BY KATHERINE LING, MEDILL NEWS SERVICE
See related article: Love knows no boudaries - but U.S. immigration laws

When Healy King meets someone new in Belfast, her American accent often leads to a simple question, "Oh, American are you, what the heck are you doing here?"

Her answer is quite unexpected. America will not allow Healy to sponsor the woman she loves--a citizen of the United Kingdom--for a green card or citizenship.

"My partner cannot get into America," the 32-year-old native of Washington D.C., said she has to explain. "They won't have her. So I have to stay here because the U.K. will let me stay based on our relationship. People in America don't know that. People here don't know that."

American law does not allow U.S. citizens to sponsor same sex partners. Their heterosexual counterparts can. If same sex, bi-national couples want to stay in the U.S., it becomes a process of visa applications and the good fortune to have skills needed for employer sponsorship for a green card or the deep-pockets to afford a lot of schooling.

"Love is love no matter what sex you are," said Healy's partner, Colleen Bradley. "You still have the crushing feeling whenever you are forced to be apart."

Founding a life in America on the uncertainty of work visas or student visas is difficult and stressful. The alternative - illegal immigration - is even worse but may be a couple's only choice if the visa options have run out and neither partner in the relationship belongs to a country that allows a citizen to sponsor a same sex partner.

Most same sex, bi-national couples who have the option to live in a country together legally, will choose to immigrate to one of the 19 countries that allow same sex sponsorship. While sponsorship may be possible, each of the 19 countries have different laws about what the partner has a right to do or have while living there, such as employment or free healthcare.

These self-described "love exiles" do not describe moving to another country to be with a partner as a choice.

"We always thought that we were choosing a way -- we were going to figure out a way to get to America," said Healy. But, she stated, in the end they had to settle in the U.K. It was the only place they could be together.

"We ran out of choices. There was no choice," Healy said.

Colleen added, "We are here because there's nowhere else."

America was always the goal

When Healy and Colleen first started dating in January 1997, the ability for both of them to live and work in the same country was not a worry.

"I think we both thought that this was a great little fling. We were both so young," Healy said with a flash of a knowing smile. "It was our first serious relationship."

Colleen had come to Washington, D.C. as a 20-year-old to work as a part of her undergraduate degree. She had always wanted to come to the U.S. and was very happy with her choice, despite doing mostly temporary jobs obtained through a temp agency.

Healy, just graduated from the University of Rochester, found herself temping as well. They met through their temp agency, quickly became friends and eventually ended up dating.

"It was love at first sight," Colleen recalled. "I had to chase her like a dog."

By June that year, however, Colleen's work visa had expired and it was time for her to go back home to finish her degree.

"It just didn't dawn on us until a month before she had to go home. And we said, 'but wait'--this got a lot more serious than we had realized," said Healy.

Colleen went back to school to finish her degree and the two didn't see each other for nine months.

"AOL and instant message was the only thing that kept us going," Colleen said.

"I used to go to sleep and leave on the computer because it was a connection. Our phone bills were hundreds and hundreds of pounds," Colleen said as she rolled her eyes in memory, admitting she was living at home at the time. "My poor mom."

Colleen graduated in June 1998 and was accepted into a Master's program in the U.K. on a complete scholarship.

But Colleen wanted to go back to Washington to be with Healy. So she forfeited her scholarship and came back to the U.S. She came on a normal tourist visa, which allows travelers from certain countries to stay without a visa for three to six months. But Colleen stayed a bit longer -- about nine months.

Colleen also got a job, not realizing the possible consequences of her actions. If she had been caught, Colleen could have been banned from coming to the United States for 10 years.

They discovered this disturbing fact towards the end of Colleen's stay in June 1999, when they saw an immigration lawyer to find out if there was any way to get a visa for Colleen to stay longer.

"That summer we kind of started thinking, 'what are you going to do?' We need to start making plans." Healy said. "So [Colleen] went to go and see an immigration lawyer in DC. And [the lawyer] said, 'Oh my God get out now. You have overstayed. If you ever want to live in this country, go home. You're over but you are not so over they will be really upset about it.'"

Colleen immediately got a plane ticket home. "She scared us. We were so stupid," she said.

So Colleen went home to get her Master's degree, changing her focus to computer science because someone had told her that if she had IT skills she could easily get a job in the U.S. and the employer would help her get an H1B or work visa.

"I wanted to live in America and that is the truth," Colleen said. "I always thought Ireland was so backward that America would take me first. It never occurred to me that America wouldn't take me. Even through all of this crap. We just thought America would get there first."

Colleen condensed her Master's program from two years into one -- even though she had had no previous computer skills. The couple spent another nine months apart, although they met each other on vacation a few times.

While on a vacation in Paris later in the year, the desperation and hopelessness of their situation overwhelmed Healy.

"I thought this was so pointless," explained Healy. "This is a four-year relationship and we had only been together for two of those years. There was no way we could see a possible solution," she said.

"We were spending all of our money going back and forth trying to see each other. All my friends were saving for larger purchases like houses. This isn't fair to me. This isn't fair to you. Why don't we just live our lives?"

Colleen, who Healy admits has been the optimistic and stubborn one in the relationship, said, "Paris was the only time I thought we weren't going to make it. That was the only time in the whole 10 years that I've been worried. There was no light at the end of the tunnel."

When Colleen and Healy had first started dating in January of 1997, their options were limited. The United Kingdom had only begun to provide limited immigration rights to same sex couples. But the rules were prohibitive. A U.K. citizen could sponsor a foreign partner if they could prove that they had lived together for four years.

Most same sex, bi-national couples cannot easily live together for four years continuously. The foreign partner usually cannot get a visa or have enough money to cover this length of time, as most visas do not allow the foreigner to work.

Couples also have to know right from the very beginning of living together that they need to start gathering evidence of their co-habitation. The idea of keeping telephone bills, pieces of mail or other proof to show co-habitation does not occur to most people regardless of sexual orientation. But the immigration office wants solid proof of all four years.

Despite all of this trouble, the couples who have at least one partner from a country that can sponsor a same sex foreign partner are lucky, said Martha McDevitt-Pugh, founder of Love Exiles, a support and advocacy group for same sex bi-national couples. Love Exiles is only one of a few organizations that exist to help same sex bi-national couples cope with the immigration and adjustment process.

"Both partners may not have a country they can go to," McDevitt-Pugh said. For example, a Russian and an American wouldn't have any options to live in either country as neither country allows same sex partner sponsorship. McDevitt-Pugh explained that for these couples, Canada is pretty much their only option. But while Canada's immigration policies are more accommodating to gay and lesbian applicants, it is still difficult to get in without the proper skill, intellectual level or financial wherewithal.

But Healy and Colleen were one of the lucky few love exiles couples who had the option to settle in one of the 19 countries that allows sponsorship of a partner, even if the requirements were rigorous.

And in 1999, the U.K. requirements for partner sponsorship became obtainable. The government dropped the requirement of four years down to two years.

But Healy and Colleen had only spent two of the four years they had been dating in the same country, and really only one year in cohabitation in the U.S. But they couldn't submit evidence of that year because Colleen had been working illegally in the U.S.

While the change in the law made settling in the U.K. possible, it still wasn't Healy and Colleen's goal. They wanted to have Colleen immigrate to the United States on a work visa. But after graduating, Colleen had no luck finding a job in the U.S. and finally found the next best thing: a position with an American-based company.

"We will get a year's experience [in Northern Ireland] and then I will definitely get a job in America," Colleen said in explaining their thought process.

But Colleen and Healy wanted to be together as soon as possible as they were tired of being apart and didn't really see how the relationship could last living apart. That meant Healy had to move to where Colleen was living, her hometown Derry, also known as Londonderry, in Northern Ireland.

Derry is quite different from Washington D.C., according to Healy and Colleen. It is a very Catholic, conservative town of approximately 85,000 people, so Healy and Colleen kept their relationship low key.

"I really didn't like going outside," Healy said. "I felt like everybody was staring at me [thinking]'there goes the American lesbian.'"

Healy said that while the U.K. may have more rights for gays and lesbians, it doesn't necessarily translate into acceptance of gays and lesbians--especially in Derry. Colleen said she thought Derry might be "the homophobic capital of Europe."

But this legal acceptance without social acceptance is not unusual, especially in small towns, said McDevitt-Pugh.

"We have all our rights. Does that mean society has caught up? No. Does it mean that we are not discriminated against at work? No. Society still has to catch up in some ways," McDevitt-Pugh said.

All of this and the shock of living in a new country left Healy feeling pretty unhappy that year, she said.

"I was just in the country doing nothing. I didn't have a job. I couldn't work. I started to get really bored and really depressed. And I was like, what am I doing here?" she said.

Healy was living in Derry legally, but again walking that illegal-legal line, flying out of the country every three months to renew her visa.

In April, Healy came home to Washington D.C. She wasn't sure if she wanted to go back to Derry when it was time to leave.

"I had been in Derry then for six months. I didn't know if I could come back. I had another mental breakdown about the whole thing. I was out at some embassy party and I was thinking, 'do I really have to go back to Derry?'"

Colleen knew Healy wasn't happy. "It was breaking my heart. I told her she had a decision to make. I had been chasing like a dog but for once I let her take the month. And it was the hardest time not to make contact."

In the end, despite still not having any real solution to their immigration problems, Healy decided to come back. "I guess I must love her," Healy explained. "I just missed Colleen so much."

In their minds, Healy and Colleen only had another couple of months they had to live in Derry. After that, Colleen would probably get a transfer or a job in America.

And then Sept. 11 devastated America and any chance Colleen had of getting a visa to work in the U.S.

"It became very quickly very clear that [Colleen] was not going to get the job in America," Healy said. "So at this point, I said right, 'We live in [Northern] Ireland now. Oh my God, we live in Ireland now. I have to find out how to live here legally.'"

American Exile

Healy's experience of exclusion and displacement in Derry is not unusual for any person going to live in another country, regardless of sexual orientation or situation.

"Imagine being an American in Great Britain. They are always going to hear your accent," said McDevitt-Pugh. "You are always seen as a foreigner. It doesn't matter if you have the passport. It doesn't matter how long you lived there. You are always different."

McDevitt-Pugh, who moved to Holland 10 years ago to be with her partner Lynn, admits that this perception of difference is true for any American, regardless of sexual preference.

"There are definitely parallels, there is a similar experience," she said. But there is a difference for same sex couples, she emphasized.

"When you grow up in the United States you never imagine that at some point in your life it is going to be a place where you can't be anymore," McDevitt-Pugh said.

"I can't be there anymore with the person I love, with my family and the people I love. You never get over that. There is a profound pain, and a profound impact that you can't have that home that you grew up with anymore."

We thought we were the only ones

Kat M., 28, an American "love exile" from Portland, immigrated to Spilsby, a small town in Northern England to be with her English partner Sarah M., 32. Kat did not feel the same hostility in Spilsby as Healy did in Derry, but she still drew far more attention than she wanted as an American and a lesbian in a small town.

Kat met Sarah online through a correspondence chat group in the fall of 2001. After many emails and phone calls, their friendship grew into a romantic relationship. The first time they met in person was when Sarah flew to the U.S. for a month-long visit in January 2003. Kat then flew back to England with Sarah for another month.

"It was a heck of a first date," said Sarah. "It lasted about 60 days."

Sarah decided she wanted to move to America to be with Kat.

"I really wanted to move to America," said Sarah. "Generally you have a better lifestyle, a lower cost of living. I felt very comfortable. And it would be easier for me to just go there," as Kat is visually disabled and has chronic health issues.

Of course it would have been quite a sacrifice for Sarah to move to America as she is very close to her family and she was worried about her elderly parents.

But like Healy and Colleen, Sarah and Kat were very naïve about the difficulties of immigration.

"We never thought that immigration would be a problem," Kat said. "You think you are free to move anywhere and go anywhere. And you are just not. You are pretty much bound to the country that you live in unless you have a really good reason to be in another country."

After contacting an immigration lawyer and doing some research on the U.S. State Department's Web site, they discovered that it was not possible for Sarah to come to the U.S. on any long-term visa that would allow her to work. Sarah didn't have any particularly outstanding job skills wanted by U.S. employers and she didn't want to go back to school--the couple couldn't afford it very easily either.

Of course, like Healy and Colleen, they considered just having Sarah come over on a tourist visa and then prolonging her stay. But she did not have enough money to prove she could support herself if she were in the U.S. on vacation and not working, a necessity to qualify for a longer six-month tourist visa in the U.S.

Unlike Healy and Colleen, Kat and Sarah were aware of the risks.

"If you get denied one time, that is pretty much it. You'll have a nightmare of a time" getting a visa the second time, Kat explained.

And then of course there are other consequences to living illegally.

"I need health insurance and how do you get health insurance if you are living illegally?" said Kat. "And [Sarah] could never go out and see [her] family again without risking never coming back or getting caught. [Sarah is] too close with [her] family to ever say 'I'm not going to see you again for years and years, or I may never see you again.'"

Sarah added, "you basically don't want to jeopardize anything for the future by doing that."

So Kat decided to move to England to be with Sarah.

Making it work

Kat and Sarah started dating in 2001, after the U.K. four-year prerequisite had been changed to two years of cohabitation. Sarah and Kat knew they needed to start to gather evidence of cohabitation so they could get a permanent visa for Kat in England.

They decided the only way to legally do this was for Kat to go back to school in Colchester in Northern England in September 2004. She had intended to go back to get her Master's at some point, and so decided to go back to school perhaps a bit sooner than she had expected.

It turns out that in the end they did not need the two-years of cohabitation. The Civil Partnership Act passed in 2005 allowed any British citizen to sponsor a partner for immigration without a prerequisite of living together.
It was not only hard for Kat to culturally adjust, but it was difficult for her to find her way around with her visual handicap. She had been very familiar with Portland and trying to navigate a new city was very hard.

"Colchester was such a nightmare. With me going to school and [Sarah] struggling to find a job," Kat said with obvious loathing in her voice.

"It was a very horrid year," Sarah agreed. On top of adjusting to living with each other and to the culture, the couple were living on Sarah's single income and quickly accumulating debt.

But a year and $35,000 later, Kat graduated and the couple had one year of documented cohabitation.

The Civil Partnership Act that went into effect in the U.K. on Dec. 5. 2005, allowed any two people over the age of 16 and who are not already in any such partnership, to form a civil partnership through a registration ceremony. Immigration laws were also changed to replace the word spouse with civil partner. Two years of living together was no longer necessary.

Kat 's student visa ran out in October 2005, so she went home and applied for the U.K. "proposed civil partner" visa, the first step in getting a permanent resident visa. The proposed civil partner visa is similar to the American K-1 fiancé visa, available to partners of the opposite sex. It lasts six months and in that time the couple must get married.

While the new law no longer required proof of co-habitation, couples still have to show proof of a relationship. Sarah and Kat's proof were three, 1-1/2 inch thick folders containing documents for the previous three years, including telephone bills, emails, letters, photos, personal statements of support from friends and family and even the deed to Sarah's parents home.

So after paying a fee of £360 (about $700) and submitting the three folders, Kat got her fiancé visa and moved back to England in February 2006. Kat and Sarah were married in April.

With civil partner registration documents included, and another £360 application fee, Kat applied for her two-year residence visa. Two years after the preliminary visa, if the couple is still together the foreign partner may apply for "indefinite leave to remain" or a permanent visa.

Normally, the two-year visa takes only about three to seven weeks to be granted. Kat applied for the visa in May. "We applied...about a month later because we were waiting for decent bank statements. The ones after the wedding were not so good," Kat explained.

Kat waited and waited, not being able to apply to jobs or do anything for fear that if she committed to volunteer, for instance, her visa would come and she would have to stop to find a job. Kat also hadn't been able to work on her proposed civil partner visa so they had already been living on Sarah's single income for four months.

"I couldn't apply to any jobs, I mean nothing. So I didn't do anything for three months and it was just depressing. It's not the same as going to a job everyday," Kat said.

Finally in August, almost three months later Kat got her visa and applied for jobs the very same day--and kept applying and applying.

"I looked from August until December, and I mean really looked," Kat said. But her handicap made it particularly hard on her to find a job, especially in England where the unemployment rate last year was at 8 percent in London and about 7 percent in the northeastern part of England where Kat was.

"I'm visually impaired and I need special software to work on a computer and I can't drive. Other certain tasks, I'm not really suited for like working with food. I get really close to things," she said demonstrating with her blonde head very close to a bowl of ice cream. "If I'm trying to make somebody's sandwich they kind of are really put off by that."

As Kat looked for a job, the two lived on Sarah's income, which was less than minimum wage even though she was working full time hours. They also were trying to pay back debt from Kat's schooling, application fees and the wedding.

And during the two-year probation, couples are not allowed any social benefits, which was hard on Kat and Sarah, as Kat has many health issues.

"Financially it was horrendous," Sarah exclaimed.

"We borrowed money mostly from my family to get by and to prove that we could support ourselves," Kat said. "To me [money] was what I was most worried about [in the application process] because we knew our relationship was fine."

Unless one of the partners has a lot of money, a lot of bi-national, same sex couples go into debt trying to stay together, McDevitt-Pugh explained. Professions often don't translate, so people have to re-educate themselves or go into a completely new field. Or they had to go to school to stay in the country. All of this usually means living on one income for a long time, while also taking out loans for school.

----------------------------

Healy and Colleen also quickly began to acquire debt after September 11 closed any options for Colleen to immigrate to the U.S. Neither had any savings to begin with, as they had spent all their money on flights and trips to see each other. Then they lived on Colleen's income while Healy lived there for the year on the tourist visa.

But Healy and Colleen did not have the option of a civil partnership. The only choice they had in 2001 was showing two years of cohabitation and then to apply for a two-year preliminary visa, followed by the permanent resident visa. "The Civil Partnership Act--it makes it a whole heck of a lot easier" than the process they went through, Healy said in retrospect.

Healy had lived with Colleen for one year but Healy could not do another year similar to that last one. So Healy went back to school to get a student visa.

Getting into the local college on a month's notice was easy--paying the expensive tuition for a foreign student, around £9,000 (about $17,000), was not. Healy borrowed money from her parents and Colleen took out a loan. And they again had to live off Colleen's first-year salary.

That year went quite well for Healy and Colleen. Healy was busy with school, so she no longer felt listless. She met a lot of new friends many of whom were from foreign countries as well. The couple bought a house in Derry and generally had a stable family life.

"There was light at the end of the tunnel," said Colleen.

In September 2003, Healy and Colleen gathered up all of their evidence of cohabitation, hired a fancy lawyer "to make sure it was done right" for another £5000 and applied for a permanent visa.

On Sept. 11, 2003, Healy received her temporary two-year visa. The cork from the champagne bottle they opened that night hangs framed in their kitchen.

"We couldn't believe it. We didn't know what to do with ourselves," Healy said.

Life after the Visa

But life after the visas is not all tea and cake.

A partner may have the right to work, but finding a job as Kat discovered, can be another battle. It also took Healy a couple of months of looking and finally moving to Belfast before she found a job.

Finding a job in the 19 countries that do allow partner sponsorship can be very difficult as many of these countries, mainly in Europe, have high unemployment rates compared to the United States.

Also, the right to work varies across all of the countries depending on how the partner sponsorships were written.

"In the legal sense only some have full recognition," explained McDevitt-Pugh. For instance, in Norway, a citizen has been able to sponsor a partner for the last 30 years. But in other countries like France, it's done on a municipal level, so it may depend on exactly where in the country the couple lives.

"It is not very easy. There is some recognition possible, but your partner may not be able to work. In Spain and Greece, you can technically bring your partner in but unemployment is so high, in order to bring your partner in you have to demonstrate a full time job," McDevitt-Pugh said. Most companies hire only on one-year contracts and if the applicant has already worked two of those twelve months the immigration officials may not accept the application.

And of course each partner's skills, may or may not translate in the new country because of necessity, language ability or education requirement, McDevitt-Pugh pointed out. For instance a very qualified nurse in the U.S. may not be able to use her skills in Norway because she doesn't know the language.

These are the same decisions you have to make when you choose a country to live in if you are an opposite sex bi-national couple, McDevitt-Pugh said.

"Except for the same sex couple there is no choice. There is only one country you can go to, if that."

McDevitt-Pugh also explained that some same sex, bi-national couples who have the option to immigrate to a country where they would be accepted as married under the law stay in the U.S. because of elderly parents.

Adam Francoeur, of Immigration Equality an American-based gay and lesbian advocacy group associated with the Human Rights Watch, agreed. "When [couples] are thinking about moving away from the U.S. they have to think about how their decisions affect their family members. Couples often report making difficult decisions about their parents who are aging and are facing possible health complications or nearing end of life decisions."

Between all the financial costs, paper work and social upheaval, the immigration process is very tough.

During these times of stress and duress, McDevitt-Pugh said, the denial of a right to live in America becomes even more pointed.

"I kind of think of America in a lot better light than I did while I was living there," commented Kat. "And in some respects I kind of put it on a pedestal in that way."

McDevitt-Pugh said idealizing America is typical for an American forced to live in another country to be with the partner. "One of the things that happens in our community is that holy grail out there 'if only.' It makes it really hard to put it in perspective," McDevitt-Pugh said.

"The more you can't have something you want it even more. And its unfortunate, you start to think, 'If only I lived in my own country, then it would be ok, then I would have a great job, I would be happy, I would lose weight' Whatever isn't working in your life, is related to the fact that you lost your home. It might be, but it also might not be at all."

So McDevitt-Pugh said it is good to talk about the same sex bi-national couple's experience compared to the opposite sex bi-national couple's experience, as many of the issues are similar.

"It is really nice to talk about 'if we were heterosexual maybe we would be living here anyway.' It's hard to put [our exile] in perspective so it doesn't become a huge source of resentment and anger. Its fine to be angry about it, but it is really sad to be just driven by your anger, to be overwhelmed by it and to just be living it all the time," she said.

Although perspective is important, McDevitt-Pugh said all of these differences take a different kind of psychological toll on same sex bi-national couples who cannot choose which of the partners' two respective home countries would be better for the couple to live in.

"There is no way to come to terms with the fact that you can't live in your own country. You can accept that it is a fact, you can build a life somewhere else," she said as she was trying to explain the different experience of same sex couples.

"But to really accept the fact that your country doesn't want you, that you are thrown away, that you are not wanted, you are not counted in the census, that you are completely forgotten is really hard to come to terms with."

But life goes on

Kat was finally able to find a job in January of this year, when the school Sarah works at was looking for a database manager. Kat had applied for the job just to prove to Sarah that she couldn't get the job.

"I was so excited because I had been waiting for so long. It was so relieving. Financially it was fantastic. To go from below minimum wage to double that," she said.

Still, in two years there is one more visa application waiting for the couple.

"There is still a certain element pressure for us two to remain as we are right now," Sarah said. "So until the two-year visa is up and we apply for the last visa. There is always a fear [of Kat] being taken away."

Kat said until she gets the permanent visa she would not feel like a "full person."

"You can't do a lot of things. I can't have any benefits so if anything happened to me or to [Sarah] and we were back down to one income. Sorry folks," Kat explained.

"You fill out your application and you are just waiting to see if someone is going to tear your life apart with one stamp."

For Healy and Colleen, that fear is gone. Healy received her permanent resident visa on Sept. 11, 2005. The next step will be to apply for a European Union resident visa as well.

As for a civil partnership like the one Kat and Sarah got, Healy and Colleen are waiting.

"At the end of the day there is no rush for it because we have the visa," said Healy. "It's just a piece of paper. I always felt that way about marriage even from a young age. I kind of thought, 'why do you need the state to tell you if you have already made a commitment?'"

But eventually, Healy and Colleen think they will do it for the tax benefits and legal protection it provides. Without it, there is still a worry that their personal commitment will not be enough, a reflection of a concern that while their legal situation is very good, Healy and Colleen still don't quite feel equal to heterosexual couples under the law.

"It's almost like equal, but no I don't feel equal. There are still a lot of differences in the law," Healy said. For instance, only one partner, not the couple, can adopt a child.

And both couples felt that they were under intense scrutiny when applying for the visas.

During the application process, the couples had to include, along with utility and leases, photos, very personal letters and emails and had to ask friends to vouch that their relationship was genuine, or in Healy and Colleen's case, that it was "akin to marriage."

"Even though the rule is here for us, I still felt they were against me," said Healy.

Still Healy and Colleen admit, life is pretty happy for them now. "Things have finally just settled down into a normal scene here now. So I feel like this is life. This is regular now," Healy said.

"It is really profound to live in a country where you are completely accepted as a first class citizen," McDevitt-Pugh said. "You know the law isn't exactly equal in the United States and you experience that, but it wasn't until I lived in a country where I was completely acknowledged as a first class citizen that I realized how important that is: to protect yourself, to protect your family and to trust the government and to not live in fear," McDevitt-Pugh said. "It really just gives you this space to develop your life and not have to be concerned with protecting yourself. That is taken care of."

Despite feeling rejected by the U.S., both couples and McDevitt-Pugh would consider moving back to the U.S. if it would pass a law like the Uniting American Families Act. The proposed legislation would change the wording in immigration from "spouse" to "partner," allowing same sex partners the ability to sponsor a foreign partner.

While the act failed to pass out of committee in 2005, advocates are hopeful with a Democratic-controlled Congress and perhaps a Democratic president in a couple of years the time could be near.

"I think there is a really profound shift going on right now. I think now the United States is ready for this to happen. I think this now is really the moment when something this basic - that an American has a right to live in America - is going to happen," McDevitt-Pugh said. She said many American ex-patriots are beginning to gather support in their own countries.

But she added, "It's harder to stand up for your rights when you are 5,000 miles away."

Kat and Sarah are still very hopeful that they will live in America. "We do hope to go back at some point," Kat said.

"I hear that phrase a lot: "When America opens up and we go home," Sarah said. "It would be nice if the option was available."

While the lifestyle, and her family and friends draw Kat back to the U.S., she is conflicted. "In another respect I feel really bitter about it as well. I mean they kind of kicked me out, you know," Kat said.

Sarah agreed, saying, "You feel resentful because they won't allow you to live there with me and I am a bit resentful because they don't want me."

Healy, whose English now betrays a slight Irish accent after six years of living in Northern Ireland, is very angry at the U.S.

"No I don't hate America. I certainly hate its policies at the moment towards me and towards you," she said. And she said she would consider going home if the laws were changed.

Colleen, on the other hand, Healy admits, would go to America tomorrow.

"I want to go the U.S. I love the U.S.," Colleen gushed.

But both couples realize the fight for equal immigration rights for gays and lesbians in the U.S. and abroad is not really about them anymore. Both couples wanted above all else for people to hear their stories so that they become aware of the issue.

"People need to be aware it is not just one person, one couple," Colleen said. "It's happened to a lot of them."

"The world is so small now," Healy added.

Which was precisely the point of passing the Uniting American Families Act, Kat said. "It's not just for us. It's for everybody. Maybe at that point in our lives we won't want to move back to America but in 10 years I know there are going to be bi-national couples in the same situation we were six years ago and they should be together and they should have the option to go where they want to go," Kat said adamantly.

Sarah thinks of it as a personal affront that one person in an immigration office can tell someone they can't live with someone they love. "If (any couple) put themselves in that position they might actually want to do something about it for everybody else."

29-May-07 | 8:11 PM
Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)
Filed under: Profiles



E-mail this page | Printer-friendly version

Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):

TrackBack URL for this entry