An Afrikaner family with two minor children has been left stranded in South Africa after US authorities refused to allow them to return, just 15 days after they arrived in the country as refugees.
The family had travelled back to South Africa to seek urgent medical treatment after one of the children and the father became ill. When they tried to fly back to the United States six days later, they were stopped at the airport because they did not have the required travel documents.
The family is now staying at a friend’s home and living out of suitcases after selling their belongings before leaving for the US. The father, who is in his thirties, spoke about their situation on condition that his identity not be disclosed.
He said the family had not intended to abandon the US refugee programme. They had been in the country for only a short time and had not yet been fully registered on all the systems or secured medical aid.
“There is absolutely nothing wrong with the refugee programme. We had barely arrived – we were not yet on all the systems – when one of our children and I became very ill. We also did not yet have medical aid, and the doctors could only help us so much before we were sent to a pharmacy.”
The family decided to return to South Africa because they still had access to medical aid and medical support at home. They planned to obtain treatment and fly back to the US six days later.
“We decided to fly back to South Africa to get help. We immediately got antibiotics and were due to fly back six days later. However, we were stopped at the airport because we did not have the necessary travel documents.”
The family’s situation reflects the strict conditions attached to refugee status. Refugees who return to the country they said they fled from can risk losing that status because the return may suggest that they no longer fear persecution or danger there.
US authorities generally expect refugees to obtain permission before travelling outside the country. A refugee who leaves the US without the correct travel document may face difficulty returning, even if the trip was brief and motivated by a medical emergency.
The father said he believed the family had no realistic alternative at the time. They had only recently arrived in a large country, did not yet know how to find a general practitioner and had not been fully connected to the systems they needed.
“We had not been there long enough to be loaded onto all the systems and so forth. We also still had medical aid in South Africa, and it made sense to come here. We had to. Everything happened so fast – there we were in this enormous country, not even knowing a GP.”
He said the family now regretted the decision because they had not fully understood the consequences of returning to South Africa.
“We are heartbroken. We tried to rely on their system, but we ultimately had no choice but to come back. I did not think about the possible consequences, and that was foolish of me. We have good medical care in South Africa, and I simply thought to fall back on that.”
The family wants to return to the US and continue with the resettlement process, but says it has not received a clear answer about what steps must be taken. Their caseworker has tried to assist, but the family currently has no confirmed route back.
“We desperately want to go back to the US, but we do not know how. I wish we could continue with the programme. Unfortunately, no one has answers for us right now. Our caseworker has also tried to help, but we currently have no way forward.”
The family’s belongings and financial position have made the situation even more difficult. Before departing for the US, they sold their possessions in preparation for a new life. They are now staying with a friend while waiting for information about their immigration status and possible travel options.
Zach Kahler, a spokesperson for US Citizenship and Immigration Services, said the Department of Homeland Security remained committed to resettling Afrikaner refugees who were being persecuted by the South African government.
He said people who were already outside the US could, in certain circumstances, apply for a travel document. The application would generally need to be made within one year of leaving the US, and the applicant would have to provide evidence explaining why the document had not been obtained before departure.
Kahler said a person who had returned to the country from which they originally fled would also need to explain how the return had been made safely.
“If a refugee is already abroad, USCIS has the discretion to allow him or her to apply for a travel document, provided the application is submitted within one year of the person leaving the US.”
“In such cases, the applicant must provide evidence and explain why he or she did not apply before departing. Furthermore, if the person has returned to the country from which they originally fled, they must explain how this could be done safely.”
The International Refugee Assistance Project, which assists refugees around the world, says refugees generally require a special travel document if they want to leave the US and return later.
The organisation warns that travelling to a refugee’s country of origin can lead to the termination of refugee status. It can also create problems when the person later applies for permanent residence or citizenship.
“Should you travel to your country of origin, your refugee status can be terminated. People receive refugee status because they are in danger in their home country. If you return, the US government takes the view that you may no longer be in danger. It can also create problems when you later apply for a green card or citizenship.”
Chris Wyatt, a retired colonel and commentator familiar with the refugee programme, said applicants needed to understand that refugee resettlement was not the same as an ordinary relocation or holiday arrangement.
He said that under exceptional circumstances a refugee might be able to travel to the country of origin and return to the US, but only after receiving explicit permission from the government.
“Under exceptional circumstances, you could potentially travel to your home country and return to the US, but you would need explicit permission from the government. We spend millions of dollars resettling people here only for them to leave the country again and return home.”
The incident comes as the US refugee programme for Afrikaners continues to expand. Organisations involved in processing applications and assisting with resettlement have had their government contracts extended until September 2027. The combined value of one such contract is nearly $29 million, about R473 million.
A separate group has also secured a contract worth about R6 million. By the end of August, 12 904 South Africans had been relocated to the US through the programme, against a financial-year target of 17 500.
More than 2 500 South Africans have reportedly left for the US each month since July. The contracts indicate that the programme will continue for at least another year, although the final number of people to be accommodated has not been confirmed.
For the stranded family, however, wider programme figures offer little comfort. They are focused on their children’s health, their uncertain immigration status and the possibility of returning to the life they had started building in the US.
Their case is now a warning to other refugees that leaving the United States without the correct permission can have serious consequences. Even a brief return motivated by illness may affect a person’s status and ability to re-enter.
Until the family receives a decision or travel document, it remains caught between two countries, with its possessions sold, its plans interrupted and its future uncertain.
