Given all the useless, often dangerous, rubbish that Australia has allowed to come to Australia to live, the denial of permanent residence to Dr. Moeller just because he has a Down syndrome son is monstrous. Moeller has given good service in a country town, where our own pampered doctors don’t wish to go; he is not a pseudo refugee who has made up lies to stay here, and he has not brought an obnoxious culture with him.

As for the son being a burden, that’s a bit rich when you think of all the dole money and benefits we pay to bludgers calling themselves refugees.

This episode shows the hypocrisy of Australian politicians. They talk about skilled immigration, but they bring in mainly people who will be a burden on society, then reject a skilled applicant who is needed because of our own choosy doctors.

We don’t need any more of the lunatic mass immigration encouraged by Labor and the Coalition, spurred on by big business and developers; we need quality, not quantity. The rejection of this doctor and his family is a disgrace

Ironically, many families also abandon their live children when they cannot cope with either physical disability or, in my own case, mental illness. The fact that my Irish mother is firmly religious [they tend to be against abortion and euthanasia] or my Brisbane-born father is a giant in the Materials Handling business and one of Adelaide's richest men, means little to them.

Unfortunately this is becoming an issue with many developed nations.

Both New Zealand and Great Britain have similar policies in place.

This is a sad state of affair when sometimes it is necessary for a better quality of life for people with (dis)abilities.

As a sufferer of MS, one of the issues for sufferers of MS is heat and the effect it has upon our bodies, suffering from pseudo exacerbations or Uhthoff's syndrome (when our bodies over-heat and we feel like we are having a relapse).

As Australia is warming up due to global warming, I am seriously having to consider moving to a significantly cooler climate, due the impact of heat on my MS and my ability to work. It's sad to think that I'm considered a burden to a system, I work, pay taxes and I am also part of one of the many clinical trials for the treatment of MS.

Australia and other developed nations, are shutting the door on people who may have a (dis)ability, but can and will contribute in many other ways. People with (dis)abilities do not automatically go onto government benefits, many of us have relatively normal working lives with a (dis)ability plus often having to pay private health insurance to cover the medical costs.

When governments have policies denying citizenship due to a (dis)ability it has a trickle down effect on how people with (dis)abilities are perceived by the greater community. Personally I would rather not have to migrate and live a life of limbo because of a lack of citizenship. I do not think anybody able bodied or (dis)abled would like to live without ever being able to call anywhere home.

Governments need to look at the bigger picture, not the physical nature of an applicant and their family. When a government gives citizenship to a able bodied, taxi driver, chef, waiter, or any other area is suffering a (semi-skilled)shortages over a doctor (skill shortages) with a child with a (dis)ability, there is something seriously wrong and ask what contributions are we really missing out on.

Yes, Dr Moeller thought it would be different in Australia. He had not done his homework before he arrived. He thought he was coming to a progressive and mature social democracy, but instead he discovered that in Australia, our attitude around disability is back in the dark ages. While there has been an outpouring of support for Dr Moeller, this attitude is not reflected in government policy. And so it is throughout the country. The average Australian expects his/her taxes to go to support people like Lukas Moeller but this expectation not fulfilled. I could not knowingly bring a disabled child into the world and expect my country to support that child. But I have unwittingly given Australia a disabled person who is now in his thirties, and I am wondering when my government is going to decide to support me in his care. This is the irony of the Moeller case: Immigration ought to talk to Disability. They would learn that unless something changes dramatically, people like Lukas DON'T cost the Australian public. They stay at home with their parents until those parents die, after which the siblings are expected to take over the care. It's a very cheap alternative and not what happens in other developed countries. Dr Moeller didn't choose well, but the rest of us cannot choose.

I guess my biggest concern is the government's perception of (dis)ability and the economic outlay they are perceived to a country. Perhaps if countries such as Australia are having these policies that they really need to extend it cover people who are heavy smokers or drinkers and the obese within this category. No one is asked to be born with a (dis)ability and then spend a life time being reminded what a burden they are on society.

What about the people with these self-inflicted future health problems? These are the areas that governments constantly pour funds into, like a band aid on a haemorrhaging wound. Whereas very little money goes into areas such as neurological disorder research, compared to what is put in to health promotion and support for what could seen some cases a lifestyle illnesses. This is a sweeping generalisation because cancer is an illness that can affect anyone, lifestyle or otherwise, and I am not saying it is any less a significant health issue.

Perhaps governments should really weigh up the costs of a child with cerebral palsy to the lifetime smoker and drinker and look at who really is more of a burden on society.

And Down Syndrome kids are ever so Luving & affectionate. These immoral imbeciles in Canberra also do themselves a great disservice, but then, not just in the case of those with disabilities, the guvment neither invest in teaching skills to the general populace either.

Red + Blue = Purple

and as I have often said, the crown is a genocidal institution and its knowing and obliging servants are <snip>

They came, they slaughtered, they enslaved and dispossessed. These people denied the entry to Australia of fleeing Jews pre the Holocasut and even after a good dose of the Nazis and the Japs for their trouble, they continued to breach the "Genocide Convention Act" after WWII by the forcible seperation of family members and in more recent times the knowing and deliberate infliction of mental harm upon children in the Asylum seeker camps.

One of the principal reasons that so called special measures are invoked to micro manage the Original people is becoz it forms part of the crown's legal defence.

According to their own law, there must b a TREATY, but, it appears they prefer to wage an ongoing "secret" degenerative war. I have heard it said that pre howard's 10 point scam, ASIO was deployed against certain representatives of the Original Australians. I am wondering, was it alleged that they planned political violence, or did Canberra merely want to know about their political & legal tactics?

..

THE SOLUTION: GREEN BROWNY for PREZ

The taxpayer bails out private companies when they go into default, yet just a small percentage of that bail out could fund multifold, the needs of people with disabilities.

Surely one valued doctor appropriately qualified, who has the support of his community, is worth more than the inexcusable number of doctors practising in Australia under spurious guidelines which allow overseas doctors whose qualifications are not recognised in Australia to enter as so called area of need specialists. They can then bypass all language proficiency requirements, do not need to do the Australian Medical Council Australian competency exams, obtain registration with a specialist college, and medical board, and then with their provider number charge both Medicare and private Health Funds. The cost borne financially to the public as well as the incalculable cost of iatragenic outcomes is far greater than any economic rationalist could justify.

A government that bails outs the banks, bails out the motor industry, bails out child care centres and can't allow a child with a disability in certainly dispels the myth of those who were so demonizing of the Howard Governments. The ethnics of those who work out the cost of bringing a disabled child into the world as opposed to aborting it is nothing short of disgusting. I wish no judgement on this nation but no one could ever complain in the least if it happens. We are following the godless path to destruction. I think it was Billy Graham who said that God would need to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah if America was not judged. God won't be apologizing to anyone but I sure hope a few apologize to Him before it is to late.

I agree that the treatment of Dr Moeller and his family is nothing short of appalling, as is the discrimination against disabled people generally in our immigration policies.

However, Reist's gratuitous linkage with abortion diminishes her argument irredeemably. This is nothing more than a cheap 'bait and switch' exercise from a Catholic Right-to-Lifer.

Reist conscripts people with disability in order to push her usual barrow. Shame on her.

I agree with CJ Morgan. Reist draws attention to a genuinely tragic social problem (the oppression of individuals with disabilities), and is to be commended for that. That this kind of oppression - indeed, that any kind of oppression - exists in the twenty-first century is shameful.

Yet Reist manages to use this issue to push her familiar anti-abortion stance. SURPRISE! This is a stance which she and others share with the Catholic Church and prominent members of the previous Liberal government, i.e. Tony Abbott. And we seemed to hear little from right-to-lifers about the Howard government's appalling rejection of refugees and asylum seekers. SURPRISE!

Well someone has to give the negative to all this emotive, but fact free outpouring of genuine desire to help disabled, without counting the costs.

One agency in our nearby town has 4 high needs [downs syndrome] clients on their books. These require full time, 24 hours a day, care for in community living.

The wages bill for each one is a bit over $350,000 a year, plus another $50,000 in additional costs, with vehicals for transport etc being absorbed in their budget for other services to the aged.

With housing, pension, & medical costs added, the cost approaches half a million each. Thats $500,000 a year each.

This is a sore point for my 80+ year old pensioner neighbour. He is getting some home support, shower assistance 3 times & cleaning one hour a week, for which he pays a subsidised $22 per week He is very grateful, but he needs just a little more, particularly with his washing, which he finds very heavy.

One more hour a week would do, but with 10 ahead of him, on the waiting list, & no more budget, a few will have to die, for him to get his help. As it is, without help with things like shopping, by his neighbours, he would be in a nursing home now. Is it any wonder he sees $500,000 on one cliant as a bit excessive.

We really can't afford to import too many $500,000 a year disadvantaged, when we have thousands of "old" Aussies, who have paid their dews, struggling for the want of just 1 or 2 thousand extra, in support.

There is more than a modicum of truth in what Hasbeen suggests. There are some outrageously expensive support models around. Part of the reason that the many have nothing is because the few have so much. Why, for instance, cannot the four people referred to share the same house and therefore the same support staff? This debate was hijacked a long time ago by the "inclusion activists" who insist on integration at any cost. While one-in-twenty persons with a disability enjoys the sort of support outlined by Hasbeen, the other nineteen are languishing in family homes with ageing and often ailing parents. This country must find cost-effective models through which to care for its disabled adult citizens - all of them.

I don't see the problem with this so-called cost of supporting the disabled. The comparatively small sums of money spent on carers etc stays in the country, unlike the millions of dollars (maybe billions)support of multinational industries where substantial sums leave the country.

It's a small price to pay where signficant benefits are being provided to the community by the parents concerned.

It reflects very poorly on our society if this becomes the norm.

Yet another anti-abortion article from Tankard-Reist.

Sorry about Dr Moeller's circumstances but the law in Australia has always been that you have to be healthy to migrate here. He pushed the envelope and it didn't budge and I am as concerned about his plight as a Bendigo doctor dealing with a woman facing an unwanted pregnancy.

Its a pity that Tankard-Reist has chosen to hijack this issue because there are really tragic circumstances that Australians who are denied access to disability pensions face every day.

In this case, I've got to give HasBeen credit for highlighting the less popular side of the coin.

I see Phil Matimein's point, but I've pretty much got to dismiss it. Government incentives for multinationals is a complex issue. What if the incentives mean the difference between Australia being the base of operations for a large company? What of the tax that is gained, and the employment? Of course, there's overkill if the incentives are more expensive than the gains, but my point is this is a different issue and if we look at every cost issue on the basis that we need to resolve multinational issues first... we're never going to accomplish anything. You simply can't use that as a basis for comparison.

I was surprised to find myself agreeing with Reists article... at first. When she then hijacked the issue for her anti-abortion cause I was disgusted. I'm surprised she can't let the issue go, for even a single article, and given the nature of her other articles, I can only believe that abortion is her focus, leading me to believe Mr Moeller's case has been cynically used.

On the basis of a single case, I can't help but think the government is being too harsh on Mr Moeller, however on the broader scale I realise that multiple cases such as this would have enormous costs and a line must be drawn.

I like the suggestion of rationalising the resources by perhaps having four people share a home.

I also can't help but note that Mr Moeller offered to pay the costs - in which case, I don't see the issue. I do understand that in future cases, there could be a snowball effect, of people at first agreeing to pay for their family member's treatment, then reneging and playing the 'poor-me' card (even if they have genuinely hard circumstances and it's warranted), which would make a conditional migration system (i.e. sign a contract stating you will cover the costs of health care) fall apart.

Tough issues. I'm glad I'm not the one who has to solve them.

" ... This is a stance which she and others share with the Catholic Church and prominent members of the previous Liberal government, i.e. Tony Abbott. ... "

I note that she says nothing about all the children that are yet to die as a result of ionising radiation weapons, initially yellow cake sold by her precious nefarious liberal guvment to englund & n.america.

This is becoz as of old, on the really important issues, the catholics say nothing, caring more about themselves than others.

Dr Helen Caldicott alleges that the n.americans even use spent fuel rods from reactors, turning these into ammunition and now, it's all over the middle east, some really nasty cocktails of potentially lethal isotopes.

Oh yes, that's right, the Islamic extremists are anti democracy and anti western aren't they, with no rational legitimate grievances?

Perhaps *runner* should have a look at some dead DU baby photos, and then tell us again about her mates howard et al?

Regarding funding for the disabled, I simply cannot concurr with some of the views expressed here. Reason being, i.m.o. u ought not think of quantum alone, but rather, what is the harvest of the use of these funds. And, money is an energy which say cld flow into a community that has centres for caring for both the aged and the disabled. Now, the question to ask yrselves, is where dos this money go. On what is it spent. Well, to support the carers, food and suplies to local small business etc etc.

It is an old red blue trick to watch those with the least fall upon one another when one group say the BlakFells, may b seen to get more than the bottom of the barrel red necks. The mind boggles.

To look at some of the current money bills b4 guvment, it seems quite plain that the lawyers are paid too much, as are the accountants and as are the war and medical machine developers. Their excess wages goes into the markets and lavish overseas trips etc and well, .. here we are. Those moneys do not go to benefit local communities. They are concentrated with policy extremists who in turn donate, and the mechanism of political donation needs to overhauled drastically to ensure a level playing field for all, not just those with the most capital. Snapping the neck metaphorically of the media moguls is also a very important ingredient to future growth and development. Had we kept telstra and plowed some of the profits into rolling out the fibre, we wld now have mass video on demand servers with bulk channels and $5 weekend mint multimedia courses for the ongoing education of all of us.

We are betrayed by our own ..

For those of you critical of Ms Reist for bringing in the abortion issue and criticising the Catholic Church, can't you see that, despite all its faults, the Church has an universalist position that says you can't pick and choose categories of life that are expendable or times when these things are too inconvenient to deal with.

As for the specific 'cynical' example of the Dr and his Down's boy, can't you see he should have aborted his own son!? Bloody selfish of him not too, afterall, the German doctors led this field back in the 1930's.

If the largest and oldest organisation in the care game can't be cut some slack on this one, well, no surprises here really..