🌐 简体中文
TEZ Brief · Special issue · November 2026
This special issue takes one question: can someone who was abused by a parent as a child qualify for asylum in the United States? Possibly, but the answer turns less on how badly the person was hurt than on why. Below we set out how U.S. law looks at these claims and what to bring to your attorney.
Serious harm alone is not enough for asylum
Asylum protects people persecuted because of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership in a particular social group (INA § 101(a)(42)(A)). One of these protected grounds must be at least one central reason for the harm (8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(B)(i)). It does not have to be the only reason, but it cannot be incidental. When the abuser is a parent or another private person, the applicant must also show that the government was unable or unwilling to protect them, and must meet the filing deadline and avoid the bars. Severe abuse can be persecution, but it does not qualify on its own.
What to do: When you tell us what happened, also tell us why it happened: what your parent said and what the abuse was about. That is often where the case turns.
Source: 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (Cornell LII) · 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42) (Cornell LII)
The parent's reason for the abuse decides the claim
Take three fathers who beat their sons. The first drinks and loses his temper: serious abuse, but anger alone may not be persecution on account of a protected ground. The second targets his son because of the boy's ties to his mother's family: a family-based social group may apply if family membership was a central reason, though recent decisions have narrowed these claims. The third beats his son for refusing the father's religion: that can be persecution on account of religion. In Matter of S-A-, 22 I&N Dec. 1328 (BIA 2000), the Board granted asylum to a daughter persecuted by her father over her religious beliefs.
What to do: Never invent or overstate a motive. Give us your parent's actual words, threats and any pattern in who was targeted. Credible testimony and the circumstances can prove motive without an admission.
Source: Matter of S-A-, 22 I&N Dec. 1328 (BIA 2000)
Being a child is not a social group by itself
A particular social group must be immutable, defined with particularity and socially distinct (Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26 I&N Dec. 227 (BIA 2014)). On July 20, 2026, the Ninth Circuit held in Garcia Demetrio v. Blanche, No. 25-991, that age-based groups meet the immutability test, because a person cannot change the age at which they were persecuted. The group must still be particular and socially distinct. On June 26, 2026, the Board held in Matter of A-G-O-F-, 29 I&N Dec. 772, that "Brazilian children" and "abandoned Brazilian children" were not particular enough. A group defined only as children abused by their parents is likely to fail, because it is defined by the harm itself.
What to do: Do not rely on age alone. A claim built on age needs evidence that the group has clear limits and is seen as a distinct group in China, such as country reports.
Source: Garcia Demetrio v. Blanche, No. 25-991 (9th Cir. 2026) · Matter of A-G-O-F-, 29 I&N Dec. 772 (BIA 2026)
Never telling the police is not automatically fatal
When a parent is the abuser, the applicant must show the government was unable or unwilling to protect them. In Matter of C-G-T-, 28 I&N Dec. 740 (BIA 2023), decided September 8, 2023, the Board held that a failure to report private abuse does not automatically defeat the claim. It can be excused if reporting would have been futile or dangerous. The Board recognized that children may be unable to approach officials, that an abuser may block contact or retaliate, and that young children may not see mistreatment as abuse. A belief that reporting was pointless is not enough by itself; the whole record must show that protection was not available.
What to do: Explain why you did not report: your age, who controlled you, what you feared, and what happened to anyone who did report. Bring anything that supports this.
Source: Matter of C-G-T-, 28 I&N Dec. 740 (BIA 2023)
China has family violence laws; practice is the question
China's Anti-Domestic Violence Law took effect on March 1, 2016, with reporting, intervention and protection orders, and its Law on the Protection of Minors prohibits maltreating children. So it is not accurate to say China has no laws against parental abuse. The question is whether protection was actually available to this child: whether anyone was told, how the authorities responded, and whether asking for help would have exposed the child to more harm. A law on the books does not prove protection worked, and the existence of family violence does not prove the government failed.
What to do: Tell us who you or others asked for help, such as teachers, relatives, police or hospitals, and what they did. Country conditions evidence will be needed.
Source: Anti-Domestic Violence Law of the PRC (NPC)
Abused as a child, applying as an adult
Proving past persecution creates a presumption of future persecution. The government can answer it by showing circumstances have fundamentally changed, for example that the parent is no longer a danger, or that the applicant can reasonably relocate within the country. Someone abused at 12 who is now 30 may face a different risk than a child still at home. Humanitarian asylum under 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(b)(1)(iii) may be available when past persecution was severe or other serious harm is possible, but only if that past persecution met every asylum requirement. In Matter of A-G-O-F-, the Board vacated a humanitarian grant because that requirement was not met.
What to do: Tell us whether your parent still threatens you, where they live now, and whether you could live safely somewhere else in China.
Source: 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13 (eCFR)
Family violence claims face stricter rules since 2025
On September 2, 2025, the Attorney General decided Matter of S-S-F-M-, 29 I&N Dec. 207. It reinstated the 2018 decision in Matter of A-B-, which narrowed claims based on harm by private actors, and overruled Matter of A-R-C-G-, which had recognized some domestic violence groups. Immigration judges and the Board must follow it in all pending and future cases. A companion decision issued the same day, Matter of R-E-R-M- & J-D-R-M-, 29 I&N Dec. 202, reinstated a restrictive precedent on family-based groups. Results now depend heavily on the facts and on the federal circuit where the case is heard.
What to do: If you have a pending claim based on family violence, have it reviewed against the current precedents before your next hearing. Filing deadlines and bars still apply.
Source: Matter of S-S-F-M-, 29 I&N Dec. 207 (A.G. 2025) · EOIR precedent decisions, Volume 29
The question that matters most
The key question is not only “How badly were you hurt?” but also “Why were you targeted?” Asylum has filing deadlines and bars, and every case turns on its own facts. If you are considering asylum or are in removal proceedings, speak with an immigration attorney about your situation.
As of November 5, 2026. The law in this area is changing quickly.
This article is general information, not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Laws and agency practices change; contact TEZ Law Firm (West Covina, California) at 626-888-6856 or [email protected] about your situation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.