Soldier's wife and kids denied visa in Manila

[sjr09 155]

I to miss my daughters first step, first real word for pretty much all of 2009. I truly know how he feels.

My experience with USEM CRBA was not as bad as this man’s but I can tell you my documentation was spot on, right down to physical presence in same location at time of conception. Proof of mothers pregnancy, ultrasound, pre-natal records, hospital billing statements, and pictures, and I was still grilled about DNA TEST over and over! Call it luck or good documentation, we passed the freaking smell test......

[sjr09 155]

I to miss my daughters first step, first real word for pretty much all of 2009. I truly know how he feels.

My experience with USEM CRBA was not as bad as this man's but I can tell you my documentation was spot on, right down to physical presence in same location at time of conception. Proof of mothers pregnancy, ultrasound, pre-natal records, hospital billing statements, and pictures, and I was still grilled about DNA TEST over and over! Call it luck or good documentation, we passed the freaking smell test......

EDIT:With out a DNA TEST

[Dakine 26]

My fiancee just had her medical exam in Manila. She was completely honest and said she had a one-time experimentation with drugs eight years ago to the interviewing physician. She asked the interviewing physician if this would be recorded in her file. The physician stated it would not.

Now I am worried. Will this automatically be reason for denial? delay? She has had a previous clean drug test and records to prove (by sheer happenestance) for one of her employments. She is in no way an abuser or addict and has never shown behavior consistent with that. She was just being completely honest.

I really wonder if the physician is good to her word in confidence or is this gonna be a problem?

Does anyone have instances where this was not a problem?

As you can tell, I am a bit worried. Never figured that telling the truth about a teenage indiscretion would be the wrong thing to do.

Thanks in advance. Any advice moving forward is also appreciated.

"My fiancee just had her medical exam in Manila. She was completely honest and said she had a one-time experimentation with drugs eight years ago to the interviewing physician. She asked the interviewing physician if this would be recorded in her file. The physician stated it would not."

Looks like the doctor was telling the truth since she passed the medical. They normally would have made her have additional questioning.

You guys are VERY fortunate.

Edited December 24, 2009 by Dakine

[taj'samericanwife 0]

if he or she has nothing to hide i'd go for another DNA test...

[anonymousperson 0]

"My fiancee just had her medical exam in Manila. She was completely honest and said she had a one-time experimentation with drugs eight years ago to the interviewing physician. She asked the interviewing physician if this would be recorded in her file. The physician stated it would not."

Looks like the doctor was telling the truth since she passed the medical. They normally would have made her have additional questioning.

You guys are VERY fortunate.

Dakine, I hope your experience in this arena is on the mark. The doctor asked no further questions regarding this subject at all. I guess we just cross our fingers and hope during the interview.

[Dakine 26]

Dakine, I hope your experience in this arena is on the mark. The doctor asked no further questions regarding this subject at all. I guess we just cross our fingers and hope during the interview.

Did they give her her Xray CD and the vaccinations and the DS 3025 vaccination record?

Edited December 26, 2009 by Dakine

[anonymousperson 0]

Did they give her her Xray CD and the vaccinations and the DS 3025 vaccination record?

She goes back for vaccinations and TB skin testing next week.

[Dakine 26]

She goes back for vaccinations and TB skin testing next week.

They wouldn't be giving her vaccinations if she hadn't passed the medical.

[Dakine 26]

They wouldn't be giving her vaccinations if she hadn't passed the medical.

At the same time if she is asked if she'd used drugs at her embassy interview she should give the same answer.

That's a tough one but she has to be consistant in case the doctor passed it on.

[*boricua.esposa* 0]

My fiancee just had her medical exam in Manila. She was completely honest and said she had a one-time experimentation with drugs eight years ago to the interviewing physician. She asked the interviewing physician if this would be recorded in her file. The physician stated it would not.

Now I am worried. Will this automatically be reason for denial? delay? She has had a previous clean drug test and records to prove (by sheer happenestance) for one of her employments. She is in no way an abuser or addict and has never shown behavior consistent with that. She was just being completely honest.

I really wonder if the physician is good to her word in confidence or is this gonna be a problem?

Does anyone have instances where this was not a problem?

As you can tell, I am a bit worried. Never figured that telling the truth about a teenage indiscretion would be the wrong thing to do.

Thanks in advance. Any advice moving forward is also appreciated.

If you would consider 6-12 months wait for AR a problem, then d answer is yes. She will pass her medical but most likely be placed under AR by CO and worse is, she might have to apply for a certain waiver that's going to cost you extra.

[anonymousperson 0]

If you would consider 6-12 months wait for AR a problem, then d answer is yes. She will pass her medical but most likely be placed under AR by CO and worse is, she might have to apply for a certain waiver that's going to cost you extra.

Well, the Medical is still in process. She had an abnormal chest xray. We have to move back our interview date and she did get additional requirements to be evaluated by a Psychologist regarding her admission to drug experimentation.

Hey, if it is just time and money (and not tooooo much of either), I am ok with that. My biggest fear is that they just completely deny her outright. That seems unlikely, but this process can make you fear the worst.

One other question, she has a ten year unlimited entry tourist visa good thru 2019. Is that in jeopardy as well with all this?

[Dakine 26]

Well, the Medical is still in process. She had an abnormal chest xray. We have to move back our interview date and she did get additional requirements to be evaluated by a Psychologist regarding her admission to drug experimentation.

Hey, if it is just time and money (and not tooooo much of either), I am ok with that. My biggest fear is that they just completely deny her outright. That seems unlikely, but this process can make you fear the worst.

One other question, she has a ten year unlimited entry tourist visa good thru 2019. Is that in jeopardy as well with all this?

"We have to move back our interview date and she did get additional requirements to be evaluated by a Psychologist regarding her admission to drug experimentation"

Something tain't right as you originally said she wasn't having any additional questioning.

"She asked the interviewing physician if this would be recorded in her file. The physician stated it would not."

[anonymousperson 0]

"We have to move back our interview date and she did get additional requirements to be evaluated by a Psychologist regarding her admission to drug experimentation"

Something tain't right as you originally said she wasn't having any additional questioning.

"She asked the interviewing physician if this would be recorded in her file. The physician stated it would not."

Well, apparently, the initial interviewing physician did include it. That is why she has to return to speak with a Psychiatrist regarding her use. That interview is in early January. She is just gonna give the details. The fact is that she does not use drugs or has a history of abuse or addiction. She admitted her one time experimentation, so she has to deal with it.

Our planned interview with the Embassy was to be late January, 2009. That has been put back since she also has an abnormal chest xray and they need to do three sputum cultures which take six weeks to be studied.

I was not sure what would happen. I was not keeping any info from the forum. I guess this is the process.

Any idea if her tourist visa is in jeopardy til this whole scene plays out? Pretty stressful. Up until this point (i.e. two tourist visas), we never had any bumps in the road.

She is completing college and has done various On The Job trainings at reputable places that even (coincidentally) did drug testing. We will probably do monthly drug tests to bolster our case in the event they are needed. I sense they will be.

Any idea what happens in the Psychiatry interview? What happens next?

[Agent 005 0]

Well, apparently, the initial interviewing physician did include it. That is why she has to return to speak with a Psychiatrist regarding her use. That interview is in early January. She is just gonna give the details. The fact is that she does not use drugs or has a history of abuse or addiction. She admitted her one time experimentation, so she has to deal with it.

Our planned interview with the Embassy was to be late January, 2009. That has been put back since she also has an abnormal chest xray and they need to do three sputum cultures which take six weeks to be studied.

I was not sure what would happen. I was not keeping any info from the forum. I guess this is the process.

Any idea if her tourist visa is in jeopardy til this whole scene plays out? Pretty stressful. Up until this point (i.e. two tourist visas), we never had any bumps in the road.

She is completing college and has done various On The Job trainings at reputable places that even (coincidentally) did drug testing. We will probably do monthly drug tests to bolster our case in the event they are needed. I sense they will be.

Any idea what happens in the Psychiatry interview? What happens next?

Two things:

#1. Admission of drug use to a physician is NOT the same as admission of drug use to a consular officer.

#2. Admission of drug use to a consular officer results in immediate and permanent denial of a US visa.

What does this mean? Well, I don't want to scare you any further but, quite bluntly, you've got major issues to deal with here. A physician provides proof of both physical and mental status of the applicant but is otherwise not involved in the adjudication process. It seems that the physician has made written documentation of the admitted drug use. Any efforts to conceal this admission from the consular officer during the interview process will prove futile. The best thing you can hope for is that the medical evaluation supports the story of a single, experimental drug use (not that it really matters, since the law does not provide leniency or differentiation for limited use) and that the consular officer exhibits compassion and overlooks this little detail (knowing that he/she may be questioned about the decision by a supervisor).

I'll keep my fingers crossed for you.

In the meantime, I would recommend you read up on the U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual Volume 9 - Visas, paying particular attention to this section:

9 FAM 40.21('B) RELATED REGULATORY

PROVISIONS

(CT:VISA-1318; 09-24-2009)

See 22 CFR 40.21('b).

§ 40.21 Crimes involving moral turpitude and controlled substance

violators.

(a) Crimes involving moral turpitude —

('b) Controlled substance violators —

(1) Date of conviction not pertinent. An alien shall be ineligible under

INA 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(II) irrespective of whether the conviction for a

violation of or for conspiracy to violate any law or regulation

relating to a controlled substance, as defined in the Controlled

Substance Act (21 U.S.C. 802), occurred before, on, or after

October 27, 1986.

(2) Waiver of ineligibility—INA 212(h). If an immigrant visa applicant is

ineligible under INA 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(II) but is qualified to seek the

benefits of INA 212(h), the consular officer shall inform the alien of

the procedure for applying to DHS for relief under that provision of

law. A visa may not be issued to the alien until the consular officer

has received notification from DHS of the approval of the alien's

application under INA 212(h).

One more note - the term "conviction" should not be interpreted to be limited to a conviction rendered in a court of law.

[anonymousperson 0]

Two things:

#1. Admission of drug use to a physician is NOT the same as admission of drug use to a consular officer.

#2. Admission of drug use to a consular officer results in immediate and permanent denial of a US visa.

What does this mean? Well, I don't want to scare you any further but, quite bluntly, you've got major issues to deal with here. A physician provides proof of both physical and mental status of the applicant but is otherwise not involved in the adjudication process. It seems that the physician has made written documentation of the admitted drug use. Any efforts to conceal this admission from the consular officer during the interview process will prove futile. The best thing you can hope for is that the medical evaluation supports the story of a single, experimental drug use (not that it really matters, since the law does not provide leniency or differentiation for limited use) and that the consular officer exhibits compassion and overlooks this little detail (knowing that he/she may be questioned about the decision by a supervisor).

I'll keep my fingers crossed for you.

In the meantime, I would recommend you read up on the U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual Volume 9 - Visas, paying particular attention to this section:

9 FAM 40.21('B) RELATED REGULATORY

PROVISIONS

(CT:VISA-1318; 09-24-2009)

See 22 CFR 40.21('b).

§ 40.21 Crimes involving moral turpitude and controlled substance

violators.

(a) Crimes involving moral turpitude —

('b) Controlled substance violators —

(1) Date of conviction not pertinent. An alien shall be ineligible under

INA 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(II) irrespective of whether the conviction for a

violation of or for conspiracy to violate any law or regulation

relating to a controlled substance, as defined in the Controlled

Substance Act (21 U.S.C. 802), occurred before, on, or after

October 27, 1986.

(2) Waiver of ineligibility—INA 212(h). If an immigrant visa applicant is

ineligible under INA 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(II) but is qualified to seek the

benefits of INA 212(h), the consular officer shall inform the alien of

the procedure for applying to DHS for relief under that provision of

law. A visa may not be issued to the alien until the consular officer

has received notification from DHS of the approval of the alien's

application under INA 212(h).

One more note - the term "conviction" should not be interpreted to be limited to a conviction rendered in a court of law.

Thank you for a very informative and enlightening post, Agent 005. That was the core of my concerns and shed a good bit of light on what we are up against. If I understand it correctly, the K1 visa (99999:1 times!) will be denied at the interview as my fiancee definitely admitted drug experimentation one time, but there is a means for appeal thru a 212(H) Waiver of Ineligibility.

A few more questions (sorry);

1.) If we end up being denied, but have the option of filing a 212(h) waiver, what are the chances of success?

2.) What is a I-601? Does it pertain to our probable situation?

3.) Anybody recommend a competent and knowledgeable attorney in Manila (elsewhere?) that can help us out on this? This is too much at stake and too much legal speak for me to be able to negotiate. Any idea how much it would cost?