Labor and the Coalition have blocked a vote on a bill that would have banned the shackling of incarcerated women during childbirth, with the government saying it was the responsibility of the states and territories.
Independent senator Lidia Thorpe introduced the bills, which would prevent shackling and stop children being strip-searched, into the Senate.
“In 2026 people can be shackled while giving birth, and children canalso have their clothes removed by adults to examine their bodies legally,” Thorpe told the Senate.
“The people sitting in this room have the power to end these barbaric, inhumane traumatic and totally unnecessary practices.”
The government said “the responsibility of the criminal justice system predominantly sits with state and territory governments”, while the Coalition said it “understands the intent” of the bill but also would not support its passage.
Typical major parties
Typical
What a fucking disgrace
Any of their rusties have the hide to shoot at the Greens, fuck off.
Shouldn’t human rights be federally mandated, and always meet, or exceed the UN declaration of human rights etc?
If only Lidia Thorpe didn’t have a well-earned reputation of being a tantrum throwing womanchild the one time she actually has an objectively moral proposal.
And yeah, I am blaming her own shitty behaviour for being part of the problem.
I don’t know, if the bill has merit, it shouldn’t matter who presents it.
The real problem the Labs and Libs are avoiding is having to debate is as it is highly contentious, especially in relation to states where there is a high percentage of indigenous women connected with the justice and penal systems.
Removed by mod
Could you provide a link to some research on your claim?
You seriously need research to tell you that Methanie will leap at the chance to avoid prison by getting knocked up so she can continue doing meth?
Try some common sense. Or go hunting for the research that is guaranteed to confirm that some women will take a get out of jail free card if it’s available.
Well, I did as you say and went looking for Australian “research that is guaranteed to confirm that some women will take a get out of jail free card if it’s available” (in this case getting wilfully pregnant to avoid jail time). Guess what? Not one study. You’re making stuff up to suit your particular prejudice. Do you truly think it’s that simple? I imagine it’s not improbable but it would be very rare. If you want to prove your point you really should be providing the evidence.
I did find a lot of other interesting info, though.
Making stuff up, like that addicts of one of the most addictive substances will do just about anything to continue using it.
You’re a genius.
I am not a genius. I am Interested in truth.
You are now generalising about addicts. We were discussing a very specific situation: that women will get wilfully pregnant to avoid jail. For a lot of women in situations surrounded by crime, poverty, addiction, mental health problems and violence becoming pregnant is yet another problem, not a solution.
Seriously, have a look at some of the studies that are available online.
I. Rules of general application
- Basic principle [Supplements rule 6 of the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners] Rule 1 In order for the principle of non-discrimination embodied in rule 6 of the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners to be put into practice, account shall be taken of the distinctive needs of women prisoners in the application of the Rules. Providing for such needs in order to accomplish substantial gender equality shall not be regarded as discriminatory.
Seems like the Bangkok rules are about promoting “substantial gender equality”.
