Australia asylum baby 'will be sent back to Nauru'

[webfact]

Australia asylum baby 'will be sent back to Nauru'

BRISBANE: -- A baby at the centre of an asylum row in Australia has been released from hospital into community detention.

But the government says baby Asha will be sent to an offshore camp in Nauru once she is well.

Doctors refused to discharge the one-year-old, who was being treated for serious burns, unless she was provided a "suitable home environment".

Full story: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-35627675


-- BBC 2016-02-22

[loppylugs1]

Good

[ezzra]

Good

Very good, enough with those back door immigrants who things that Australia owes them a new life full of social welfare and other free amenities that even real aussies don't get....

[jaidam]

Sending this one child to Nauru will save 100s or 1000s of lives because economic migrants will realize that the chance of a successful dole-bludging in Oz is zero so they won't bother trying. Something Merkel should have considered before inviting the whole of the ME to Germany.

[shirtless]

Its smart its sets the bar at our way our the highway ,no exceptions. The PC protesters should be asked if they want to pay an extra tax as they want them so much, these pricks all take the high moral road until they have to pay for it.

[F4UCorsair]

Strong government position which I applaud

Even the idiots from the left now realize the Libs policy works.

[borisloosebrain]

And the rage continues. All of us descendents of immigrants, many of whom arrived by boat, without visas, some settlers armed with guns and prejudice and murderous christian values who wiped out the locals without a thought, some more recent refugees, some like a few of my ancestors fleeing religious wars in Prussia and poverty in Ireland. I know shitloads of immigrants in Oz, mostly European, Asian and African, and some elderly pre WW2 German Jews most of them have started businesses, some very successful business, and have created jobs, in some cases a lot of jobs, none of them came looking for welfare, all of them looking to build a life for themselves like my ancestors did.

I understand the concern about having people turn up whose first and main allegiance is to Allah. But that doesn't mean you treat children or toddlers like shit <deleted>. Australia is better than that ! At least I thought we were

Edited February 22, 2016 by borisloosebrain

[Thechook]

Australia can't afford floods of ilegal immigrants, they are already attacking the aged pension, private super funds and the public health system to try and raise money for these people who asking for more and more handouts. Where is all the money going to come from when the entire muslim population moves to the west so infidels can look after them?

[arjunadawn]

A curious point within the story is the increasing political activism of doctors. This is evident across the world as western states move increasingly toward nanny/police states. Doctors are increasingly using their collective "gate keeper" power as the most immediate intercessors with the public to a political advantage. Likewise, similarly minded progressives within government are seeking to empower doctors to act out their political activism; so, even the vast body of doctors who wish to remain true to simply Hippocrates and not Marx are being forced into collaborative work as State agents). This is true across the spectrum from smoking to guns to depression etc. Doctors are acting upon their personal,collective activism, and state ordered.

Long ago it was the rare doctor who stood up to police or government and said such a thing as "Yea, well ok. When he is released he is yours but right now he is my patient and you... get out! Uncuff him" etc. You get it; the doc hero in the movie. Doctors would only rarely use their inherent power and nearly always it works. Why? Because their role was clearly defined as aloof from politics or sides or points of view- just the facts, just the patient- this patient- this moment- this time. The patient, the problem, the cure, next patient.

Now doctors are either assigned or self appointed extensions of child protective services, IRS, ICE, battered women, the arbiter of what constitutes a suitable home for a baby, or any number of emotional issues of the moment from guns to obesity to body dysmorphic syndrome to bullying to authority aversion syndrome to... ad naseum. The roles of doctor by this phenomena has degraded in the morphing of less than doctor, to government stooge or political hack. What a shame. I've blended doctors and countries but the same applies.

[teambum]

Australia can't afford floods of ilegal immigrants, they are already attacking the aged pension, private super funds and the public health system to try and raise money for these people who asking for more and more handouts. Where is all the money going to come from when the entire muslim population moves to the west so infidels can look after them?

Were is all the money paid into the pension funds? Will be the same with super all happy now but when start selling off shares in 20 years stock prices will fall so no money for super.

[simple1]

A curious point within the story is the increasing political activism of doctors. This is evident across the world as western states move increasingly toward nanny/police states. Doctors are increasingly using their collective "gate keeper" power as the most immediate intercessors with the public to a political advantage. Likewise, similarly minded progressives within government are seeking to empower doctors to act out their political activism; so, even the vast body of doctors who wish to remain true to simply Hippocrates and not Marx are being forced into collaborative work as State agents). This is true across the spectrum from smoking to guns to depression etc. Doctors are acting upon their personal,collective activism, and state ordered.

Long ago it was the rare doctor who stood up to police or government and said such a thing as "Yea, well ok. When he is released he is yours but right now he is my patient and you... get out! Uncuff him" etc. You get it; the doc hero in the movie. Doctors would only rarely use their inherent power and nearly always it works. Why? Because their role was clearly defined as aloof from politics or sides or points of view- just the facts, just the patient- this patient- this moment- this time. The patient, the problem, the cure, next patient.

Now doctors are either assigned or self appointed extensions of child protective services, IRS, ICE, battered women, the arbiter of what constitutes a suitable home for a baby, or any number of emotional issues of the moment from guns to obesity to body dysmorphic syndrome to bullying to authority aversion syndrome to... ad naseum. The roles of doctor by this phenomena has degraded in the morphing of less than doctor, to government stooge or political hack. What a shame. I've blended doctors and countries but the same applies.

Within Australia it is legislated that the medical profession notify relevant agencies if in their opinion a child has suffered abuse / unsafe environment at their place of residence and so on. Sadly extreme child abuse cases are not uncommon in Oz.

In the case of offshore detention facilities the Oz government has specifically enacted legislation that staff at offshore detention centers, including medical staff, are not permitted to inform people outside of government of any risk / abuse issues & are subject to two years imprisonment if they do so. The medical profession has held demonstrations etc protesting that the legislation is counter to their duty of care oath, the OP is an example of the protest movement.

Edited February 23, 2016 by simple1

[ROGER DUNN]

Enough is enough, these 'people ' come to Aus and have no intention of working

or adapting to the Australian way of life.They just want to build their Mosques

and live in their own little Ghetto"s The Government is weak on this subject.

They should listen to the Majority of the people , and not molly coddle these

uninvited. Also many Aussies are going without because of this situation'

and many are quite rightly so resenting it.

[up2u2]

This plays well to the far Right Wing conservatives. However, Centre Right, Centre Moderates and anything to the Left take a VERY dim view of capturing people and torturing them. Particularly being cruel to women and children and babies. Electorally and politically it is toxic and will damage the coalition chances of re-election. Which is a good thing. A classic case where the 'ends' do not justify the 'means'. Voter backlash will be pretty significant on this issue.

[simple1]

<snip>

many Aussies are going without because of this situation and many are quite rightly so resenting it.

Nonsense - back up your claim. There is not one shred of evidence that government saving for not spending on offshore detention / refugees would be reallocated to welfare budgets for Australians.

Edited February 23, 2016 by simple1

[loppylugs1]

This plays well to the far Right Wing conservatives. However, Centre Right, Centre Moderates and anything to the Left take a VERY dim view of capturing people and torturing them. Particularly being cruel to women and children and babies. Electorally and politically it is toxic and will damage the coalition chances of re-election. Which is a good thing. A classic case where the 'ends' do not justify the 'means'. Voter backlash will be pretty significant on this issue.

What a load of rubbish They have not been "captured",not been tortured and not been cruel to women and children The migrants may well want to reach a destination,if that destination does not want them then they are blocked,simple.

....and I might add look at northern towns in the UK that have spiraled into the dumping ground of the world,horrific ,not even a parallel universe,like the back end of Mars,soul destroying scenes. Australia would be turned into an island ghetto in just a few years,do not let it happen,I'm sure the electorate will decide its not for them

Edited February 23, 2016 by loppylugs1

[up2u2]

This plays well to the far Right Wing conservatives. However, Centre Right, Centre Moderates and anything to the Left take a VERY dim view of capturing people and torturing them. Particularly being cruel to women and children and babies. Electorally and politically it is toxic and will damage the coalition chances of re-election. Which is a good thing. A classic case where the 'ends' do not justify the 'means'. Voter backlash will be pretty significant on this issue.

What a load of rubbish They have not been "captured",not been tortured and not been cruel to women and children The migrants may well want to reach a destination,if that destination does not want them then they are blocked,simple.

....and I might add look at northern towns in the UK that have spiraled into the dumping ground of the world,horrific ,not even a parallel universe,like the back end of Mars,soul destroying scenes. Australia would be turned into an island ghetto in just a few years,do not let it happen,I'm sure the electorate will decide its not for them

Only the very far Right Wing supporters are buying into that rhetoric. You just have to look at the 2 party preferred numbers to see the government is struggling and being cruel to asylum seekers particularly women and children is causing damage. Probably the worst Opposition I have seen and still it's 50/50. A Blue Ribbon seat bi-election for Hockey's seat saw a swing of 13% against the government. The ISIS Death Cult 'dog whistling' simply does not work with an Australian electorate. UK and America yes but not Australia the electorate is a little more educated. For Dutton and Morrisson the moment they uttered the words 'I will not comment about 'on water' operations' their political careers ended that very second. The electorate has decided. The 'ends' do not justify the 'means'. Eventually a Royal Commission will be held investigating in detail what occurred under the governments Offshore Detention policy and it will be to the shame of all Australian people when it is revealed what a government did in their name.

[simple1]

This plays well to the far Right Wing conservatives. However, Centre Right, Centre Moderates and anything to the Left take a VERY dim view of capturing people and torturing them. Particularly being cruel to women and children and babies. Electorally and politically it is toxic and will damage the coalition chances of re-election. Which is a good thing. A classic case where the 'ends' do not justify the 'means'. Voter backlash will be pretty significant on this issue.

What a load of rubbish They have not been "captured",not been tortured and not been cruel to women and children The migrants may well want to reach a destination,if that destination does not want them then they are blocked,simple.

....and I might add look at northern towns in the UK that have spiraled into the dumping ground of the world,horrific ,not even a parallel universe,like the back end of Mars,soul destroying scenes. Australia would be turned into an island ghetto in just a few years,do not let it happen,I'm sure the electorate will decide its not for them

The current government has acknowledged conditions at the offshore detention centres are extremely tough and have confirmed the purpose is to deter future human smuggler 'clients' boarding boats. The Oz government has the right to legislate that 'boat people' are illegal migrants even if they are positively vetted (approx 75%), at the same time such legislation is in breach of international law.

The thousands of people who arrive by air and immediately claim asylum are not treated in the same manner as boat arrivals (have a much higher rejection rate than boat people) and rarely, if ever, mentioned by politicians and others who are anti asylum seekers / refugees. Accordingly the conversation & treatment of boat people, IMO, is vilification & discriminatory.

Edited February 23, 2016 by simple1

[F4UCorsair]

The news this morning is saying that the baby was DELIBERATELY scalded by her mother to get to the mainland. Doctors are saying that they have no evidence of that, but how would they. Guards on Nauru are saying that was the case.

This is exactly what I said on another thread. If this child and her mother are permitted to remain on the mainland, there will be others in these detention centres harming their kids to achieve the same outcome, and boats will start arriving with kids injured near their destination.

It's a risk we can't afford to take.

Edited February 23, 2016 by F4UCorsair

[simple1]

The news this morning is saying that the baby was DELIBERATELY scalded by her mother to get to the mainland. Doctors are saying that they have no evidence of that, but how would they. Guards on Nauru are saying that was the case.

This is exactly what I said on another thread. If this child and her mother are permitted to remain on the mainland, there will be others in these detention centres harming their kids to achieve the same outcome, and boats will start arriving with kids injured near their destination.

It's a risk we can't afford to take.

One guard on Nauru made the claim. Very sadly medical staff would have substantial experience with assessing the circumstances & injuries caused by abuse of children.

Queensland Police confirmed the investigation had been finalised. It is understood no charges were laid.

The allegations against the mother are at odds with Lady Cilento Hospital records stating the child spilt hot water on her chest and that there is "no evidence that the burn injury is non-accidental".

[F4UCorsair]

You only need ONE guard to attest that's what happened if he saw it happen simple1.

It's very difficult to assess, after the fact, how a scalding burn occurred, and I really don't care much for the incident, but what is important is that the policy is not diluted, because we'll be back to the labor days with boats arriving every day, and that is not sustainable.

That no charges were laid is irrelevant....it means no more than the wallopers couldn't nail it on the mother, and if she and the infant were the only ones present (but maybe a guard saw it??) and the mother stuck to her story, the cops don't have a leg to stand on. Even if a guard was present, it would be his word against hers.

Many people confuse a not guilty verdict handed down by a jury as the person being innocent when it's not so. It means only that there wasn't sufficient evidence to convict "beyond reasonable doubt". The police brief to the Director of Public Prosecutions just wasn't conclusive enough for the DPP to proceed?? I don't know.

Let me say it again.....doctors are there to repair people, not get involved in political issues, and that's the mistake they made. Fortunately, the government position prevailed.

Edited February 24, 2016 by F4UCorsair

[simple1]

You only need ONE guard to attest that's what happened if he saw it happen simple1.

It's very difficult to assess, after the fact, how a scalding burn occurred, and I really don't care much for the incident, but what is important is that the policy is not diluted, because we'll be back to the labor days with boats arriving every day, and that is not sustainable.

That no charges were laid is irrelevant....it means no more than the wallopers couldn't nail it on the mother, and if she and the infant were the only ones present (but maybe a guard saw it??) and the mother stuck to her story, the cops don't have a leg to stand on. Even if a guard was present, it would be his word against hers.

Many people confuse a not guilty verdict handed down by a jury as the person being innocent when it's not so. It means only that there wasn't sufficient evidence to convict "beyond reasonable doubt". The police brief to the Director of Public Prosecutions just wasn't conclusive enough for the DPP to proceed?? I don't know.

Let me say it again.....doctors are there to repair people, not get involved in political issues, and that's the mistake they made. Fortunately, the government position prevailed.

IMO government has politicised the medical profession by threatening to jail them when reporting on conditions in offshore detention facilities - an act of political folly

[loppylugs1]

This plays well to the far Right Wing conservatives. However, Centre Right, Centre Moderates and anything to the Left take a VERY dim view of capturing people and torturing them. Particularly being cruel to women and children and babies. Electorally and politically it is toxic and will damage the coalition chances of re-election. Which is a good thing. A classic case where the 'ends' do not justify the 'means'. Voter backlash will be pretty significant on this issue.

What a load of rubbish They have not been "captured",not been tortured and not been cruel to women and children The migrants may well want to reach a destination,if that destination does not want them then they are blocked,simple.

....and I might add look at northern towns in the UK that have spiraled into the dumping ground of the world,horrific ,not even a parallel universe,like the back end of Mars,soul destroying scenes. Australia would be turned into an island ghetto in just a few years,do not let it happen,I'm sure the electorate will decide its not for them

Only the very far Right Wing supporters are buying into that rhetoric. You just have to look at the 2 party preferred numbers to see the government is struggling and being cruel to asylum seekers particularly women and children is causing damage. Probably the worst Opposition I have seen and still it's 50/50. A Blue Ribbon seat bi-election for Hockey's seat saw a swing of 13% against the government. The ISIS Death Cult 'dog whistling' simply does not work with an Australian electorate. UK and America yes but not Australia the electorate is a little more educated. For Dutton and Morrisson the moment they uttered the words 'I will not comment about 'on water' operations' their political careers ended that very second. The electorate has decided. The 'ends' do not justify the 'means'. Eventually a Royal Commission will be held investigating in detail what occurred under the governments Offshore Detention policy and it will be to the shame of all Australian people when it is revealed what a government did in their name.

Once again a load of rubbish.Who are the "very far right"? are you the "very far left" or something?. I assume the "very far right" are the majority of the voters who put the govt. into power.

When push comes to shove,yes those boats will be pushed back,no escaping that,. Muslims attempting to overpower the majority of voters wishes will not prevail and that goes for anybody.

There needs to be a major crackdown too on the spongers already there in Oz who have noses firmly in the trough

[Will27]

This plays well to the far Right Wing conservatives. However, Centre Right, Centre Moderates and anything to the Left take a VERY dim view of capturing people and torturing them. Particularly being cruel to women and children and babies. Electorally and politically it is toxic and will damage the coalition chances of re-election. Which is a good thing. A classic case where the 'ends' do not justify the 'means'. Voter backlash will be pretty significant on this issue.

What a load of rubbish They have not been "captured",not been tortured and not been cruel to women and children The migrants may well want to reach a destination,if that destination does not want them then they are blocked,simple.

....and I might add look at northern towns in the UK that have spiraled into the dumping ground of the world,horrific ,not even a parallel universe,like the back end of Mars,soul destroying scenes. Australia would be turned into an island ghetto in just a few years,do not let it happen,I'm sure the electorate will decide its not for them

The current government has acknowledged conditions at the offshore detention centres are extremely tough and have confirmed the purpose is to deter future human smuggler 'clients' boarding boats. The Oz government has the right to legislate that 'boat people' are illegal migrants even if they are positively vetted (approx 75%), at the same time such legislation is in breach of international law.

The thousands of people who arrive by air and immediately claim asylum are not treated in the same manner as boat arrivals (have a much higher rejection rate than boat people) and rarely, if ever, mentioned by politicians and others who are anti asylum seekers / refugees. Accordingly the conversation & treatment of boat people, IMO, is vilification & discriminatory.

I don't agree that it's vilification or discriminatory, I just thinks it's practical.

The main flaw with your continual comparasion of air arrivals and boat arrivals is that people arriving illegally by air

are just a trickle. Mainly because of the expense involved in air travel and also a lot of people get caught at airports

by Oz immigration officers before they arrive in Oz.

Boat arrivals on the other hand were arriving like a tsunami.

IMO, you cannot really compare the two.

[simple1]

This plays well to the far Right Wing conservatives. However, Centre Right, Centre Moderates and anything to the Left take a VERY dim view of capturing people and torturing them. Particularly being cruel to women and children and babies. Electorally and politically it is toxic and will damage the coalition chances of re-election. Which is a good thing. A classic case where the 'ends' do not justify the 'means'. Voter backlash will be pretty significant on this issue.

What a load of rubbish They have not been "captured",not been tortured and not been cruel to women and children The migrants may well want to reach a destination,if that destination does not want them then they are blocked,simple.

....and I might add look at northern towns in the UK that have spiraled into the dumping ground of the world,horrific ,not even a parallel universe,like the back end of Mars,soul destroying scenes. Australia would be turned into an island ghetto in just a few years,do not let it happen,I'm sure the electorate will decide its not for them

The current government has acknowledged conditions at the offshore detention centres are extremely tough and have confirmed the purpose is to deter future human smuggler 'clients' boarding boats. The Oz government has the right to legislate that 'boat people' are illegal migrants even if they are positively vetted (approx 75%), at the same time such legislation is in breach of international law.

The thousands of people who arrive by air and immediately claim asylum are not treated in the same manner as boat arrivals (have a much higher rejection rate than boat people) and rarely, if ever, mentioned by politicians and others who are anti asylum seekers / refugees. Accordingly the conversation & treatment of boat people, IMO, is vilification & discriminatory.

I don't agree that it's vilification or discriminatory, I just thinks it's practical.

The main flaw with your continual comparasion of air arrivals and boat arrivals is that people arriving illegally by air

are just a trickle. Mainly because of the expense involved in air travel and also a lot of people get caught at airports

by Oz immigration officers before they arrive in Oz.

Boat arrivals on the other hand were arriving like a tsunami.

IMO, you cannot really compare the two.

I respect your opinions, but you may like to review the Oz government numbers and commentary at the URL below; you will observe arrivals by air and then claiming asylum are not insignificant. In fact in the reporting year 2013 - 2014 there was 9,646 applications. Obviously with the implementation of the PNG Solution it stopped onshore applications by boat people.

Do most asylum seekers arrive by boat?

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1415/AsylumFacts#_Toc413067443

It's interesting to note there is an estimated 68,000 illegal migrants in Oz, again a matter which is very rarely mentioned in the media & by so called 'commentators', one assumes because the vast majority are not Muslim.