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...

[izabsmiling]

---

@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 

[cherry*135]

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.

[izabsmiling]

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.

[cherry*135]

This confirms what az posted earlier, when somone asked if this baby born in Australia would automatically  become an Australian citizen.

Children born in Australia to parents who are not Australian citizens or permanent residents, automatically acquire Australian citizenship on their 10th birthday if they have lived most of their life in Australia.

[icyfroth]

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.

[cherry*135]

---

@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.

---

????

The Gov policy is to transfer them asap.. I didn't comment on whether that actually happens or not.

[cherry*135]

---

@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.

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@polksaladallie wrote:

---

@am*3 wrote:

---

@polksaladallie wrote:

The detainees in motels have not been assessed either.

---

That is not the current system/policy in place today.

---

I understood that is was.    August 22, 2013

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/newslocal/news/ryde-motel-home-to-100-iranian-asylum-seekers-waitin...

   Ryde motel home to 100 Iranian asylum seekers waiting for immigration screening

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-05-11/housing-asylum-seekers-in-motels-common-practice/430190

Housing asylum seekers in motels 'common practice'

---

the first article is from 2010, but the following still applies

They have come from Christmas Island. They have already undergone some checks and screening. They did not arrive here 4 weeks ago and instantly transported to an inner city Motel.

Nor are details supplied there of how long they were on Christmas Island, how they came to be on Christmas Island in the first place - ie did they turn up unannounced or were we aware of their intended arrival (you do know that we actually extend invitation to some assylum seekers, don't you? i.e they have been identified as being at risk and in need of assylum by Australian counterparts in their areas or by being registered with the United nations High Commissioner for Refugees.etc)

[cherry*135]

The other asylum seeker thread ( incl mention of English 'orphans'.)

http://community.ebay.com.au/t5/Community-Spirit/Let-s-reverse-the-debate-shall-we/m-p/818897#U81889...9

My point about motel accom is: The immmigration policy the family in this story is under, is the current LNP policy. Not one from 2010, nor even Aug this year.

Putting boat people up in motels, is no longer the current policy under the LNP Govt is it?

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@am*3 wrote:

---

@my*mum wrote:

---

@polksaladallie wrote:

I agree.  Of course it is easier when the numbers are small.  But NZ seems to be hugely more humane.

---

did you look at what they actually offer and to whom? it is no more or no less than what Australia offers and provides.

---

Yes, it is a better system than here. Maybe not the Govt, but the Churches and charities, as mentioned above, spend 6 months with each family or individual and help them settle in in many ways.

They don't send boat people with no documentation to Manus Island.

---

the churches and charities spend 6 months with refugees..... not asylum seekers.