x dont let son go for medical test please help

If your son is not medically examined as part of this application - whether he's designated non-accompanying now or not - you will never be able to sponsor him to Canada.  This means that if something happened to your ex-wife, your son would be orphaned and you would either have to go back to your country to parent him, or leave him to someone else.  I don't have to tell you that your ex-wife is being selfish, but in her defence, she probably does not understand the requirement and thinks that you're only trying to find a way to get your son and take him away from her.  It might help if she understood that even if he is included and examined, you cannot bring him to Canada without her written consent.  They would NEVER let him over the border into the country without her authorization and CIC states very clearly in their manuals that officers absolutely will not issue a permanent resident visa to a minor who is in the custody of the other parent. 

From OP2 Processing Manual, Sections 5.10 & 5.11:

5.10. Non-accompanying family members Applicants must declare all family members when applying for a visa and must again declare all family members, whether accompanying or not, prior to obtaining permanent resident status. Permanent residents who did not declare all their family members on their application are reportable under A44(1) [see also “Sponsor who may be subject to an A44(1) report” (section 10.5 below) and “Misrepresentation” (section 5.22 below)]. In addition, all family members, whether accompanying or not, must be examined, unless the appropriate officer determines that they are not required by the Act or the former Act to examine the family member [R117(10)]. Family members who were not declared and examined are excluded from the family class and may not be sponsored at a later date as per R117(9)(d) unless R117(10) applies. Non-accompanying family members must undergo medical examinations. 5.11  Officers will not issue a permanent resident visa to separated spouses, common-law partners or children in the custody of someone else, even if they are examined. This is because separated spouses and partners are not members of the family class as per R117(9)(c) and because children in the custody of someone else are non-accompanying family members. If these family members are genuinely unavailable or unwilling to be examined, the consequences of not having them examined should be clearly explained to the applicant and reflected in the CAIPS notes. Officers may wish to have applicants sign a statutory declaration indicating they understand the consequences of failing to have the family member examined. 5.12. Exclusion from membership in the family class – R117(9)(d), R117(10) and R117(11) (former OM OP 03-19) Under both the previous legislation and under IRPA, both the applicant and the applicant's family members, whether accompanying or not, must meet the requirements of the legislation. There are no exceptions to the requirement that all family members must be declared. With few exceptions, this also means that all family members must be examined as part of the process for achieving permanent residence.  Officers should be open to the possibility that a client may not be able to make a family member available for examination. If an applicant has done everything in their power to have their family member examined but has failed to do so, and the officer is satisfied that they are aware of the consequences of this (i.e., no future sponsorship possible), then a refusal of their application for non-compliance would not be appropriate. Officers must decide on a case-by-case basis using common sense and good judgment whether to proceed with an application even if all family members have not been examined. Some scenarios where this may likely occur include where an ex-spouse refuses to allow a child to be examined or an overage dependant refuses to be examined. Proceeding in this way should be a last resort and only after the officer is convinced that the applicant cannot make the family member available for examination. The applicant themselves cannot choose not to have a family member examined. The intent of R117(9)(d), R117(10) and R117(11) is to ensure that persons whom the sponsor made a conscious decision to exclude (either by not declaring and/or not having the persons examined) from their own application for permanent residence cannot later benefit by being sponsored by this same person as a member of the family class.

In addition, if CIC is contacting her about this - rather than you - they can be quite overbearing in their demands and that might have put her off.  Why would she want to take the time and spend the money to take the child to a special doctor to have an examination just to facilitate your immigration to Canada?  It is asking a lot . . . so try to understand that part of the equation, too.  Is there someone else there who can take your son to this appointment.  If you schedule it, and pay for it, do you have a parent or sibling who has access to your son who could take him to the Dr.  The key, I think, is to try to find out what your ex-wife is objecting to.  I know it's hard to have the conversations with an ex (I have an ex-husband myself and it's very difficult to discuss things, even about our children, because we seldom agree), but this is important.  Another thing: how old is your son?  Is he old enough to make this decision for himself?  If so, he should be aware of what it all means and start making his wishes known.  I have no doubt my ex would have given me a really hard time about this very same issue if it had not been for the fact that our daughter was 10 years old at the time and was very clear about the fact that she wanted to live in Canada with me.  He valued his relationship with her enough that he honoured her decision. 

If none of this turns things around with her - and never being able to bring your son to Canada is not acceptable to you - then you should get the courts in your country involved in this case and they can order her to have him examined because it's in his best interest to be able to be reunited with you if something happens to her.  Where you're at a disadvantage is that you're in Canada and, with an inland application in process, you're really not in a position to go home to fight this out.  I will say that CIC does not like to allow minor children to be excluded from applications because of the fact that it leaves a child without a parent if something happens to the custodial parent.  They are not likely, however, to "waive" the requirement for examination and still allow him to be sponsored at a later date.  If they allow the application to proceed without him being examined, you will have to sign a declaration saying you understand you are forever barred from sponsoring him.  None of us can tell you what to do but you do have the option to withdraw the inland application, go home and straighten this out with your ex through the courts, and then file a new outland PR application that can include your son (still as a non-accompanying dependent) when you're able to get him medically examined.  

Edited by RobsLuv - 29 Apr 2010 at 10:58am

You could TRY to show her a photocopy of the application showing that he's non-accompanying to show that you aren't trying to take him. Just leave good options for HIS future.

Your wife sounds like she's being unreasonable. I'm also assuming you have tried to pay for the medical exam, so she can't refuse for monetary reasons