Submission to National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention from The Australian Psychological Society

Executive Summary The Australian Psychological Society categorically condemns the practice of detaining child asylum seekers and their families, on the grounds that it is not commensurate with psychological best practice concerning children’s development and mental health and wellbeing. Detention of children in this fashion is also arguably a violation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. A thorough review of relevant psychological theory and available research findings from international research has led the Australian Psychological Society to conclude that: • Detention is a negative socialisation experience. • Detention is accentuates developmental risks. • Detention threatens the bonds between children and significant caregivers. • Detention limits educational opportunities. • Detention has traumatic impacts on children of asylum seekers. • Detention reduces children’s potential to recover from trauma. • Detention exacerbates the impacts of other traumas. • Detention of children from these families in many respects is worse for them than being imprisoned. In the absence of any indication from the Australian Government that it intends in the near future to alter the practice of holding children in immigration detention, the Australian Psychological Society’s intermediate position is that the facilitation of short-term and long-term psychological development and wellbeing of children is the basic tenet upon which detention centres should be audited and judged. Based on that position, the Society has identified a series of questions and concerns that arise directly from the various psychological perspectives that have been brought to bear on estimating the effects of detention on child asylum seekers. The Society argues that, because these questions and concerns relate specifically to improvement and maintenance of child detainees’ educational, social and psychological wellbeing, they are legitimate matters for the Inquiry to consider and investigate. • What steps are currently being taken to monitor the psyc hological welfare of the children in detention? In particular, what steps are being taken to monitor the psychological wellbeing of children arriving from war-torn countries? • What qualifications and training do staff who care for children and their families in detention centres have? What knowledge do they have of psychological issues faced by people who have been subjected to traumatic experiences and are suffering high degrees of anxiety, stress and uncertainty? • What provisions have been made for psycho-educational assessment of children’s specific learning needs prior to their attending formal educational programmes? • who are suffering chronic and/or vicarious trauma as a result of witnessing threatening behaviour whilst in detention? • What provisions have been made for families who have been seriously affected by displacement to participate in family therapy? • What critical incident debriefing procedures are in place for children who have witnessed their parents, other family members, or social acquaintances engaging in acts of self-harm or being harmed while in detention? What psychotherapeutic support is in place for children who themselves have been harmed or have engaged in self- harmful acts while in detention? • What provisions are in place for parenting programmes that provide support for parents of children under extremely difficult psychological and physical circumstances? • What efforts are being made to provide parents with the opportunity to model traditional family roles for children, such as working to earn an income, meal preparation, other household duties, etc.? • What opportunities are in place for the assessment of safety issues such as bullying, and sexual or physical abuse of children or their mothers in detention centres? • How are resources distributed to children and families in detention centres? • What socialization opportunities are available either within detention centres or in the wider community for children to develop skills and independence, engage in social activities, participate in cultural traditions, and communicate and interaction with same-age peers and adults from similar ethnic and religious backgrounds? • What access do children and families have to videos, music and entertainment from their cultures of origin? • What provisions are in place to ensure the maintenance of privacy in a manner commensurate with usual cultural practice? • What is the Government’s rationale for continuing to implement a policy of mandatory detention of child asylum seekers that on the face of it is likely to have a pernicious impact on these children’s mental health? • In view of the evidence on the potential long-term impact of mandatory detention on children, what processes may be followed by Government to avoid such a practice and, more importantly, to develop policies and practices that will have a positive impact on these children’s psychological development and mental health?

Hard Lessons : Reflections on Governance and Crime Control in Late Modernity

The essays in this book catalogue a wide and varied range of instances where 'things go wrong' in the practice of criminal justice. The contributions document instances where laws, policies and practices have produced unintended consequences of the most deleterious kind, drawing attention to 'boot camps', detention centres and specific penal policies such as 'short, sharp shock' and 'three strikes and you're out'. Also examined are policing practices such as 'zero tolerance', 'saturation policing' and punitive laws in the area of drug use, sex offences, and prostitution. It will be demonstrated that in each of these cases, the objectives of government resulted in the creation of new and unforeseen problems requiring further reform to the justice system.

Violent urbanism is us

This paper explores violent urbanism in the recent science-fiction filem District 9 whhich depicts an alien immigration camp, filmed on location in Soweto in 2008 in the midst of a series of violent clashed between indigenous South Africans and the new wave of African immigrants. Violent Urbanism is the State of method of control of bodies and populations by those precise biological techniques that determine geopolitical sites for the control of cities. This film while presented as cinema verite speaks the real invasion of traditional, spatio-disciplinary regimes such as corporate-run detention centres, refugee camps, border control and enforced relocation by those imperceptible techniques which violate the body by reducing it to a biological datum, tool, or specimen to serve the security agenda of the twenty-first century nation-state. These techniques are chemical and biological warfare proliferation; genetic engineering; and surveillance systems, such as biometrics, whose purview is no longer limited to the specular but includes the molecular. District 9 evinces a compelling urban image of contemporary biopolitics that disturbs the received historiography of post-apartheid urbanism. Clearly Johannesburg is not the only place this could or is happening - the reach of biopolitics is worldwide. District 9 visualises with utter precision the corporate hijacking of the biological realm in contemporary cites, just as it asks the unsettling question, who exactly is the "audience" of Violent Urbanism?

Navigating uncertainty in Australia : fostering informed citizenship through teaching controversial issues with pre-service teachers

Australia is a multicultural immigrant society created by public policy and direct state action over a period of two hundred years. It is now one of the world’s most diverse societies. However, like many nations, Australia faces challenges to managing ‘unauthorized arrivals’ who claim to be refugees. The issue of how to deal with unauthorized arrivals is controversial and highly emotive as it challenges public policy and government capacity to manage the multicultural ‘mix’ of Australia’s population. It also raises questions about border security. Given that it is impossible to discern beforehand who is a ‘proper’ refugee and who is not, claims to refugee status by unauthorised arrivals in Australia need to be tested against international convention criteria devised by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). There are no simple solutions to controversial questions such as how and where should unauthorised arrivals, and the children accompanying them, be housed whilst their claims are investigated? Moreover, as this issue continues to prompt division and heated debate in Australian society, teachers new to the profession are often reluctant to explore it in the classroom. However, there are opportunities in national and state curriculum documents for the values dimensions of curriculum inquiries into controversial issues such as this to be addressed. For example, the most recent national statement on the goals for schooling in Australia, the Melbourne Declaration (MCEETYA, 2008), makes clear that Australian students need to be prepared for the challenges of the 21st century and to develop the capacity for innovation and complex problem-solving. The Melbourne Declaration informs the first national curriculum to be implemented in the Australian states and territories, and all other national and state initiatives. Its focus on developing active and informed citizens who can contribute to a socially cohesive society implies a capacity to deal with a range of issues associated with cultural diversity, This chapter explores the ways in which pre-service and early career teachers in one Australian state reflect upon curriculum opportunities to address controversial issues in the social sciences and history classroom. As part of their pre-service education, all the participants in this study completed a final year social science curriculum method unit that embedded a range of controversial issues, including the placement of children in Australian Immigration Detention Centres (IDCs), for investigation. By drawing from interviews and focus groups conducted with different cohorts of pre-service teachers in their final year of university study and beginning years of teaching, this chapter analyses the range of perceptions about how controversial issues can be examined in the secondary classroom as part of fostering informed citizenship. The discussion and analysis of the qualitative data in this study makes no claims for the representativeness of its findings, rather, a range of beginner teacher insights into a complex and important facet of teaching in a period of change and uncertainty is offered.

Hosting an asylum seeker in Australia: A nationwide exploratory study

In recent years, there has been a rise in the number of people seeking asylum in Australia, resulting in over-crowded detention centres in various parts of the country. Appropriate management and assistance of asylum seekers has been an issue of major socio-political concern. In mid-2012, the Australian ruling government introduced a ‘first of its kind’ community placement initiative, which involved relocating low-risk asylum seekers from detention centres to homes of those Australian families who volunteered for this program. The present study investigated host families’ motivations for volunteering into this scheme and their resulting experiences. Twenty-four men and women from all over Australia were interviewed in person or over the telephone. Consistent with theoretical frameworks of altruism, acculturation, and intergroup contact, thematic analysis indicated participants’ interest in diversity/humanitarian issues were major factors that motivated them to host asylum seekers. Language and cultural barriers were reported as challenges, but generally, participants found the experience positive and rewarding. The initiative was regarded as an excellent avenue of learning about new cultures. The hosts played a strong role in promoting the English language proficiency and intercultural settlement of the asylum seekers. The scheme was considered as one way of diffusing fear/biases against asylum seekers prevalent amongst the Australian community at-large. Participants also provided suggestions to improve the scheme.

Rights and wrongs of Australian government asylum seeker policy

Worldwide, no fewer than 50 million people a year are now fleeing dangerous and often life threatening situations in their countries of origin (UNHCR, 2014c). As one part of this movement, thousands risk journeys through dangerous waters hoping to obtain asylum in Australia. However, Australian Government policies adopted since 2013 aim to ensure that no asylum seeker nor any of the 3,500 detainees held in offshore detention centres will ever be settled on the mainland. To this has now been added a declaration that none of the recent refugees or 6200 asylum seekers waiting in Indonesia in centres run by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) will gain entry (Whyte, 2014a). These immigration policies differ dramatically from those adopted in earlier decades that produced the country’s decidedly multicultural identity. This article reviews these changing perspectives of Australian governments and communities within the context of international obligations and expectations; the experiences of those directly involved in border policing practices and in detention centres; and the attitudes of national media. Relations and conflicts among the interests of the different parties are discussed and the scope for less punitive responses to the plight of asylum seekers is examined. The authors then focus on alternative processes to better address the interests and objectives of legitimately interested parties by processes which successively examine, optimise and reconcile the concerns of each. In so doing, they aim to demonstrate that such methods of sequential problem solving can respond effectively to the multiple concerns of the many significant stakeholders involved in increasingly significant global issues, whereas recourse to such single-goal, top-down programs as are expressed in the government’s current determination to “Stop the boats” at all costs are unlikely to prove sustainable.

Measuring building quality of shopping centres in Surabaya by Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP)

Quality has been an important factor for shopping centers in competitive conditions. However, quality measurement has no standard. In Surabaya, only two regional shopping centers will be measured in this research. The objective is assessing quality of shopping centers building using Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) method and calculating the Building Quality Index. An overall ranking of Hierarchy priorities of quality criteria founded as a result from AHP analysis. Access and Circulation became the highest priority in affecting quality of shopping centers building according to respondents’ perception of quality. Weightened value as a result from comparison between two shopping centers as follows: Tunjungan Plaza get 0,732 point and Surabaya Plaza get 0,268 point. The first shopping center got higher weight than the second shopping center. The BQI for Tunjungan Plaza is 66% and for Surabaya Plaza is 64%.