DV 2015 KENYA SELECTEES FORUM
- Thread starter Kenyan gal
- Start date
@SusieQQQ are you saying HIV is not a problem for DV visa? Oh ok I never knew that.
Sm1smom
Super Moderator
Being HIV positive will not lead to a visa denial. However because it can lead to one becoming a public charge if the party involved doesn't seem to be financially sound enough or have the prospects of handling the expenses associated with getting the needed medical treatment, then one could be denied.
pose
Registered Users (C)
@msdada I didn't know ur from msa.im from msa too.@podoski I didn't do mine in MSA.how much were you charged to do it in MSA.btw its a good thing you applied for your PCC in Nairobi.i applied at urban and it was a nightmare...almst 7 wks it took to get it and I had to chase it solo in Nairobi.
SusieQQQ
Well-Known Member
It used to be grounds for denial but that got changed a few years ago. Mom's point about the potential public charge implications is valid however. I'm not familiar with what the general health insurance scheme policies regarding ARV treatment, treatment for related illnesses etc are.
SusieQQQ
Well-Known Member
FYI the list of diseases preventing the granting of a visa is here: http://www.cdc.gov/immigrantrefugeehealth/exams/medical-examination-faqs.html#5
manyash
Member
ehehehehe i find it strange sir imagine someone seeing ma cobra,,,,it will even shrink trust u me
God-Is-Love
Well-Known Member
In Ethiopia, the medical examination doesn't include HIV test. They take blood samples only for syphilis test. There is no way for the CO to know whether the applicant is HIV positive or not. How could the CO raise the issue of public charge?
Britsimon
Super Moderator
Is honesty in answering questions not a possibility?
SusieQQQ
Well-Known Member
Did the doctor not ask if there are any serious medical issues even if not doing a blood test for them? They are obliged to report on other things such as alcoholism or certain mental health issues even though they don't do blood tests for them?
Sm1smom
Super Moderator
Yep, the panel doctor is no longer required to carry out blood test to determine if one is HIV positive or not. However, part of the visual observation and the questions they ask in the course of the medical exam is enough for them to make a determination of suspected HIV presence or not. If the panel doctor suspects one could be HIV positive, he/she has been instructed to ask the patient if they would like to be tested for HIV. Regardless of the patient's answer (the patient could say yes and do the test right away, or out-rightly refuse to do the test; the patient could also opt to go do the test somewhere else), the panel doctor is obligated to note his/her observation on the medical report.
9 FAM 42.66 N17 APPLICANTS SUSPECTED OF BEING HIV INFECTED BY THE PANEL PHYSICIAN:
For applicants who may benefit from being tested for HIV, such as those with signs or symptoms suggestive of HIV or those with TB disease, the panel physician may counsel the applicant about HIV, and may administer an HIV serologic test, if the applicant consents to the testing. The applicant may also choose to undergo HIV testing at a non-panel-physician site. The panel physician must also inform the applicant that they do not have to be tested for HIV and that any results of the HIV serologic testing will be provided to the consular section processing his or her visa application as part of the visa medical examination packet of forms.
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/87891.pdf (p.15)
For applicants who may benefit from being tested for HIV, such as those with signs or symptoms suggestive of HIV or those with TB disease, the panel physician may counsel the applicant about HIV, and may administer an HIV serologic test, if the applicant consents to the testing. The applicant may also choose to undergo HIV testing at a non-panel-physician site. The panel physician must also inform the applicant that they do not have to be tested for HIV and that any results of the HIV serologic testing will be provided to the consular section processing his or her visa application as part of the visa medical examination packet of forms.
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/87891.pdf (p.15)
By the way, here's what 9 FAM says with regards to HIV positive applicants and Public charge:
9 FAM 40.11 N9.1-2 Public Charge as Related to Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Positive Applicants:
Under section 212(a)(4) of the INA, an immigrant visa (IV) applicant must demonstrate that he or she has a means of support in the United States and that he or she, therefore, will not need to seek public financial assistance. It may be difficult for HIV-infected applicants to meet this requirement of the law because the cost of treating the illness can be very high and because the applicant may not be able to work
There is no waiver possible for this inadmissibility; however, if the applicant is able to demonstrate that he or she has acquired additional insurance or funds which would be sufficient to overcome the inadmissibility, you may determine that the inadmissibility no longer applies.
On November 2, 2009, CDC issued the HIV Final Rule removing HIV infection from the definition of communicable disease of public health significance effective January 4, 2010. Although HIV infection is no longer a ground of inadmissibility under section 212(a)(1)(A)(i) of the INA, the requirement that an HIV-infected applicant must demonstrate that he or she overcomes inadmissibility under section 212(a)(4) of the INA remains.
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86936.pdf (p.9)
Under section 212(a)(4) of the INA, an immigrant visa (IV) applicant must demonstrate that he or she has a means of support in the United States and that he or she, therefore, will not need to seek public financial assistance. It may be difficult for HIV-infected applicants to meet this requirement of the law because the cost of treating the illness can be very high and because the applicant may not be able to work
There is no waiver possible for this inadmissibility; however, if the applicant is able to demonstrate that he or she has acquired additional insurance or funds which would be sufficient to overcome the inadmissibility, you may determine that the inadmissibility no longer applies.
On November 2, 2009, CDC issued the HIV Final Rule removing HIV infection from the definition of communicable disease of public health significance effective January 4, 2010. Although HIV infection is no longer a ground of inadmissibility under section 212(a)(1)(A)(i) of the INA, the requirement that an HIV-infected applicant must demonstrate that he or she overcomes inadmissibility under section 212(a)(4) of the INA remains.
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86936.pdf (p.9)
SusieQQQ
Well-Known Member
Very informative - thanks for digging out - could well save someone paying fees etc when they may end up being denied for this.
coronahope
Member
Quite informative. Thanks.
God-Is-Love
Well-Known Member
The doctor didn't ask anything about HIV. Ofcourse he asked if I had ever been admitted to hospital for any previous serious health issue.
It is also common that, even the applicant may not know if he/she is HIV positive unless he/she conducted the test previously for some reason, like marriage...
Last edited:
God-Is-Love
Well-Known Member
Thanks Mom. What a great information!
podolski88
Active Member
They charged me 22000ksh for the medicals
podolski88
Active Member
He he he you better be prepared