on 14-11-2013 03:47 PM
This is disgraceful and I can only hope the people who are in charge fix this asap.
An asylum seeker who was moved off Nauru to give birth is being locked up for 18 hours a day in a detention centre in Brisbane while her week-old baby remains in hospital with respiratory problems.
The case of Latifa, a 31-year-old woman of the persecuted Rohingya people of Myanmar, has shocked churches and refugee advocates.
She was separated from her baby on Sunday, four days after a caesarean delivery, and has since been allowed to visit him only between 10am and 4pm in Brisbane's Mater Hospital. The boy, named Farus, has respiratory problems and needs round-the-clock medical care.
Latifa is confined to the Brisbane Immigration Transit Accommodation, 20 minutes away, where her husband and two children, four and seven, are being held.
Latifa's husband, Niza, is not allowed to visit the child at all, according to people in daily contact with the family.
on 16-11-2013 05:36 PM
I disagree. We're talking about migrants to this country.
The english kiddies were "legal" migrants and treated harshly enough.
Illegal migrants to this country are treated with much more clemency.
This case is simply another emotional appeal to break down the Australian border security defences.
16-11-2013 05:40 PM - edited 16-11-2013 05:41 PM
There is a HUGE difference between a migrant and a REFUGEE or an ASYLUM seeker. no doubt over that.
Apart from that, what do English orphans have to do with an immigration policy in 2013 for boat people and their access/visiting times to visit their newborn baby in hospital.. zip. 'Orphans' were brought here 1947-1967.
A migrant wouldn't be in a detention centre to start with.
on 16-11-2013 05:40 PM
@izabsmiling wrote:
@am*3 wrote:Now you are getting really off track in a thread about hospital treatment of a mother who arrived by boat.
Am3 wrote:TA's stop the boats, turn back the boats, they won't set foot in Australia - where did does that give the impression they can land and be placed in motels?
@polksaladallie wrote:The detainees in motels have not been assessed either.
Am3 wrote:That is not the current system/policy in place today.
my post was in line with these
see the details of detainees and the policy re 48hr transfer etc. in the article I added
read the entire article and find out why the policy re 48 hr transfer has not been adhered to.
Do you understand what a policy is?
additionally, I believe that Am3's post was directed at Icy, whose post I took to be a little tongue in cheek and alluding to the fact that the topic of the thread and the circumstances surrounding the topic are being grossly diluted with nothing more than emotive rhetoric and a desperate attempt to ignore the facts surrounding the situation.
on 16-11-2013 05:44 PM
the churches and charities spend 6 months with refugees..... not asylum seekers.
They wouldn't spend 6 months settling in an asylum seeker (who hadn't been granted refugee status) now would they?
I know the topic is asylum seekers..
on 16-11-2013 05:47 PM
Opening post, specifically about limited hosptial visiting times for mother and no visiting times for father and other siblings.
An asylum seeker who was moved off Nauru to give birth is being locked up for 18 hours a day in a detention centre in Brisbane while her week-old baby remains in hospital with respiratory problems.
The case of Latifa, a 31-year-old woman of the persecuted Rohingya people of Myanmar, has shocked churches and refugee advocates.
She was separated from her baby on Sunday, four days after a caesarean delivery, and has since been allowed to visit him only between 10am and 4pm in Brisbane's Mater Hospital. The boy, named Farus, has respiratory problems and needs round-the-clock medical care.
Latifa is confined to the Brisbane Immigration Transit Accommodation, 20 minutes away, where her husband and two children, four and seven, are being held.
Latifa's husband, Niza, is not allowed to visit the child at all, according to people in daily contact with the family.
on 16-11-2013 05:47 PM
@am*3 wrote:A Darwin-based support network for asylum seekers says some who arrived by boat in Top End waters earlier this week are showing signs of torture
Can't see the connection with that and the mothers treatment or conditions place upon her by the hospital/immigration dept myself.
I will confess that I cannot see or remember why I thought these two articles belonged in this thread, but I'm going to post them anyway, because when i first came across them, they did make me go "aha!, some facts relevant to something i read in this thread, and as I now have 17 tabs open and only 2 screens fired up, I want to close some but not lose them LOL)
so here goes
Stuck in Indonesia: Asylum seekers before they set sail for Australia
oops, make that 21 - some were hiding!
Fact Sheet 61 - Seeking Protection Within Australia
on 16-11-2013 05:51 PM
@am*3 wrote:
@icyfroth wrote:No we are talking about people who enter Australia with all sorts of hopes and aspirations and under all kinds of situations and go through all sorts of hardships to eventually settle here to make a better life for themselves.
We're crying about a mother deprived of her child in entering this country illegally when so many english children were illegally deprived of their mothers in coming here.
No one disagrees with that. Kevin Rudd included them in his 'Sorry' speech.
But they were not asylum seekers nor refugees. Nor do they have anything to do with treatment of a family who arrived by boat and had conditions placed on them re visiting their newborn baby in hospital.
There is another thread here started recently, where the UK 'orphans' were brought up, again in a refugee/asylum thread. Not the same topic at all...same comments in that thread.
orphans???????????Many were taken (kept away) from their parents and their parents from them
.Apologies have been made to them and their parents
There could be similarities depending on how you look at it and depending on how our our Country treats Asylum seekers in the future.
"Child Migrants Programme"
Prime Minister Julia Gillard has delivered a national apology to victims of forced adoption practices that were in place in Australia from the late 1950s to the 1970s.
More than 800 people affected by forced adoptions gathered at the Great Hall in Canberra for the historic occasion.
"Today, this Parliament, on behalf of the Australian people, takes responsibility and apologises for the policies and practices that forced the separation of mothers from their babies which created a lifelong legacy of pain and suffering," she said.
"We acknowledge the profound effects of these policies and practices on fathers and we recognise the hurt these actions caused to brothers and sisters, grandparents, partners and extended family members.
"We deplore the shameful practices that denied you, the mothers, your fundamental rights and responsibilities to love and care for your children.
"You were not legally or socially acknowledged as their mothers and you yourselves were deprived of care and support.
Today, this Parliament, on behalf of the Australian people, takes responsibility and apologises for the policies and practices that forced the separation of mothers from their babies which created a lifelong legacy of pain and suffering.
Julia Gillard
"We say sorry to you, the mothers, who were denied knowledge of your rights, which meant you could not provide informed consent.
"You were given false assurances. You were forced to endure the coercion and brutality of practices that were unethical, dishonest and in many cases illegal."
on 16-11-2013 05:51 PM
It appears to me, from that news article I posted earlier, it was the Immigration Dept (or what ever that branch dealing with detainee'sis called) that placed the time limits on the visiting hours, not the hospital.
on 16-11-2013 05:54 PM
@am*3 wrote:It appears to me, from that news article I posted earlier, it was the Immigration Dept (or what ever that branch dealing with detainee'sis called) that placed the time limits on the visiting hours, not the hospital.
On Sky News, Dr Hewson accused Mr Morrison of arrogance, saying his treatment of the woman was ridiculous.
"It's inhumanity in the extreme in my view, I mean a mother in these circumstances is normally given 24-hour access to a child in intensive care," Dr Hewson said.
"I mean for heaven's sake, you know Morrison can go make all the short-term points he likes out there but this is something I think that sends absolutely the wrong message."
The baby was discharged from hospital yesterday.
A spokesman for Mr Morrison yesterday said doctors at the hospital had advised that it is common for mothers not to stay overnight because of bed restrictions.
But in a statement to ABC's AM program, the Mater Hospital suggested the mother should have been allowed to visit her child whenever she wanted.
The hospital says it encourages new mothers to be involved in the baby's care wherever possible to help establish a strong bond, and does not place restrictions on visiting hours.
"Once a mum is clinically well enough to go home, she is discharged from hospital, but is encouraged to be involved in her baby's care wherever possible to help establish and strengthen her bond with her baby," the statement said.
"Mater places no restrictions on women and they can visit their baby anytime where possible."
on 16-11-2013 05:56 PM
@izabsmiling wrote:From the article In reply to your previous posts (as seen above)
Federal Government policy is for asylum seekers to be transferred offshore with 48 hours, however these asylum seekers have been held at Darwin's Blaydin Detention Centre for five days now.
"Originally we did think that they would begin to be sent to Christmas Island and onto Nauru or Manus Island on Wednesday but as of [Thursday] night they were still here in Darwin and apparently the reason they were still here is because of delys with their medical clearances," Ms Murphy said.
yes, I do believe that appropriate medical attention should be given seeing as it was reported in that article the AS's showed signs of torture from an undetermined source.
a) They need medical treatment for their own health - that's the nice thing to do, wouldn't you agree?
b) I would also like such investigations to try and determine by whose hand the torture occurred so that if it was at the hands of one of our authorities/authoritive figures/resources that they can be suitably punished. And if at the hands of others, that either their authoritive figures can be notified or we ourselves take punitive action. Perhaps medical testing is required to determine that depending on the nature of their injuries, medical testing that does not happen in just 48 hours.
c) as horrible as this sounds, there is also the question of what communicable diseases (if any) these new arrivals may be carrying/been exposed to before they are released from a situation of quarrantine.