medical on kids not in application?

[RickNicky]

situation is at final stage ,canada now making medicals on wifes kids in uk that are not part of application for PR mandatory at a cost of 317.00 each
they state that this is needed in order to retain our right to sponsor the kids at any time in the future should some sort of accident happen and the children require care"ex death of father etc.
keep in mind they also admit that should we ever start a sponsorship for children more medicals at that time required
sounds like extortion to me
i just cant get around the logic of this ,is there any recourse.
can they really state 10 years from now should a childs family be killed in a catastrophe that their mother cant bring them to canada unless she pays money for un necesary medicals now?

 

[RobsLuv]

situation is at final stage ,canada now making medicals on wifes kids in uk that are not part of application for PR mandatory at a cost of 317.00 each
they state that this is needed in order to retain our right to sponsor the kids at any time in the future should some sort of accident happen and the children require care"ex death of father etc.
keep in mind they also admit that should we ever start a sponsorship for children more medicals at that time required
sounds like extortion to me
i just cant get around the logic of this ,is there any recourse.
can they really state 10 years from now should a childs family be killed in a catastrophe that their mother cant bring them to canada unless she pays money for un necesary medicals now?

Yes, they can really do that - and they have! There is no way around this - all dependent children of an applicant HAVE to be medically examined (and criminally examined if they are over the age of 18), whether or not they are accompanying the applicant to Canada. This is to preserve their eligibility as members of the family class. It is true - if you do not have them examined, they have to be excluded from the PR application and they can NEVER be sponsored to Canada in the future - even if something happens to their father. And CIC does not like to allow this to happen. It might help you to read through Section 5.10, and especially 5.12 of the OP2 Processing Manual. The language is very strong.

An applicant has to declare ALL of their eligible (for sponsorship) family members prior to receiving their own permanent residence, and those family members have to be examined as to their eligibility to be sponsored, before the applicant receives permanent resident status. This is designed to safeguard against future litigation from immigrants who suddenly "discover" family members that they want to sponsor to Canada after they land in Canada. If the family member was not examined as part of the original application, they are NOT eligible to be sponsored - period. CIC understands the predicament this puts legitimate parents in - so they simply require that it's done upfront as a protection, and they don't like to allow parents to exclude dependent children from their applications over a simple medical exam. Fighting this will accomplish nothing except significantly delaying the processing of your application.

Don't think of it as "extortion" - think of it as an insurance policy. It is true that they will need to undergo another medical if there is ever an application made to sponsor them in the future - but some applicants have to have a medical exam re-do for an original application (if it takes longer to process their application than the year the medical is valid for), so it's just part of the process. CIC does not get the money the DMP collects for the exam - that's the DMP's renumeration for the exam.

 

[RickNicky]

Thank you for the fast reply i have no issue and agree with declaring all children,i agree that the goverment has to know what they might be dealing with in the future.
The part i dont get is the 1000.00 spent for exams on children that arent coming here considering that if they ever were they would have to have same again,this is teh part that makes absolutely no sense to me.

 

[RobsLuv]

Thank you for the fast reply i have no issue and agree with declaring all children,i agree that the goverment has to know what they might be dealing with in the future.
The part i dont get is the 1000.00 spent for exams on children that arent coming here considering that if they ever were they would have to have same again,this is teh part that makes absolutely no sense to me.

I understand - believe me. I have two adult sons - over the age of 18 at the time of our application - who NEVER intended to come to Canada and we still had to have them examined. It was going to cost in excess of $1100 USD to have them medically examined at home - so they flew to Canada for a visit and underwent examination here, at $178 CDN each. Might that be an option for you guys?

I guess the reasoning is that people might leave a child off an application because the child has a medical condition that they believe makes the child inadmissible to Canada - and then once they get to Canada, they apply under Humanitarian and Compassionate grounds to bring the child. Actually this is sorta dumb because the dependent children of a spousal/common-law applicant are excessive demand exempt anyway - but the IRPA and Regs apply to all types of applicants across the board, and a medically inadmissible dependent for another type of applicant (for example, a Skilled Worker) WILL make not only the child, but the parent applicant, inadmissible. So you can see why some people might want to avoid examination of dependents - so they can get into Canada, and then they try to bring their children under H&C.

I agree, it can be unfair. But the fact remains that without dooming your wife and her children to being forever separated (unless she returns to the UK), you have no other option.

 

[RickNicky]

This reallt caught my eye could you elaborate"Actually this is sorta dumb because the dependent children of a spousal/common-law applicant are excessive demand exempt anyway "

 

[RickNicky]

something else just caught my eye making this whole process really pointless ..opinions?

Exceptions to medical inadmissibility
A38(2)(a) states that spouses, common-law partners and dependent children who are members of
the family class are not inadmissible even if they have a medical condition that will result in
excessive demand to health or social services.
R24 provides further exemption from medical inadmissibility that might reasonably be expected to
cause excessive demand on health or social services for conjugal partners and children to be
adopted.

 

[RickNicky]

Just realized i answered my own question so now what doesnt matter same applies?

 

[RobsLuv]

Basically, yes, same applies. We could take this so far as to say that it doesn't make sense that spousal and dependent child applicants are even required to undergo medical examination if they're exempt from inadmissibility due to medical issues anyway . . . so, yeah, it's all pointless. But ALL applicants, whether Family Class, Skilled Workers, Entrepreneurs, etc., undergo medical examination anyway . . . and lots of spousal applicants even have to undergo a second medical exam if the first one expires before PR is finalized. How much sense does that make? But you're dealing with a government bureaucracy and they follow "rules". I've discovered they're really not that great at applying common sense or logic to the rules, and they're even less adept at interpreting the "rules" - but, as I said before, trying to fight it will only hurt you in the long run. See, they don't care if your wife ever gets PR!! You're the only ones with anything to lose.

Not complying will result in long delays in processing your application, they will not "argue" the point with you, or make an exception because, if they make an exception in your case, they have to make one for everybody. The only way they will relent is to allow you to exclude the children from the application - and from eligibility in the Family Class - which means they will NEVER be able to be sponsored to Canada. Most of us don't want to back ourselves into that corner simply for the sake of argument.

 

[RickNicky]

Thanks again for all your input here just out of curiousityconcerning this

"Where, however, the applicant has declared the person and CIC chooses not to examine the
family member, for example, because of an administrative decision or for policy reasons, or due to
an administrative error, the family member is not excluded from membership in the family class."

Now this seems to imply that CIC could choose not to by policy or administrative reasons any idea what door they are leaving open here example?

seems pretty airtight from teh applicant side all uselessness to the contrary as we discovered above,now this makes me wonder why the officers need a backdoor?

 

[RobsLuv]

Basically my understanding of this is that there was a time when this was discretionary, and/or when some family members were not allowed to be included in applications. So, if that was the case, an applicant now, who was originally processed under that premise, cannot be penalized because things have changed since. It kinda goes into it in the OP2 Processing Manual, in Section 5.12 - in fact, that section makes specific note of the fact that current refugee claimants are not required to have non-accompanying family members examined.

Many of the family class cases that are currently being processed have a sponsor who immigrated to Canada under the previous legislation. Under the previous legislation, certain persons either did not have to be examined as part of the application or could not be examined due to an administrative policy or decision taken by CIC.

There are two groups of persons who fall into the above category:

• The family members of an applicant for refugee status did not have to be examined as part of the application. (In addition, it should be noted that under the current Regulations, i.e., R176, the non-accompanying family members of a protected person who is seeking to remain in Canada as a permanent resident, are not required to be examined and therefore should not be excluded from the family class in a subsequent sponsorship);
  • Where an application for H&C consideration was made in Canada, CIC did not allow the overseas family members to be included as part of the application. Consequently, they were not examined.
    In addition, under the previous legislation, there were situations where an application could proceed even though the applicant made a decision not to have a family member examined, namely:
    • where a dependent child was in the custody of the sponsor's spouse or ex-spouse;
      where the applicant was formally separated from their spouse.
      

Obviously, the more "exceptions" to the rule - the more confusion and the more appeals allowed for applicants who can prove that they were not adequately notified that they were excluding a family member by not adhering to some vague requirement that applied in this case, but not in that one. I think they just tried to simplify things by making it mandatory for pretty much everyone (except the non-accompanying family members of refugee claimants) to be examined - just to tighten the processing boundaries and clean up the "technicalities" that were allowing "everybody and their uncle" into Canada under appeal.

 

[mitamata]

Basically, yes, same applies. We could take this so far as to say that it doesn't make sense that spousal and dependent child applicants are even required to undergo medical examination if they're exempt from inadmissibility due to medical issues anyway . . . so, yeah, it's all pointless.

Don't forget, excessive demand exempt doesn't mean they'll let anyone in if they pose a danger to public health. So if you have an active tuberculosis for example, they won't let you in until you recover from it. So I wouldn't say it's entirely pointless. But yes, for depandants that aren't coming with you, it does seem pointless.

 

[RobsLuv]

I agree, and good point. It is true that even though something, at least something curable, that is a threat to public health would not make a spousal/dependent child applicant inadmissible, it will most certainly delay their entry to Canada. So, if nothing else, the medical exam for accompanying family members and applicants isn't pointless . . . the non-accompanying ones - I really believe it's to prevent people from hiding medical conditions that might make them or their dependents inadmissible under OTHER types of application, like skilled worker, etc.

In addition - criminal clearances are required of both accompanying and non-accompanying family members (or dependents of a spousal applicant) and a criminal record CAN make a spousal applicant inadmissible. Even the criminal record of a dependent family member, if they're designated as accompanying, can make a spousal applicant inadmissible. If they're not accompanying, it's not supposed to make the applicant inadmissible per s23 of the Regulations - but that's the reason they refused my application and we're still under appeal so don't know if that will be overturned or not.

 

[cchabert]

What happen if you don't have any way to know where you children are because your ex-wife disappear with them after a very nasty divorce 10 years a go and you start a new live with new children and wife? Does CIC will require medicals for them?

 

[RickNicky]

you supply last known information ,it is the applicants responsibility to do all that is requested to the best of their ability
I was told that if no response comes from kids gaurdian within a period of time"no idea how long"
then it would be deemed a refusal from the custodial parent and the applicant has done their part.
the only thing is then the children would not be on your application for any future right to sponsor them ,you would have to waive that right.
Your CIC Rep could confirm this for you as far as exact procedure to follow.

 

[Julie0430]

My American husband and I received a letter from Buffalo (we're doing an inland app which we sent to Veg March 25th) asking for pics and a birth certificate for his son who lives in the US with his mother. It said we had two months to provide the info. We've had problems getting the birth certificate and photos from the mother and now we are over the two month preriod. Does anyone know what will happen to our case since we're over the time limit? Is his application still being processed in Veg? I've emailed Buffalo but still no reply!