Refugees "visiting home"

[Notanotherkendoll]

I'm not sure how I feel after this conversation with a friend so would like to hear other opinions.
My friend took in a Ukrainian refugee back in 2022, she was a 18/19 year old teenager. She didn't stay for long before getting employment/started studying and was able to move out but they have remained in touch and my friend sort of views herself as the girls "uk mum".
Anyway friend is once again beside herself as she has gone back to Kyiv for a few days. This isn't the city she is from but sadly the city she was from was under siege for sometime and is now mostly destroyed. She is going to visit her family who all moved to Kyiv, as the only girl her family pushed her to flee when the war started but her mum stayed put.

This has me thinking, surely if it is safe enough for her to return home to visit, it's safe enough for her to move back? I thought the whole point of being a refugee was that your own country wasn't safe, if you are going back to visit how can that be the case?

AIBU to think it's incompatible with the very nature of being a refugee to be able to visit home?

It's because the anti-immigrant rhetoric in this country is out of control and these so called 'valid questions' and 'concerns' fuel the fire.

Id assume the risks are exactly the same . It’s not as if missiles pause to find out if you’re a resident or just there on a mini break, Russian soldiers don’t stop and check before they rape if someone is on holiday or actually lives there. The risk is the same I think it’s just those going home are desperate to see family so probably take the risk and try to keep their visits as short as they can ?

There is a war on. Her home town was flattened.
If she's working and studying and paying her way why are you so desperate for her not to stay in the UK?

This has me thinking, surely if it is safe enough for her to return home to visit, it's safe enough for her to move back?

Well let's think about this. Would you move to Ukraine? Is it safe enough for you?

What? Do you think having a lot of money in your bank account or expensive things will mean that the bombs and bullets will miss you? You don't have to be hard-up financially to be fleeing war (or, for men, depending on age and health, possibly also fleeing being drafted for the war effort).

You're talking sophistic and convoluted nonsense.

OP isn't being as fatuous as some think! This topic merits a 50 page policy explanation from the Home Office so it's not straightforward.

Article 1C of the Refugee Convention provides that the Convention no longer applies where someone voluntarily re-avails themselves of the protection of their home country, or takes up the protection of another - which is why someone ceases to be a refugee if they are subsequently granted British citizenship. If someone is a refugee from Iran, say, and they return to Iran while they hold refugee status then their refugee status will be revoked under part 11 of the Immigration Rules.

Similarly humanitarian protection can be revoked if the circumstances that caused it to be granted no longer apply.

When someone is granted refugee status they get 5 years leave. If they acquire another citizenship or return to their home country in that time their refugee status gets revoked, although they can travel elsewhere on their Refugee Convention travel document.

At the end of 5 years they apply for indefinite leave. If the situation in their home country hasn't changed then they get indefinite leave and a year later can apply for citizenship. If it has then the Home Office decide whether they should be allowed to stay or expected to return, and of course someone who has learned English, got a job, formed relationships etc will be in a better position than someone who hasn't.

Once they have citizenship they are no longer a refugee. Someone who came as a refugee, got citizenship, and then finds the situation in their home country has vastly improved may well choose to travel back for holidays.

As others have said though, Ukrainians were granted leave under a Ukraine-specific appendix to the Immigration Rules so these rules do not apply.

They have a different status.

People who receive visas through the Ukraine Family Scheme are not officially designated as asylum seekers or refugees but receive a different temporary status. This status has some benefits over claiming asylum because it entitles those issued visas under the scheme to the right to work, study, and claim benefits.
https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/ukrainian-migration-to-the-uk/#:~:text=People%20who%20receive%20visas%20through,%2C%20study%2C%20and%20claim%20benefits.

I have no problem supporting people here on a temporary basis due to circumstance to get an uninterrupted education and hopefully [for them] to return home at some point to help rebuild their country.

A true refugee would I think struggle to visit home for a "holiday" unless given the right to work and reside here as re-entry to the UK would be problematic. At that point I would not personally classify them as refugees as their cases have been reviewed and they have moved into resident or whatever category comes next.

You know that you can be rich, and still at risk of being bombed. What does wealth have to do with it? Can you only be a refugee if you’re poor???

TBH the Ukrainians i know, are all working, doing jobs we don't want to do, they also take an active part in our local community, one has organised a twinning with a Ukrainian town and does a Ukrainian evenings at the local community centre.

Perhaps those moaning about Ukrainians here will step up and become carers & nursery workers.

They will also return once or if, Ukraine is at peace again.

Insulting people because you're losing an argument isn't a good look. Neither is being a pedant.

Again, I have never suggested she has been granted refugee status. That is in your head and you seem a bit fixated.

She is here because she is fleeing a war. Emergency measures were rushed through and visas were given to expedite a quickly developing situation.

She is not here because she was granted a temporary visa. She is here because she was fleeing a war and therefore was granted a temporary visa.

I'm afraid this is either completely fabricated or your "acquaintance" is bullshitting you for what is no doubt an entertaining reaction.

Asylum seekers who leave the UK will have their claims unceremoniously withdrawn under paragraph 333C(b) of the Immigration Rules.

So long it is not on our taxes she can choose to do wherever she wants. The problem is when we have so little for our own poorest communities and some come to take advantage. If she is paying taxes and working to contribute under a working visa is fine. However, if she gets free education, accommodation and benefits because of the war going on but goes there when on a refugee status is different. Resources are very scarce but people are not willing to close the tap. Then complain about nothing working and poverty.

My Ukrainian guest (that sounds strange because after 2 years she is very much part of our family) goes home 2 or 3 times a year. It's terrifying . I worry about her every time she goes. However she has an elderly grandmother who won't move, her mother also has a younger daughter of school age , therefore as GM won't move and mum doesn't want to be separated from her young daughter, they are all obliged to stay. It's awful and dangerous.

I would never tell our guest, but I am willing the GM to pop her clogs (she's 91) and then her mum and sister will come and they will all be safe.

As for asylum seekers , I think there is a lot more abuse in that system than the homes for Ukraine scheme. I work in SOC and have run multiple prosecutions where the accused are naturalised British - having persuaded the govt that they have a 'well founded fear of persecution ' in there home country, gained ILR and then Citizenship. (Whilst committing multiple acts of criminality) Only for the country from where they are fleeing to be the first place they visit once safely in possession of a UK passport.

The irony being is that they travel on their birth countries passport to that country and back to UK on the British one. This isn't an occasional thing.. this has been going on habitually for at least 20 years.

In my mind, if you are granted asylum for humanitarian reasons and there hasn't been a substantial regime change in the country you forfeit your citizenship here if you return.

How utterly heartless some of the posts on this thread are.

Kyiv is NOT safe. But people are still living, working and going to school there and making the best of it.

We hosted a refugee family of a Mum and 2 kids 2 years ago. After missing her husband/kids dad and parents/grandparents terribly they returned to Kyiv. They endure daily drone attacks and long periods of time without power, heat or water which is only going to get worse as winter approaches.

Mum & kids recently travelled 30 hours by train to have a holiday in another European country which we happily contributed to. As the Mum said, the kids need a break from the rocket attacks. Men are not allowed to leave the country.

DH has been asked to go to Kyiv for business. I have told him I do not want him to go under any circumstances.

Please do not begrudge the refugees who live here the chance to see their loved ones at home for a short time. It may be the last time they see them.

I'll do you one better op, an instagram influencer I follow just went to Ukraine on holiday. Who the hell goes on holiday to a country where there is a war?

WhereIsMyDaughter
**
I personally don't have an opinion on the issue. I don't know all the facts and background to someone's situation and it's not my place to sit here and judge. If they are here legally, that's the main thing“

The background is that the young Ukrainian woman in question is not a guest or friend of the poster. Her former host has no issue so what on earth has it to do with the OP?

Someone with nothing better to do than insinuate about a refugee’s motives on the internet when they clearly have bugger all idea of the dangers in that person’s home nation should they return does need to get a life.

She didn’t get killed on her short visit? Obviously it is totally safe then. Probably just using her country’s war against a global superpower to have an easy life over here.

If we're playing top trumps, a female Instagram influencer went to Afghanistan and posed with the Taliban and talked about feeling comfortable as a woman there.
There's no cure for stupid and few for handmaidens.

OriginalUsername2 · Today 11:51
I think so too. It’s a shame people can’t just politely educate the OP without all the bitchiness

OP clearly does not wish to be “educated” despite her “genuine”, honest, question.

there is a very unpleasant, racist undertone to her/his posts and to all of those agreeing with her/him.

Such unpleasant comments about people not seeking asylum but “seeking a better life”. What’s wrong with that? Thousands of Brits do the same in Spain and France every year. Oh, hang on, they’re British so that’s different, obviously.

Seriously?

Their home town could be taken over at any given moment, and they would have to gain refugee status/a visa/ asylum immediately, whilst everyone else is rushing to do the same. Maybe they will get one before the soldiers get there, maybe they won’t. That’s very different to being there for a short period but having somewhere you can legally get back to easily.

It’s really not difficult to understand. You can’t just “hold” refugee status somewhere else until you might need it.

🤨

Would you visit Kyiv at the moment OP? Would you feel completely at ease if you did?

I sure as hell wouldn't.

But if my family were there, I think I would think the risk would be worth it to see my family, especially if I was only 19. That's so young.

It sounds like she has coped remarkably well under very difficult circumstances but most probably misses her family and home very much. Good luck to her.

You don't sound very nice OP.

Ye, super safe out there.
I don’t know if some of you are plain stupid or just ignorant but jfc

This is hilarious.

You've said she is a refugee. Your exact words were 'She's apparently fleeing a war so that makes her a refugee, whatever her legal status'.

As well as showing that you did call her a refugee, this is also completely wrong. There's literally a whole category of protection for people fleeing wars who don't fall under the ambit of the Refugee Convention, in fact.

The fact that you think the difference between being a refugee and being not a refugee whilst having a different type of leave to remain is mere semantics and pedantry says everything. You don't know what you're talking about.

Yes and she isn't going back to where she came from but to another, safer, city where her family have taken shelter.

Op, the girl no longer lives with you so what does it matter?

I can understand people wanting to see their loved ones and being prepared to take the risk though I doubt anyone from Syria would do the same.