Husband threatening to revoke PR if divorcing

[rjessome]

Ok, understandable that they refuse if it is not your kid but if they were to move the excessive demand decision to the time of sponsorship, you will have a lot of tears in the media. There will be cases where somebody left the disabled child with the parents to give the rest of the family a better life and then the parents die and they can not sponsor this child because he is excessive demand, they will go to the papers and cry. There will be cases where you left a healthy child behind until at a better time and he is in an accident and now he is excessive demand and can not join you etc. etc.

And it's not just the excessive demand portion that warrants an examination. CIC can refuse PR based on a medical condition that creates a threat to the public health and/or a threat to the public safety. No one is exempt from these two conditions of medical admissibility. And since families are treated as a unit when it comes to medical and criminal admissibility, one child being found inadmissible due to a medical threat to the public health would cause a refusal of ALL of the applicants.

 

[toby]

And it's not just the excessive demand portion that warrants an examination. CIC can refuse PR based on a medical condition that creates a threat to the public health and/or a threat to the public safety. No one is exempt from these two conditions of medical admissibility. And since families are treated as a unit when it comes to medical and criminal admissibility, one child being found inadmissible due to a medical threat to the public health would cause a refusal of ALL of the applicants.

Ah .. that is the missing link, rjessome. Thanks. So, to confirm, even if a child of a PR applicant will not accompany the PR to Canada, will (to be clear) stay in the home country, the fact that the child has a serious medical problem or has an unacceptable criminal background, will bar the PR and the rest of the family from getting residency in Canada.

If I have understood this correctly, it seems absolutely unfair and absurd. Rather tha bar the entire family, all Canada has to do is admit the PR applicant (and family) to Canada and make sure he or she understands that the child is barred. If (as Leon points out) the press makes a big deal about the child`s plight, it would be easy for CIC to explain to the Canadian public that the alternative (barring the entire family) was a far harsher alternative, that CIC took the kinder route.

I don`t think Canadians want to admit criminals or medical catastrophes -- too expensive.

 

[Baloo]

If (as Leon points out) the press makes a big deal about the child`s plight, it would be easy for CIC to explain to the Canadian public that the alternative (barring the entire family) was a far harsher alternative, that CIC took the kinder route.

The press and the general public (well the vocal ones) are not likely to accept "the kinder route" description.
Explaining that a family should be separated would be a political minefield.
So, unfair or not, it is politically not worth the pain.

Note: My post does not mean that I believe it is reasonable.

I don`t think Canadians want to admit criminals or medical catastrophes -- too expensive.

The question is, why should they?

 

[Leon]

If somebody felt that strongly about immigrating to Canada, they have an option to ask relatives or someone they know in old country to adopt the sick child so it is no longer a member of the family class but I do not know how common it is that people would leave their child for good for a PR.

 

[Baloo]

If somebody felt that strongly about immigrating to Canada, they have an option to ask relatives or someone they know in old country to adopt the sick child so it is no longer a member of the family class but I do not know how common it is that people would leave their child for good for a PR.

That has to be a harsh option.

 

[Leon]

Yes but I think that is the idea of immigration when they made the rules about all or one. They do not want people to leave their spouses or children behind to get PR so they make it very hard to do and you know that if you do it, it is final.

If Canada immigration said that you and your one child can go and your wife and/or other child can not, you might say well, let us try it out and you get your PR and go to Canada and later go to the TV and complain about having to leave half your family behind. However, if you must divorce your wife and/or give up custody of your child to be able to immigrate yourself, you know that is the choice you are making and it is final.

 

[Baloo]

I think you are right.

This will invite comment -

After a lot of conversation with Cradle Canadians I have come to the viewpoint that the immigration process should be more thorough, the requirements for entry should be higher, breaches/illegality should be dealt with more forcefully and in a faster time frame.

There needs to be a clearer definition (within the application process) of what is expected of all immigrants to Canada.

That said, the overall process needs to be less painful for applicants.

 

[Leon]

The system is slow because it is swamped with applications. I am not sure what they can do about that. Maybe they could just simplify it somehow and not have one million immigration classes with different requirements.

If you think the immigration process is painful now, just wait until they introduce the immigration class with the blue elephant

 

[toby]

The system is slow because it is swamped with applications. I am not sure what they can do about that. Maybe they could just simplify it somehow and not have one million immigration classes with different requirements.

If you think the immigration process is painful now, just wait until they introduce the immigration class with the blue elephant

I am not aware of this, Leon. Elucidate, please?

 

[Baloo]

I am not aware of this, Leon. Elucidate, please?

Read my signature

 

[Leon]

This joke started after somebody had been complaining about the requirements of a certain immigration class and I said that immigration makes the rules and if they want to make an immigration class for people who have a blue elephant tattooed on the left thigh, they could. I am 99% sure this is not about to happen though.

 

[toby]

This joke started after somebody had been complaining about the requirements of a certain immigration class and I said that immigration makes the rules and if they want to make an immigration class for people who have a blue elephant tattooed on the left thigh, they could. I am 99% sure this is not about to happen though.

;D ;D

 

[Baloo]

This joke started after somebody had been complaining about the requirements of a certain immigration class and I said that immigration makes the rules and if they want to make an immigration class for people who have a blue elephant tattooed on the left thigh, they could. I am 99% sure this is not about to happen though.

Woah, that 1% may be enough for Jason Kenney - LOL