Residency obligation short daughter to come to Canada to study

[arun.k]

Hi, Thank you for your time reading this. I came to Canada in 2010 on student permit and subsequently was admitted as PR along with wife and child under Ontario PNP. I am employed in Canada first as a grad student and from 2013 on a regular full time job. Due to my parent's old age and health situation only I could remain in Canada . My wife couldn't stay on and child went back with mother. They have visited Canada few times but do not meet residency obligation in any way. My PR card renewal is currently in process. My daughter, now 17 year old, has admission offers from five universities including UofT and McMaster. I would like to get her to Canada for her studies and potentially live here, but first preference is to get her to join the university in September. I am torn between the following options.

Option 1. Renounce PR status and simultaneously apply for student visa
Option 2: Renounce PR and subsequently apply for student visa
Option 3: Apply for PRTD on humanitarian grounds. If rejected, do not appeal and apply for student permit
Option 4: Land border crossing with a humanitarian application.
In her case the humanitarian reason is, being a minor she lived outside Canada only because it was not her decision and now she is coming back with a plan to study and potentially live here.

Any suggestions or thoughts welcome.
Thank you again

 

[canuck78]

Hi, Thank you for your time reading this. I came to Canada in 2010 on student permit and subsequently was admitted as PR along with wife and child under Ontario PNP. I am employed in Canada first as a grad student and from 2013 on a regular full time job. Due to my parent's old age and health situation only I could remain in Canada . My wife couldn't stay on and child went back with mother. They have visited Canada few times but do not meet residency obligation in any way. My PR card renewal is currently in process. My daughter, now 17 year old, has admission offers from five universities including UofT and McMaster. I would like to get her to Canada for her studies and potentially live here, but first preference is to get her to join the university in September. I am torn between the following options.

Option 1. Renounce PR status and simultaneously apply for student visa
Option 2: Renounce PR and subsequently apply for student visa
Option 3: Apply for PRTD on humanitarian grounds. If rejected, do not appeal and apply for student permit
Option 4: Land border crossing with a humanitarian application.
In her case the humanitarian reason is, being a minor she lived outside Canada only because it was not her decision and now she is coming back with a plan to study and potentially live here.

Any suggestions or thoughts welcome.
Thank you again

Not sure why she would have H&C reasons while she had a parent living in Canada she could have lived with. You can certainly try but she had th opportunity to live in Canada since her parent lived in Canada.

 

[MidoRafa]

Hi, Thank you for your time reading this. I came to Canada in 2010 on student permit and subsequently was admitted as PR along with wife and child under Ontario PNP. I am employed in Canada first as a grad student and from 2013 on a regular full time job. Due to my parent's old age and health situation only I could remain in Canada . My wife couldn't stay on and child went back with mother. They have visited Canada few times but do not meet residency obligation in any way. My PR card renewal is currently in process. My daughter, now 17 year old, has admission offers from five universities including UofT and McMaster. I would like to get her to Canada for her studies and potentially live here, but first preference is to get her to join the university in September. I am torn between the following options.

Option 1. Renounce PR status and simultaneously apply for student visa
Option 2: Renounce PR and subsequently apply for student visa
Option 3: Apply for PRTD on humanitarian grounds. If rejected, do not appeal and apply for student permit
Option 4: Land border crossing with a humanitarian application.
In her case the humanitarian reason is, being a minor she lived outside Canada only because it was not her decision and now she is coming back with a plan to study and potentially live here.

Any suggestions or thoughts welcome.
Thank you again

Not commenting on the likelihood of success of H&C (no idea), but another option may be for her to renounce her PR (or it gets revoked) then you sponsor her as your dependent child? While the 2 processes are unlikely to be completed by September, it will at least give you both a sense of stability and a clean start for her (with new/valid COPR and PR card, ability to travel without fearing for her status, etc.). Perhaps she could defer admission for a semester or a year?

I am also not sure how her application for a student visa would be viewed given that her father lives in Canada and her "previous" PR status (assuming she renounces it before applying or it gets revoked by unsuccessfully requesting a PRTD). Her intent to return after studies may be somewhat difficult to demonstrate..

 

[MidoRafa]

Not sure why she would have H&C reasons while she had a parent living in Canada she could have lived with. You can certainly try but she had th opportunity to live in Canada since her parent lived in Canada.

I could be wrong but wouldn't it be possible to make the case that she didn't have a lot of influence over which parent to stay with and/or that it was in the teen's best interest to stay with the mom+extended family rather than with her student/employed father by himself?
They (IRCC) may also see that if they reject her PRTD, the father could later apply to sponsor her, so they may opt to save themselves a bunch of work down the road (pure speculation here!).

 

[Copingwithlife]

I could be wrong but wouldn't it be possible to make the case that she didn't have a lot of influence over which parent to stay with and/or that it was in the teen's best interest to stay with the mom+extended family rather than with her student/employed father by himself?
They (IRCC) may also see that if they reject her PRTD, the father could later apply to sponsor her, so they may opt to save themselves a bunch of work down the road (pure speculation here!).

The Government doesn’t operate on the “ save themselves a bunch of work down the road “ rule .
They operate by rules set out. The applicants are just numbers in an application.
The parents had a choice where their child should live , and now they and the child face the consequences.

 

[armoured]

Option 3: Apply for PRTD on humanitarian grounds. If rejected, do not appeal and apply for student permit.
Option 4: Land border crossing with a humanitarian application.

Personally I would suggest either of these paths. You do not, of course, have a guarantee that she'll be approved for a student visa if a PRTD is refused. But you would not have a guarantee of that in any of the other cases, either. You could subsequently apply for PR status if refused - which would likely take some time to process and therefore require (for example) deferring her study for an academic year.

If land border crossing, she would be admitted and given the opportunity to appeal should she be reported. I do not know whether it would be practical for her to study during the appeal period - there may be issues such as showing that she is a PR and hence eligible to study (with respect to the university, that is). The same possibility exists to apply anew for PR status, although then issues come up with whether she can remain in Canada in the interim.

There are some practical issues that may arise depending on the choices you make, such as (effectively) limited ability to travel outside Canada.

Although there can be strong opinions here about this, and no guarantees, my understanding is that IRCC has historically been relatively lenient with respect to minors or those who attempt to return as soon as or close to the age of 18, on the basis that it was their parents' choice.

You may wish to consult a lawyer. I believe if given PRTD she may be able to get a PR card but I am not clear on that.

In terms of making a PRTD application on H&C grounds, keep in mind that the intent of granting is for individuals who are determined to become established in Canada, not 'just thinking about it.'

 

[canuck78]

I could be wrong but wouldn't it be possible to make the case that she didn't have a lot of influence over which parent to stay with and/or that it was in the teen's best interest to stay with the mom+extended family rather than with her student/employed father by himself?
They (IRCC) may also see that if they reject her PRTD, the father could later apply to sponsor her, so they may opt to save themselves a bunch of work down the road (pure speculation here!).

You can certainly try but having her live with her mother was a personal choice made by the family when there was an option to live with her father knowing there was a residency obligation. It wasn't as though both the parents left Canada and the child had to move abroad. High school students can be pretty independent getting to school and returning home if a parent is still at work.

 

[armoured]

IF (or assuming that) the daughter applies at 18 (or in anticipation), I would assume that the decision will be made without consideration or negative judgments regarding the wisdom of the parents' choices for the daughter as a minor.

That is, indeed, the point of H&C consideration for an individual who was not compliant with RO as a minor.

(I do not know legalities but suspect that IRCC would not be overly insistent on the age 18 barrier and allow such a request at age 17 if the parents agreed 'to allow the daughter her choice in the matter' - given that age of majority and details can vary by jurisdiction)

 

[canuck78]

IF (or assuming that) the daughter applies at 18 (or in anticipation), I would assume that the decision will be made without consideration or negative judgments regarding the wisdom of the parents' choices for the daughter as a minor.

That is, indeed, the point of H&C consideration for an individual who was not compliant with RO as a minor.

(I do not know legalities but suspect that IRCC would not be overly insistent on the age 18 barrier and allow such a request at age 17 if the parents agreed 'to allow the daughter her choice in the matter' - given that age of majority and details can vary by jurisdiction)

To assume the same argument can be made for children who had both their parents leave Canada versus children where one parent has remained in Canada seems a bit of a stretch especially when the parents remained married. Think they should certainly try but I can certainly see the argument that the family had the option for the child to remain with the father in Canada to secure RO if the goal was to go to university in Canada. It is always up to IRCC!

 

[armoured]

To assume the same argument can be made for children who had both their parents leave Canada versus children where one parent has remained in Canada seems a bit of a stretch especially when the parents remained married. Think they should certainly try but I can certainly see the argument that the family had the option for the child to remain with the father in Canada to secure RO if the goal was to go to university in Canada. It is always up to IRCC!

You're right that it is up to IRCC, ultimately. And I can see the counter-argument - but I think it's wrong and suspect a lawyer would love to try that out and challenge it. (Not saying that's advisable, of course - and assuming it's a matter that's subject to legal arguments/justiciable)

If the underlying argument is that minors whose parents both left Canada gave their children no choice - it's making an assumption that split households (Canada/abroad) gave their children choice in the matter.

Perhaps that is true in some families, but the whole point of minors (largely) not being entirely responsible for their actions and choices is that no, they don't have final decision-making authority or responsibility in many important contexts.

And the comments above on this mostly are about the parents' choices.

Of course this argument strictly speaking applies if the daughter applies on her own as an adult - I don't know how it might be looked at if applying at age 17, for example.

But again, in the end, up to IRCC.

 

[dpenabill]

. . . My daughter, now 17 year old . . . I would like to get her to Canada for her studies and potentially live here, but first preference is to get her to join the university in September. I am torn between the following options.

Option 1. Renounce PR status and simultaneously apply for student visa
Option 2: Renounce PR and subsequently apply for student visa
Option 3: Apply for PRTD on humanitarian grounds. If rejected, do not appeal and apply for student permit
Option 4: Land border crossing with a humanitarian application.
In her case the humanitarian reason is, being a minor she lived outside Canada only because it was not her decision and now she is coming back with a plan to study and potentially live here.

From the 'dpenabill' peanut gallery (fwiw) --

Main option is to apply for PR TD and/or travel via the U.S., and plan to appeal if that becomes necessary. Back-up option, if PR status is lost, is for parent in Canada to sponsor the child for PR again.

My sense is that the safest approach is to make the PR TD application almost immediately AFTER the child reaches the age of 18. Odds of a favourable decision are likely good, subject to some exceptions.

Note, if the PR can travel via the U.S., and if the PR makes the PR TD application and that is denied, the PR can appeal and still travel to Canada via the U.S. and will be allowed entry. Moreover, the PR should then apply for a PR card with a good chance a one-year card will be issued. This would help with meeting school proof of status requirements.

The removed-as-a-minor H&C case is among those with the best-chance of success.


The Longer Explanation:

Few H&C cases are a sure-shot. Meaning that even though most RO H&C cases are not likely to be successful (probably not by a wide margin), some, "a few," are at least close to having very good odds of a favourable outcome.

Among the few who have what is nearly a sure-shot (with some exceptions; no guarantees) are those PRs removed-as-a-minor seeking to return to Canada SOON AFTER (with some emphasis on both "SOON" and "AFTER") the PR attains the age of majority or is otherwise emancipated.

There is NO guarantee. There are significant exceptions.

And there is some gray area depending on the details in the individual case.

From what I have seen in the cases we know about, the key element is that the removal from Canada itself is characterized as a decision imposed on the PR, as a minor and dependent. Not the minor PR's choice.

Whether the child's parents or guardians could have made a decision allowing the child-PR to stay in Canada, or otherwise be in Canada for longer periods of time, that is about what choices the parents made, and does not otherwise represent any decision by the child, by the PR. So the fact that one parent is IN Canada is largely NOT relevant. It does not change the fact that the child has been removed from Canada while a minor/dependent.

I have not seen any IAD decisions in which the child's state of mind PRIOR to reaching the age of majority, or otherwise becoming emancipated, has been probed. In a PR TD application, or in presenting the case to a PoE officer upon arrival, the recently emancipated PR simply presents the case that he or she was removed from Canada while a minor and is now seeking to return to Canada. This is among the simplest RO related H&C cases.

That is, I have not seen any of these cases in which the PR is questioned about possible could-have stayed in Canada, while still a minor, scenarios.

I doubt there is any need to address or argue this to IRCC, CBSA, or if there is an appeal, to the IAD. I doubt the PR's pre-emancipation preferences or choices are discussed (unless the PR brings them up). It is not likely IRCC or CBSA is interested in whether the parents might have allowed the child to choose, since after all that is still the parent's decision not the child's. It is very likely that simply asserting the removal from Canada while a minor is sufficient.

Whether a PR TD will be issued on H&C grounds, or the PR will be waived into Canada on H&C grounds, without being issued a 44(1) Report, depends mostly on how soon after attaining the age of majority (or emancipation) the removed-as-a-minor PR takes action to return to Canada.

There are other factors which probably explain, at least in part, some of the *exceptions.* Most of those do not seem involved here, since this removed-as-a-minor PR clearly has ongoing Canadian ties, in that she has a parent living in Canada.

All of which is to suggest that a young PR in this situation who makes a PR TD application, or otherwise travels to Canada (such as via the U.S. and applying for entry at a land-border-crossing PoE), SOON AFTER attaining the age of majority, PROBABLY has very good odds of being issued a PR TD or otherwise allowed into Canada without being reported, based on H&C grounds rooted in having been removed-as-a-minor.


Is Waiting Until After Turning 18 Important?

NOTE, in my remarks above I repeatedly refer to the PR making the effort to return to Canada AFTER attaining the age of majority. That's the basic situation underlying the successful applications for H&C relief based on being removed-as-a-minor in the IAD decisions about this issue.

It is NOT at all clear how IRCC (in Canada or in visa offices), CBSA, or the IAD will approach the case for a PR who is not yet emancipated or past the age of majority. I have seen rather few IAD decisions addressing this. Most of the cases in which H&C relief is considered for a minor or dependent involve decision-making concurrent with an H&C application by at least one of the dependent's parents. The outcome of these cases, so far as I have seen, almost always depends on how it goes for the parent. That is, in these cases mostly ALL or NONE get H&C relief. The few exceptions to this I can recall involved young PRs at least 18 who got relief when the parent did not, based on removed-as-a-minor reasoning.

I cannot begin to explain why these cases, as to the minors, are treated differently than the usually successful H&C case based on removed-as-a-minor reasons for those young PRs applying independent of other family AFTER reaching the age of majority. I am not certain it really makes a difference. But we do know that for those removed-as-a-minor (with some exceptions, such as some who had almost zero attachment to Canada, ever) applying for H&C relief relatively soon AFTER reaching the age of majority, it appears they have very good odds of being allowed to keep PR status. So waiting to reach 18 seems to be the safer approach.

 

[armoured]

My sense is that the safest approach is to make the PR TD application almost immediately AFTER the child reaches the age of 18. Odds of a favourable decision are likely good, subject to some exceptions.
...
Whether the child's parents or guardians could have made a decision allowing the child-PR to stay in Canada, or otherwise be in Canada for longer periods of time, that is about what choices the parents made, and does not otherwise represent any decision by the child, by the PR. So the fact that one parent is IN Canada is largely NOT relevant. It does not change the fact that the child has been removed from Canada while a minor/dependent.
...
It is very likely that simply asserting the removal from Canada while a minor is sufficient.
...
waiting to reach 18 seems to be the safer approach.

Thank you, this states quite clearly the point I intended to make.

Going back to the OP question: the question mark for the specific case is, when does the daughter turn 18?

And related to that, the stated priority to have the daughter begin studies in university in September of this year.

As far as having best-probability of success at retaining PR status, the answer is apply for PRTD as soon as possible after age 18. This may not give sufficient time to begin study in September (and certainly not if the daughter turns 18 after September). Asking for a deferral of study simplest.

If beginning study in September is an absolute priority, other approaches could be looked at - but they would all bear some risk of denial/refusal or a much more complex situation and still not being able to begin studies in September. Exactly what the balance of probabilities might be is too hard to say, and might (ultimately) entail more delay and/or complexity.

So without the info about when the daughter reaches 18, perhaps not worth going into at this point.

 

[arun.k]

Thank you all of you for your kind consideration and time.

She turns 18 in January 2022.

I consulted a lawyer this evening. She advocated yet another nuanced approach: Step 1: Apply to CIC for continuance of PR with a humanitarian package and receive application acknowledgement and UCI. Step 2: Then daughter to fly to US and present herself at the border. This she says is a better approach because the officer at the border can see there is already an application ongoing and that the PR has made a serious effort to represent her case in advance. The lawyer mentioned the child's chances of being issued a sec 44 is further reduced with this approach. When quizzed about what happens if a sec 44 is issued, the lawyer said, it will expedite the already submitted application hearing. If the appeal is rejected the option is to convert to a student permit. I hadn't come across such an option before so I must confess I am still processing this information. I am sure, as experienced members you understand the path described.

Now, mulling over your comments of turning 18 before appearing at the border there seems to be a case to defer the start of school by a term. I must state that the lawyer didn't seem to favor waiting until after daughter turns 18.

If I understood your deliberations correctly, one parent staying back in Canada may or may not have much bearing over the child's determination by IRCC but in my case even I had to spent considerable amount of time out of Canada from latter half of 2017, travelling as much as 5 times to my country of origin to cater to attend to various needs including medical. My continuance in my full time Canadian job was saved only by my generous employer who allowed me to work remotely at will. As of applying for renewal of PR card I had 200 days in excess of RO. The only reason I point this out is to suggest that it was not feasible to predictably provide stable conditions for the child in Canada.



Once again I thank you all. Looking forward to your thoughts.

 

[dpenabill]

I consulted a lawyer this evening. She advocated yet another nuanced approach: Step 1: Apply to CIC for continuance of PR with a humanitarian package and receive application acknowledgement and UCI. Step 2: Then daughter to fly to US and present herself at the border. This she says is a better approach because the officer at the border can see there is already an application ongoing and that the PR has made a serious effort to represent her case in advance. The lawyer mentioned the child's chances of being issued a sec 44 is further reduced with this approach. When quizzed about what happens if a sec 44 is issued, the lawyer said, it will expedite the already submitted application hearing. If the appeal is rejected the option is to convert to a student permit. I hadn't come across such an option before so I must confess I am still processing this information. I am sure, as experienced members you understand the path described.

Generally I defer to information and advice from a qualified immigration lawyer. This is especially so in regards to advice based on the lawyer's review of an individual's actual circumstances. (After all, I am NOT an expert, not even close, and a lawyer can better evaluate relevant facts, including those best not shared in a venue like this forum; so there is little or no comparison between what someone here, like me, can offer, versus that of a licensed professional with actual experience handling such matters.)

While this is subject to some exceptions (I do not put much stock in free consultations, for example), it warrants emphasizing that it is usually better to completely follow a lawyer's advice or, in effect, fire the lawyer and rely on other sources of assistance. Trying to mix-and-match advice is a recipe prone to fail.

Beyond that, commenting on what a lawyer has advised can be complicated due to imprecise language and the risk of confusion. This appears to be a significant factor here.

All of which is to emphasize my reluctance to comment on, let alone evaluate, let alone criticize what the lawyer appears to recommend.

Nonetheless . . . Some Observations:

There seems to be something a bit awry here. Probably rooted in some confusion in the language. So, some further "clarification" may be worth considering.

There is no such thing as applying for continuance of PR. For H&C reasons or otherwise.

The lawyer may have been referring to an application to renew the PR card, or otherwise an application for a new PR card. This is NOT an application to continue PR. PR status continues unless and until there is some formal adjudication terminating status.

Assuming the lawyer was referring to an application for a PR card, to be eligible to make this application, however, IRCC states that the PR "must be physically present in Canada." See the guide for PR card applications (this should link).

Whether or not, let alone how and to what extent, IRCC can or will enforce this, is not clear. This eligibility requirement is not based on a statute or regulation. There have been judicial decisions stating that IRCC cannot deny a PR card application for the sole reason the PR did not make the application in Canada or is not in Canada. But IRCC has continued to assert that being in Canada is a requirement.

It is feasible the lawyer contemplates ignoring this eligibility requirement and proceeding with making the application despite the PR herself being outside Canada. I do not know. But, to be clear, the application needs to be signed by BOTH the PR herself AND (until she is 18) at least one parent. It is clear that she is the one making the application. Not a parent on her behalf. And as long as she is not IN Canada, the guide states she is NOT "eligible for a PR card."

It does not seem likely the lawyer is referring to making a PR TD application.

As I noted in my previous post:

Main option is to apply for PR TD and/or travel via the U.S., and plan to appeal if that becomes necessary. ​

Other than first making whatever kind of application the lawyer suggests, what you have described the lawyer saying is essentially consistent with this "main option," with what appears to be a preference for making the trip via the U.S. rather than applying for a PR TD.

I would note that if the approach pursued does not involve waiting until she is 18, I too would lean in favour of making the trip via the U.S. rather than applying for a PR TD. Probably heavily in favour of traveling via the U.S. (visa offices appear to be more strict compared to CBSA officers at a PoE). The fact the PR is there, at the door so to say, is clear evidence of making the effort to return to Canada.

That said, for context, there are pros and cons relative to these respective approaches, applying for a PR TD versus traveling via the U.S. (and particularly so if she waited until she was 18). So which approach a particular PR takes is a personal decision which should be made in consideration of that individual's personal situation.

As I also noted in my previous post:

Back-up option, if PR status is lost, is for parent in Canada to sponsor the child for PR again.​

If an appeal is necessary, and it is denied, to remain in Canada to attend school, yes she can apply for a student permit.

However, there is nothing to "convert" to a student permit in this. What happens when the appeal is denied is that she becomes a Foreign National, and in order to remain in Canada she will need to apply for some other status, such as a student permit. HOWEVER this will not give her status to remain in Canada beyond the expiration of her status as a student. If she is hoping to be a PR, you should be able (assuming you are eligible) to sponsor her for PR until she reaches the age of . . . I think it is 21, perhaps somewhat longer if she remains a full-time student.

She can apply for BOTH. She can apply for the student permit first, and later you and her make the sponsored PR application. Or . . . well, there are various ways to go about this. None of which needs to be explored in depth UNLESS she is issued the 44(1) Report upon entering Canada and then loses the appeal.


Another Clarification:

"When quizzed about what happens if a sec 44 is issued, the lawyer said, it will expedite the already submitted application hearing."​

Here too it seems likely what the lawyer said is somewhat different than this version of it, some confusion rooted in the language. The issuance of a 44(1) Report will, in a general overall sense, "expedite" a definitive outcome. But to be clear, it will not expedite IRCC's processing of an application for a new PR card. Rather, the procedures attendant the issuance of the 44(1) Report will determine your daughter's status. IRCC would almost certainly suspend processing a PR card application pending the outcome of any appeal from the 44(1) Report. Basically, if a 44(1) Report is issued at the PoE, she will lose PR status unless she appeals and wins the appeal. Only if she wins the appeal, will IRCC proceed with the PR card application and issue a new PR card (although she may be able to apply for and be issued a one-year card pending the outcome of the appeal -- this will NOT resolve the determination of inadmissibility resulting in the 44(1) Report, meaning she will still need to pursue and win the appeal).


Note Regarding Impact of Age:

My previous remarks about before or after turning 18 are based on cases involving PR TD applications as reported in IAD decisions. Based on those cases, it is readily apparent a PR who applies for a PR TD soon after reaching the age of majority, relying on H&C relief based on having been removed-as-a-minor, has good odds (among the best odds for RO H&C cases) of prevailing on appeal despite being denied a PR TD. This in turn suggests, which is consistent with anecdotal reporting, that such PRs have rather good odds of being issued a PR TD and otherwise keeping PR status. The impact of applying BEFORE the age of majority is NOT readily apparent in either the IAD cases or in anecdotal reporting I have seen. My suggestion about what is safe is based on going with what is known (good odds for those applying SOON and AFTER reaching 18) rather than what is unknown.


Concluding/Summary Observations:

If the objective is to attend school here in September, months prior to her 18th birthday, the least risky approach is probably coming to Canada via the U.S. At the risk of contradicting the lawyer, I doubt a PR card application prior to that enhances the odds of a favourable decision at the PoE. I suspect some risk that a PR card application might invite elevated scrutiny, especially given the IN Canada eligibility requirement.

Where to from there depends on what happens at the PoE.

 

[arun.k]

Thank you very much dpenabill
I admit my language was confusing. The lawyer was referring to applying to renew her PR card on Humanitarian and Compassionate (H&C) grounds, my use of word continuance was misleading. She was definitely not referring to PRTD. Thanks for flagging the IRCC requirement to be present in Canada to apply, which in her case is not possible. I also see your point that a prior application may invite additional scrutiny at the PoE, so I will be very interested to know how the lawyer works around that. Thank you all of you again for outlining the nuances of each approach. I now feel reasonably confident to talk to lawyers from the point of view of knowing what to consider asking. This has been hugely helpful to us.