A South African family living in Warkworth since 2020 is battling to prevent the deportation of their 7-year-old son, Joshua, who has autism and a rare form of epilepsy.
Despite the family’s contributions to New Zealand’s workforce and their deep ties to the community, Immigration NZ declined their residency application due to Joshua’s health, labeling him a burden under the Acceptable Standard of Health policy.
After multiple appeals, including a tribunal decision in their favour, Associate Ministers Chris Penk and Erica Stanford rejected the case.
The family is now making a final humanitarian appeal to the Immigration and Protection Tribunal. Speaking to legacy media today they argue the policy is discriminatory and are calling for reform to protect migrants and refugees with disabilities.
Image credit: Getty Images
Ah, I think I see the problem here. Incorrect pigment.
And..a violation of the U.N. International Human Rights of the Child on the part of the government!
NOTICE PARAGRAPH ONE; IT MENTIONS DISABILITY!
Article 2
1. States Parties shall respect and ensure the rights set forth in the present Convention to each child within their jurisdiction without discrimination of any kind, irrespective of the child’s or his or her parent’s or legal guardian’s race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national, ethnic or social origin, property, disability, birth or other status.
2. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the child is protected against all forms of discrimination or punishment on the basis of the status, activities, expressed opinions, or beliefs of the child’s parents, legal guardians, or family members.
Article 6
1. States Parties recognize that every child has the inherent right to life.
2. States Parties shall ensure to the maximum extent possible the survival and development of the child.
Article 8 (APPLIES TO THOSE WHO ARE NEURO-DIVERSE, HAVE ASPERGERS, OR A SPECTRUM OF AUTISM!
1. States Parties undertake to respect the right of the child to preserve his or her identity, including nationality, name and family relations as recognized by law without unlawful interference.
2. Where a child is illegally deprived of some or all of the elements of his or her identity, States Parties shall provide appropriate assistance and protection, with a view to re-establishing speedily his or her identity.
Article 16
1. No child shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his or her privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his or her honour and reputation.
2. The child has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
Article 18
1. States Parties shall use their best efforts to ensure recognition of the principle that both parents have common responsibilities for the upbringing and development of the child. Parents or, as the case may be, legal guardians, have the primary responsibility for the upbringing and development of the child. The best interests of the child will be their basic concern.
2. For the purpose of guaranteeing and promoting the rights set forth in the present Convention, States Parties shall render appropriate assistance to parents and legal guardians in the performance of their child-rearing responsibilities and shall ensure the development of institutions, facilities and services for the care of children.
3. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that children of working parents have the right to benefit from child-care services and facilities for which they are eligible.
ARTICLE 23 APPLIES SPECIFICALLY TO DISABLED OR NEURO-DIVERSE CHILDREN!
Article 23
1. States Parties recognize that a mentally or physically disabled child should enjoy a full and decent life, in conditions which ensure dignity, promote self-reliance and facilitate the child’s active participation in the community.
2. States Parties recognize the right of the disabled child to special care and shall encourage and ensure the extension, subject to available resources, to the eligible child and those responsible for his or her care, of assistance for which application is made and which is appropriate to the child’s condition and to the circumstances of the parents or others caring for the child.
3. Recognizing the special needs of a disabled child, assistance extended in accordance with paragraph 2 of the present article shall be provided free of charge, whenever possible, taking into account the financial resources of the parents or others caring for the child, and shall be designed to ensure that the disabled child has effective access to and receives education, training, health care services, rehabilitation services, preparation for employment and recreation opportunities in a manner conducive to the child’s achieving the fullest possible social integration and individual development, including his or her cultural and spiritual development
4. States Parties shall promote, in the spirit of international cooperation, the exchange of appropriate information in the field of preventive health care and of medical, psychological and functional treatment of disabled children, including dissemination of and access to information concerning methods of rehabilitation, education and vocational services, with the aim of enabling States Parties to improve their capabilities and skills and to widen their experience in these areas. In this regard, particular account shall be taken of the needs of developing countries.
THE POLICY AND ACTIONS TAKEN BY STANFORD IS NOTHING LESS THAN A GLOBALIST METHODOLOGY OF ‘GETTING RID OF’ THOSE WHO ARE NEURO-DIVERSE. THIS IS DARWINISM IN ACTION (SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST…) AND VIEWS THOSE ON THE AUTISM SPECTRUM AS ‘USELESS EATERS, A BURDEN TO SOCIETY, ETC
LUXON HAS ALSO DENIED BENEFITS TO AUTISTIC KIWIS WHO OWN THEIR OWN HOME…THINKING THAT THEY SHOULD SELL THEIR HOMES AND LIVE OFF OF THE PROCEEDS WITHOUT ANY SUPPORT WHATSOEVER. THIS MINDSET REFLECTS THE THINKING OF LUXON, AND WE WILL NOT BE VOTING EITHER FOR NATIONAL OR LABOUR IN THE NEST ERECTION, WHERE WE ALL GET BONED!
When you look at how they behaved and rejoiced in that behaviour, during COVID, is anyone surprised? Governments are essentially self serving gangs, with their own agenda.
And yes this is disgraceful but then that’s what we get, if we keep deluding ourselves by voting for them.
We just get asked to authorize/give power too those already selected to represent the corporation, “Sovereign in Right of New Zealand”. Individual sovereignty then shifts to the corporation called “government”, where they then have the power to rule over you in any manner they deem fit, because we elected the selected.
And yet we have all these fat lazy feral locals sucking on our system…..rather have a loved autistic child immigrant than another entitled dole bludging local….bur yeah agree with the above comment, probably wrong colour. Definitely needed to commit a few crimes and then play the victim to be able to stay…..we let murderers and rapists stay, why go hard on a disabled child? Unreal.
If parents are willing to cover ALL costs related to the child’s health then they should be allowed to stay. If they are not willing to pay we should not be required to pay .
Parents choice at that point.
I feel for the family, I do. They’re obviously the wrong colour as others above have already commented.
But I also know that ALL governments are basically just cabals of corrupt lawyers emptying out each respective nation’s coffers. Everything they do is about precedent.
And if they relax the rules for THIS poor family, they’ll start doing it for literally everyone. And no, I’m under no illusions that it isn’t ALREADY happening to some degree, but I’d rather not open the floodgates.
Rules are there for a reason. We need MORE of them RE immigration, not less.
Article 18, Section 2…