A family is facing deportation after being told their hearing-impaired son does not meet Australia's migration health requirements and would be a financial burden on the country.

Key points: The Wangchuck family say Australia is "home" after they migrated in 2012

The Wangchuck family say Australia is "home" after they migrated in 2012 Their teenage son Kinley is hearing impaired and has not met migration health requirements

Their teenage son Kinley is hearing impaired and has not met migration health requirements His parents say he has learned AUSLAN and would struggle to communicate in Bhutan if they are forced to leave

The family, who migrated to Australia from Bhutan in 2012, said their son Kinley faces a "world of isolation" if deported.

The 18-year-old is hearing impaired and has learnt Australian sign language (AUSLAN), but his mother Jangchu fears he would be unable to communicate in Bhutan.

"No one in Bhutan has heard about AUSLAN and there are no facilities to help him," Ms Pelden said.

"Kinley is so happy here and settled and now he can finally communicate."

"We came in search of a better life and if Kinley goes back, it's a world of isolation — there's nothing there for us," she said.

The family's permanent residency visa application was rejected by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) two weeks ago and the family was given 28 days to leave the country.

They appealed to Immigration Minister David Coleman, who has the power to overturn the tribunal's decision.

The family lived in Melbourne before moving to Queanbeyan, NSW, where Ms Pelden works at a local childcare centre and her husband Tshering works in an aged care home.

During the appeal process, the family — who applied for permanent residence in 2015 — will receive a bridging visa but will not be allowed to work until the Minister makes a final decision.

Kinley's former teacher said he was a widely-adored, "terrific young man". ( ABC News: Niki Burnside )

'Australia is home'

Ms Pelden said despite the AAT ruling her son could financially burden the Government, Kinley had never visited a doctor in Australia other than for his annual hearing test.

Despite Kinley being the only family member to not meet the visa requirements, under Australia's migration laws the whole family will be deported.

"This is home for us now. Australia is home," Ms Pelden said.

"We have lived here for seven years and I can't imagine going back because we are all so happy here."

"If we go back, we have to start again from the beginning."

Kinley's 17-year-old brother Tenzin Jungney is a Year 11 student at Queanbeyan High School and hopes to study international law at ANU, and then maybe medical degree or international studies

"It's frightening," Mr Jungney said.

"I have lived half my life in Australia. I've basically adapted to Australian culture and society. And since there's such a big difference in Australian society and Bhutanese society the sudden change in things [it] would probably effect me a lot."

"I would like to ask a chance to stay here and show we can actually succeed."

The Wangchuck family said deportation would mean starting from the beginning in Bhutan. ( ABC News: Niki Burnside )

Family praised as 'perfect citizens'

Kinley's former teacher David Randall described the family as "the neighbours you want to have."

"They just make perfect citizens," Mr Randall said.

"It's Australia's loss, besides being a humanitarian disaster."

Mr Randall said Kinley was unable to communicate when he arrived in Australia but a "hunger to learn" drove his development.

He said the family struggled in Bhutan because Kinley's condition was undiagnosed and came with a "social stigma".

Mr Randall said it wasn't until Kinley arrived in Australia and was properly diagnosed that he received a hearing aid and began to communicate.

"Everyone who meets him adores him, he is a terrific, terrific young man," Mr Randall said.

"They are very humble, hardworking people who contribute to the economy and are model citizens."

Government defends assessment process

A spokesperson from the Department of Home Affairs said Australia's migration health requirements were not "condition-specific" and that each case was individually assessed.

"The assessment is undertaken individually for each applicant based on their condition and level of severity," the spokesperson said.

"It is an objective assessment to determine whether the care of the individual during their stay in Australia would likely result in significant costs to the Australian community or prejudice the access of Australian citizens and permanent residents to services in short supply."

The spokesperson said the Minister would not comment on specific cases and did not need to explain his decisions.

"A person is able to request intervention, however the Minister cannot be compelled to exercise his powers," he said.

"What is or is not in the public interest is entirely a matter for the minister considering each case on its own merits."