and then live happily ever after (in the US) for the rest of their lives. What's "weird" or unusual is for the happily married couple to return to Panama to live. So, strike number one.

Visitor's Visa, Denied: The next thing that Dix did wrong was to apply for a visitor's visa for his new wife. They applied to travel to the US and this was denied, and as a result he applied for the I-130 Visa - Petition for Alien Relative. And in fact what was denied this week was their application for this I-130 petition. What Dix and his wife could have done that the USCIS headquarters would have viewed as a normal flow would have been to simply get married in Panama, and then apply for the I-130 Petition for Alien Relative through the consulate here. Once that was granted, then they could have moved to the United States, his wife would have been granted a Green Card, a US Social Security number, driver's license, the works. The problem is that Dix wanted to marry his wife, get permission for her to travel to the US, but they want to live (for the most part) here. In short, the USCIS doesn't "get it" when it comes to expatriates and people who want to live out of the United States. They seem to think along the lines of "if you want to live in Panama, why are you applying for permission to visit the United States" or something like that.

The Side I Will Never Get: There's one side of this story that I will probably never have access to. I would love to be able to interview the woman who conducted the interview with Dix and his wife, to sit down with her, review the file, and to ask her why she denied their application. Was it an issue of age discrimination? Or, were there a series of "red flags" that they are trained to spot? Due to privacy act issues that conversation or interview will never occur. And of course, the woman who conducted the interview has probably done literally thousands of these kinds of things during the course of her career. Let's assume that she's a stellar professional who simply followed protocol, her experience, and her training. Let's give her the benefit of the doubt. Maybe Dix and his young bride did simply throw the system too many curve balls and one of them got stuck. Maybe.

Or Maybe, It's That Other Thing: Dix alleges that he was discriminated against on the basis of both age and race. He's a white guy, and his wife is a dark-skinned Latina, but in reality he feels it was more the age thing than race related. In any case he is now in the process of preparing a formal complaint which he will send to the Office of Security and Integrity and the Chief of the Investigations Division of the USCIS, as well as to their Office of the Inspector General, both in Washington DC. At this point the only thing he can do is wait for the USCIS to respond to his application for the I-130 petition in writing, and then follow the instructions provided in that letter to appeal the decision. But, any action he decides to follow with regards to a potential criminal complain or allegations or wrongdoing or age discrimination on the part of the interviewing official will follow a separate path.

Right Down The Middle: There. Was that professional enough for you? You see, it's simply my own personal perception that middle aged women (in general) frown on couples involving older men and younger women. I think there is an entire demographic of middle aged women out there who have been dumped by their former spouses, who basically "traded up" for a newer model. I think there is a lot of resentment out there. I know I'm catching a lot of flack for the "hooters above the strike zone" comment that I made on AIP earlier this morning. Please notice that I'm saying "I think" a whole lot in this paragraph because this is the part of this story where I get to express my opinion. Older men hook up with younger women all the time, and behind almost every one of those relationships there's a pissed-off "ex" somewhere back on the woodpile who is quite likely filled with resentment. Hey, it happens, no denying that.

Did It Happen In This Case? Who the hell knows? I sure don't. One of the questions I would ask (in my interview that can never happen) would be to ask the USCIS employee "have you ever been divorced?" "Did your husband leave you for a much younger woman?" "If so, do you think the personal events in your life might have influenced your decision in this case?" But it's certainly not my job to go there - let's leave that for whatever kind of internal review or investigation the USCIS decides to generate based on Dix's complaints and allegations. And no matter what happens, with all of the stone throwing that he's going to be doing you can bet that on the next go-around this application is going to be treated with sterile gloves and a serious dose of absolute objectivity, exactly as it should have been handled in the first instance. So, good luck to you, yon geezers of the world who would tilt at this administrative windmill a la Don Quixote. Don't let the bastards get you down. Stiff upper lip and all that.

Copyright 2008 by Don Winner for Panama-Guide.com. Go ahead and use whatever you like as long as you credit the source. Salud.