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 07:50 PM
@*elizabeths-mum* wrote:
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' ' 😄
my friend in the NSW prison service expressed the same thoughts LOL
but I know what I have to go through just to try and organize emergency transportation for one of my kids, especially if the other two or myself have other pre arranged committments - and they don't require a security escort (well not legally LOL).
16-11-2013 07:54 PM - edited 16-11-2013 07:59 PM
Do people really expect 5star accom, food and service in a refugee camp
I am unhappy with the wider situation and attitude. You still haven't clarified what Australian mothers being forced to adopt out their babies has to do with asylum seekers, more specifically ones not allowed to visit their baby unrestricted while in detention?
That was a very odd thing to post in this thread.
16-11-2013 08:03 PM - edited 16-11-2013 08:05 PM
No it wasn't to you, mymum, your post must have slipped in before my reply. It was intended for the person who quoted that news story about Australian mothers being forced to adopt out their children.
Using this thread to push their own agenda is my guess.
on 16-11-2013 08:04 PM
@my*mum wrote:
@*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.
I don't think so? she was taken from the hospital at 4pm on Sunday, baby was released late Thursday afternoon.
on 16-11-2013 08:08 PM
Did the mother arrive at the hospital at 10am Thursday as usual for her daily visit? I don't think that info has been published.
on 16-11-2013 08:12 PM
Yes, she was there Thursday and spent the day 🙂
16-11-2013 08:13 PM - edited 16-11-2013 08:14 PM
on 16-11-2013 08:22 PM
@*elizabeths-mum* wrote:
Isn't it funny, in the old days which we are all so thankful to have moved on from, the mother would have remained in hospital for 2 or 3 weeks and therefore wouldn't have been discharged before bubby.
What is the standard stay after a Caesar now? A woman I know left the same day, but that was financial as she (and her family) were still waiting for Australian citizenship and couldn't afford the health care. I find that sad.
Citizenship or permanent residency? I am sure permanent residents are entitled to the same medicare benefits as citizens and in order to become a citizen, you need to be a permanent resident. Unless there have been some drastic changes recently.
on 16-11-2013 08:30 PM
on 16-11-2013 08:39 PM
@izabsmiling wrote: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.
a) none of this has anything to do with the OP
b) none of this has anything to do with race, colour or religion or any other form of discrimination.
c) we are looking into "what they have been and what they are going through" that's the whole idea behind processing those who seek asylum!
d) This woman put her own children at risk of Malaria. She chose to come here knowing that she would be transferred to an offshore detention centre.
e) To our knowledge, she did not become pregnant by force, she became pregnant and gave birth twice in Malaysia where malaria is a huge consideration and then chose to come here to do it again. NO ONE FORCED her
f) preventative measures for the prevention of malaria can begin once a child is 5 kg.
g) the woman and family have arrived after spending at least 10 years in malaria prone regions, how have they avoided infection so far?
h) is it a possibility that her children could die? She gave birth to them whilst in Detention in a malarian prone region. She put them on a boat and risked their lives just for a chance that they may be accepted into Australia. And now the responsibility is being passed onto the Australian government? C'mon hey!
i) her children are being used as a tool and a weapon to circumvent established procedures and protocols, just as ashjoma suggested that other persons seeking assylum may do.
j) felicity Ogilvie is a journalist, it is her job to dramatize and sensationalize situations and take them out of context and proportion, she is hardly a credible authority on the topic.
k) just read that story in the last link and absorb the manipulation that is occurring and has occurred. Exactly as ashjoma said does and will happen.