... 2345

thread: Anyone in VIC done the police check required to continue or commence IVF post-July?

  1. #55
    Registered User

    Feb 2009
    Brisbane
    123

    "My very great concern is that we could have a situation where two male paedophiles commission -- and I have to say to the house that I detest that word in this context; the use of that word very much reflects the government's attitude to children -- a child, and if there were no police checks, there would be nothing anybody could do to stop them. I would not want to see a child put into a position where they would be effectively under the guardianship of paedophiles. To allow that to happen would be a total abrogation of our responsibility as members of Parliament. For that reason I will be opposing this particular amendment."



    I very much doubt that 2 MALE paedophiles would be able to get prg in the first place. *rolling of eyes*

  2. #56
    Registered User

    Oct 2008
    69

    "My very great concern is that we could have a situation where two male paedophiles commission -- and I have to say to the house that I detest that word in this context; the use of that word very much reflects the government's attitude to children -- a child, and if there were no police checks, there would be nothing anybody could do to stop them. I would not want to see a child put into a position where they would be effectively under the guardianship of paedophiles. To allow that to happen would be a total abrogation of our responsibility as members of Parliament. For that reason I will be opposing this particular amendment."*
    It infuriates me that people seem to automatically assume that 2 gay men = 2 pedophiles. There are plenty of people out there who have been physically and sexually assulted by heterosexual parents. One does not exclude the other.

    South Australia does not have the police check, but we have to complete a stat dec stating we promise to do the best by the child and so on.

  3. #57

    Apr 2009
    Melbourne
    1,069

    Ladies,

    I have received a response from the HRLRC about this issue. I am happy to forward a copy of the letter to anyone, if you want to pm me.

    Generally though, they think the police checks breach the Victorian Charter of Human Rights but the discrimination would probably be found to be justified and proportionate given that the purpose of the legislation is to protect children.

    Unfortunately the police checks are not considered a breach of the Equal Opportunity Act either, because a person's police check is not protected under the legislation. However, there has been recommendations on this issue - that a person should not be discriminated against on the basis of their police checks - but for now, it's not applicable. The HRLRC recommends writing a friendly letter to the A-G on this issue.

    There's a bit more to it, but let me know if you're interested and I'll forward a copy of the letter to you.

    Hope that clarifies some things...seems like we all have to grin and bear it, despite how outrageously discriminatory it is on a moral and social level.

    Seph

  4. #58
    Registered User

    Apr 2007
    in lactation land
    3,776

    ...seems like we all have to grin and bear it, despite how outrageously discriminatory it is on a moral and social level.
    I encourage people to keep up the rage about it though. Voice your opinions to whoever may be listening, nag, complain and be angry about it. We want to avoid this happening anywhere else. May Victoria be the only place this slips into law.

    Seph I would love a copy of the letter. Can you email me at Gmail, dustygal is the prefix. Cheers and thanks for the info.

  5. #59

    Apr 2009
    Melbourne
    1,069

    Dusty, I've emailed it to you - let me know if it doesn't arrive.

  6. #60
    Registered User

    Aug 2009
    1

    Even tough the police check seems to have it's obvious downsides as described and nobody know where this will eventually end - who decides who is going to have children - I in some ways would agree with doing some form of a background check but obviously it's very specific as I have just found out, and I am really annoyed by this.

    My wife and I just started this IVF treatment and were told that we need ot have a police check done. I thought okay, no issue as we both have a current "Working with Children Check" as we do volunteer work with children in the community. I pretty much assumed that this should be sufficient as to obtain a WWC a police records check is done and then on top of that you records are monitored on an ongoing basis.

    So I asked them to accept our WWC instead of the requested police check and this was the reply:

    "The cards they have are Working With Children Check cards and these checks are not conducted by Victoria Police. DHS are clear in their instructions that they will not accept a Working With Children check and a police check conducted by us must be provided."

    To put it blunt this I find way out of line. If I just would start challenge that statement I would need to ask if not the Victorian Police conducts the police check who does for the WWC? How many police forces and records do we have in this country?

    On a more general level one has to ask what they are trying to achive? Is it the protection of the unborn child? If yes, than one would assume that if somebody is certified to work with other people's children that should provide sufficient protection for their own children? Obviously not!

    So the only conclusion here can be that somebody wanted to introduce a barrier to IVF treatment by putting a process in place that delays or prevents the treatment.

    So much for the intentions of the people who introduced this legislations - now I am going to have a police check conducted by Victorian Police, not that other police that does the police checks for the WWC!

  7. #61
    Registered User

    Apr 2007
    in lactation land
    3,776

    Hi Andy1
    It seems you are caught up in the reddest of red tape . Perhaps they just haven't properly interpreted the legislation yet or are being super cautious to follow the letter of the law. Either way I hope you don't have to go through too much more invasive searches.
    GL with your cycle!

  8. #62

    Apr 2009
    Melbourne
    1,069

    Saw this in the Hun today:

    New law demands police checks for childless couples | Herald Sun

    The Hun was running a poll - please vote! - Poll Popup | Herald Sun

    Seph

  9. #63
    Registered User

    Apr 2009
    Sydney
    6

    This is outrageous and offends on so many levels. This discriminates against infertile couples. There is no evidence to suggest this group of parents are higher risk - quite the opposite. Anyone who's been through IVF and has been lucky enough to conceive thinks their baby is so precious. You have to really want children to go through the emotional and financial strain of IVF. IVF is not a lifestyle choice, as gossiped about aging stars in womens magazines, it is a treatment for medical conditions for ordinary women and men.
    This is a 3 part check requiring checks against the policy criminal records, child protection orders and fingerprint check. What is going on with society when ordinary citizens are have fingerprint checks? Is infertility now a crime? What happens with this information and does it create a record entry for people who previously were not on the police database?
    This will be a double whammy for infertile couples in VIC, after the federal govt removed IVF from the Medicare safety net, increasing treatment costs by thousands of dollars. This is government and bureaucracy gone wrong. I'm sure the police, always under resourced, have some real criminals to chase.

    I'm 23 weeks pregnant with a georgeuos IVF baby after trying over 7 years & 3 frozen embryos - luckily in NSW.

  10. #64
    Registered User

    Nov 2009
    2

    Victoria - Police State

    Most Victorians, the writer included, would support initiatives to protect at risk Children and therefore some suggestions may be helpful. Basic Internet research identified that Australian Politicians and Beauracrats may pose considerably more risk to their children than IVF couples. To support this proposition the following are listed:

    Milton Orkopoulos , 2008 NSW Labour 13 years detention, 28 Child Sex Offences
    Keith Wright, 1993 Qld Labour, 11 years, Child Sex Offences
    Bill D’arcy, 2000, Qld Labour, 11 years, Child Sex Offences
    Terry Martin, 2009, Tasmania, Court hearing in progress, Child Porn
    Willian Stuart Brown, 2000, Ausaid/Australian Embassy Jakarta Child sex offences
    Peter Hollingworth allowed a known Paedophile priest to continue working, whilst Archbishop of Brisbane – latter resigned as Governor General as a result of the scandal.

    In view of this, it is fair for the population to demand that:

    1) The Police Clearance and working with children requirements for IVF patients be removed, or that this requirement be introduced for all Victorians of reproductive age.

    2) Politicians should subject themselves to special scrutiny and police clearances before being allowed to have children on the basis that there appears to be considerable more risk of children being abused by politicians than IVF parents.

    To date no evidence has been produced by any politician supporting the case that there is an issue with child abuse among IVF patients. I have written to many politicians without a sensible response, excpet for the Greens who are very supportive.

  11. #65
    Registered User

    Jul 2009
    Melbourne
    411

    and to add my twopenneth in, apart from being outreagously offensive by implication, it's also utterly utterly pointless.

    I've lived in Australia for 1.5 years. Did they check with the UK police? No. So I (or DH) could have been the UK's most wanted list for 33.5 years of my existence, and moved country to escape it (as notable paedos do- like Gary Glitter - not the UK's best export), and would not have shown up on the stupid little form.

    honestly. As if people live in one place all their lives.

  12. #66
    Registered User

    Feb 2004
    Melbourne
    11,171

    LondonMiss, great point, anyone from overseas wouldn't come up on the Australina register.

  13. #67
    BellyBelly Life Subscriber
    Add sushee on Facebook

    Sep 2004
    Melb - where my coolness isn't seen as wierdness
    4,361

    The thing is, unless every person who wishes to fall pregnant (naturally or not) is required to undergo a police check prior to even trying, then it is discrimination.

    With only a relatively small percentage of children born in Australia are a result of IVF (I think it's something like 4% Australia-wide, so an even smaller number if you just consider Victoria), that means that the majority of children born in Australia will not have had the dubious 'benefit' of having their parent's police cleared.

    So to place this impost on just a few for no real reason is arbitrary and disciminatory. Unless there is a known and proven history of peodophiles undergoing IVF to conceive children (and why would they when 96% or so of them can simply do it naturally?), then there isn't sufficient reason to impose this breach of privacy on an infertile couple.

    I think this is simply a case of a pollie looking for cheap point-scoring without the stats to back it up. The problem is that as IVF patients are in the minority, it got passed as being 'in the interests of the child'.

    I take real issue to being considered guilty until proven innocent. Yet this is what this legislation does. All Victorian IVF patients are being treated as if they are criminals until they can prove otherwise. Disgraceful.

    So what are we going to do about it?

  14. #68
    Registered User

    Feb 2009
    Brisbane
    123

    ITA Sushee. Even though I am in Qld, I would be willing to help out in anyway i can to get this reprehensible situation changed.

    With all the changes to medicare re OB & GYN, IVF and this, it just seems like women and in particular woman with infertility issues (who are a minority and by definition a disabled minority at that) are being targeted. It is disgusting.

  15. #69
    Registered User

    Oct 2005
    Brisbane
    16

    This whole thing makes me see red....

    Until the entire population of Australians who are at child-bearing age are also subjected to these checks - it's discrimination. Plain and simple.

    Fight it, Victorians.

  16. #70
    Registered User

    Dec 2008
    Melbourne
    2

    Unfair!

    I am in the process of filling this paperwork out too-it makes me so angry!!!!
    Child protection?????? Anyone undertaking assisted reproduction clearly WANTS a child and deserves the same rights as those who conceive naturally.
    These laws are insane and discrimintory!

    22/08/2009-ICSI Boy

  17. #71
    Registered User

    Apr 2010
    2

    Research/opinions/experiences

    I think it is completely discriminatory for Victorian couples to have to undergo these police checks which is why I have picked the topic for my yr11 persuasive speech. I would be really grateful to anyone who could share their personal experiences and/or offer their opinion on the issue.
    Thanks so much guys

  18. #72
    Registered User

    Dec 2008
    Melbourne
    2

    Happy to help

    I think it is completely discriminatory for Victorian couples to have to undergo these police checks which is why I have picked the topic for my yr11 persuasive speech. I would be really grateful to anyone who could share their personal experiences and/or offer their opinion on the issue.
    Thanks so much guys
    I am available to give my opinion......
    What a great issue to cover

    Last edited by princess melli; April 1st, 2010 at 02:18 PM. : Removing ticker

... 2345