Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Refugees in australia essay
Australia treat asylum seekers essay
Australia treat asylum seekers essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Refugees in australia essay
Asylum Seekers Oral Presentation
Should asylum seekers who come by boat, be denied permanent access to Australia?
Let me tell you the story of an Iraqi surgeon who came to Australia by boat in 1999, to seek refuge. Dr Munjed Al Muderis was forced to flee Iraq, after being forced in October 1999 to cut Iraqi soldier’s ears that didn’t obey the rules of the Iraqi president at that time, Saddam Hussain.
He arrived in Australia in late 1999 and now he is an orthopaedic surgeon and an author.
Many people have arrived to the shores of Australia since the early days, and they were warmly welcomed. Some even payed to come and live in Australia.
But now the opposite is happening.
They are instead being forced to stay in detention camps and some
…show more content…
Most asylum seekers come from the following countries; China, Iran, Iraq, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Zimbabwe and Pakistan.
Asylum seekers should not be denied permanent access to Australia because every person has the right to seek asylum.
Seeking asylum in Australia is not illegal, so why do people get sent to detention centres immediately or even automatically after their arrival?
Asylum seekers who come by boat should not be denied permanent access to Australia. They had to put themselves in danger, just to get into a country they believe will shelter and protect them from the things they escaped. They should be protected rather than denied and punished. The circumstances for them seeking refuge it not always black and white or known to authorities. They should not be discriminated against on the basis that they are seeking refuge. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and the Australian Government need to understand that a person never wants to leave his or her home country, family or
…show more content…
Some asylum seekers know Australia as a “safe country” and a “humane country” that respect people and refugees, but what did Australia give them back? The Australian Government is trying to prevent asylum seekers from exercising their rights. They come to Australia thinking that their life will shift for the better and that they will be safe if they came here, but little do they know by the time they arrive to the seashore their life is ruined. Asylum chasers such as, children, mothers, fathers, elderly people and pregnant mothers are being sent to detention centres in Australia each year. In 2015 there were 227 children in immigration detention facilities on the Australian Islands, Manus and on Nauru island according to the Asylum Seekers Resource Centre. The Australian Human Rights Commission stated that the mental health of 85% of parents and children was negatively affected while in confinement. Parents and children were asked about their emotional and mental health after leaving the centres, 22% of them said they are always sad and crying, 6% of them say they are always scared and
I, along with many other people believe that as a human we deserve Human Rights, regardless of who we are of what our background is, where we live, what we look like, what we think or what we believe in. However this is not the case. In Australia we are believed to be a multicultural community and a diverse society. Nevertheless the way Asylum Seeker and Refugees are being treated is
In doing so, we are also blocking out people who have the potential to bring even more cultural diversity into the community. If we honestly believe that we are a generous and multicultural nation, it’s time we show it by empathising with our fellow human beings. In order to improve the conditions in detention centres there must be a change to our unnecessarily harsh system. We need rules to be enforced, such as; a maximum 30 day time limit, and the people that are detained must be let out within this time frame. Within this time, health, character and identity checks must be completed. Shutting down isolating and remote detention centres. Speeding up the processing system. Asylum seekers must be given the opportunity to communicate with the outside world and have full access to legal advice and counselling. This means that telephones, internet and external activities need to be an option. Unaccompanied minors also need to be a priority. It is time that Australia treats our neighbours with all the dignity and respect that they finally
One of Australia’s biggest moral wrongdoings that has been continued to be overlooked is the providing of safety for refugees. Under the article 14, in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it states that everyone has the right to seek and enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution. It is not in anyway, shape or form illegal to seek asylum from maltreatment. Australia is obliged under international law to: offer protection, give support, ensure that any individual is not sent back unwillingly to the country of their origin. A report made by
Phillips, J. (2011), ‘Asylum seekers and refugees: What are the facts?’, Background note, Parliamentry library, Canberra.
Controversy has surrounded Australia’s boat arrivals since 2001, when the Howard government took office. Howard instituted Operation Relex, a policy directing the Royal Australian Navy to intercept and board suspected illegal entry vessels, or SIEV’s (Turning Back Boats). Initially widely accepted, this policy was designed to discourage people from arriving illegally by boat. However, turning back small, overcrowded boats, and returning them just inside Indonesian waters, quickly became a safety issue (Turning Back Boats). According to the “Senate Select Committee’s Inquiry into a Certain Maritime Incident,” of the 12 boats intercepted from September 2002 to March 2003, four were turned back and three sank, killing two people (Turning Back Boats). Although Australia has a right to protect its borders from illegal aliens, over 90% of these asylum-seekers qualify as refugees (Turning Back Boats). Such a low success rate is reason enough to end the hazardous practice, but even more concerning are the detention centers where the remaining 10% are held. In 2001, the Howard government passed the Pacific Solution, authorizing the transport of asylum-seekers to island nations and offshore detention centers (Turning Back Boats). Since then, countless human rights violations have occurred at the Christmas Island, Manus Island, and Nauru detention centers (Murray). The asylum-seekers, some children, are often detained in poor conditions for indefinite periods of time, subjected to enhanced screenings, and refused legal representation or the right to appeal (Australia). After Howard left office in 2006 the refugee policies stopped, and the Australian government worked to heal the damage done to the islanders and its international reputation (Turning Back Boats). However, under PM Tony Abbott, the asylum seeker policies returned in 2014 through Operation Sovereign
After the Vietnamese ’boat people’ started arriving in Australia, the Australian attitude towards refugees and asylum seekers has been very effective at integrating them.
Though Australia is perceived as a democratic country whose government is open to public scrutiny, this belief is erroneous. The Australian Government’s apathy towards asylum seekers is neglectful of the fundamental human right to liberty and a sense of safety. Australia will need to overturn these inhumane laws to move forward as a country. If you believe Australia is a country of equality and acceptance then you are deluding yourself.
Although, asylum seekers and refugees are given a few options if they feel as though their rights are being breached, like they can apply to tribunals and courts to view their visa related decisions, they can also make a complaint to the Australian Human Rights Commission about their human rights being breached in immigration detention centres, yet they do not have control over who enters the country, the government is not obliged to comply with the recommendations that are made. Although the government had made few attempts to comply with the human right obligations towards asylum seekers and refugees by introducing new policies and prioritising the safety of the children in these detention camps, there are currently still many breaches towards their rights that the government continues to adapt, therefore they are still constituting a breach of international law
The conditions of Australia’s immigration detention policies have also been cause for concern for probable contraventions of Articles 7 and 10 of the ICCPR. Whilst in Sweden, asylum seekers are afforded free housing whilst their applications are being processed, Australia’s methods are much more callous. Under the Pacific Solution, maritime asylum seekers are sent to impoverished tropical islands with no monitoring by human rights organisations allowed (Hyndman and Mountz, 2008). The UNHCR criticised Australia’s offshore processing centres stating that “significant overcrowding, cramped living quarters, unhygienic conditions, little privacy and harsh tropical climate contribute to the poor conditions of… Nauru and Papua New Guinea” (Morales
Moreover, there is no legislature in the UK setting out a minimum level of care for asylum seekers, financial support comes as weekly payments and and accommodation is on a no choice basis. However, this is different in cases of UASC as a statutory responsibility under section 17 and 20 of the children’s act 1989 and 2004 is triggered. This Act is triggered only after establishing that the child is indeed under 18, this then leads to an assessment with the child subsequently becoming a looked after child with an allocated social worker. The social worker is therefore a first contact for the child responsible for integrating the child into the community and taking care of their educational, social and emotional wellbeing. Consequently, an ongoing assessment is necessary to build an in-depth understanding of the vulnerabilities and competences of each child or young person to appreciate the risk or protective factors resulting from their circumstances and to plan service responses appropriate to their needs and wishes. There should therefore be emphasis placed on assessing the mental health of these kids because of the adverse experiences in their home countries and the distress experienced in an alien country or culture in which they find themselves. Weaver and Burns (2001) thus argue that social workers need a greater understanding of the impact of trauma to be effective with asylum seekers in general and UASC. However, many people who are exposed to traumatic experiences do not necessarily develop mental issues so social workers should be cautious about making assumptions as studies shows that most asylum seekers point to social and economic factors as important rather than psychological
As a signatory to the UN 1951 refugee convention, we have already agreed, not to return asylum seekers or to detain them indefinitely. In 2001, the Tampa incident brought disrepute to us as we failed to take the right action. Another wave of backlash irrupted when Indonesian fishing vessel codenamed SEIV X sank in northern waters. The UN is highly critical on the practice of mandatory detention over long periods. As a law abiding nation, we need to keep our citizens well informed of our obligations under UN convention so that we can collectively meet our obligations in true spirit. Once Australians realise that we are providing over 200,000 migrant visas annually and the asylum seekers would occupy less than 2% of it and irrespective of the fears mongered by politicians, almost 93% of asylum seekers who arrived by boat in the have been recognized as “genuine” refugees by Australian authorities and the popular “country shoppers” or “economic migrant” stories do not represent the reality, it is not difficult to develop a national consensus on this ongoing, unavoidable issue in an overpopulated world with a massive imbalance in resource
An extraordinary 65.3 million Refugees have been displaced around the world. In 2015 Australia took 12,000 of them. But where are Australians placing these Refugees? Australia is deporting these Refugees to a third country, either on Manus or Nauru Island. These Islands have reports of inhumane and cruel treatment towards Refugees For those who aren’t fully aware of what Refugees are; they are people whom come to Australia illegally without the appropriate visas. They cannot obtain these visas because of the reasons they are fleeing their country … their Government. None the less it should be the Australian Government they fear. The concepts of refugees are kept hidden away from us by our own Government in reflection of their Governments own self-interest. This tragedy is classified as a modern day witch hunt.
Throughout our history, persons fleeing their country to seek asylum elsewhere is not new to us. The job of policy makers and government officials is to enact laws that will accommodate these people and allow them to have a smooth transition into new societies. The necessities that refugees need stretches beyond the basic food, shelter and water. In addition to that, they need proper humanitarian care. That includes the same civil rights that us citizens have.
It is quite bogus to see that some Australians are willing to generalise all of the asylum seekers as terrorists, because many of these asylum seekers are in actuality genuine refugees who come to Australia to seek a better life, and leave their old and unhappy one. Imagine you are in the shoes of one of the asylum seekers. They travelled by boat with their family to get to Australia because they are facing a threat to their lives; would you do the same thing? If you had any common sense the answer would probably be a yes because you want a better life for your family and yourself. How would you feel if people from Australia did not let you into their country and turned their backs on you?
A refugee is an individual who has escaped their country of origin and is incompetent to return due to fear of being victimized because of their religion, race and for political or social view (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, 2006).This essay illustrates some of the main impacts that affect the health of refugee in Australia from overseas. Language is a significant barrier to health, these refugee come from non-English speaking countries and find it hard to access health services. They feel disempowered because every time they need an interpreter who is not always available (Australian Human Rights Commission [AHRC], 2010). The use of interpreters is many impacts on health such as, miss communication (The department