The Times writes about deportation case

« BBC Report on Ama Sumani who was deported last week from the UK | Reminder of Portrait Competition »

The Times writes about deportation case

by davidjohn ^Pro @ 2008-01-15 – 23:46:01

Proud to be British ?
Where is the son of the manse ?

Cancer deportation ‘not exceptional’
Richard Ford, Home Correspondent

The deportation of a Ghanaian woman with terminal cancer was defended by the head of the immigration service yesterday, who disclosed that there were hundreds of similarly difficult cases each year.

Lin Homer said that the removal of Ama Sumani, who was in hospital in Cardiff, back to Accra was heart-rending but not exceptional.

She spoke as The Lancet described the removal of Ms Sumani as atrocious barbarism. “To stop treating patients in the knowledge that they are being sent home to die is an unacceptable breach of the duties of any health professional,” it said. “The UK has committed an atrocious barbarism. It is time for doctors’ leaders to say so, forcefully and uncompromisingly.”

Ms Sumani, 39, suffers from malignant myeloma and was receiving dialysis at a hospital in Cardiff when she was taken by immigration officers and flown back home last week because her visa had expired. She left the hospital in a wheelchair accompanied by five immigration officials before being driven to Heathrow to board a flight to Accra last Wednesday.

Keith Vaz, the chairman of the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee, said that he had spoken by telephone to Ms Sumani in her Accra hospital shortly before a hearing of the committee — at which he told Ms Homer, the chief executive of the Border and Immigration Agency: “Her health has deteriorated since she arrived in Ghana.”

Ms Homer said: “I think it is very difficult to see the circumstances in which this case stands out from the very many difficult cases we consider. These are incredibly difficult cases. There are many hundreds each year.”

She added: “We deal with many hundreds of cases where the personal circumstances reach and touch the people involved. It is one of the things that makes being a caseworker in the agency a difficult job.”

Ms Sumani came to England as a student in 2004. It is not believed that cancer had been diagnosed at that time. Her lack of English prevented her from taking up the course and she then sought work, which broke the rules of her student visa. She did not keep in touch with the immigration authorities and was taken ill a year ago.
Options:
Tags:
- love
- art

7 Comments to The Times writes about deportation case

Hide subcomments

- technomist
- 2008-01-16 @ 01:15:56
You don't really say what you think about this. The Home office spokesperson is correct. There are hundreds of cases like this.

One thing missing from the reports is that the Ghanaian lady had been home to Ghana in the middle of her somewhat unsuccessful 'studies' and returned here, with apparently little intention of furthering her academic career. She apparently also never sought the assistance of the Ghanaian High Commission while here, which is a bit odd. I would be interested to know how she was financing these travels and, indeed, was able to afford to come and study at all - seems she is a good deal better off and/or better connected than the vast majority of her countrymen.
- - davidjohn ^Pro
  - 2008-01-16 @ 09:31:37
  Well we will never agree. Taking a cancer patient from hospital and deporting her the same day is un Christian to put it mildly.
  Remember 470 million people can come here without visa so immigration control principally affects our Commonwealth friends which gives the impression of Racism.
  The Chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee also said on Saturday that the decision is astonishing and ministerial discretion could have been exercised.
  
  We went uninvited without visas into Iraq, spent vast sums of tax payers money and now terrorism is rife there.
  - - technomist
    - 2008-01-16 @ 11:31:50
    Dear Davidjohn, You hadn't said anything to agree or disagree with. You have just reported what someone else had said in the Times.
    
    I have some thoughts. Removing someone on the same day as they have gone from hospital, seems to me to be the only way to do it humanely: take her straight to a plane and abroad, so that on arrival no time has been wasted which would interrupt treatment. It is supposed to be done after medical advice, which suggests to me that some kind doctor somewhere has quietly sanctioned this removal. As she does not have family here to say goodbye to, I do not see what the purpose of any delay would have been.
    
    I agree its not Christian, but the Home Office is not a Christian organization. They are the body Parliament has tasked with the job of removing people who are not here legally or who have abused our hospitality by breaking our laws. They do not set policy, we do, through our elected representatives and after consultations with interested groups. The Home Office's behaviour is a reflection of the conflicting instructions they indirectly receive from us, the public, in the face of some genuinely difficult choices which life throws up.
    
    As for discretion being exercised, the fact is it wasn't. Criticise the minister, by all means. The exercise of such kind of discretion has been quite rare under this government. I should think, though, that as there really are many such cases, the Minister would have some difficulties. Is he going to send a message that anyone from abroad who is not entitled to be here will be allowed to stay for the rest of their lives and get free and expensive treatment on the NHS? (There would also be other benefits such as housing, spending money and access to other council services). Is he gong to exercise discretion in favour of a person who had been back to Ghana once and returned with no obvious intention to abide by the stated purpose of her previous permission to be here. As the Church used to say when this really was a Christian country, people should not come before a court of Equity with unclean hands.
    
    If this is a moral issue, would we not be applying double standards by failing to apply such moral principles? Do we not find ourselves blinded by the race issue, when someone chooses to raise it, to the extent that we could be accused of double standards? If she were from Kosovo, would she be allowed to stay: I suspect not these days, having seen many Kosovans removed in recent years. If she were American, she would be expected to go back to the States, though we know how difficult it is for many people to access healthcare there.
    
    I note that the Lancet do not criticize the Ghanaian hospitals for failing to treat her, or the Ghanaian government for not caring about her.
    
    Your point about visa to Iraq is correct - we were uninvited at the time. Such is the nature of war. Subsequently however, troop movements in and out of that country have been with the knowledge and permission of the elected Iraqi government. That is somethig I personally dislike, as I have been against the war in Iraq from day one.
    - Reply to comment
    - Permalink
- ranfuchs ^Pro
- 2008-01-16 @ 08:51:45
I agree, but this is a problem which is easy to see and call our attention. What about the problem of those who never gets the treatment they deserve?

I have a friend who was diagnosed a few weeks ago with malignant skin cancer. Now she is waiting for her operation. Here, unlike Australia, most English doctors are not trained to recognise skin cancer at early stages. So by the time it is recognised it is nearly too late, and every day can mean the difference between in time and too late. Yet, nobody can tell her how long she'll be waiting.

We have to make a call. are we trying to be part of the civilized world, or is it like America that we want to be: everyone is equal as long as their bank account is equal
- Reply to comment
- Permalink
- loiswakeman
- http://lois.co.uk
- 2008-01-16 @ 08:57:35
This does seem heartless - on humanitarian grounds. But where do you draw the line? Not a decision I'd like to be asked to make.

She was interviewed at the hospital a few days ago, and seemed to be able to speak reasonablle English now.

One also wonders at an educational institution that allows someone to come here and study without English.
- Reply to comment
- Permalink
- Not-Herneschase
- 2008-01-17 @ 11:36:05
It seems that now adays such cases are reported in very emotional and biased terms. The facts included in or omitted from the articles depend largely upon the political leanings of the media reporting and the effect they wish to achieve.

This case does sound an abysmal show of injustice on face value. Has anyone bothered to establish Ms Sumani's prognosis in terms of life expectancy etc? I assume it is the cost of her treatment and her financial support that is fuelling this whole argument.

Presumably if she has had surgery and was on dialysis, chemo, radiotherapy etc etc she would have found work/studies quite hard and probably wasn't 'together' enough to arrange the renewal of her visa. I personally feel that if diagnosed with Myeloma, I would be in pieces. Have we considered that she may not have had access to appropriate advice and didn't think to contact the Ghanaian High Commission.

I think that the frequent mistake some of us make is to think that all members of society are aware of their political, and legal rights and would act in a slick organised manner in similar circumstances - I know I wouldn't.

It doesn't matter where we reside or the colour of our passport, I would like to think that we were all treated with sympathy and dignity in similar circumstances. Myeloma is one of the most heinous and invasive of all cancers and deportation, from what I understand, is a terrifying and demeaning experience. Not how Ms Homer or any members of her family would like to spend her final time on earth I am sure.
- - davidjohn ^Pro
  - 2008-01-17 @ 12:36:36
  Yes but things are moving now and various offers of help are coming in. But the case tells us about the way ' discretion fails to be exercised' David.
  - Reply to comment
  - Permalink