One of the advisors to former Federal Health Minister Neal Blewett, who recommended the ban on gay blood donations in the 80's has now called for the ban to be reversed, in evidence in the Tasmanian gay blood ban case brought by 25 year old gay man Michael Cain.
Other experts have called for the ban to remain, according to the Hobart Mercury. The trial continues.
Thursday, 21 August 2008
Thursday, 14 August 2008
New Anti-Bullying Program for SA Schools
One of the key problems for gay and lesbian youth, and for those who are a little older, is dealing with internalised homophobia and feeling different in part due to bullying at schools. The South Australian government has announced a new anti-bullying program in schools, which is to be welcomed. I hope that it has strong twin messages against homophobia in schools and in favour of acceptance.
Here's the Ministerial Media Release:
Education Minister Jane Lomax-Smith says:
“Violence among young people is absolutely unacceptable, whether it happens at school, at home or in the community.
“We have seen some shocking examples of teenage behaviour in recent times and police and our schools are working together to address these matters.
“Violence is an issue for all schools – Government, Catholic and Independent – the community as a whole and parents right across Australia.
“The State Government’s Coalition to Decrease Bullying, Harassment and Violence in South Australian schools is taking a lead role on these issues.
“The Coalition includes local experts in dealing with school bullying, along with representatives of Government, Catholic and Independent schools.
“They are looking at emerging trends, such as whether the use of mobile phone cameras is inciting violent incidents and the issue of violence among girls.
“The Coalition already has done significant work around school yard bullying and cyber bullying, including providing information to parents.
“One of the first actions I took as Education Minister in 2004 was to distribute to schools one of the most comprehensive anti-bullying packages ever produced.
“The package, still being used in schools, includes detailed information about how to develop an anti-bullying policy for the school and teach respect for others in the classroom.
“Our teachers and schools are very conscious of their responsibilities to counter and reduce bullying and violence, and this package can help to support them in their work.
“This age-old problem is not one we can solve easily or quickly, but every small step we take towards more peaceful schools is worthwhile.
“Today I am announcing further details of two new State Government initiatives to help address the behaviour of young South Australians.
ALL State schools will this week receive a new training package – Your Classroom: Safe, Orderly and Productive and training will be provided to 2000 classroom teachers. It is part of a $10 million investment in addressing student behaviour. Under this new program, teachers in their first five years will be trained first. They will take part in workshops before trialling new approaches in their own classrooms.
PROFESSOR Donna Cross from Edith Cowan University in Western Australia has accepted an invitation to lead a roll out of the Supportive Schools Program to South Australian secondary schools in 2009. This preventative program has been shown to decrease the incidence of bullying in schools by encouraging positive relationships between students.
“These are just some of the ways that schools, with support from our Coalition of experts, are working to address bullying, violence and harassment in schools.”
Here's the Ministerial Media Release:
Education Minister Jane Lomax-Smith says:
“Violence among young people is absolutely unacceptable, whether it happens at school, at home or in the community.
“We have seen some shocking examples of teenage behaviour in recent times and police and our schools are working together to address these matters.
“Violence is an issue for all schools – Government, Catholic and Independent – the community as a whole and parents right across Australia.
“The State Government’s Coalition to Decrease Bullying, Harassment and Violence in South Australian schools is taking a lead role on these issues.
“The Coalition includes local experts in dealing with school bullying, along with representatives of Government, Catholic and Independent schools.
“They are looking at emerging trends, such as whether the use of mobile phone cameras is inciting violent incidents and the issue of violence among girls.
“The Coalition already has done significant work around school yard bullying and cyber bullying, including providing information to parents.
“One of the first actions I took as Education Minister in 2004 was to distribute to schools one of the most comprehensive anti-bullying packages ever produced.
“The package, still being used in schools, includes detailed information about how to develop an anti-bullying policy for the school and teach respect for others in the classroom.
“Our teachers and schools are very conscious of their responsibilities to counter and reduce bullying and violence, and this package can help to support them in their work.
“This age-old problem is not one we can solve easily or quickly, but every small step we take towards more peaceful schools is worthwhile.
“Today I am announcing further details of two new State Government initiatives to help address the behaviour of young South Australians.
ALL State schools will this week receive a new training package – Your Classroom: Safe, Orderly and Productive and training will be provided to 2000 classroom teachers. It is part of a $10 million investment in addressing student behaviour. Under this new program, teachers in their first five years will be trained first. They will take part in workshops before trialling new approaches in their own classrooms.
PROFESSOR Donna Cross from Edith Cowan University in Western Australia has accepted an invitation to lead a roll out of the Supportive Schools Program to South Australian secondary schools in 2009. This preventative program has been shown to decrease the incidence of bullying in schools by encouraging positive relationships between students.
“These are just some of the ways that schools, with support from our Coalition of experts, are working to address bullying, violence and harassment in schools.”
Wednesday, 13 August 2008
WA election:surrogacy laws on hold
Premier Alan Carpenter's calling of an election has had one unintended consequence: people hoping to become parents with the passing of proposed Western Australian surrogacy changes now have to wait longer in the hope that, one day, laws in Western Australia allowing surrogacy will be passed.
One couple, Steve and Desiree Case, fear that they will never have children, according to the the west.com.au.
One couple, Steve and Desiree Case, fear that they will never have children, according to the the west.com.au.
Monday, 11 August 2008
Malaysia: Drop Political Charges Against Opposition Leader
Malaysia: Drop Political Charges Against Opposition Leader
Police Investigation of Anwar Ibrahim Lacks Credibility
(New York, August 7, 2008) – The Malaysian government should immediately withdraw politically motivated charges against opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, Human Rights Watch said today. Police served Anwar, who is running for office, with an order to appear in Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court on August 7, 2008, under a colonial-era law that criminalizes homosexual conduct.
The Malaysian government appears to be manipulating the legal system to shore up support for its continued rule and undermine the opposition.
Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch
But several instances of misconduct around the investigation into allegations that Anwar had sexual relations with a male former aide show the charges are aimed at preventing Anwar from leading a new government. Police handled the inquiry improperly, while government officials interfered in it and tried to publicly intimidate and embarrass Anwar. On August 26, Anwar is due to run in a by-election for the constituency vacated on July 31 by his wife, Dr. Wan Azizah Wan Ismail. On August 6, police ordered him to appear in Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court to face charges under section 377 of Malaysia’s criminal code, which criminalizes “carnal intercourse against the order of nature.”
“The Malaysian government appears to be manipulating the legal system to shore up support for its continued rule and undermine the opposition,” said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “This case is really about preventing challenges to the government’s rule.”
There is no legal impediment to Anwar’s running in the by-election, but denial of bail would prevent him from campaigning. Although a “sodomy charge” is a non-bailable offense, common practice has been for bail to be granted. Given Anwar’s high public profile, Human Rights Watch said that bail should be granted, as there is no evidence that he is a flight risk or will intimidate the complainant or any witnesses.
The police investigation into the allegations against Anwar, who was arrested on July 18 and interrogated about the accusations, has lacked transparency and impartiality. Police refused to publicly release the first information report filed by the complainant, Saiful Bukhari, as required under Malaysian law. This has fuelled suspicions that the document may have been altered after Anwar’s arrest.
Even more damaging to the credibility of the police investigation and the Malaysian government has been their response to a medical report by the first doctor to examine Saiful. The report of an anal examination conducted by a doctor at Hospital Pusrawi, and leaked on the internet on July 29, found no evidence of “sodomy.” Kamaruddin Ahmad, the hospital’s medical director, verified the report as authentic, but said the doctor who examined Saiful was a general practitioner, not a specialist, and that the examination was not “sodomy-related.”
Deputy Inspector General of Police Ismail Omar dismissed the report’s relevance, describing it “as an attempt to sabotage police investigations” and confuse the public. Ismail also told reporters that police are considering investigating news sources that leaked the medical report.
“The authorities seem more concerned with investigating how the medical report was leaked than with the fact that its content doesn’t support the criminal charges,” said Adams.
The government of Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi has faced serious challenges from opposition parties since the national election in March 2008 in which the ruling Barisan Nasional (National Front) lost its two-thirds majority in the parliament and control of five states. Public opinion polls in Malaysia indicate little support for the prosecution of Anwar. An opinion poll released on August 1 by the Merdeka Center for Opinion Research found only 11 percent believed the sodomy allegations, while two-thirds believed the charges are politically motivated. Only a third expressed confidence that institutions such as the judiciary, the police and the attorney-general’s office would perform their roles in Anwar’s case in a fair and transparent manner.
“The charges leveled against Anwar provide the government a convenient distraction from current political crises,” said Adams. “Pursuing this case will only undermine the credibility of the police, the prosecutor and the government.”
The sodomy charges were filed under an antiquated law, a holdover from British colonial rule, that criminalizes “carnal intercourse against the order of nature,” both consensual and non-consensual. Human Rights Watch opposes all laws used to criminalize consensual homosexual conduct between adults, and urged the Malaysian authorities to repeal those provisions while replacing those on non-consensual sexual acts with a modern, gender-neutral law on rape.
Anwar’s previous trials in 1999 and 2000 on corruption and sodomy charges raised serious concerns about judicial independence and fairness. The courts refused bail, prevented Anwar from raising certain defenses, disallowed witnesses from testifying, and improperly threatened defense lawyers with contempt proceedings. Then-Prime Minister Mohamad Mahathir even went on television during the trial to declare Anwar guilty.
If the charges are not dropped, trial proceedings should be fair and public, and conducted by an independent, impartial and competent court that meets international due process standards, Human Rights Watch said. This includes selecting the judge at random according to the standard practice in Malaysia. There should be no shadow of suspicion that the selection of the judge was fixed, as in the previous trials.
Source: Human Rights Watch
Police Investigation of Anwar Ibrahim Lacks Credibility
(New York, August 7, 2008) – The Malaysian government should immediately withdraw politically motivated charges against opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, Human Rights Watch said today. Police served Anwar, who is running for office, with an order to appear in Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court on August 7, 2008, under a colonial-era law that criminalizes homosexual conduct.
The Malaysian government appears to be manipulating the legal system to shore up support for its continued rule and undermine the opposition.
Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch
But several instances of misconduct around the investigation into allegations that Anwar had sexual relations with a male former aide show the charges are aimed at preventing Anwar from leading a new government. Police handled the inquiry improperly, while government officials interfered in it and tried to publicly intimidate and embarrass Anwar. On August 26, Anwar is due to run in a by-election for the constituency vacated on July 31 by his wife, Dr. Wan Azizah Wan Ismail. On August 6, police ordered him to appear in Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court to face charges under section 377 of Malaysia’s criminal code, which criminalizes “carnal intercourse against the order of nature.”
“The Malaysian government appears to be manipulating the legal system to shore up support for its continued rule and undermine the opposition,” said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “This case is really about preventing challenges to the government’s rule.”
There is no legal impediment to Anwar’s running in the by-election, but denial of bail would prevent him from campaigning. Although a “sodomy charge” is a non-bailable offense, common practice has been for bail to be granted. Given Anwar’s high public profile, Human Rights Watch said that bail should be granted, as there is no evidence that he is a flight risk or will intimidate the complainant or any witnesses.
The police investigation into the allegations against Anwar, who was arrested on July 18 and interrogated about the accusations, has lacked transparency and impartiality. Police refused to publicly release the first information report filed by the complainant, Saiful Bukhari, as required under Malaysian law. This has fuelled suspicions that the document may have been altered after Anwar’s arrest.
Even more damaging to the credibility of the police investigation and the Malaysian government has been their response to a medical report by the first doctor to examine Saiful. The report of an anal examination conducted by a doctor at Hospital Pusrawi, and leaked on the internet on July 29, found no evidence of “sodomy.” Kamaruddin Ahmad, the hospital’s medical director, verified the report as authentic, but said the doctor who examined Saiful was a general practitioner, not a specialist, and that the examination was not “sodomy-related.”
Deputy Inspector General of Police Ismail Omar dismissed the report’s relevance, describing it “as an attempt to sabotage police investigations” and confuse the public. Ismail also told reporters that police are considering investigating news sources that leaked the medical report.
“The authorities seem more concerned with investigating how the medical report was leaked than with the fact that its content doesn’t support the criminal charges,” said Adams.
The government of Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi has faced serious challenges from opposition parties since the national election in March 2008 in which the ruling Barisan Nasional (National Front) lost its two-thirds majority in the parliament and control of five states. Public opinion polls in Malaysia indicate little support for the prosecution of Anwar. An opinion poll released on August 1 by the Merdeka Center for Opinion Research found only 11 percent believed the sodomy allegations, while two-thirds believed the charges are politically motivated. Only a third expressed confidence that institutions such as the judiciary, the police and the attorney-general’s office would perform their roles in Anwar’s case in a fair and transparent manner.
“The charges leveled against Anwar provide the government a convenient distraction from current political crises,” said Adams. “Pursuing this case will only undermine the credibility of the police, the prosecutor and the government.”
The sodomy charges were filed under an antiquated law, a holdover from British colonial rule, that criminalizes “carnal intercourse against the order of nature,” both consensual and non-consensual. Human Rights Watch opposes all laws used to criminalize consensual homosexual conduct between adults, and urged the Malaysian authorities to repeal those provisions while replacing those on non-consensual sexual acts with a modern, gender-neutral law on rape.
Anwar’s previous trials in 1999 and 2000 on corruption and sodomy charges raised serious concerns about judicial independence and fairness. The courts refused bail, prevented Anwar from raising certain defenses, disallowed witnesses from testifying, and improperly threatened defense lawyers with contempt proceedings. Then-Prime Minister Mohamad Mahathir even went on television during the trial to declare Anwar guilty.
If the charges are not dropped, trial proceedings should be fair and public, and conducted by an independent, impartial and competent court that meets international due process standards, Human Rights Watch said. This includes selecting the judge at random according to the standard practice in Malaysia. There should be no shadow of suspicion that the selection of the judge was fixed, as in the previous trials.
Source: Human Rights Watch
Sunday, 10 August 2008
US: Gestational surrogacy agreements
One of the issues I have discussed with lesbian clients recently who are contemplating making babies is whether to go through an IVF clinic or to have known donors. If the latter, does the donor get recognised in some way?
An obvious issue from a long time family lawyer like me is that usually there is little point entering into an agreement if it is not enforceable. If it ain't binding, why try? However, long experience has taught me that in some cases, even if the agreement isn't binding, sometimes there can be benefits in creating an agreement.
For example, many years ago I acted for a mum who was in the Family Court asking for her kids to live with her(back then we called it custody, I am just trying to keep up to date with the jargon). She said that she had felt forced to leave the town in which she and her ex and the kids lived, and now sought the help of the court in getting the kids back.
It was at this moment that we had the Perry Mason surprise moment- which is why I say to clients: "I don't like surprises." The other side produced a stat dec by my client to Centrelink saying that she had agreed that the kids were to live with their dad. Thsi document was not a binding agreement, but was clear evidence of the intention of my client. Round one to dad- the court had no hesitation that day in ordering that interim custody was with dad (some months later I might add she was successful and the kids ended up with my client).
Now in Connecticut we have had the issue litigated about gestational surrogacy agreements.
The issue is whether the gay couple can be recognised on the birth cert
ificate as the parents. In two cases they were, and in the third, they were not.
So the agreements may or may not be valid, but the intention of the parties was clear- for the gay couples to have children and to be recognised on the birth certificates as parents.
Let's see how it pans out.
An obvious issue from a long time family lawyer like me is that usually there is little point entering into an agreement if it is not enforceable. If it ain't binding, why try? However, long experience has taught me that in some cases, even if the agreement isn't binding, sometimes there can be benefits in creating an agreement.
For example, many years ago I acted for a mum who was in the Family Court asking for her kids to live with her(back then we called it custody, I am just trying to keep up to date with the jargon). She said that she had felt forced to leave the town in which she and her ex and the kids lived, and now sought the help of the court in getting the kids back.
It was at this moment that we had the Perry Mason surprise moment- which is why I say to clients: "I don't like surprises." The other side produced a stat dec by my client to Centrelink saying that she had agreed that the kids were to live with their dad. Thsi document was not a binding agreement, but was clear evidence of the intention of my client. Round one to dad- the court had no hesitation that day in ordering that interim custody was with dad (some months later I might add she was successful and the kids ended up with my client).
Now in Connecticut we have had the issue litigated about gestational surrogacy agreements.
The issue is whether the gay couple can be recognised on the birth cert
ificate as the parents. In two cases they were, and in the third, they were not.
So the agreements may or may not be valid, but the intention of the parties was clear- for the gay couples to have children and to be recognised on the birth certificates as parents.
Let's see how it pans out.
Saturday, 9 August 2008
Finally it's happening: gay man takes on Red Cross over blood donation
The long anticipated case has commenced in Tasmania, with 25 year old gay man Michael Cain challenging the Red Cross about its rule that gay men can't give blood.
His challenge is that it is discriminatory by the Red Cross as it does not take into account whether a person engages in safe sex or not, so a straight person engaging in unsafe sex can give blood, but gay men who engage in safe sex cannot.
The case continues next week.
Further links:
ABC news
Rodney Croome gay activist
Gay blood donation
Overseas, the results are mixed:
Sweden has kept the ban, as has
Finland and the USA, but Russia has removed the ban.
The approach taken by the Tasmanian Red Cross is a one year ban, similar to that advocated by the US Red Cross.
His challenge is that it is discriminatory by the Red Cross as it does not take into account whether a person engages in safe sex or not, so a straight person engaging in unsafe sex can give blood, but gay men who engage in safe sex cannot.
The case continues next week.
Further links:
ABC news
Rodney Croome gay activist
Gay blood donation
Overseas, the results are mixed:
Sweden has kept the ban, as has
Finland and the USA, but Russia has removed the ban.
The approach taken by the Tasmanian Red Cross is a one year ban, similar to that advocated by the US Red Cross.
Thursday, 7 August 2008
Murder of transgendered woman in the States: is this the beginning of a transpanic defence?
Angie Zapata, a transgendered woman from Colorado was
murdered on July 17. A man has been arrested in the case.
The claims in the case are that one day, after meeting on a social networking site, Angie took the man back to her place and performed oral sex on him.
The following day, when the man came back, he is alleged to have asked Angie whether she was a woman, to be told "I'm all woman". The man then allegedly grabbed Angie's groin, discovered that Angie had a penis, and killed Angie.
It is only a question of time before the man's lawyer will argue that his client panicked and killed Angie on the basis that he thought Angie was a woman, and then discovered that Angie was a man.
murdered on July 17. A man has been arrested in the case.
The claims in the case are that one day, after meeting on a social networking site, Angie took the man back to her place and performed oral sex on him.
The following day, when the man came back, he is alleged to have asked Angie whether she was a woman, to be told "I'm all woman". The man then allegedly grabbed Angie's groin, discovered that Angie had a penis, and killed Angie.
It is only a question of time before the man's lawyer will argue that his client panicked and killed Angie on the basis that he thought Angie was a woman, and then discovered that Angie was a man.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
