Australian Refugees with Infectious Diseases

Introduction

Every year, Australia welcomes over 13000 refugees from all across the world. These refugees or immigrants have been exposed to a variety of physical, economic, and political situations, all of which have had an impact on their health. There has been controversy in recent years about whether Australia should welcome refugees with contagious diseases. Despite the fact that medical practitioners have developed a process for handling refugees with infectious diseases, opponents believe that the country is worsening the situation and spending a lot of resources to treat and manage the increasing disease prevalence across the country. To address some the issues aired by critics, the ASID (Australian Society of Infectious Diseases) provided guidelines for diagnosis, management, and prevention of infection from refugees and other immigrants. This essay explores the issue of refugees with infectious diseases. It outlines the reasons why refugees with infectious diseases should be allowed into Australia.

Arguments

Refugees experience disruption of basic of the provision of basic services and are exposed to poor living conditions. Moreover, they experienced numerous cases of human rights violations and prolonged uncertainties. Due to these circumstances, refugees and asylum seekers are vulnerable to complex physical and mental health conditions. Besides, they encounter barriers from accessing the basic healthcare services. By allowing them to come to Australia, they do not only receive healthy settlement but also help in identification and management of the infectious diseases and other health conditions they may be suffering from. Based on the four principles of healthcare ethics, healthcare providers must strive to benefit the patients at all cost.

The Principle of Beneficence

According to Murray. Windsor, Parker & Tewfik (2010), the principle of beneficence encourage practitioners to utilize their knowledge and skills to benefit the patients. In the case of refugees with infectious diseases, Australia should not only allow them in but also use their human resource for health and other resources to help manage the infectious diseases. Attempts to bar refugees with infectious diseases from entering into Australia is unfair in nature. The principle of justice calls for healthcare professionals and policymakers to practice fairness in their medical decisions (Sypek, Clugston & Phillips, 2008). The human right laws call for equal and fair treatment of individuals. Thus, refugees with infectious diseases should be allowed into Australia. Moreover, non-maleficence principle holds practitioners responsible for their decisions. A move to prevent refugees with infectious diseases from getting into Australia also deny them the opportunity to access healthcare services. Thus, policymakers must consider the fact that their decision could harm this category of refugees.

The Declaration on Human Rights

The declaration on human rights require governments, international community, and other agencies to collectively provide care to people who are in most need in order to prevent unnecessary illness and deaths. Governments must avail vaccines to curb the spread of infectious and communicable diseases. Australian government, therefore, must abide by the rule of rescue and allow refugees with infectious diseases to get into the country. According to Phiri, Dietsch & Bonner (2010), global and local communities are morally obliged to ensure regular supply of vaccines and put in place health assessment plans to prevent spread of communicable diseases. Australian government must consider ethical requirements and humanitarian perspective while making decisions regarding refugees with infectious diseases. Efforts must be directed to help asylum seekers from poor countries through evidence based guidelines.

Australian Health Sector

Over the past decade, Australian health sector have been keen on controlling infectious diseases. Through the help of the Commonwealth Department of Health, the country have tried the best to allocate resources for diagnosis, management, and prevention of infectious diseases. Moreover, there is increased preparedness, disease detection, and reporting. National health security have been tightened through proper planning and preparedness. Since a lot of preparedness have been put in place to ensure health security, there are no reasons to deter refugees who are in dire need of Australian government’s help in getting medical care (Correa-Velez, Gifford & Bice, 2005). Moreover, the entry of refugees with infectious diseases will not be a big issue since there are measures put in place to assess their health conditions and enroll them into medical care and other support programs thereby preventing spread of communicable diseases. Currently, Australian immigration department demands the health of all those travelling into the country to be assessed. Medical attention is provided to all those who have been diagnosed with infectious diseases (Colucci et al., 2014).

Biosecurity Measures

Australian ministry of health have put in place biosecurity measures to control the spread of infectious diseases. Disease surveillance through surveillance networks are being used to deal with routine and infectious diseases. Besides, rumors surveillance have strengthened the functionality of diseases surveillance systems and biosecurity. Thus, the entry of refugees with infectious diseases will not pose a serious threat to the Australian population since such diseases will be tracked through surveillance systems in place and appropriate medical attention provided.

Conclusion

Refugees with infectious diseases need medical attention from Australian government and other agencies operating within the country. Although policymakers and legislatures claim that refugees and asylum seekers exert pressure on the countries resources for health and pose a serious threat in terms of disease prevalence, the move to bar them from getting into Australia will be against declaration on human rights. All countries and agencies must carry out their obligation of offering humanitarian assistance to refugees and asylum seekers. Moreover, the decision to prevent refugees with infectious diseases will go against the four principles of healthcare ethics. Therefore, refugees with infectious diseases should be allowed into Australia.

References

Colucci, E., Szwarc, J., Minas, H., Paxton, G., & Guerra, C. (2014). The utilisation of mental health services by children and young people from a refugee background: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Culture and Mental Health, 7(1), 86-108.

Correa-Velez, I., Gifford, S. M., & Bice, S. J. (2005). Australian health policy on access to medical care for refugees and asylum seekers. Australia and New Zealand health policy, 2(1), 23.

Murray, L., Windsor, C., Parker, E., & Tewfik, O. (2010). The experiences of African women giving birth in Brisbane, Australia. Health Care for Women International, 31(5), 458-472.

Phiri, J., Dietsch, E., & Bonner, A. (2010). Cultural safety and its importance for Australian midwifery practice. Collegian, 17(3), 105-111.

Sypek, S., Clugston, G., & Phillips, C. (2008). Critical health infrastructure for refugee resettlement in rural Australia: case study of four rural towns. Australian Journal of Rural Health, 16(6), 349-354.