Prolonged immigration detention, complicity and boycotts

Abstract

Australia’s punitive policy towards people seeking asylum deliberately causes severe psychological harm and meets recognised definitions of torture. Consequently, there is a tension between doctors’ obligation not to be complicit in torture and doctors’ obligation to provide best possible care to their patients, including those seeking asylum. In this paper, we explore the nature of complicity and discuss the arguments for and against a proposed call for doctors to boycott working in immigration detention. We conclude that a degree of complicity is unavoidable when working in immigration detention, but that it may be ethically justifiable. We identify ways to minimise the harms associated with complicity and argue that it is ethical to continue working in immigration detention as long as due care and attention is paid to minimising the harms of complicity. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)Centre for Children’s Health Ethics and Law, Children’s Health Queensland, South Brisbane, QLD, Australia. Release Date: 20190516. Publication Type: Journal (0100), Peer Reviewed Journal (0110). Format Covered: Electronic. Document Type: Journal Article. Language: EnglishMajor Descriptor: Bioethics; Immigration; Physicians; Asylum Seeking. Classification: Professional Ethics & Standards & Liability (3450). Population: Human (10). Location: Australia. Age Group: Adulthood (18 yrs & older) (300). References Available: Y. Page Count: 5. Issue Publication Date: Feb, 2018. Publication History: First Posted Date: Aug 9, 2017; Accepted Date: Jul 11, 2017; Revised Date: Jul 1, 2017; First Submitted Date: Dec 28, 2016. Copyright Statement: All rights reserved. Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article). 2018. <br />