Heart Murmur Detected During Medicals

[BoerieNZ]

Hi Everyone

My two kids and I went for our medicals yesterday. Mom had already done hers with flying colors and yesterday was our turn. The kids were 100% fine with no issues. Mine went swimmingly as well, right up to the point where the doctor noticed a heart murmur. Needless to say, I was mortified - at that moment whatever murmur was there probably because worse as well due to stress.

The doctor stated that in most cases, especially in fit people, there are heart murmurs sometimes which are completely harmless and referred to as "innocent" murmurs. He ordered an EchoCardioGraph to be done to see what's going on, all on the same day. The technician who performed the echocardiograph did what she needed to do, plugged electrodes on me and performed a sort of "sonar" around my heart. She said that she couldn't see any prolapsed valves or any abnormality that would cause my murmur, and according to her, must be normal.

She's obviously going to submit the results and her report to the doctor stating the same.

When you read articles like these: https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/784...-in-indian-man

It's pretty easy to see that immigration don't take heart murmurs lightly. If I read the above article correctly though, it does seem like the poor guy in the article suffered from an actual heart murmur with identifiable causes in the heart's actual structure, which will require surgery at some point.

Does immigration differentiate between "innocent" murmurs and the actual "bad" ones? Or do they close your application just at the hint of a murmur, being "innocent" or not? Seeing as this innocent-type murmur is so common, I'm sure the echocardiograph should be enough to convince the Case Officer?

Thanks for any replies

[JandM]

What you have found there is a news item about a worst-case scenario - and obviously, you don't get readers for stories where everything turned out fine in some situation. Also, by helping put together a story like that, the poor man maybe had some hope that NZ voters will appeal to the government on his behalf.

At the link here https://www.immigration.govt.nz/opsmanual/#46506.htm, A4.10.1 gives the list of conditions that are an outright 'no' for residence. As you will see, your situation is NOT one of those. Your medical will be referred, and/but since you will be able to submit the reports showing that there is no abnormality, you should be declared as ASH (Acceptable Standard of Health).

[BoerieNZ]

It's just a little weird that the article states the INZ denied the person residency due to a likelihood of an operation being required in 10 to 20 years, when the ops-manual states that it's only relevant if an operation or other medical treatment is likely within a 5 year period. I mean, geepers, anything can happen to anyone in 10 to 20 years health-wise. I really hope this was NOT the actual reason given by INZ, because based on the likelihood of something possibly going wrong in 10 to 20 years in the future, they can decline everyone if they wanted to.

My echocardiograph report states that nothing really "abnormal" was found. They did spot some mitral valve buckling but with no regurgitation, so I don't have mitral valve prolapse (which is the common abnormality) officially. Either way, I am going for a second opinion an getting an EKG, Stressed EKG and another EchoCardioGram done to backup the first report. When that comes through as "all good", I'll have the confidence to face INZ Medical assessors when we have medicals done next year for our Residency applications. I'd rather know all the facts now, than find out when it's too late.

I'll let you all know what happens

(p.s I don't know why this wasn't posted in the medical thread, I could have sworn I was in that subforum when I created this post)

[JandM]

This article being in a news outlet, the objective facts and the slant aren't open to being held to an exact standard of accuracy. There's probably no way to know true details of the case, at this distance in time. I agree with you that, if that WAS the only reason given, it would APPEAR to go against the regulations in the operational manual. You might be able to find the case in the online records of the IPT.

(I've moved the thread now.)

[mainlandgay]

I did a quick search on the IPT website and I think I found the case in the article - https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search...127_202760.pdf

If you just want a summary, skip to page 10 onwards which pretty much summarises everything but pretty much it came down to the difference between an acute condition which has the 5 year limit and a chronic condition which states "...over the predicted course of the condition..." without a specific time frame. The case fell into the second category so immigration were able to consider the potential costs past the 5 year mark.

I don't know if this helps you out at all - perhaps I've given you more to think about.

[jawnbc]

Have you considered getting a cardiologist's report and sending that in with your application? I included a specialist report with my application: while it still got flagged for review, it was cleared within a fortnight.

Good luck!

[JandM]

jawnbc's is a good suggestion - this can cut down the time waiting for a medical to be assessed. Assuming that a cardiologist agrees that the technician who saw you is correct and you don't have an abnormality causing your murmur, your situation is not the same as that of the man in the article.

[BoerieNZ]

I had a chat with my doctor who is doing the e-medical and the report done by the EchoCardioGraph technician is 100% indicative of a functional murmur. I asked the doctor if that report will be accepted (as he's done a few of them) and he stated that he has not had a comeback from the NZ medical assessment team yet and I should be fine. Here's hoping.

[JandM]

Good luck.