Last never say never. Canada or any country , thinfs can change. Do not be too wedded to some national image.
Thereby defeating the entire purpose behind universal health coverage...If they do not qualify for drugs many times, what is stopping Cabada to tweak the rules a bit to also include Major operations in some cases?
There is no large Constituional principle coming in the way then.
Yes, Canada is ossified and dull and unsophisticated. Definitely not good enough for the likes of you. Feel free to move to one of those enlightened countries that "withholds public funds".The cases that has been cited are older than the one I cited above.
I think it is an open question what will happen if someone will take this case to the federal courts.
But as I said what happens if someone makes a contract with a private insurance that they legally commit to pay for life for general health or some condition. If one can back out of that, one can back out of anything.
One can also enter into a legal agreement with Canadian government that one will not rely on social services of Canada taking care of a menatal condition in their own.
PR is also not the same as citizenship. It is easy to distinguish between the two. The inability to do so is at the heart of much of EU recent problems with migrants. The same seem to be happening in Canada too. A self inflicted wound. If one country can withhold public funds to let jt term visa holders it can and should do to PR too.
These simple things, if it cannot be solved by a society in general. It is a sign of an ossified and dull society masquerading as a progressive society. Irrationality does not last when people are made aware of that. Stupidity can sustain it for long but not when knowledge dawns.
Here the situation is ridiculous; people are being denied admission on he grounds Canada will compulsorily take careful of them. At least see the irony here.
The simple solution is have people legally fill bonds with the government that they voluntarily withdraw from some forms of utilisation of public funds which their status will ordinarily make them eligible. So no special resident class is created. Just certain individuals with slightly unconventional contracts with the federal government. Why Canada is too unsophisticated to do that? As soon as they renege on that bond, out goes their cisanstatus . Needs a little bit of spark to solve these issues.
No does not defeat it. It makes a huge positive difference in life of specific individuals. It doesn't nothing to rest of people. Not even PR family members of those individuals, much less general population.Thereby defeating the entire purpose behind universal health coverage...
Canadian society is great. Not sure about government . Sorry if you feel offended. I chose Canada for a reason.Yes, Canada is ossified and dull and unsophisticated. Definitely not good enough for the likes of you. Feel free to move to one of those enlightened countries that "withholds public funds".
Sorry but where exactly was the court case you cited, that had someone overcome excessive demand due to having private insurance??Tony20182017 said:The cases that has been cited are older than the one I cited above.
Doubtful you can find one in which the insurer can't cancel it or raise premiums later, especially for general medical procedures that would normally be covered by healthcare. The whole basis of private health insurance plans is they are subject to regular renewals where the insurer can make any changes they want.But as I said what happens if someone makes a contract with a private insurance that they legally commit to pay for life for general health or some condition. If one can back out of that, one can back out of anything.
No, there is zero capacity at present to enter into such an agreement with the government since no law allows for it. What you are suggesting is currently a legal impossibility. If you are thinking things will change soon, well you may be waiting a long time.One can also enter into a legal agreement with Canadian government that one will not rely on social services of Canada taking care of a menatal condition in their own.
The excessive demand criteria projects 10 years out after someone becomes a PR. And a PR can become a citizen in around 3-4 years. So there will be a very long period of time during the 10 year excessive demand test, that the person will be a citizen of Canada, not a PR.PR is also not the same as citizenship. It is easy to distinguish between the two.
Personally, I would be fine with something like this.The simple solution is have people legally fill bonds with the government that they voluntarily withdraw from some forms of utilisation of public funds which their status will ordinarily make them eligible. So no special resident class is created. Just certain individuals with slightly unconventional contracts with the federal government. Why Canada is too unsophisticated to do that? As soon as they renege on that bond, out goes their cisanstatus . Needs a little bit of spark to solve these issues.
While this might work on paper what happens to those who have intertwined their entire lives here. Now suddenly you want them to be returned to whence they came because they decided to avail themselves of medical which they signed a contract to that they wouldn't?The simple solution is have people legally fill bonds with the government that they voluntarily withdraw from some forms of utilisation of public funds which their status will ordinarily make them eligible. So no special resident class is created. Just certain individuals with slightly unconventional contracts with the federal government. Why Canada is too unsophisticated to do that? As soon as they renege on that bond, out goes their cisanstatus . Needs a little bit of spark to solve these issues.
Canada has now made major changes to the medical inadmissibility clause. My son also has DS and we received our PR in Sep 2018.Our family is planning to transfer in Canada, but my son have down syndrome. Is it possible to apply a family PR excluding our son in the process? I understand the policy and is willing to apply my son on a long term multiple entry visa instead. I just want to know if this is possible, or did anyone have an experience on partial family PR application? Thanks.
@sjose can you please whatsapp me at +92 303 8959664 wana discuse my case and need some advise as my baby is also suffering with some issues but not yet finally diagnosed. His age is 5 months now and doctor having some doubt of CP but not yet confirmed as symptoms are mild. We are expecting our medicals in November or December and at that time my baby will be 12 to 13 months old.Canada has now made major changes to the medical inadmissibility clause. My son also has DS and we received our PR in Sep 2018. I would encourage you to apply .