I’ve had this thought for some time, and I’ve explained it in conversations but never posted it here.
The current process of determining when something is “excessive demand” is to take the medicals for every person in the family and then picking the one that has a condition requiring treatment and using that to declare the entire family is inadmissible.
I’m having a difficult time how this seems fair to a reasonable person. The numeric value is computed as an average over the population. So, how do you take the average of one group and the worst case of a second group and make any reasonable determination on such basis.
Instead, I would suggest this is a form of reverse cherry picking – you pick the worst sample of the group and then discard the entire group.
My suggestion: if you find yourself in this situation, make the argument. Get someone at IRCC to explain why this is fair. I’d suggest that what makes more sense is to compare average to average between groups. So a family with three children, one of whom needs special education services, would be evaluated as a family.
Perhaps I’m wrong here. I’m interested in hearing people’s opinions on this.