The Appalling Asylum Seeker Conditions

[azureline**]

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.

Advertisement

Latifa's husband, Niza, is not allowed to visit the child at all, according to people in daily contact with the family.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/asylum-seeker-mother-kept-from-newborn-baby-in...

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@*elizabeths-mum* wrote:
The hypothetical Mater having to pay for it scenario is irrelevant to the actuality as they will never have to pay for it. Mater is perfectly free to make statements that underline that it isn't their policy stopping the mother being with her baby's while the cost of such visits isn't coming from their budget.

That is exactly the situation where escorts are needed, crikey.

---

hey?

I think I am agreeing with you, but I don't understand your last sentence. Could you either clarify or expand?

[cherry*135]

 post 284 - There is a very specific issue in the opening post (mother (currently in Australia temporarily in detention) having limited visitation rights to her baby in hospital).. not a open slather on all refugees/asylums seekers issues.

Julia Gillard is no longer the PM.. whatever policies Labor had for asylum seekers are no longer in force.

Whatever policies in 1947-1967 are no longer in force either.

It is Nov 2103, Tony Abbott is the PM and the LNP policies on asylum seekers/refugees are in force.

[*elizabeths-mum*]

Iza, I may have missed a few posts, but are you comparing the 4x18hours that this mother wasn't able to be with her baby with the forced permanent relinquishment of babies in the past?

[cherry*135]

Yes.. now we are onto forced adoptions.. really relevant to this thread (not).

[*elizabeths-mum*]

Sorry crikey, it was in reference to your post about having to find staff. I remember being asked a number of times in prison if I expected staff 'to be able to be pulled out of his 'bottom' ' 😄

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@izabsmiling wrote:

I see it differently Am3.

This is very relevant to the topic :

"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."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-21/gillard-delivers-apology-to-victims-of-forced-adoption/4585972

---

how has this situation forced the separation of mothers from their babies to cause a lifelong legacy of pain and suffering????

OMG! it was 3 days, each of those days where the mother was given access to the baby - none of her human rights have been infringed upon, she was reunited with her baby full time after 3 days.

You seem to be forgetting that no one forced this woman to be here, she is seeking asylum and has not yet been processed. As yet, it has not even been determined if her claims for asylum are genuine! We didn't stick her on that boat, nor did we force anyone else to do it. She has come here to seek asylum and as such is subject to the laws and procedures surrounding asylum. She is not a refugee. she is not an immigrant, she is a voluntary seeker of asylum!

[cherry*135]

Apologys to victims of FORCED ADOPTIONS... was the mother in the opening post forced to adopt out her newborn baby?

Why is that link/post relevant to this thread?

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@*elizabeths-mum* wrote:
Iza, I may have missed a few posts, but are you comparing the 4x18hours that this mother wasn't able to be with her baby with the forced permanent relinquishment of babies in the past?

---

it was 3 periods of 18 hours, not 4!

On day 4 the mother was released from hospital at an undetermined time.

On days 5, 6 and 7, her hours were restricted.

On day 8 the baby was released from hospital and returned to the full time care of her mother and family!

also consider the mother needed to sleep sometime during those 18 hours, as well as eat, bathe and attend to other matters of hygiene and care related to post operative c section and child birth in general.

also being in high care, wouldn't the mother also have needed to express milk for the baby? (if she was breastfeeding) (I don't know, none of mine were breast fed)

and I am not including in that time she may have spent with her other children, as they did have their father to provide short term full time care, and most kids with a sibling in hospital have to make do with one parent (sometimes none) whilst their sibling is in hospital and or undergoing medical care.

[izabsmiling]

EM, I am unhappy with the wider situation and attitude.

Unfortunately I feel that if these people and their childten had different faces,skin and religions.. more people in this Country would be willing to acknowledge that they are more than physical bodies and also more willing to look into what they have been and are going through.

Seems some have more compassion for our export Cattle than they do for other human beings and that recognising these humans as human isn't the in thing.

Are we returning children unassisted to some places as well? 

Scott Morrison says mother and newborn could be sent back to Nauru

SCOTT MORRISON: All appropriate care is provided for people who are located in the offshore processing facility, she was brought to Australia to give birth to a child and she had other health complications that also necessitated her being brought to Australia for that purpose. 

Now that is the process we follow, now if and when she is in a fit state to return to Nauru or Manus Island, and that will be assessed by doctors, then that's what will occur.

FELICITY OGILVIE: The Royal Australasian College of Physicians president-elect, Nicholas Talley, says there is a risk that the asylum seeker's children could die if they're sent offshore. 

NICHOLAS TALLEY: Well malaria is a problem. Pregnant women of course - this woman's no longer pregnant, but pregnant women and also young children can't be given the medications that will help protect them from malaria and if they go to a high malaria environment then indeed they will be at risk. 

And in fact the infant mortality is also an issue overall if you look at the infant mortality for example on Nauru, it's about seven times higher than in Australia. That's pretty significant.

FELICITY OGILVIE: The woman says that she's afraid that her infant or her young children might die because of the heat and food that's being served that's half cooked at times. Is that a possibility, could the children die?
NICHOLAS TALLEY: Certainly http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2013/s3887268.htm

Defence should also be wary of being forced into a position of having to defend deaths in detention, particularly of children. Officials in Immigration should be now giving frank and fearless advice because when the fan clogs up it will be them that Morrison seeks to blame for his transgressions.

 Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/comment/scott-morrisons-noshowandtell-on-asylum-seekers-is-already-s...

[cherry*135]

I don't think it was that bad that the mother couldn't sleep there overnight.. because she would be doing just that sleeping.

The baby's health wasn't failing.. wouldn't want to leave his side it was.