Jones (2001, p. 258) argues that children within immigration processes are not granted full access to the rights defined in the UN’s Rights of the Child convention. Their rights may be affected, such as right to remain in the country, right to join with family, and ability to claim asylum (Jones, 2001, p. 258). The Human Rights Commission (2014, p. 62) argues that Australia has a duty of care to all people in detention centres especially children, which is currently unmet due to the unsafe conditions of detention centres. From January 2013 to March 2014, it was found that there were 233 incidents of assault involving children, 27 acts of hunger strikes by children, and 33 reported incidents of sexual assault mostly involving children (Human …show more content…
(2011, p. 619) identified common themes within reporting about asylum seekers, such as illegality or queue jumping, forcing their way into Australia, descriptions of large arrivals, seeking asylum for economic gain rather than protection, links between asylum seekers and terrorism, and hostile asylum seekers. McKay et al. (2011, pp. 622-623) notes that public opinion in commentary was highly negative and constantly linked the asylum seekers debate with fears of domination and terrorism. On the 11th of March in 2011, a riot broke out on Christmas Island which led to burning building and physical confrontations (Grewcock, 2013, p. 15). These riots were blamed on ‘failed asylum seekers’ but most asylum seekers involved in the riot were later declared …show more content…
169). They took spots away from people who were legally entitled to resettle in Australia, they’re transport was due to criminal people smugglers, they had moved passed other countries that could have granted them asylum, they were irresponsible for bringing children on the unsafe trip, they were able to pay their way to Australia therefore they were not asylum seekers were among the many accusations (Jupp, 2003, p. 169). The politicians also declared that the detention centres were acceptable and that all complaints were unjustified (Jupp, 2003, p.
One of the more disconcerting aspects of Bill C-31 is the newly adopted Designated Country of Origin (DCO) legislation which has permanently labeled particular nations as “safe”. Consequently, individuals claiming refugee status who originate from these countries no longer have the same rights and privileges afforded to their refugee counterparts from other nations (“Overview of C-31,” 2013). In turn, this has led to a dichotomy between those who view this change as necessary in order to diminish the influx of embellished and falsified refugee claims and those who view this policy as discriminatory and prejudiced towards people originating from certain nations.
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.
Australia has had a long history of receiving individuals and groups who are seeking asylum as well as unfortunately a long history of turning those away who are perceived as different. (McKay,Thomas & Blood 2011).Even though the white Australia policy was abandoned decades ago it still lives on as a strong resonance in the conservative right of politics (Westoby & Ingamells, 2010). Community fear about Australia’s border seem easily triggered, which has prompted the term ‘paranoid nationalism’ to be used to describe the heightened refugee politics of the Howard years linked to discrimination and maltreatment of asylum seekers which still lives on today (Westoby & Ingamells, 2010). This paper will use the term asylum seeker to identify those who have arrived at Australian shores seeking refuge without a valid visa. I aim to consider throughout this paper this history of how asylum seekers have been constructed as the ‘other’ and to examine the role of public discourse and political, legal and media responses, such as the implementation of detention centres, as creating and reinforcing the position of asylum seekers as different and not belonging. It will be therefore argued that while we have come a long way from the treatment the Howard government gave asylum seekers, we have not come far enough. Two key areas being the use of ‘othering’ and the implementation of detention centres need to be challenged if we are to take the responsibility of providing refuge for asylum seekers seriously.
The United States fails to protect its borders, while Australia sacrifices human rights in order to do so. Traditionally, first-world countries and their citizens assist those in less developed countries. Many of the island nations in the south pacific suffer from poverty and frequent natural disasters. Most would agree that, as the most developed country in the region, it is Australia’s responsibility to advocate for human rights and contribute to humanitarian efforts for the island nations. To its credit, Australia normally satisfies this role. However, when asylum-seekers come by boat, Australia draws a forceful line. The United States is also tasked with protecting its borders, but takes a more appropriate approach. In 2012, the PEW research
Smothers, Ronald. (1998, February 6). Asylum Seekers Testify on Abuse by Jail Guards. The New York Times, pp. 1A, 9A.
In 2005 the Migration Amendment Act was introduced which relates to the notion that children must only be put in detention centres as a matter of last resort to ensure the safety of children as there had been many concerns from the Members of parliament. This new policy has given the opportunity for many children and their families to be released into community detention centres whereby there is higher security to ensure their protection. However, in Australia there had still been a substantial amount of children that had still been held in detention centres and often for lengthy periods. Although the Australian Government had attempted to comply with the new policy by gradually allowing children and their families to be released into the community detention centre, the Refugee Council of Australia continues to be concerned with the security and protection of children during the process whereby they determine the status of refugees, while in detention but also in the community.
Everyday over 11 million people battle with the fact that they can’t be legal in America. Hiding in the shadows, petrified of what might happen to them if they are caught trying to help their kids and families be successful in a safe home. Millions of undocumented immigrants are denied a “path to citizenship” due to immigration laws. These laws need to be altered and should allow these hurting families a chance to be legal. If these immigrants get deported, the United States is losing vital resources, they will fear losing their families, and since they are trying to get right by law, why not give them a chance? Furthermore undocumented immigrants are worthy to fight for, and this is why.
Since the time of federation the Aboriginal people have been fighting for their rights through protests, strikes and the notorious ‘day of mourning’. However, over the last century the Australian federal government has generated policies which manage and restrained that of the Aboriginal people’s rights, citizenships and general protection. The Australian government policy that has had the most significant impact on indigenous Australians is the assimilation policy. The reasons behind this include the influences that the stolen generation has had on the indigenous Australians, their relegated rights and their entitlement to vote and the impact that the policy has had on the indigenous people of Australia.
Within Australia, beginning from approximately the time of European settlement to late 1969, the Aboriginal population of Australia experienced the detrimental effects of the stolen generation. A majority of the abducted children were ’half-castes’, in which they had one white parent and the other of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent. Following the government policies, the European police and government continued the assimilation of Aboriginal children into ‘white’ society. Oblivious to the destruction and devastation they were causing, the British had believed that they were doing this for “their [Aborigines] own good”, that they were “protecting” them as their families and culture were deemed unfit to raise them. These beliefs caused ...
Undocumented immigrants are mostly in every country, the U.S maintains a high status of illegal or undocumented workers. Every country seems to think there is a problem and are trying to cut the number of undocumented immigrants or illegal workers. We seem to think, why is this happening? Are undocumented workers ruining the economy or supporting it, are they stealing jobs from Americans or just taking unappealing jobs? Undocumented workers are moving to the United States, seeking a better life and opportunities for themselves and their families. They live in a country where their unable to find work and eventually struggle. Some feel that undocumented/illegal immigrants shouldn’t be a major concern. They support this opinion by denying the major problems that result from the arrival of illegal immigrants into our country.
Throughout the past centuries, immigration has had many positive and negative impacts on our country and society. Law and order have been the founding cornerstone of our democracy, and the mandate of the U.S. Constitution is for Congress to do the work of the people and that of the nation. Immigration has continuously been a passionate debate within our society. This particular topic will always be a sensitive subject due to Americans personal beliefs and morals.
Post, S. G. (2004). Children: II rights of children. In Encyclopedia of bioethics (3 ed., Vol. 1, pp. 385-387). New York, NY: Macmillan Reference USA.
Today, immigration has been a very popular topic especially in the media. It has been a subject of intense national debate because of the new election. Every year, hundreds of thousands of immigrants, legal and illegal, from around the world, come here to the United States. Because they feel like the United States has more benefits, and freedom. These people all have different reasons; some hoping to get a better life, some hiding from persecution etc... Many of them believe America is the best place to go. I plan on finding answers to the following questions: Why should/shouldn’t immigrants be allowed to stay? Should we have any restrictions on who is allowed to immigrate to this country? If so, which ones? How does immigration affect the
U.S. immigration law is very complex, and there is much uncertainty as to how it works. The Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA), the body of law governing current immigration policy, provides for an annual worldwide limit of 675,000 permanent immigrants, with certain exceptions for close family members ("How the United States Immigration System Works: A Fact Sheet"). Around the world there are so many immigrants/refugees who are in the hunt for a fitter life. Some come from places where civil war occurs or some suffer economically trying to support their family. Knowing the fact that they are desperate to seek for a better life, the best option is to migrate to the U.S, the land of opportunities. The problem lies in the migration to the U.S. What are the quotas for new immigrants arriving to the U.S? What are the eligibility requirements to becoming a permanent citizen in the U.S? With much inquiry, this topic has become very intriguing. What people must understand is that
Immigration poses an ongoing debate in which people are becoming increasingly unsure as to whether immigrants are benefiting their society. This paper will examine three of the main benefits of immigration: the increase in diversity it provides, the rise in skills and labor and the benefits to the economy. Immigration leads to cross-cultural integration, therefore increasing ethnic variety. This increase in diversity is beneficial as it leads to improvements in society, as well as educational development. Increased immigration also means there are more skills and experts available to the hosting countries, as well as extra workers to take up jobs that need filling. Immigration also leads to improvements in the economy as taxes are paid and employment and wages increase.