A couple applying for a study permit + SOWP under SDS could only get a medical appointment for weeks after their planned submission date, and asked whether they could file first and let the medical update later. The thread disagreed with itself — instructively:
- Several members: upfront medical is required under SDS. Two commenters said upfront medicals are mandatory for the SDS category, and one pointed to the SDS document checklist (the upfront-medical point) as the source — SDS trades faster processing for a complete file at submission.
- One member: not strictly mandatory, but do it anyway. A dissenting reply claimed upfront medicals are not mandatory under SDS but conceded that most people do them upfront and that it is clearly better for the timeline.
- The practical resolution: whichever reading is right, filing an SDS application without the upfront medical risks either non-SDS treatment (losing the fast track) or a request letter that stalls the file. With an appointment only weeks away, members' logic points to waiting and filing complete — an SDS file's whole value is completeness.
- Check the current checklist. The thread itself resolved disputes by pointing at the official SDS checklist — the right move, since SDS requirements have changed over the years (and the SDS stream itself was later discontinued for new applications; treat the SDS-specific mechanics here as historical).