Boiler

Well I self sponsored

The clock does not start until she becomes a LPR, and as mentioned above that could easily be a year after she enters on a K1, or longer. You may need to look at things like Health Insurance, fiancee vs spouse. And other day to day practicalities such as DL.

Just use salary

She can petition siblings but that takes decades.

No i assume you are looking to adjust status. Best to start the process asap

By all means contact the Consulate, I assume nothing has been done since the visa was issued.

how will she sponsor the 3 of them?

There is only one process and it is easier and quicker of you file for the child, file that I 130. Canada is not quick, 18 months or so. Personally I would look into the legal side of things and ensuring the Mother can not change her mind. That would be a Canadian Family Law issue.

No, marrying and filing an I 130 would be better

Montreal does not play when it comes to showing US domicile

Why?

Regular short visits should not be an issue, it is when you push it, then it can be problematic

Just to clarify this is someone you have yet to meet?

One of those Welcome to America situations

Filing on line seems to cause problems, did you put your US address down as you main point of contact?

Guardianship has nothing to do with immigration, maybe counter productive from a visitor status perspective but then offhand I can not think how the situation would arise. No question I can think of. If you want him to visit then by all means apply and see. Obviously the Airlines are used to dealing with people who have issues, my Mother visited and needed to use a wheelchair. Ohh just a thought not sure how his condition would impact Travel Insurance, good idea to check.

Where have they been for the last 4 years? How Biden tarnished his own legacy https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c7vd5n3el6no

How old is he Do you mean adoption, guardianship does nothing. A lot of Eastern European Countries can use the VWP.

The Insurance Industry never struck me as being particularly logical, more like a roller coaster and I am not here to defend it. I had dealings with the US before coming here but corporate not personal insurance. I was surprised at how controlled everything is, regulated at the State level, this is not normal and it never occurred to me that this would be the case. So each State is different, sort of like dealing withe different Countries, and in CA rates had to be approved and justified using historical date but the cost of reinsurance could not be included, which is weird. I assume as long as the Insurance Companies were making money they went along with things, as I mentioned things started unravelling, the gov set up the FAIR plan, more catastrophic events, and the Insurance Commissioner is a political appointee so the market became more and more distorted. It also encouraged? people to build in areas where logically you would not if the full cost of the insurance risk was taken into account, sort of like Florida, well some people can, would but if you have a mortgage, need Insurance as apart of that and the full cost was taken into account, perhaps you would not or build very differently. There has been a sort of similar situation in the UK with new housing developments being built on historical wetlands and guess what they flood, duh. I remember going down the M4 a lot and past an area that was always wet in the winter and wondered why on earth they subsequently developed the area, Anyway this is on a much bigger scale, and with the continuing effects of distorting the market I am not sure what the answer is, the State can try and put pressure on the Insurance Companies but if they cant see how they will ever make any money the logical response is just to pull out as many have done and more will do, which will of course just put pressure on those that remain. I suppose there is a solution but not quick or cheap or likely to happen

Possibly

Rule of thumb is to stay out for twice as long as you were in