Commission Website: National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention
Click here to return to the Submission Index
Submission to the National
Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention from
Address by Nicholas Procter,
Associate Professor, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA
Special thanks goes
to Maritza Manojlovic, Michele Nardelli and Rosemary Thompson who skilfully
helped me to elaborate the arguments of the paper. To the Middle Eastern
new arrivals that warmly welcomed me into their lives, ready to reveal
their deepest concerns in the belief that they would be taken seriously,
I say thank you. My greatest thanks goes to Mohammed Amirghiasvand for
inspiring me to continue working in this area.
Ladies and gentlemen,
it is so good to see you all here. This is an excellent turnout.
Thank you for all
coming.
Allow me to start
in the customary way. I would like to acknowledge the Kaurna people who
are the traditional owners of the land we are meeting on. Than you for
your invitation.
Ladies and gentlemen,
if you go away with nothing more from my paper today, I want you to remember
two things.
Firstly I will argue
that the cruelty towards people of all ages who seek asylum in this country
is no longer possible to ignore. There is steadily accumulating evidence
from a range of credible sources that the process of detention and post-detention
policies of this Government are providing a retraumatising environment.
I am in agreement
with some of the nation¡¯s finest mental health experts that
until proven otherwise, there is every reason to assume that disabling
mental problems and mental disorders being experienced by people in detention
is a direct outgrowth of the conditions of detention.1
Secondly, I will
demonstrate that there is no greater sense of humanity in life than to
reach out to someone and tell them that you care for them at a time when
there are perilous consequences for their mental health and well being.
Before discussing
what is happening inside and outside our detention centers, lets have
a brief look at what characterises refugees and asylum seekers.
Globally there are
around 20 million refugees. Refugees and asylum seekers are distinguished
from migrants by their lack of choice. Under Australian Law and International
Law (Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of human rights) a person
is entitled to make an application for refugee asylum in another country
when they allege they are escaping persecution. Many arrive as refugees
and as such have to leave their countries of origin to escape persecution,
imprisonment, torture or even death. Families may have been physically
separated, causing much grief. Refugees are often preoccupied by worry
about relatives left behind in the country of origin. Many refugees including
children have no other relatives in their country of destination.
Their psychological
well being of is further compromised by repeated experiences of failure
in this new country as their efforts to gain work and learn English is
thwarted.
Most of these people
- who have often suffered personal and life tragedies that, have also
had to deal with feeling misunderstood, stigmatized and marginalized by
their inability to speak English, by their cultural beliefs or by their
general appearance.
The Middle Eastern
asylum seekers I have been speaking with have fled to escape persecution,
imprisonment, torture or even death. Many have been physically separated
from loved ones, causing much grief, and there is a pervading preoccupation
about family members left behind and the outcomes of their refugee experiences.
It is important to note that upon a determination being made by the Australian
authorities concerning each so-called "illegal" entrant, one
of two consequences necessarily follow. Those who meet the test are granted
a Temporary Protection Visa (TPV). Where the asylum-seeker is found not
to be a refugee they are removed under the Migration Act 1958 (Commonwealth)
as soon as possible. There is no guarantee that the country that they
left, or those countries through which they travelled, will take them
back.
The duration of a
Temporary Protection Visa is only 30 months. At the end of this period
an interview ¡© the so-called 30-month interview - is held
in order to review the status of asylum seekers.
I understand that
four such interviews were held in South Australia during May this year.
And during the first three months of next year I estimate that more than
2000 interviews will need to be held. This will cause enormous strain
for individuals and families who are already feeling the effects of circumstances
here and in their homeland.
What is the government
doing in preparation for this major event in the lives of people who have
had to escape oppression, fear of persecution, torture or even death and
are now being faced with the daunting task of having to convince authorities
that they are still a refugee?
When the TPV holders
are released from a detention centre, after a determination by the Department
of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (DIMIA) as is
required under the Act, DIMA provides them with information, often without
the assistance of an interpreter, as to how to obtain a Medicare card,
how to find treatment for medical problems and an envelope containing
forms they can fill out for acceptance into social services. The view
expressed by officers of the department is that their obligations to TPV
holders stops immediately after a briefing - often rushed, short and confusing
and, on many occasions, held after a long bus ride of several hours duration
following release from a detention centre where the refugee has been held
in virtual isolation, perhaps for years. The refugee is possibly unfamiliar
with Western bureaucracies and the filling out of forms and lacks functional
English. It is reported that DIMIA officials have stated that their responsibility
stops after they have so provided information and limited accommodation
at a rooming house or, as they refer to them, "backpacker accommodation"
2.
Unlike those granted
Permanent Protection Visas (as all refugees were, prior to October 1999),
these refugees cannot access the settlement services provided to other
refugees, such as English classes. They cannot access the mainstream social
welfare system to obtain pensions or Newstart allowances, cannot bring
their families to Australia, and they cannot return to Australia. All
of these entitlements are available to refugees who are processed "offshore"
and who are then authorised to enter Australia.
Let me give you some
real life examples of the sorts of issues I have been talking to people
about.
Here is the true
story of one refugee I have worked closely with.
I am a young Afghani.
I spent 25 years of my life in Afghanistan with my family. Life there
was not easy but I was happy and life was good. But my life changed
when a group called the Taliban came to power in Afghanistan. They destroyed
my life and made me a refugee.
It was not an easy
decision to leave - but I had to leave my country. I escaped, faced
a lot of hardship and difficult situations and on September 25 2000
I got to Port Headland in Australia ¡© happy and relieved
that it was all over and I was hopeful.
I spent the first
6 months of my life in Australia in Port Headland Detention Centre.
The condition in the camp was not good. For three months me and the
another three people were living in a windowless room - as a matter
of fact as I come to think about it ¡© a cell yes, that is
what it was, a cell. This was meant for just one person. Every 24 hours
we were allowed to go out for a walk or a smoke for 10 minutes.
After three months
I was moved to another block which was much larger and about 800 detainees
were living in that block. I was happy that I could go out and walk
and breathe freely in a much larger fenced area. Most of my time was
spent in food queues. The dining hall was very small and detainees had
to take turn for food. I had to wait for two hours to eat. Breakfast,
lunch and dinner ¡© 6 hours in total in a queue.
Our Government now
argue that people like this young man should return home. Many of you
will be aware of the Federal Government¡¯s offer of cash being
offered to people willing to return to Afghanistan. The Government's offering
each asylum seeker $2,000 to return to his/her homeland. A family is eligible
for up to $10,000. The offer applies only to those Afghans who arrived
in Australia, Christmas Island, or Nauru before May 16 this year and who
are in detention awaiting a decision on their refugee status. They have
28 days, in which to accept the offer.
Yet it is my view
that this sort of pressure is unsettling and divisive for at least four
reasons.
First, there has
been only a relatively short period of peace in Afghanistan. Peace is,
in this sense, still in its infancy. It is difficult for families to return
to an uncertain future in an environment where there is an interim government
and sporadic fighting. This is a conflict that cannot be turned off like
a tap.
Second, there is
nothing to go back to. Many sold all they owned in order to come to Australia.
Third, the thought
of returning home brings on feelings of shame and persecution. There is
a fear that their return will mean betraying people, a sense of ¡°You
left us to go to Australia¡± and the coming to Australia
was in itself done quickly. There will be a very real concern among those
who do decide to return of being told by family that they should not expect
any special treatment. Nor can they expect that everything will be the
same for them.
Fourth, parents fear
the disruption and distress this move will bring on among their children.
For the past 2-3 years post detention children have been helped by all
to adjust and cope with the change of living. In short, people are feeling
that this will be disruptive for children.
People are being
forced to make decisions about whether or not they will return in a highly
pressurised, stressful environment. Medical staff who have worked at the
Woomera Detention Centre report that they have treated people showing
severe signs of depression, anxiety, psychosis and many have been in need
of re-hydration some of which was against the will of the people themselves.
Self-harm ¡© wrist cutting and slashing requiring suturing
has been a weekly occurrence. So too the breaking of glass, attempted
hangings and burnings.
The rates of self-harm
amongst Australia's immigration detainees, including children and young
people up to the age of 20, is appallingly high, according to a report
from the Catholic Commission for Justice, Development and Peace.
The report, called
"Damaging Kids", concludes, "Widespread psychological
and emotional abuse of children and young people is occurring as a result
of being incarcerated in Australia¡¯s Immigration Detention
Centres. The damage to children is profound and may permanently impair
their psychological development and wellbeing as adults."
According to Doctor
Louise Newman, Chair of the Faculty of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,
Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists,
Children currently
held in Detention Centres have been exposed to serious psychological
distress in adults and adult self-harming behaviours, and have experienced
cultural dislocation and community trauma. In these circumstances it
is likely that many will develop Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and
that this may become chronic with effects on development.3
These surveys and
medical reports have been backed up by a coalition of health and welfare
professionals and with highly credible reports from registered psychologists,
teachers and mental health nurses.
And to make matters
worse there is a culture of marginalisation both inside and outside the
Detention Centres. According to one medical officer who has worked there,
there is a blinkered view of Middle Eastern People and this persists among
some camp guards.
This "blinkered
view" as he put it is nothing more than a taken-for-granted assumption
that they (detainees) are all queue jumpers, criminals, militants, here
to establish terrorist cells in Australia.
This is just not
true. In a rebuff to these claims - claims which are also being made by
some of our most senior politicians - that asylum seekers could be terrorists,
the 2001 annual report of the Australian Security Intelligence Organsiation
(ASIO) says of the 3,700 checks it had made to July 2001, only one person
has been stopped for security concerns. It was not clear if this person
came to Australia by boat or by air. The agency says its primary investigations
centre on supporters of terrorists groups who are already Australian citizens,
or permanent residents already approved by the Government 4.
In describing the
mental health implications of detaining asylum seekers, Zachary Steel
and Derrick Silove identify factors such as prior experiences of torture
and other forms of persecution in the country of origin, the stress created
by the length and conditions of detention, and the feelings and the anxiety
and desperation in those whose refugee claims are rejected.
What is of particular
concern to me, as a mental health professional, is that these are the
sorts of conditions in which people seeking asylum are expected to tell
their story over and over again, in order to convince immigration officials
that they are telling the truth.
When people escape
to another country their application for asylum is considered in light
of the information they can supply and any facts known about the country.
Clearly, asylum seekers do suffer from denial of credibility and claims
are dismissed on grounds of minor discrepancies. Mental distress and emotional
disorders can and will affect the quality of information people remember.
Think for a moment about your own experience of being anxious and the
way in which there might be more attention given over to threat more than
anything else.
Where the experience
is highly traumatic for example, a situation involving serious injury
to the person the situation is even more complex. There may be important
differences between traumatic and non-traumatic memories. For example,
initial recall of traumatic events by people with post-traumatic stress
disorder typically does not involve normal narrative memory. In other
words, the story of what happened may be fragmented and therefore appearing
inconsistent.
The assumption made
by government officials is that inconsistency of recall means that people
are assumed to be telling lies.
If discrepancies
in recall of events continue to be used as a criterion for deciding if
someone is telling the truth, then asylum seekers who have post-traumatic
stress at the time of their interviews are systematically more likely
to be rejected the longer their application takes.5
The task ahead is
to change the fundamental process of doing this kind of investigation
with people who are living under cruel conditions.
Why is it that consistency
is valued so highly when common sense, as well as research, tells us it
is difficult to tell a story exactly the same way twice?6
It is no wonder then
that given this sort of background we should be asked by people released
from detention centres such questions as, Do you really trust us? Do
you believe what we are telling you? What do you think about us? Do you
want us here in Australia? Do you really like us? The whole experience
of being detained in a camp in the middle of the desert had left them
without reference points in the community. Their experience cannot help
but undermine that all people need to feel safe, need to have a relationship
of trust before they can reveal who they are and before they can allow
others to know them.
I have organised
the remainder of this paper according to this overall theme and will endeavour
to address issues relating to it using the following story.
Jamal 7
is a 25-year-old single Afghani man who arrived in Australia via Pakistan
9 months ago. He was in Port Headland Detention Centre for 9 months and
was released 4 months ago. Back in his home country he was a carpenter
and worked in his family-run business. He had a big family (4 brothers
and 3 sisters) of which he is the oldest. He wanted to marry his cousin.
However, the government changed bringing a new regime to power. When he
refused to join them he was arrested and put into prison for 3 years.
When he came to Adelaide
he was given accommodation in a Backpacker Hostel and was told he had
7 days to find his own accommodation. He receives $182.45 per week assistance
from the Government and from this he must pay for everything. He has a
temporary permit visa and is only allowed to stay in Australia for 3 years.
Until Jamal is able to prove his refugee status, he cannot remain permanently
in Australia, nor can he sponsor his fiance to join him. Jamal is not
sure that his cousin¡¯s parents will let her remain unmarried
for that long. This is something he thinks about constantly and agonizes
about day and night.
At the time I met
Jamal immigration officials told Jamal that in order to get his medicare
card he must apply for permanent residency in Australia. This has now
changed. At the present moment you can apply for medicare prior to applying
for permanent residence. As previously stated, his English is very limited
and he has no access to free English classes for refugees. He receives
letters from the immigration department and Centerlink everyday and doesn't
know what to do with them. He is beginning to think that he is under surveillance
from these two groups.
He is living in rented
accommodation in the western suburbs of Adelaide. As he speaks little
English people do not understand him and turn away. Whenever he goes to
Centerlink about a job they talk about "job links", "job
matching', "job networks" and intensive assistance. He finds
all this is very confusing. Back in his homeland if you need a job you
go to a workshop and show what you can do with your hands. But he finds
things here to be very complicated. Sometime ago he attended a job interview
and was told that he was not suited to the job without a driver's license
and proper English. This is something he fears will keep happening.
A few days later
he was found by the police wandering in the street at 3.30am, and was
taken to hospital casualty department. During an interview with an interpreter
he told of feeling isolated, alone without energy and empty inside. He
is constantly talking about wanting to be a part of the ¡°mainstream¡±
and starting a new life here. He feels that he has so much to do with
so little time. By mainstreamhe is thinking about the place where people
go to socialize, make friendships and trust others. He says he wants to
feel at home here. He feels that he wants to trust others, but through
the passage of time, is having increasing difficulty in doing so. At the
same time he is thinking about his family and homeland. Yesterday he received
a letter from his mother. Below is a segment of the letter:
It is about nine
months since you have gone. I know from the United Nations that you are
in Australia. Do parents have no rights? You saved yourself and not us!
The soldiers have
captured three of your brothers and a cousin. They force us to go to war
and kill our brothers. They are in prison. It is one of those prisons
without any roof over their heads. They are exposed to the elements wind,
snow and rain. I have been there a few times to try and release them.
The prison guards are asking for 15,000 Lakh per person (approximately
A$6,000) to release them from prison. The prison guards are beating them
three times per day with metal rods. My son, my son, I need your help.
For the sake of God help me (pleading) and send some money so that I can
free your brother. Because of the drought in Afghanistan there has been
no harvest. We have no money. How nice it would be if you can take me
to where you live. What a wonderful life it would be. Life is so bitter
here. The schools are closed. Children are not allowed to go to school.
They must stay at home.
Jamal says he feels
very guilty that he has not found a job and that he is not sending money
to his family. He feels that he has let them down. It is not possible
to call them by telephone and let them know that things are not easy here.
He wants to reassure his fiance that he will come back for her. He feels
that he has failed.
But he cannot leave
Australia and 3 years is a long time to wait. To complicate matters he
is quite upset about not being able to find a job in Australia and keeps
repeating over-and-over again that he has failed his family after all
they have done for him. During the interview he is tearful, makes limited
eye contact and appears to be having trouble keeping his concentration.
He looks very depressed and thinks his life is no longer worth living.
"No life is worth all this trouble" he says 8.
People like Jamal,
and others, challenge and inspire us with their stories. We can learn
from them how important it is to create a special connection with people.
There is no greater sense of humanity in life than to reach out to someone
and tell them that you care for them at a time when their mental health
and well-being is being eroded. It is by listening to people honestly
and without prejudice that we as health workers learn what practical things
we can do to make a difference.
From my perspective
there is a lot going on at a community level to help people like Jamal.
Some government, but mainly non-government and volunteer organisations,
are working very hard to provide services, promote inclusion and marshal
as much practical and political assistance as possible in pre and post-detention
settings. To my mind there are many layers of activity ¡© both
political and practical taking place.
At the heart of what
people are trying to do is create a humanizing experience for people enduring
a dehumanizing one.
And making this point
I am careful to mention that asylum seekers are not a homogenous group.
Yet for stories to
be told there needs to be a display of trust and acceptance that needs
to be genuine and sustained.
It is against this
background that we return to the story of Jamal. What was particularly
crucial was the need for him to find somebody who he could trust. That
is, a counsellor or community worker he can go to whenever practical help,
support and/or advice are needed. Without this trust, there can be a series
of disappointments surrounding the behavior and actions of others. It
is important to prevent this disappointment turning into disillusionment
and, ultimately abandonment of others in health and helping relationships.
Jamal decided to
try and trust others. He decided to do this by talking with a counsellor
on a regular basis. He took the view that while talking about his problems
and sharing them with someone else was ¡°risky¡±,
to not do this could make his situation worse. After a couple of sessions
with the counselor, Jamal began to open-up to describing his feelings.
To help bring this process about during the sessions, the counsellor began
by asking Jamal some general questions about his background, where he
came from and what aspects of his culture were most important to him and,
ultimately, what is it that troubles him in life at the moment.
During these interactions
the counsellor showed genuine interest in the answers that were given,
without judging Jamal¡¯s decision or methods of coming to Australia.
Over time Jamal began to come around to the idea that what he was feeling
is a natural consequence of having to largely self-manage his frustration
and loneliness in Australia. The counsellor introduced the idea that what
he was feeling was not unique, and reassured him that there was nothing
seriously wrong with him. Upon hearing this, Jamal said he was quite relieved.
The counsellor then
introduced the idea that what he was going through was a life experience
that was very foreign to him. The way this operated was much the same
way that life in this new country was foreign to him. The counsellor did
this by introducing the following notion:
'Right now you
are something of a pioneer. What is now the saddest part of your life
will shape some of the most important part of your life in the future.
It is something that you may one day talk about with others more freely,
perhaps even with pride.'
The counseling sessions
are a means through which to introduce the notion of structure and hope
into Jamal's life. This structure can be in the form of making plans with
regard to friendships, learning English, and finding a part-time employment.
Voluntary work -if it is obtainable - is seen as a useful strategy to
resolve boredom as well as a means to help with the development of self-trust,
as it is English language skills. Volunteer work in a supportive environment
is also seen as a means to help relieve some of his loneliness and distress.
This idea is built
around the notion of Jamal helping other people here at a time when he
is feeling powerless to help his mother and brothers in Afghanistan.
This form of helping
others is a language that he can understand - it is a practical means
of being able to do something with his time and develop important social
skills with others, increase his social network.
What this also does
is offer him a practical means of doing something to help impact upon
his circumstances.
Jamal decides to
write a letter to his family back in Afghanistan. In his letter he talks
about his life since he left home, his journey to Australia, life in the
camp and life in Adelaide. He does this in great detail. He explains in
as much detail as he can that his life here in Australia is not easy here
and money is short. Jobs are not easy to get. In other words, he wants
to send a message to his family of what life is really like in Australia.
He talks about his love for his family, how much he is missing them and
how grateful he is for the opportunity to start a new life. He talks about
how sorry he is for the situation of his brother and cousin. He stresses
that he has not forgotten them and will do whatever he can, as quickly
as he can, to help them.
The way he trusted
others was a gradual process. It did not come overnight. He gradually
realised that Australia was not a Detention Centre. Over time the anger
subsided - he became able to see the other side of Australia - what he
had called the ¡°mainstream¡±. There are caring
people around the place. But the only way he could do this was to make
himself available to others. For the first three months he made a decision
that he needs to concentrate on his English.
He also decided that
he must write a letter to his mother and explain his situation. The purpose
of the letter is try to give his family a better picture of what life
is like in Australia. That is, some real truths of the matter in Australia.
Below is a segment of Jamal's letter to his mother:
Mother I must reassure
you that I care for you and our family. I would and will do whatever
I can to help you and my brothers. But Australia is not like the way
we see it in the Hollywood Movies.
In order to get
a job I must learn English. I must have a proper license to do things
here. This includes driving a car, working, getting health care benefits.
I cannot just go and get a job. Life here is just not that simple. The
cost of life here is also very expensive. If I want to sponsor my fiancee
I must have a job. The only way I can provide for her in the first two
years is to have good job. But I must have good English first. Without
good English it is not possible for me to get a job. And without a job
I cannot get any money or find a place to live. Please understand and
please forgive me.
Clearly, mental health
work with asylum seekers involves some deeply personal encounters. For
stories to be told there needs to be a display of trust and acceptance
and that needs to be genuine and sustained.
Generating trust
with people involves much more than being warm and pleasant - and these
things are important. Developing trust is also about being able to deliver
trust. Before looking more closely at the benefits of this process, it
is useful for me to briefly consider some background issues I believe
to be essential for all health and human service workers to reflect upon.
At the beginning
of this paper I made the point it is quite clear that, for refugees given
the circumstances of their search for asylum, the length of their quest,
the trauma along the way, their often unhappy reception in Australia and
their detention here, it will take a while to build the kind of trust
that will allow them to share their sorrows and heartaches and indeed
their aspirations for the future.
To achieve these
aims, I call upon health and human service workers to identify their own
prejudices and biases, and what is suggested and inferred by them. To
this end I developed a series of questions to help guide this reflective
process 9. Health and human service workers should ask
themselves:
- What are my
own feelings towards refugees and asylum seekers? Do I indulge those
that are distressed or non-communicative? Do I fear or dislike them?
Do they unsettle me? And if so, why?
- How are my
experiences, ideas, thoughts and feelings about working with people
who either speak little or no English or prefer to speak another language
manifest during clinical practice?
- To what extent
does media and popular opinion shape my personal and professional views?
- To what extent
do I believe that refugees and asylum seekers are entitled to the full
range of Health and Human Services free of charge, including ongoing
help from mental health professionals?
Before I conclude
let me emphasise the following.
The giving and receiving
of personal information in a respectful way is not only helping us to
get to the "heart of the matter" when it comes to mental health
and well-being, it is the crucial element for the consolidation of new
lives for these newest Australians. This experience has told me of the
importance of moving on. Moving on is never easy and the timetable for
doing so can be impossible to predict. In the case of asylum seekers,
this timetable is regulated by government and takes the form of what my
colleague, Robert Barrett 10, calls "time torture".
No matter what political
persuasion, to simply keep the same attitudes will erode our freedom as
a nation and destroy our sense of community. For the children it will
erode their freedom. A freedom that is needed to trust the world around
them so that they can be confident as people in their own right.
I will now conclude
with a short letter written to our Prime Minister by a group of year 2
students attending St Aloysius College in Adelaide. The letter is an extremely
valuable document telling how the students want the Federal Government
to stop locking up children in detention centres. It so clearly conveys
how their personal interpretation of how the children should be free to
be themselves - in the least restrictive environment. I wish to thank
Carolyn Lewis (class teacher) and the entire class whose average age is
about 7 years for granting me permission to read this letter to you.
Dear Mr Howard
We believe that children
should not be kept in the Woomera Detention Centre for the following reasons:
- It's cruel.
- Children should
live in a loving environment.
- Children should
not see bad things happening.
- It's not fair
to put families in jail just because they come from another country
and don't have a visa.
- Children can't
eat their country's food so they might get sick.
- Children shouldn't
play behind barbed wire.
- Children should
be treated with respect just like you treat your own children.
- The children
have not done anything wrong.
Year 2CL 27.5.2002
D.M. and Steel, Z. Letter in reply to the Psychological disturbances in
asylum seekers held in long term detention: a participant observer account,
by A. Sultan and K. O¡¯Sullivan. Medical Journal of Australia
2001; 176: 86. See also letter from Halasz, G., Block, M., Petchkovsky,
L., Cooper, H. and 20 co-signatories (all psychiatrists) in same issue.
material has been sourced from Occasional Paper No. 10 - February 2001:
Forgotten People -Asylum in Australia. Catholic Commission for Justice
Development and Peace Melbourne.
The Royal Australian Colelge of Physicians health ans social Policy: Asylum
Seekers. Media Release ,8 May 2002 Source, http://www.racp.edu.au/hpu/policy/asylumseekers/release_children.htm
Accessed online 18/05/02.
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/TWTChronoidx_Thursday14February2002.htm
(accessed online June 1 2002).
J., Scragg, P. and Turner, S. (2002) Discrepancies in autobiographical
memories - implications for the assessment of asylum seekers: repeated
interviews study. British Medical Journal, Vol. 324, pp. 324-7.
J (2002) Electonic letter, ¡°Much else to consider: a response
to Herlihy, J., Scragg, P. and Turner, S.¡± http://bmj.com/cgi/eletters/324/7333/324
his real name.
Adapted from Procter, N.G. (forthcoming) Speaking of Sadness and the Heart
of Acceptance. A model of interactive learning between migrant communities
and mainstream mental health services. Australian Transcultural Mental
Health Network: Canberra
from Procter, N. (2000) The local-global nexus and mental health of transnational
communities. Hawke Institute Working Paper Series No 8. Hawke Institute,
University of South Australia, Magill.
of Psychiatry, University of Adelaide.
Last
Updated 22 October 2002.
