NC - Zahra Clare Baker, 10, Hickory, 9 Oct 2010 - #13

Status
Not open for further replies.
You still need a passport, though, even with a visa. We had work permits and resident visas when we lived in Egypt, yet they were worthless without showing our passport as well. Since 9/11, even passports are needed if traveling to The Bahamas, which did not previously require one.

ETA: I'm not sure if you were saying that a visa eliminated the need to show a passport or not... So sorry if I misinterpreted what you were saying!

Duh! I'd left the passport part out, that was the hence "almost" as easy part.

It's been a long day!

But point still stands regardless, with the waiver system unless something has been entered into the immigrations system and flagged at the time of ticket purchase, it's drama free travel.

Additionally, just before the 90 days are up, you wouldn't even have to return to your native country, a short "vacation" to Canada and a re-entry from there, would reset the 90 days. Unless this has been changed within the last 2 years.
 
BBM
I have been trying to figure this out all day I thought it was a federal thing not a state mandated subject just wasnt sure. THANKS With this info Zahra WOULD have been getting a monthly check and FREE MEDICAL care.

Maybe in a drug stuper EB or AB still thought the 2 legal aliens needed an american passport to get more US benifits.

I was born and raised a US citizen and had no idea never having to deal with it. Maybe they had someone with MY unknowledge telling them thy needed it and believed it.I know im reaching just trying to make some semblance of sense out of how they think.
If you sponsor an immigrant, they are not allowed to receive US benefits for a certain amount of time. Even if AB and SM had paperwork in order (which I doubt) I am uncertain if Zahra could start collecting benefits, at least not so quickly.
 
Eb and AB are married, that allows AB and Zahra to enter the country- taht makes AB is eligible to work here which be default means he got a SS#.

Zahra is a legal alien, disabled and a child- that makes her eligible for SSI and Medicaid.
SSI payments for a child with a disability are dependent on family income.

So they didn't need to fake anything to get aide they already qualify.

Now addressing the whole the whole idea there was a plan to go away and come back without Zahra is ridiculous- the fact that there was a verified sighting of Zahra and those witnesses have said she was clean and happy tells me they were not locking her up in the attic and starving her. Nor where they hiding the fact that she existed.

this case is horrifying as it is I honestly don't think we need to add fiction to make things worse.



She could get medicaid. Legal aliens who are pregnant or under the age of 19 and income eligible can get medicaid.




To get SSI:
SSI rules about disability

Your child must meet all of the following requirements to be considered disabled and therefore eligible for SSI:

  • The child must not be working and earning more than $1,000 a month in 2010. (This earnings amount changes every year.) If he or she is working and earning that much money, we will find that your child is not disabled.
  • The child must have a physical or mental condition, or a combination of conditions, that results in “marked and severe functional limitations.” This means that the condition(s) must very seriously limit your child’s activities.
  • The child’s condition(s) must have lasted, or be expected to last, at least 12 months; or must be expected to result in death.
If your child’s condition(s) results in “marked and severe functional limitations” for at least 12 continuous months, we will find that your child is disabled. But if it does not result in those limitations, or does not last for at least 12 months, we will find that your child is not disabled.
Providing information about your child’s condition

When you apply for benefits for your child, we will ask you for detailed information about the child’s medical condition and how it affects his or her ability to function on a daily basis. We also will ask you to give permission for the doctors, teachers, therapists and other professionals who have information about your child’s condition to send the information to us.
If you have any of your child’s medical or school records, please bring them with you. This will help speed up the decision on your application.
http://www.ssa.gov/pubs/10026.html#ssi-benefits

So I guess it would depend on the paperwork filled out and what a doctor said, I would guess.
 
Ok I'm going to try to post some snips and links (this is written for the public and does not appear to include the specifics). More at link:

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/disab...k/102.00-SpecialSensesandSpeech-Childhood.htm

B. How do we evaluate hearing loss?

1. What evidence do we need?

a. We need evidence showing that you have a medically determinable impairment that causes your hearing loss and audiometric measurements of the severity of your hearing loss. We generally require both a complete otologic examination and audiometric testing to establish that you have a medically determinable impairment that causes your hearing loss. You should have this audiometric testing within 2 months of the complete otologic examination. Once we have evidence that you have a medically determinable impairment, we can use the results of later audiometric testing to assess the severity of your hearing loss without another complete otologic examination. We will consider your test scores together with any other relevant information we have about your hearing, including information from outside of the test setting.

b. The complete otologic examination must be performed by a licensed physician (medical or osteopathic doctor). It must include your medical history, your description of how your hearing loss affects you, and the physician's description of the appearance of the external ears (pinnae and external ear canals), evaluation of the tympanic membranes, and assessment of any middle ear abnormalities.

c. Audiometric testing must be performed by, or under the direct supervision of, an otolaryngologist or by an audiologist qualified to perform such tests. We consider an audiologist to be qualified if he or she is currently and fully licensed or registered as a clinical audiologist by the State or U.S. territory in which he or she practices. If no licensure or registration is available, the audiologist must be currently certified by the American Board of Audiology or have a Certificate of Clinical Competence (CCC-A) from the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA).
 
LE have spoken with Grandma and apparently she can't verify whether Zahra ever made the move to Hickory either. So we might be able to assume that she had not spoken with her in the six weeks prior to her disappearance.

MOO

"The girl's grandmother Karen Baker told The Townsville Bulletin that Adam and Elisa Baker married just over two years ago, and relocated to North Carolina, living first in a trailer park before moving about six weeks ago into their rented one-story house in Hickory, a city of 40,000 residents about 58 miles northwest of Charlotte."

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/wo...-old-zahra-baker/story-e6frf7lf-1225938992542

I'm sure she knew her granddaughter was with them; where else would she be?
 
Right from the Gov site.

WHAT DOES "DISABLED" MEAN FOR A CHILD?
An individual under age 18 is "disabled" if he or she has a medically determinable physical or mental impairment, which:


results in marked and severe functional limitations; and

can be expected to result in death; or

has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months.


If the individual is age 18 or older, the adult definition of disability explained below applies.

I think the criteria for disability is different from that for SSI? moo
 
If it's for the record, could you provide a link establishing this?

Deductive reasoning. Police haven't shared a whole lot of information about the case, but they have been pretty open about their trouble pinning down when Zahra was last known to have been alive. LEO has spoken to the mother directly (by phone) and I expect to the grandmother as well, and would certainly have gotten access to phone records by now via Australian authorities assisting. It's only in the past couple of days that they've come up with a "sighting" that puts her alive any more recently than about 6 weeks before her disappearance. Grandmother has also spoken to the press and hasn't mentioned anything about when she last spoke to Zahra. So not a peep about any phone contact with her since at least the time of the last change of residence.

Also, if grandmum (and/or mum) had been speaking to Zahra periodically by phone, it's hard to imagine they wouldn't have detected at least a hint of trouble in her tone of voice, even if she was being monitored during calls by EB/AB and not free to openly make any complaints. And if I were a loving grandmother or mother, whose young cancer survivor, amputee grand/daughter had been half way around the globe for two years with her not-too-bright dad and his "gothic fairy" internet bride, and I thought I heard even the slightest hint of worry or unhappiness in her tone, I'd step up the phone call frequency and notify Australian child welfare authorities if I found I could no longer reach her. I'd also be insisting, either directly, or if blocked by EB/AB, then through Australian child welfare authorities, on confirmation that the child was receiving appropriate follow-up care and monitoring for a cancer survivor and amputee.
 
Eb and AB are married, that allows AB and Zahra to enter the country- taht makes AB is eligible to work here which be default means he got a SS#.

Zahra is a legal alien, disabled and a child- that makes her eligible for SSI and Medicaid.
SSI payments for a child with a disability are dependent on family income.

So they didn't need to fake anything to get aide they already qualify.

Now addressing the whole the whole idea there was a plan to go away and come back without Zahra is ridiculous- the fact that there was a verified sighting of Zahra and those witnesses have said she was clean and happy tells me they were not locking her up in the attic and starving her. Nor where they hiding the fact that she existed.

this case is horrifying as it is I honestly don't think we need to add fiction to make things worse.

I think we're all trying to brainstorm as a group here. I have seen no indication that there is any intention to make things worse. Quite the opposite, in fact . . .We're looking for the truth. Maybe it will just take me a little longer and on a different route than you. . . But I'm certainly not trying to add any fiction or make things worse!!!!
 
I posted the requirements for a child to be considered disabled- you are more than welcome to think I am wrong but the Social Security information given on their web sight is not wrong.

For hearing impaired, you must still be below a certain level of impairment even with hearing aids. If the hearing aids correct hearing to a certain level, then she is no longer considered eligible. Same with blindness: if glasses can correct your vision then you are not vision impaired. (I just did some quick research and combined with my own knowledge of services provided, which I think are similar to what IDEA provides for kids in schools.)
 
I think the criteria for disability is different from that for SSI? moo

The medical criteria is the same. The financial resources and whether or not you've paid into the system are different.
 
More at link:

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/disability/professionals/bluebook/101.00-Musculoskeletal-Childhood.htm

A. Disorders of the musculoskeletal system may result from hereditary, congenital, or acquired pathologic processes. Impairments may result from infectious, inflammatory, or degenerative processes, traumatic or developmental events, or neoplastic, vascular, or toxic/metabolic diseases.

B. Loss of function.

1. General. Under this section, loss of function may be due to bone or joint deformity or destruction from any cause; miscellaneous disorders of the spine with or without radiculopathy or other neurological deficits; amputation; or fractures or soft tissue injuries, including burns, requiring prolonged periods of immobility or convalescence. The provisions of 101.02 and 101.03 notwithstanding, inflammatory arthritis is evaluated under 114.09 (see 114.00D6). Impairments with neurological causes are to be evaluated under 111.00ff.

2. How we define loss of function in these listings.

a. General. Regardless of the cause(s) of a musculoskeletal impairment, functional loss for purposes of these listings is defined as the inability to ambulate effectively on a sustained basis for any reason, including pain associated with the underlying musculoskeletal impairment, or the inability to perform fine and gross movements effectively on a sustained basis for any reason, including pain associated with the underlying musculoskeletal impairment.

The inability to ambulate effectively or the inability to perform fine and gross movements effectively must have lasted, or be expected to last, for at least 12 months. For the purposes of these criteria, consideration of the ability to perform these activities must be from a physical standpoint alone. When there is an inability to perform these activities due to a mental impairment, the criteria in 112.00ff are to be used. We will determine whether a child can ambulate effectively or can perform fine and gross movements effectively based on the medical and other evidence in the case record, generally without developing additional evidence about the child's ability to perform the specific activities listed as examples in 101.00B2b(2) and (3) and 101.00B2c(2) and (3).

b. What we mean by inability to ambulate effectively.

(1) Definition. Inability to ambulate effectively means an extreme limitation of the ability to walk; i.e., an impairment that interferes very seriously with the child's ability to independently initiate, sustain, or complete activities. Ineffective ambulation is defined generally as having insufficient lower extremity functioning (see 101.00J) to permit independent ambulation without the use of a hand-held assistive device(s) that limits the functioning of both upper extremities. (Listing 101.05C is an exception to this general definition because the child has the use of only one upper extremity due to amputation of a hand.)
 
The medical criteria is the same. The financial resources and whether or not you've paid into the system are different.

Thanks, there are so many possibilities, temporary disability, permanent, and SSI. and it goes on and on. I appreciate your input.
 
"The girl's grandmother Karen Baker told The Townsville Bulletin that Adam and Elisa Baker married just over two years ago, and relocated to North Carolina, living first in a trailer park before moving about six weeks ago into their rented one-story house in Hickory, a city of 40,000 residents about 58 miles northwest of Charlotte."

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/wo...-old-zahra-baker/story-e6frf7lf-1225938992542

I'm sure she knew her granddaughter was with them; where else would she be?

Well they might have told her she was with them but Grandma had obviously not spoken to Zahra herself or she would have been able to verify to LE that Zahra actually was alive after the move. The only verification they have at this point seems to be the employees of the furniture store.

Also Grandma left out the fact that they had lived first with EB's father and then an apt before the trailer park and the move to the rental home.

I also thought Grandma was not giving interviews? :waitasec:

MOO
 
More at link:

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/disab...00-NeoplasticDiseases-Malignant-Childhood.htm

113.03 Malignant Solid Tumors. Consider under a disability:

A. For 2 years from the date of initial diagnosis. Thereafter, evaluate any residual impairment(s) under the criteria for the affected body system.

OR

B. For 2 years from the date of recurrence of active disease. Thereafter, evaluate any residual impairment(s) under the criteria for the affected body system..
 
There is no category for childhood lung cancer. In that case, the adult category would be used. More at link:

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/disab.../13.00-NeoplasticDiseases-Malignant-Adult.htm

3.14 Lungs.

A. Non-small-cell carcinoma--inoperable, unresectable, recurrent, or metastatic disease to or beyond the hilar nodes.

OR

B. Small-cell (oat cell) carcinoma.

OR

C. Carcinoma of the superior sulcus (including Pancoast tumors) with multimodal antineoplastic therapy. Consider under a disability until at least 18 months from the date of diagnosis. Thereafter, evaluate any residual impairment(s) under the criteria for the affected body system.
 
The medical criteria is the same. The financial resources and whether or not you've paid into the system are different.

I believe a child can recieve disability benefits if the parent is disabled and previously worked.

At this time we are NOT able to know if Zahra in fact collected SSI, I say she didnt but SM had other plans for it to happen. My very own opinion:innocent:
 
I believe a child can recieve disability benefits if the parent is disabled and previously worked.

At this time we are NOT able to know if Zahra in fact collected SSI, I say she didnt but SM had other plans for it to happen. My very own opinion:innocent:

Yes, they can potentially receive SSDI on their parents SS#, not SSI. And this is for adult children not minor children. Starts at age 18. They also have to be disabled.
 
More at link:

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/disability/professionals/bluebook/101.00-Musculoskeletal-Childhood.htm

A. Disorders of the musculoskeletal system may result from hereditary, congenital, or acquired pathologic processes. Impairments may result from infectious, inflammatory, or degenerative processes, traumatic or developmental events, or neoplastic, vascular, or toxic/metabolic diseases.

B. Loss of function.

1. General. Under this section, loss of function may be due to bone or joint deformity or destruction from any cause; miscellaneous disorders of the spine with or without radiculopathy or other neurological deficits; amputation; or fractures or soft tissue injuries, including burns, requiring prolonged periods of immobility or convalescence. The provisions of 101.02 and 101.03 notwithstanding, inflammatory arthritis is evaluated under 114.09 (see 114.00D6). Impairments with neurological causes are to be evaluated under 111.00ff.

2. How we define loss of function in these listings.

a. General. Regardless of the cause(s) of a musculoskeletal impairment, functional loss for purposes of these listings is defined as the inability to ambulate effectively on a sustained basis for any reason, including pain associated with the underlying musculoskeletal impairment, or the inability to perform fine and gross movements effectively on a sustained basis for any reason, including pain associated with the underlying musculoskeletal impairment.

The inability to ambulate effectively or the inability to perform fine and gross movements effectively must have lasted, or be expected to last, for at least 12 months. For the purposes of these criteria, consideration of the ability to perform these activities must be from a physical standpoint alone. When there is an inability to perform these activities due to a mental impairment, the criteria in 112.00ff are to be used. We will determine whether a child can ambulate effectively or can perform fine and gross movements effectively based on the medical and other evidence in the case record, generally without developing additional evidence about the child's ability to perform the specific activities listed as examples in 101.00B2b(2) and (3) and 101.00B2c(2) and (3).

b. What we mean by inability to ambulate effectively.

(1) Definition. Inability to ambulate effectively means an extreme limitation of the ability to walk; i.e., an impairment that interferes very seriously with the child's ability to independently initiate, sustain, or complete activities. Ineffective ambulation is defined generally as having insufficient lower extremity functioning (see 101.00J) to permit independent ambulation without the use of a hand-held assistive device(s) that limits the functioning of both upper extremities. (Listing 101.05C is an exception to this general definition because the child has the use of only one upper extremity due to amputation of a hand.)

Lot's of criteria, looks to me like she doesn't qualify. Looks to me as if Zahra doesn't qualify on the 'loss of function' definition and 'ambulate effectively' definitions...moo mho
 
Hi everyone!! I've been gone all afternoon and evening. I'm trying to catch up but can someone let me know if anything new has come out today? TIA!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
107
Guests online
3,242
Total visitors
3,349

Forum statistics

Threads
592,283
Messages
17,966,569
Members
228,735
Latest member
dil2288
Back
Top