0
   

HIV and AIDS patients being banned from immigration.

 
 
Baldimo
 
Reply Fri 13 Apr, 2007 10:02 am
Source
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't really see an issue with this. No one has a right to immigrate to another country. If medical bans are put in place then good for that country not wanting to spread sickness in their nation. I hope we do the same thing.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 5,665 • Replies: 26
No top replies

 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Apr, 2007 10:07 am
Ihave sympathy for anyone going through a major debilitating and especially ultimately fatal illness.... but I must agree that I see no need in letting extra people carrying a communicable disease into the country.

It's one of those terribly tough spots to find oneself in and I'm glad I'm not in charge of making the ultimate decisiion because it's a lsoing game.
0 Replies
 
bungie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Apr, 2007 01:28 pm
Re: HIV and AIDS patients being banned from immigration.
Baldimo wrote:

Dr. Chris Lemoh, an infectious disease specialist whose is working on a doctorate on the spread of AIDS among African immigrants in Victoria, rejected Howard's comments, saying excluding people with HIV could not be justified.
"It's a hysterical overreaction, it mixes racism with a phobia about infectious disease," he said. "To not allow people to come on the basis of any health condition is immoral, it's unethical and it's impractical to enforce."


From the statement posted by Baldimo, I didn't see Howard making any racist comments.
I know some Americans who can't immigrate to Australia because they don't have enough money behind them. So, would this also be immoral and unethical to refuse them on the basis of wealth ?
I can certainly see a case for not letting people with HIV ( whatever their race ) immigrate to this country.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 02:27 am
There are children, potential migrants/asylum seekers, who have contracted aids through absolutely no fault of their own.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 03:34 am
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
Ihave sympathy for anyone going through a major debilitating and especially ultimately fatal illness.... but I must agree that I see no need in letting extra people carrying a communicable disease into the country.

It's one of those terribly tough spots to find oneself in and I'm glad I'm not in charge of making the ultimate decisiion because it's a lsoing game.


I think the main reason cited against admission is cost......as Oz has universal health care, there are problems for anyone with serious illnesses being allowed to migrate here, since the community will bear the cost of their care, not just HIV positive people.


Anti HIV drugs are pretty expensive, though.

My understanding is that quite a lot of exemptions are granted.

I agree it's a toughie...especially for so many people from HIV hotspots, like Africa, wanting to come in as refugees.
0 Replies
 
aidan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 03:54 am
Quote:
"There may be some humanitarian considerations that could temper that in certain cases..." he told Southerncross Broadcasting


This line lends some perspective to his viewpoint.
It's not doing anyone any good to stretch any national healthcare system past the point of being able to deliver an acceptable level of services to its citizens.-but it sounds like he is leaving the door somewhat open (at least in his own thoughts) to provide humanitarian aid to those who are in need.
Of course that instict will probably leave things open just enough to create a real hornet's nest in terms of differentitating which cases should meet that criteria.
It's a no-win situation.

Too many people wanting to be taken care of and not enough people available to take care. It's the same story all over the world.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 03:59 am
I don't think that it is Australia's responsibility to pay for the care of the people with HIV & AIDS. In addition, in some countries AIDS is a scourge.

Australia is simply being practical. Those children with care will grow up, and have the potential to spread the disease. It is one thing to have to care for one's own people. It is quite another to knowingly import a serious problem. I agree with the Prime Minister.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 06:15 am
Are you saying, Phoenix and Baldimo, that the USA does not have health requirements for immigrants?


You certainly used to.....and numerous other countries do.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 06:18 am
Re: HIV and AIDS patients being banned from immigration.
bungie wrote:
Baldimo wrote:

Dr. Chris Lemoh, an infectious disease specialist whose is working on a doctorate on the spread of AIDS among African immigrants in Victoria, rejected Howard's comments, saying excluding people with HIV could not be justified.
"It's a hysterical overreaction, it mixes racism with a phobia about infectious disease," he said. "To not allow people to come on the basis of any health condition is immoral, it's unethical and it's impractical to enforce."


From the statement posted by Baldimo, I didn't see Howard making any racist comments.
I know some Americans who can't immigrate to Australia because they don't have enough money behind them. So, would this also be immoral and unethical to refuse them on the basis of wealth ?
I can certainly see a case for not letting people with HIV ( whatever their race ) immigrate to this country.


Has someone said it is racist?


If there is a problem with it, it would more likely be anti HIVism than racism!


Lots of refugees of different races are let in.


Howard persists in claiming that Oz takes more refugees, per capita, than any other country...though I have never heard stats quoted to support this, and it is in the context of defending the awful policy of detention centres for alleged illegals who will not leave.


Edit:

I note the article says our laws are stricter re health.


I wonder if they are?


I have been trying to find out what the US rules are re this for immigrants, but no matter how I google, I can't find them.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 07:30 am
dlowan- The United States DOES have health exceptions for immigrating to the US.

Quote:
The following communicable diseases render a person inadmissible:



1. chancroid

2. gonorrhea

3. granuloma inguinale

4. acquired immune deficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS)

5. Hansen's disease (infectious leprosy)

6. lymphogranuloma venereum

7. infectious state syphilis

8. infectious tuberculosis (TB) (clinically active)

http://www.visalaw.com/04mar1/2mar104.html
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 07:40 am
Phoenix32890 wrote:
dlowan- The United States DOES have health exceptions for immigrating to the US.

Quote:
The following communicable diseases render a person inadmissible:



1. chancroid

2. gonorrhea

3. granuloma inguinale

4. acquired immune deficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS)

5. Hansen’s disease (infectious leprosy)

6. lymphogranuloma venereum

7. infectious state syphilis

8. infectious tuberculosis (TB) (clinically active)

http://www.visalaw.com/04mar1/2mar104.html



Yeah...I thought so.


I suspected most countries had similar rules.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 11:52 am
Whose fault it is for being hiv positive is simply not an issue. It is communicable, normally leads to aids, treatment is expensive, and it often leads to fatal complications. There is no cure. I would say Howard is on the right track.
0 Replies
 
CalamityJane
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 11:59 am
Yes, the United States has a medical exam for visa applicants, and
I remember that I had a very thorough exam, x-rays, blood test, and show proof of propper immunizations prior to being granted access, and it
was NOT Ellis Island. Smile
0 Replies
 
gustavratzenhofer
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 12:05 pm
I'm still pissed that they let Jane in.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 12:14 pm
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
Ihave sympathy for anyone going through a major debilitating and especially ultimately fatal illness.... but I must agree that I see no need in letting extra people carrying a communicable disease into the country.

It's one of those terribly tough spots to find oneself in and I'm glad I'm not in charge of making the ultimate decisiion because it's a lsoing game.


This has come up in Canadia, too, and the problem which most people overlook is that the national health system assumes a horrible cost burden. Treating HIV is expensive, and if these people get in as landed immigrants, they have their medical care provided, but are often unable to work, which just increases the health care cost of the province without additional tax revenue.

I'm not trying to be callous here, but i understand why a nation with a national health care system would react in that way.
0 Replies
 
CalamityJane
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 12:29 pm
gustavratzenhofer wrote:
I'm still pissed that they let Jane in.


Yeah, I did slip through the cracks. Laughing
0 Replies
 
bungie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 12:47 pm
msolga wrote:
There are children, potential migrants/asylum seekers, who have contracted aids through absolutely no fault of their own.


Absolutely true msolga, as there are also people who are not wealthy through absolutely no fault of their own, not allowed to immigrate.
0 Replies
 
bungie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 12:58 pm
Re: HIV and AIDS patients being banned from immigration.
dlowan wrote:

Has someone said it is racist?


If there is a problem with it, it would more likely be anti HIVism than racism!


Lots of refugees of different races are let in.

Dr Lemoh says it's racist and a phobia.
quote
Dr. Chris Lemoh .....
"It's a hysterical overreaction, it mixes racism with a phobia about infectious disease," he said.
end quote
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sun 15 Apr, 2007 04:20 pm
Re: HIV and AIDS patients being banned from immigration.
bungie wrote:
dlowan wrote:

Has someone said it is racist?


If there is a problem with it, it would more likely be anti HIVism than racism!


Lots of refugees of different races are let in.

Dr Lemoh says it's racist and a phobia.
quote
Dr. Chris Lemoh .....
"It's a hysterical overreaction, it mixes racism with a phobia about infectious disease," he said.
end quote



It's a cold day in hell when I feel moved to defend Howard....but I did, on the basis of both rationality, and what I suspect to be universality of the practice; at least in countries with the luxury of just saying no to some immigrants.

Unlike the usually incredibly poor countries into which refugees, sick and well, flood on a regular basis, without health checks. Sigh.


So, how to we make this fairer?
0 Replies
 
bungie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 16 Apr, 2007 01:34 am
Re: HIV and AIDS patients being banned from immigration.
dlowan wrote:


It's a cold day in hell when I feel moved to defend Howard....but I did, on the basis of both rationality, and what I suspect to be universality of the practice; at least in countries with the luxury of just saying no to some immigrants.

Unlike the usually incredibly poor countries into which refugees, sick and well, flood on a regular basis, without health checks. Sigh.


So, how to we make this fairer?


I have to agree with you dlowan and I have no idea how to make it fair, but we must have control over immigration. No matter what the rules, some people will feel unfairly treated.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Beached As Bro - Discussion by dadpad
Oz election thread #3 - Rudd's Labour - Discussion by msolga
Australian music - Discussion by Wilso
Oz Election Thread #6 - Abbott's LNP - Discussion by hingehead
AUstralian Philosophers - Discussion by dadpad
Australia voting system - Discussion by fbaezer
 
  1. Forums
  2. » HIV and AIDS patients being banned from immigration.
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 08/03/2020 at 04:02:47