Volume 202 - Issue 11
Antenatal care for asylum seekers
Authors: Hasantha Gunasekera and David Isaacs
Med J Aust 2015; 202 (11): 572. || doi: 10.5694/mja15.00312
Published online: 15 June 2015
Published online: 15 June 2015
Two paediatricians who have recently visited Nauru disagree with statements made by IHMS doctors
To the Editor: We read with interest the recent perspective written by doctors from International Health and Medical Services (IHMS).1 They state that regular visits to Nauru by specialists, including paediatricians, deliver care “commensurate with that in Australian communities”. The IHMS doctors also state that “We encourage informed commentary and debate among the public and the medical profession”. As specialist paediatricians who recently visited Nauru for IHMS, we disagree with both these statements.
We agree with our fellow Australian general paediatricians2 and the Australian Medical Association:3 mandatory immigration detention of children is child abuse. This view is supported by the numerous specific instances of child abuse meticulously documented in the Australian Human Rights Commission's report of the National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention4 and corroborated in the Australian Government Department of Immigration and Border Control's own Moss Review.5 The Royal Australasian College of Physicians and 14 other colleges and health organisations have called for the immediate release of children from prolonged immigration detention.6
As long as asylum seekers are in detention on remote islands, IHMS cannot provide paediatric and obstetric care commensurate with that in Australian communities. However, IHMS doctors can claim that they are trying to provide the best health care possible by working within the system. Unlike the Red Cross, which eschews political involvement, IHMS, a private company, has a significant conflict of interest: its contractual obligation to the Department of Immigration and Border Control.
IHMS required us to sign a contract that included clauses forbidding media comment or “any public statement that concerns or is related to or which might reasonably be expected to affect the Department [of Immigration and Border Control] or IHMS”. IHMS cannot forbid transparency and then claim to encourage informed commentary and debate.
Competing interests
We provided specialist paediatric services in Nauru. All proceeds were donated to the Children's Hospital at Westmead refugee clinic.
References
- Parrish M, Renshaw A, Duncombe GJ, et al. Antenatal care for asylum seekers. Med J Aust 2015; 202: 12. 1
- Corbett EJM, Gunasekera H, Maycock A, Isaacs D. Australia's treatment of refugee and asylum seeker children: the views of Australian paediatricians. Med J Aust 2014; 201: 393-398. lefthere
- Vasek L. Mandatory detention of asylum-seekers like child abuse, AMA tells inquiry. The Australian 2011; 26 Sep. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/policy/mandatory-detention-of-asylum-seekers-like-child-abuse-ama-tells-inquiry/story-fn9hm1gu-1226146845917 (accessed Feb 2015).
- Australian Human Rights Commission. The forgotten children: National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention 2014. Sydney: AHRC, 2014. https://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/document/publication/forgotten_children_2014.pdf (accessed Feb 2015).
- Moss P. Review into recent allegations relating to conditions and circumstances at the Regional Processing Centre in Nauru. Final report. Canberra: Department of Immigration and Border Protection, 2015. https://www.immi.gov.au/about/dept-info/_files/review-conditions-circumstances-nauru.pdf (accessed May 2015).
- Australia's peak health groups call for all children to be released from immigration detention [joint statement]. March 2015. https://www.racp.edu.au/index.cfm?objectid=25E35458-AFF1-2B86-9FFC8A4D6507F5CD (accessed Apr 2015).