Ethical Issues and Human Rights in Human Service: A Case Study

Desklib provides solved assignments and past papers to help students succeed.

Running Head: Ethical Issues and Human Rights in Human Service
Assessment 2: Cds2000: Ethical Issues & Human Rights in
the Human Services
Name:
Student Number:
Course Name: Word Count:

Ethical Issues and Human Rights in Human Service
Table of Contents
Introduction......................................................................................................................................3
Discussion........................................................................................................................................4
Conclusion.......................................................................................................................................7
References........................................................................................................................................8
2

Ethical Issues and Human Rights in Human Service
Introduction
Individuals belonging to the LGBTQ communities in Australia experiences violation of Human
Rights, faces discrimination at work as well as in front of law and falls prey to harassment while
accessing health services from government and private hospitals, besides being in public
(humanrights.gov.au, 2015). For this report on ethical issues and human rights in human
services, the problems faced by individuals belonging to LGBTQ community within Australia, in
relation to the improper access to law and granting their basic human rights, has been chosen.
The issue discussed herein is about Dr. Campbell and Ms. A, who had been her partner for 10
years. Dr. Campbell and Ms. A had got married in Canada since the Australian laws did not
recognize same-sex marriage as legal and had a daughter together, both being the legal parents of
the child. Sometime later, when the couple decided to be separated, the Australian Court did not
grant them divorce; for getting divorced in Canadian court, the couple required staying back in
the place for 1 year before being able to file a divorce (Remedy.org.au., 2019).
3

Ethical Issues and Human Rights in Human Service
Fig 1: Infographics related to homosexuality and other issues encountered commonly among
members of LGBTQ community
(Source: Humanrights.gov.au., 2015)
Later on, the couple attained formal divorce and allotment of their property, however there were
no legal actions taken up for allotting the custody of the child neither for arranging for such
provisions which would allow ‘R’, the child to experience undeterred economic development
and societal welfare. This led to disappearance of Ms. A from the scene without contributing for
child support as well as for mutual mortgage of properties, which was in the name of both the
women, thus rendering economic pressure on Dr. Campbell solely. This was a case of violation
of article 26 of ICCPR (Universal declaration of Human Rights), which states Equality of
individuals before law, besides article 2(1), which claims non-discrimination and article 14 (1),
which ensures facilities of fair trial to all the individuals seeking Justice (Remedy.org.au., 2019).
UN Treaty Body database, details of cases from media such as legal websites and online news
articles and research articles and journals related to the Ethical issues and Human rights in
Australian context has been studied and cross-referenced for gaining a deep insight into the
issues discussed herein
Discussion
Explanation of the breach/s and the involvement of the articles from the Universal
Declaration are involved.
According to the analysis of the case by the legal bodies as well as by UN Convention and
Declaration of Human Rights, in the case concerning Dr Campbell, there had been breaches to
the article 26 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, besides article 2 (1) and 14
(1), which preaches non-discrimination and fair trial respectively. According to Article 26,
equality of the individuals before the law, irrespective of their identity and sexual orientation
should be ensured, which in this case, had been overtly violated (International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights, 2017).
According to regulations of Queensland, wherein Dr Campbell is a resident, the daughter given
birth to by her had been rendered her name solely as a parent since Ms A belonged to the same
4

Ethical Issues and Human Rights in Human Service
sex as her and the law codes prohibited proclamation of ‘same-sex’ legal parents to child. The
legal codes also did not allow Dr. Campbell to have access to child support facilities, as the court
did not recognize either same-sex couples or their divorce as legal. Owing to the refusal of
divorce, Ms A was able to able to elope after getting a share of the property and not contributing
to the mortgages and other debts, which Ms A. and Dr. C were equal contributors in. Not
granting divorce to Dr. Campbell also has other implications like the information of the next of
kin has the name of Ms A since she is her spouse, which is cumbersome for Dr. Campbell as she
has to travel to foreign often and there is practically no one to be contacted should an emergency
occur during the transit.
The breach to article 26 of ICCPR is evident from the fact that Dr. Campbell and Ms. A were not
allowed to execute same-sex marriage within Australia and had to travel all the way to Canada to
get married. Later on, when the couple decided to walk out of marriage, then the courts did not
grant them the right to do as well despite the fact that child and polygamous marriages not being
legal as per Australian law code are still granted divorces within Australian jurisdiction
(Bayefsky, 2017). Later on, though the couple was granted separation, there were no proper legal
proceeding regarding the custody of the child and thus, Dr. Campbell was the one whom had to
handle the pressure of debts, mortgages and child all at once and all alone.; this was a violation
of her individual rights as well. The discrimination made on grounds of the sexual orientation of
the individuals resulted in the breach of article 2(1).
The unjust solution rendered to Dr. Campbell, regarding the custody of the child, equal division
of property amongst Ms. A and Dr. C, though the former took up no responsibilities of clearing
her own debts, mortgages and neither contributed to the child’s development and needs also
preached the breach of article of 14 (1) of access to fair trial. The article 2 of universal
declaration of Human Rights also states that the global residents have the freedom to profess
their own choice without facing any discrimination of sorts, which has been violated in this case
(Elkins, Ginsburg & Simmons, 2013). Besides Article 7 states that all individuals, irrespective of
their differences in case , creed, religion, social status and other aspects, are equal before law,
which too has been violated and dispersal of proper justice to Dr. C had not been looked into by
the Australian government.
5

Ethical Issues and Human Rights in Human Service
The nature and scope of the contravention and identification of the violators according to the
media report/s
The breach to articles 26, 14 (1) and 2(1) were complete and entire, given the fact that the
freedom to profess their own choice, freedom of free trial and protection against discrimination
of all sorts had been denied to Dr. Campbell in entirety (Hantal, 2014). Belonging to LGBTQ
community allowed for scope of breach to the acts. The Australian state is the violator, besides
Ms. A, who denied Dr. C the access to wealth and a share in looking after the child, who was her
legal child too.
The outcome of the violation according to the media report/s
The outcome of the violation of the articles 26, 14(1) and 2(1) were different for Dr. Campbell,
Ms. A and the child. For Dr. Campbell, the violation led her to difficult situations, both
economical as well as societal. She had to bear the burden of debts, mortgages as well as the
expenses of bringing-up a child all by herself and thus, had to sacrifice on her social life. For Ms.
A, the violation had proved to be a benefit of sorts, since she could elope with a share of the
properties commonly owned by both of them and did not have to manage the hassles of bringing
up a child nor did she have to contribute for the same. The child too, had been affected by the
violation since she did not have the liberty of choosing the parent with whom she wanted to stay
nor was granted the economic freedom (since her legal parent had lots of economic pressure on
her). No enquiry about her health, well-being and care had been made by the court post the
separation between her legal parents and she had not been granted any way of contacting Ms. A.
Evaluation of the outcome of the violation in terms of international and/or domestic law and
theory of social justice
The outcomes of the violation are impeccable since the different aspects and ways in which the
violation has affected the three individuals involved, has been clearly stated. According to
Garret, (2013), Rawl’s Theory on Social justice states that all individuals are equal and they have
access to equal opportunities and liberties for making the best that they can, of their own lives.
The case depicts denial of liberty and rights to the victims, Dr. C and her daughter, thus
reflecting on the violation of the social justice. Absence of federal bill of rights in Australia,
coupled with the lack of administrative and judicial actions for opposing the discrimination done
6

Ethical Issues and Human Rights in Human Service
by the government, based on the sexual orientation of individuals depicts the plight of the
violation (Jones, 2017).
The implications of the evaluation in terms of the issue and for human rights
This case led the Parliament to adopt certain measures to ensure that the homosexual couples
received equal treatment from the government and were granted the right to living on their own
terms. The current reforms regarding the rights granted to the LGBTQ community can be owed
back to this case and the Human rights in Australia are currently improving (Forsythe, 2017).
However, owing to religious constraints, the LGBTQ communities are still looked down upon
and there are small discriminations still occurring in the legal as well as administrative systems
Conclusion
This study helped in gaining a brief insight into the legal and human rights systems of Australia;
the peek depicted that owing to lack of federal legal codes for enabling the individuals to
complain against the governmental actions, there were quite many cases of breaches of UN
Declarations of Human Rights and other such Covenants. The incidences such as the one
discussed in the study however, led to reforms and restructuring of the legal codes, so that the
oppressed sections of the society as well as people with different preferences all were accepted
as part of society, without discrimination, and were granted equal rights.
7

Ethical Issues and Human Rights in Human Service
References
Bayefsky, A. F. (2017). The Principle of Equality Ornon-Discrimination in International Law. In
Equality and Non-Discrimination under International Law (pp. 71-104). Routledge.
Cases - Remedy Australia. (2019). Remedy.org.au. Retrieved 25 May 2019, from
https://remedy.org.au/cases/38/
Elkins, Z., Ginsburg, T., & Simmons, B. (2013). Getting to rights: Treaty ratification,
constitutional convergence, and human rights practice. Harv. Int'l LJ, 54, 61.
Face the facts: Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex People | Australian Human Rights
Commission., (2015). Humanrights.gov.au. Retrieved 25 May 2019, from
https://www.humanrights.gov.au/our-work/education/face-facts-lesbian-gay-bisexual-trans-and-
intersex-people
Forsythe, D. P. (2017). Human rights in international relations. Cambridge University Press.
Garret, J., (2013). Rawls' Mature Theory of Social Justice: A Introduction for
Students.. People.wku.edu. Retrieved 25 May 2019, from
https://people.wku.edu/jan.garrett/ethics/matrawls.htm
Hantal, B., (2014). Social Justice: 7 Theories of Social Justice – Explained!. Your Article
Library. Retrieved 25 May 2019, from http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/economics/social-
justice-7-theories-of-social-justice-explained/39830
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, (2017). United Nations
CCPR/C/119/D/2216/2012, Retrieved 25 May 2019, from https://tbinternet.ohchr.org
Jones, P. (2017). Human rights, group rights, and peoples’ rights. In Human Rights (pp. 277-
304). Routledge.
Student Learning Outcomes — Social Justice Program. (2019). Uwosh.edu. Retrieved 25 May
2019, from https://www.uwosh.edu/social_justice/student-learning-outcomes
8