Search results

The immediate and long-term impact of trauma on children and young people: The implications of placement in detention centres for recovery from trauma and development of resilience

This is a Report of the findings and reasons for findings made by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (the Commission) following an inquiry conducted by the Commission. The inquiry related to a complaint by the Asylum Seekers Centre (the Centre) against the Commonwealth of Australia (the Commonwealth), Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (the Department).

<h2>2.1 Introduction<sup><strong><a href="#fn1" name="fnB1">[1]</a></strong></sup></h2>

Introduction Proposed purpose Where should comments be sent What is a 'Living Will'? Reasons for discussing living wills Status of living wills How can a person make a living will? When could a living will be invoked? Can a living will be revoked or changed? How can capacity be determined? Legislative considerations Advocacy implications Limitations of Living Wills Benefits of having a living will Key Issues for Comment References

Pursuant to s 31(b)(ii) of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission Act 1986 (Cth), I attach, on behalf of the Commission, a report of an inquiry conducted by my predecessor, Professor Alice Tay. The inquiry dealt with a complaint of discrimination in employment by Mr Kenneth Douglas against the Commonwealth of Australia (Australian Defence Force).

In early 2001 AMEEF, as managers of the MMSD (Australia) project, commissioned various studies including a baseline assessment of the minerals industry and five other areas of interest: mining and biodiversity, stakeholder engagement, mining-Indigenous agreements, managing minerals wealth, and industry-based initiatives for sustainable development. These studies will contribute to a final report of the MMSD (Australia) project, which will form part of MMSD's global project.

This paper will highlight the findings of research examining Family Court and state Guardianship Tribunal's originating materials and written reports from 'experts' and family members. It includes all sterilisation cases involving minors that have proceeded to legal judgment in Australia between 1992-1998. The central assertion is that non-consensual sterilisation continues to be framed as a medical problem to be 'cured' for family and social reasons.

[This is an extract from my honours thesis analysing Australia’s Mandatory Detention Policy giving special attention to the implications on refugee children.]

1. The adequacy and effectiveness of the policies, agreements, laws, rules and practices governing children in immigration detention or child asylum seekers and refugees residing in the community after a period of detention

In 1999 and 2000 the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (the CERD Committee) and the Human Rights Committee (HRC) of the United Nations both criticised the 1998 amendments to the Native Title Act 1993 (the NTA) as limiting the rights of Indigenous people.(1) The committees found that the amendments were discriminatory and recommended that Australia either suspend implementation of the 1998 amendments (2) or amend the NTA anew.(3) No action has since been taken to lessen the discriminatory impact of the 1998 amendments and the true extent of the diminution of native title par