connaust Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 A federal inquiry has heard families are abandoning their disabled children in order to fit into Australia's immigration criteria. A parliamentary committee is looking at relaxing the rules which block many immigrants from entering Australia if a family member has a disability or a health condition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest33730 Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 Not before time!! Daniel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Janeloz Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 We are currently having to arrange further assessments/reports for our eldest son. If it wasn't for this I think we would have our visas by now. He is fully aware of what is happening and when I told him that we had been sent an email requesting further reports, he turned to me and said "so its my fault that we haven't got the visa yet", of course I told him that it wasn't and that we would just get on and do the reports and then it will be fine. I hope it is all fine, he would be devastated if he thought we couldn't go because of his special needs, but we will deal with it as a family and would never cast him aside, he's far more important than a life in Australia, and I'm shocked that anyone could do such a thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wanderer Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Andrew, A parliamentary committee is looking at relaxing the rules which block many immigrants from entering Australia if a family member has a disability or a health condition. Well lets say there is a parliamentary inquiry being held into the impact of medical issues on immigration, there being a thread on the Migration board that was started by the Inquiry Secretary and Gollywobbler and at least one other PIO poster have made submissions. What usually happens with such inquiries is that a further government discussion paper and/or recommendations can be made that various governmental levels will consider, DIAC and the Minister having an input and it would largely rest with the Minister if some legislation was to be forthcoming to ammend the current regulations. It is possibly considered a bit difficult to fiddle with the current regulations too much as it is not DIAC that decide but rather Medical Officers make recommendations in regard to likely impact on Australia and they're not just talking of for next year or the next decade but as a life time situation. The regulations essentially say that DIAC are guided by medical opinion and it is only after an appeal to the MRT that the Minister may intervene if the MRT turn an appeal down. Governments do need to have regulations and if they are thwarted too easily, I suppose a country is at risk of entering further into chaos. I do hope your family ultimately receives a good outcome Jane and you can all get to enjoy Australia. I am also shocked that people would abandon their children because of regulations of another country and I would much rather see people with the qualities you exhibit come here than people doing that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Hi janeloz As far as I am concerned, a child who is able to understand that his or her special needs could be a show stopper is not too disabled to be able to migrate. This is a subject which is close to my heart because my ancient Mum is physically disabled following a serious back injury a few years ago. I thought we might have to run the gauntlet with the Migration Review Tribunal, possibly an appeal to the Minister and so forth. Tackling Mum's application for a Contributory Parent subclass 143 via was straightforward and my Aussie sister and I could easily deal with that by ourselves. However I was well aware that the whole thing might go pear shaped. If it went wrong then I wanted the finest Immigration lawyer in Australia in the wings, on standby to take over from me at very short notice. Somebody suggested Nigel Dobbie so I contacted him explaining the score: Dobbie and Devine Immigration Lawyers Pty Ltd Nigel has a mind like a razor and has since become a good friend, even though Mum was OK on her visa meds so we did not need him professionally in the end. Other Poms in Oz members have used Nigel on meds issues since then, though. I have great hopes for the Inquiry. I reckon that the meds criteria will have to be changed where people with disabilities are concerned. I think that life threatening diseases which need a lot of resources (eg the patient needs a kidney transplant urgently and needs dialysis in the meantime) may well continue to be a barrier to migration. I think, though, that whatever happens the MOC will have to be forced to act with transparency and accountability before very long. I fervently hope so, anyway. Fingers crossed for your family, hun. Best wishes Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Hi Wanderer I am also shocked that people would abandon their children because of regulations of another country and I would much rather see people with the qualities you exhibit come here than people doing that. It is tragic but I have read several MRT cases in which children have been farmed out to rellies in the visa applicant's country of origin in order to give the applicant family the best chance of succeeding with their visa application. The situations have ended up in the MRT because DIAC have not accepted that the non-migrating person is not a dependent of the visa applicant. It is terribly sad when a family make a heart-breaking decision to leave a family member behind but I think we need to steer clear of imputing Western family values to the situation. The outcome is sometimes far worse than you or I would be willing to consider for Australia's sake, too. Mr Kiane was a refugee or asylum seeker. He succeeded in obtaining Permanent Residency in Australia. At the relevant time George Lombard was living and practising in Canberra. He acted for Mr Kiane during part of the poor man's ordeal. Profile | George Lombard Consultancy Pty. Ltd. George then moved to Sydney and another migration agent took over the task of trying to get visas for Mr Kiane's wife and children. It dragged on for several years because one of the children had cerebral palsy. The Australian Embassy in Islamabad treated the family disgracefully and were told off by the Ombudsman 3 or 4 times. Each time the Embassy promised to mend its ways and then proceeded to behave just as badly as before. Eventually in 2001, Mr Kiane went to the Australian Parliament House one day. He stood on the steps in front of the building, doused himself in petrol and ignited his clothes. He lingered in hospital for about 10 days before he eventually died from his burns. George visited him in hospital and later attended the poor man's funeral. George has mentioned the case in his response to the Inquiry Secretary, on this thread: http://www.pomsinoz.com/forum/migration-issues/67292-have-your-say-health-requirement.html George seems to think that it would be possible to get a submission from Mr Kiane's widow. I don't know what happened to the widow and children. Hopefully the tragic death of the husband - which was reported on the BBC TV news in the UK - embarrassed the Australian Government and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees sufficiently to ensure that the widow and children were eventually allowed to move to Australia if they still wanted to do that after Mr Kiane's death. Several of the lawyers have referred to Mr Kiane's case in their own responses to the Inquiry, I notice. Cheers Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest siamsusie Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Stories like this leave me speechless and respect to George for showing the human side to mankind may Mr Kiane RIP and I do hope his widow and children were granted a place here, the man fought and died for his principles. ss Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest John Sydney Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Hang on a second there are two sides to every story. Mr Kiane story was not straight forward and immigration felt he was dishonest - his family was allowed in for the funeral and then when back (from memory) Immigration is for the benefit of Australia not the other way round why would we bring some one in who will cost the Australian Tax payer money from day one? Before Australia started charging an application fee to cut down the numbers 3,000,000 people per year (plus their families) applied to enter Australia. Why shouldn't Australia pick and chose the best for Australia? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Hang on a second there are two sides to every story. Mr Kiane story was not straight forward and immigration felt he was dishonest - his family was allowed in for the funeral and then when back (from memory)Immigration is for the benefit of Australia not the other way round why would we bring some one in who will cost the Australian Tax payer money from day one? Before Australia started charging an application fee to cut down the numbers 3,000,000 people per year (plus their families) applied to enter Australia. Why shouldn't Australia pick and chose the best for Australia? Hello John I hear you but I doubt you. You are saying that only the fittest physical and mental specimens should be permitted to migrate to Australia, are you not? If so, that is blatant social engineering, isn't it? For which there might be a viable place but is Australia the right place for it, I ask? Cheers Gill PS - On at least 3 occasions the Commonwealth Ombudsman held that there was no rational basis for the Department's intransigent, irrational prejudice against Mr Kiane and against his disabled child in particular. Several times the Ombudsman more or less told the Aussie Embassy in Islamabad to get on with it, stop dragging their feet and process the visa application without further prevarication. Each time, DIAC responded to the Ombudsman in writing, accepting his criticisms and promising to do better. Nothing happened. Nothing at all. Your theory requires that the Ombudsman was also mistaken and was hoodwinked by Mr Kiane? I've yet to encounter the cynical villain who has committed suicide. Have you met several in your time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest John Sydney Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Gollywobber - As I said I was doing Mr Kiane story from memory and still am - But the fact remains he torched himself - he should not have been allowed in What sane person no matter what problems they have would to do that - It doesn't matter what the Australian Government did or didn't do. Now you want Australia to let his kids in as a sort of "sorry" If they cannot make on their own why should they get special treatment As I stated before only the best candidates should be let in - If it was a company hiring and they had 10 people apply for the job which do they chose? The best one for the job so why should Immigration be any different? Up until 1960 or so it didn't matter how many unskilled people came into Australia we needed them but now the work force needs to be better trained/ skilled so we have changed our requirements How many unskilled poms would jump at the chance to come to Australia if we agreed to let them in we would be flooded? I understand the old theory - import unskilled people the second generation is forced to get a head and become lawyers/Doctors etc it use to work well but in the future with more computerisation /robots taking over even more or the unskilled and semi skilled work we have enough problems with our own home grown uneducated unskilled kids. You only have to look a the Car industry as a classic example 50 years ago it would take 30 people to put together an engine now its 2 people and robots do the rest. In Australia the day will come soon when we stop protecting the present car industry and it will die and we will import all our cars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest33730 Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 As I stated before only the best candidates should be let in - If it was a company hiring and they had 10 people apply for the job which do they chose? The best one for the job so why should Immigration be any different? The problem is John that you are suggesting that disabled people might not be the best candidate whereas in my opinion they often are. Anyone who has fought the challenges that a disability can bring can often add far more to society than able bodied people. It can never be that any society starts saying a disabled person is not of as much value as an abled bodied person. Monetary consideration is only one criteria and again in my opinion not the most important. Daniel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest John Sydney Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 I understand where your coming from - but the problem a rises where do you draw the line? Sooner or later you have to draw the line and when you do. People who are left out will complain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest33730 Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 I understand where your coming from - but the problem a rises where do you draw the line? Sooner or later you have to draw the line and when you do. People who are left out will complain. John, I totally agree with you but my point is that you cannot have a society where the starting point for making these decisions is if someone is disabled - Ultimately I don't think any of us wish to live in a country where money is a more important value than compassion. The line therefore has to be drawn further back than perhaps we feel comfortable with in order to safe guard against this or any other discrimination based on colour,creed or physical appearance. History has shown us where that leads & I pray that Australia never starts down that path. Daniel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.