medical Refused tourist VISA for 2x DUI's Medical

[Duke & Marie 1,389]

21 hours ago, Jessibbb said:

Visiting Florida in around 7 months, a family holiday with quite a big group of us.

Have 2 previous DUI convictions so visa was turned down, one was around 5 years ago and the other around 8 years.

Was recommended to apply for waiver of ineligibility.

So now I have the medical booked with embassy physician.

I've read some horror stories about these medicals!

What should be expected?

 

Although the embassy officer stated visa was turned down for the DUIs only, there was also a caution for possession in 2012. 

Not an alcoholic or drug addict, just like to point that out!

Have a good job in public sector, have done for many years.

Have return tickets booked along with hotel details and enough spending money.

 

I'd just like to know what to expect at the medical, really don't want to miss out on this amazing family holiday due to silly past mistakes.

I'm a british citizen.

Basically because you had 2 DUI in the last 10 years you need the medical to show you don’t abuse or are dependent on alcohol.. not because of DUI. If you can demonstrate no addiction or abuse during the examination you should be issued the visa without a waiver.. 

 

your canabis issue is another matter though

 

 

[Duke & Marie 1,389]

9 minutes ago, jan22 said:

The issue really has nothing to do with crimes of moral turpitude, as the possible inadmissibility is not under 212 (a)(2) for criminal acts.  It would be under 212 (a)(1)(A)(iv)for health grounds, which says that a person is inadmissible if they are determined to be a drug abuser or addict.

Well, I was responding to @user555 when noting DUI and moral tribute.. 

 

and yes I agree, the referral to the medical was done to check no alcohol related illness such as addiction.. if he can show he’s not addicted he should be fine.. 

 

however his canabis issue will be his problem if blood tests are done

Edited February 6, 2020 by Duke & Marie

[geowrian 22,335]

5 minutes ago, Duke & Marie said:

his canabis issue will be his problem if blood tests are done

Or when they ask when the last time he used was.

[JFH 12,189]

21 hours ago, Jessibbb said:

 

I am a recreational cannabis smoker. Obviously not all the time as I work a lot.

That is the big issue. Your “recreational use of cannabis” is the visa officer’s “frequent law-breaking”. Not only is it illegal on a federal level here, it’s illegal in the UK. The consulate takes a very dim view of such a disregard of the law. 

[jan22 2,898]

11 minutes ago, Duke & Marie said:

Well, I was responding to @user555 when noting DUI and moral tribute.. 

 

and yes I agree, the referral to the medical was done to check no alcohol related illness such as addiction.. if he can show he’s not addicted he should be fine.. 

 

however his canabis issue will be his problem if blood tests are done

He doesn't have to be addicted -- a determination that he is an abuser (a lower standard than addicted) is sufficient for a determination of admissibility.  

[Duke & Marie 1,389]

3 minutes ago, geowrian said:

Or when they ask when the last time he used was.

Actually, I’m 100% sure the medical will include blood test, especially since the referral was done for alcohol related issues. 

 

Alcohol will register changes in his blood cells in both his liver/kidneys for up to 3 months.. and I’ve no idea how long canabis will show for

[Duke & Marie 1,389]

8 minutes ago, jan22 said:

He doesn't have to be addicted -- a determination that he is an abuser (a lower standard than addicted) is sufficient for a determination of admissibility.  

The diagnosis of a substance-related disorder alone does not make an applicant ineligible to receive a visa unless there is evidence of current or past harmful behavior associated with the disorder that has posed or is likely to pose a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the applicant or others in the future.

[Boiler 43,430]

3 minutes ago, Duke & Marie said:

The diagnosis of a substance-related disorder alone does not make an applicant ineligible to receive a visa unless there is evidence of current or past harmful behavior associated with the disorder that has posed or is likely to pose a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the applicant or others in the future.

2 DUI's and continuing illegal drug use.

[SusieQQQ 11,584]

12 minutes ago, Duke & Marie said:

Actually, I’m 100% sure the medical will include blood test, especially since the referral was done for alcohol related issues. 

 

Alcohol will register changes in his blood cells in both his liver/kidneys for up to 3 months.. and I’ve no idea how long canabis will show for

Mr google says a chronic user of marijuana will show in urinalysis for 30 days.

 

 

[jan22 2,898]

7 minutes ago, Duke & Marie said:

The diagnosis of a substance-related disorder alone does not make an applicant ineligible to receive a visa unless there is evidence of current or past harmful behavior associated with the disorder that has posed or is likely to pose a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of the applicant or others in the future.

Wrong.  The portion of the law you are referring to is 212 (a)(1)(A)(iii).  Read the next section -- 212 (a)(1)(A)(iv).  It's very short, and clearly states that any alien found to be a drug abuser or addict is inadmissible.

 

(And, I would also argue that 2 DUIs are, in fact, evidence of harmful behavior that poses a threat to the property, safety, or welfare of himself and others.  But that really doesn't need to be argued, if he's found inadmissible under 212 (a)(1)(A)(iv)).

Edited February 6, 2020 by jan22

[Duke & Marie 1,389]

2 minutes ago, Boiler said:

2 DUI's and continuing illegal drug use.

Yeah it’s not looking good for him when all combined.. not unless he’s hasn’t touch the grog or pot in the last 3 - 4 months.. it will all come out in the blood test for sure. 

[Duke & Marie 1,389]

6 minutes ago, jan22 said:

Wrong.  The portion of the law you are referring to is 212 (a)(1)(A)(iii).  Read the next section -- 212 (a)(1)(A)(iv).  It's very short, and clearly states that any alien found to be a drug abuser or addict is inadmissible.

I’m actually looking at the below document, that outlines the requirements for what is an abuser etc and the requirements by which the MO determines if he is an abuser or not... they can’t apply the section if he’s not defined as one ☝️ 

 

9 FAM 302.2-7(B)(3)  (U) Substance-Related Disorders Under INA 212(a)(1)(A)(iii) - Alcohol and Other Non-Controlled Substances 

Edited February 6, 2020 by Duke & Marie

[jan22 2,898]

16 minutes ago, Duke & Marie said:

I’m actually looking at the below document, that outlines the requirements for what is an abuser etc and the requirements by which the MO determines if he is or not 

 

9 FAM 302.2-7(B)(3)  (U) Substance-Related Disorders Under INA 212(a)(1)(A)(iii) - Alcohol and Other Non-Controlled Substances 

Which is, if you read the title of the FAM section -- that you have copied in your reply--  is for a finding under 212 (a)(1)(A)(iii) as i alead said.  Again, under 212 (a)(1)(A)(iv), a finding of drug abuse/addiction alone rises to an inadmissibility, period.  See 9 FAM 302.2-8 for implementing regulations.  The determination of abuse/addiction is made by the panel physician.

Edited February 6, 2020 by jan22

[SusieQQQ 11,584]

12 minutes ago, Duke & Marie said:

I’m actually looking at the below document, that outlines the requirements for what is an abuser etc and the requirements by which the MO determines if he is an abuser or not... they can’t apply the section if he’s not defined as one ☝️ 

 

9 FAM 302.2-7(B)(3)  (U) Substance-Related Disorders Under INA 212(a)(1)(A)(iii) - Alcohol and Other Non-Controlled Substances 

That doesn’t cover the controlled substance violation.

 

if you keep on scrolling down to 

9 FAM 302.2-8  (U) DRUG ABUSE OR ADDICTION - INA 212(A)(1)(A)(IV)

you'll note it says “(U) No Harmful Behavior Required:  Harmful behavior is not a relevant factor in rendering a determination of ineligibility under the provisions of INA 212(a)(1)(A)(iv).”

 

 

 

[Duke & Marie 1,389]

5 minutes ago, jan22 said:

Which is, if you read the title of the FAM section -- that you have copied in your reply--  is for a finding under 212 (a)(1)(A)(iii) as i alead said.  Again, under 212 (a)(1)(A)(iv), a finding of drug abuse/addiction alone rises to an inadmissibility, period.  See 9 FAM 302.2-8 for implementing regulations.

I’m not saying abuse isn’t inadmissible..

 

I’m saying the MO must FIRST determine that there is abuse under the requirements mentioned in order for inadmissiblity clause to be applied.