Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Dilemmas: A marriage of inconvenience

Virginia Ironside
Wednesday 28 July 1993 23:02 BST
Comments

THERE was a general shaking of heads over the matter of Joe, who had been asked to enter a marriage of convenience for the sake of a charming Nigerian girl. Unless Amina got married, she would have to return home to poverty, and be unable to continue her musical studies in this country.

How much should someone from the West sacrifice to give a better future to a friend from a developing country? Would it be morally wrong to tell her to go home - or morally wrong to break the law to help someone you care for?

Last week's saviour, Anne Innes of Malmesbury, Wiltshire, was adamant: 'Joe should reject out of hand the hare-brained scheme. It would be imprudent, dishonest, counter- productive and almost certainly illegal if the intention were to contravene the Immigration Acts. Such extreme and quixotic gestures might be justifiable in a case of life or death (to rescue a friend from the Nazis or Saddam Hussein, perhaps), but would be wildly inappropriate here.'

She suggested Amina and Joe try to raise money for Amina's college fees here by fund-raising - 'the Home Office will usually grant temporary residence for educational purposes unless they suspect that it's a cover for illegal immigration'. Joe's family could offer free board and lodging.

But some readers rather craved a Mills & Boonish end to the tale. While disapproving of a marriage of convenience, many hoped that Joe and Amina might fall in love. 'Who knows?' mused Sally Guthrie of York. 'They might love each other with greater durability than many with more romantic notions.'

And Emily Marbach of London wrote: 'What does Joe gain? Perhaps a good friend, someone to share the heating bills with, a sense that he is doing his little bit to help someone from a developing country, a big responsibility and maybe, who knows, a lover and a real wife. Sometimes such marriages of convenience work out.'

No one mentioned the legal responsibilities that Joe would be taking on. For instance, were she to get pregnant, he might have trouble proving he was not the father and could end up having to go to court to avoid paying maintenance. He would have to be sure of Amina before he signed on the dotted line at the register office.

Highly suspicious of all the goings on, a Sherlock Holmes with an enormous magnifying glass appeared in the shape of Susannah K M Crow of Edinburgh. She lived for eight years in Nigeria and learnt that if you don't ask the right questions, you won't get the right answer.

Her credentials as a sleuth were established when she deduced that Amina could not be a pianist - 'because I witnessed one of the last tours by the last piano-tuner in Nigeria, the end of a long line in a notable Lagos family'.

She was wary of the whole set-up. First, she said, Amina's name tells us she is Muslim. Since she has come to England on a visit, she must be Westernised or liberal.

'It would be a serious mistake to assume that because she has her natural father or mother she has therefore lost her family lifelines; it is in the nature of families in Nigeria to have a series of aunties, senior brothers, uncles and others whose function involves helping to provide for such 'orphans'.

'Her life is also not devoid of cash. An economy return bought in Nigeria is comparable with the annual salary of a local high-ranking civil servant. Amina did not earn her fare working in a pizza parlour on Saturdays and she couldn't pay for it with plastic. If she swears she doesn't have any source of income back home, then somebody bought her ticket, or else she earned a lot of money very quickly.'

In other words, is Joe being taken for a ride? He really must think of himself and what he is letting himself in for. Claire Jones of London warned: 'Should Joe marry Amina simply to allow her to stay in this country and then get divorced, he may find he meets someone who will not marry a divorcee. This actually happened to a friend of ours whose long-term relationship broke down because, as a Catholic, coupled with tremendous family pressures, she would not marry someone who was divorced.'

One writer said that the scheme was so risky that Joe would be mad to go ahead without at least extorting a fee from the girl. Apparently pounds 3,500 is the going rate.

And with pursed lips, Sue McGregor of Andover, Hampshire, echoed my own feelings when she said: 'No, Joe should not marry Amina. It is rarely necessary to be dishonest in order to be helpful.'

Perhaps Jean Summers of Brentwood, Essex, summed it up. 'The old adage, 'If in doubt, don't' clearly applies in Joe's case,' she wrote. 'To enter into marriage with anything other than the intention of making a lifetime commitment is utterly foolish. We risk hurting not only ourselves and our partner but also a whole network of family and friends.

'If Joe wants to help Amina, then he can seek ways in which her studies can be funded either here or abroad, and if they both later feel ready for a lifelong commitment, then by all means marry - and stay together.'

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in