HCCSSD205 Social Justice Case Study 2 Sample

HCCSSD205 Social Justice Case Study 2

Instructions

Before writing your case study, remember to review each week’s module topics to help you identify a specific social justice issue (you may also choose an issue not discussed in class, but you will need to get permission from your lecturer to write on this topic). In choosing your topic, it is also recommended you conduct some preliminary research to ensure there is enough content available on your chosen issue.

To complete this case study, you will:

1) Identify The social justice issue

Identify and justify your choice of the social justice issue. In justifying your choice, you will use research and evidence to discuss the extent or severity of the issue in Australia, why it is considered a breach of human rights, which international or national legislation may be breached by the persistence of this issue, how the issue came to prominence etc. In discussing how the issue came to prominence, you should discuss key events, media reports, protests, Royal Commissions into the issue, famous court cases etc.

2) Research the issue in at least 2 Australian states, comparing and contrasting state responses to the issue. Examine each state’s historical and current response to the issue. If the state’s response to the issue differs from the federal response, you should also discuss how and why the response was different. For example, the ACT state government legalised same-sex marriage in 2013, even though the federal government refused to do so at the time. While the legislation was eventually voided by the High Court, it highlights the fact that different jurisdictions do not always agree on what should be done about a social justice issue.

3) Critical analysis of the responses

Critically analyse the responses of the two states and/or federal government to the issue. To do this, research the effects of each state’s and/or federal government’s responses on the issue and substantiate your arguments with statistics, literature and other research. Discuss the strengths and limitations of each response. Other points to note:

- Double-space papers throughout

- Use APA 7th edition referencing guide

- Include a minimum of 10 relevant references

- Late papers will be penalised as per Torrens Assessment policies (10% deduction of final marks per day)

- Requests for extensions must be made before the due date of the assessment (see Torrens Assessment policies).

Solution

Title: Biases and Discrimination: A Social Justice Issue in Australia

1. Introduction

Racism and sexism are still active manifests of social injustice in Australia. It is relevant for people of varied color, women, gay and lesbians and people of other non-conforming sexual orientation and identity. These are prejudices which work subconsciously and result in societal structurally enforced factors like racism, sexism, access to job opportunities, healthcare, and education (Elias & Paradies, 2021.p.48). This paper for MBA Assignment Expert specifically looks at the hostility impacts that surround biases, concerning how they affect patients’ basic human rights, and how both the federal and state governments in New South Wales and Victoria are addressing the issue.

2. Identifying the Social Justice Issue

The social justice issue of discriminations and bias continues to be an issue in Australia with a direct negative effect on the society in aspects of race and origin, gender, and disabilities, and other aspects of sexuality (Le et al. 2024.p.104698). Everyday prejudices described as stereotype-driven automatic associations and reactions consistently influence people’s lives while remaining unnoticed by the individuals themselves. These biases affect basics like employment, health and housing creating prejudicial societal structures and framework (Baker & Clegg, 2023.p.100087).

Prejudice and racism are violations of human rights (humanrights, 2024). The same is unlawful under the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 as well as under the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The UDHR and the ICCPR claims that all individuals deserve equality before the law and citizenship liberties from discrimination. These standards assert that bias and discrimination are serious offenses because they violate a person’s two most fundamental rights, i.e. “right to dignity” and “equality” (Hine et al. 2023.p.138).

3. Researching the Issue in Two Australian States

New South Wales (NSW)

The Anti Discrimination Act 1977(NSW) specifies that discrimination is unlawful in relation to race, gender and sexual misidentification, and other factors in public contexts (Permezel et al. 2023.p.103712). However, NSW has accused of adopting a less progressive policy compared to other Australian states. For instance, when advocating for the non-implementation of gender equality in workplaces, NSW used to fall behind the targets, as seen by advocacy groups like Women NSW (Parmenter, Leroy-Dyer & Holcombe, 2024.p.101480).

In response to policing of Aboriginal people, the NSW Police Force formed the Aboriginal Strategic Advisory Council to enhance the force’s interaction with Indigenous communities and decrease racism. Even, in NSW, Education Standards Authority is implementing anti-bias learning programs in school to reduce biases from childhood. These policies represent a change to active measures to prevent discrimination though subsequent press releases and police.

Victoria

In fighting bias and discrimination, Victoria is famous for advanced measures that are almost always ahead of the federal level. The state passed the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 that enhances anti discrimination laws and creates favorable equality of opportunity policy for public entities (Butler, 2022.p.346). Victoria has launched some radical measures such as a Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission (VEOHRC) that implements anti- discriminate measures and provides practical training on “hidden bias”. Cultural diversity is also supported in Victoria’s public sector; all civil servants must complete anti bias training (humanrights, 2024).

The Victorian government has also adopted a peculiar position in relation to the questions affecting sexual minorities and has been defending the policies and campaigns that fight discrimination. For example, in 2021, Victoria enactment of the Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act against the LGBTQ+ persons (Schwartz, Jahn & Geller, 2022.p.101292). This legislation has unveiled Victoria’s intent to deal with discriminations, especially those that stem from sexual orientation.

Comparison of NSW and Victoria

Where NSW and Victoria both offer protection against bias and discrimination, there are marked differences between these two. Victoria’s measures and approaches are balanced and long-term that expresses the proper concern about Discrimination and social justice for such communities such as LGBTQ+ and others (Kilicaslan et al. 2024.p.87). NSW was more cautious although the laws are relatively liberal in Australia. Very often such practice means that the authorities seek to enhance the legislation gradually rather than stimulating certain exclusive innovations. The Victorian approach represents a larger focus on imbedding inclusiveness shown by VEOHRC participation of public entities (humanrights, 2024). Nevertheless, the reaction of NSW has been rather conservative; the problems are solved mostly by modifying existing laws and creating or employing advisory boards.

4. Critical Analysis of Responses

Strengths and Limitations of NSW's Response

The Anti Discrimination Act of NSW aims at setting out legal provisions against discrimination in different arenas. The creation of councils such as the Aboriginal Strategic Advisory Council shows that there is desire to fix the broken trust of Indigenous peoples (Thurber et al. 2022.p.2086). But the limitations remain as the state has not enacted particular laws concerning the more recent social justice issues as for example; protection of LGBTQ+ people from conversion therapies.

In addition, while NSW has been equally aggressive in implementing diversity in particular schools, the degree of elimination or prevention of prejudice among students is hard to quantify.

While these educational initiatives set out to eradicate prejudice from young age, several of those have found that if they are not reinforced on a regular basis, changes may be small at best. This issue implies that NSW might have produced policies but the problem facing them is that they are not well implemented to the degree that will make a “lasting impression” in the society.

Strengths and Limitations of Victoria's Response

The strategies Victoria has employed to tackle biases and discrimination have been applauded for their pre-emptive and encompassing measure. The Equal Opportunity Act and creation of the VEOHRC also offer more than simple protection against discrimination; they seek to promote the equal opportunity in all public organizations (humanrights, 2024). This is particularly liberal because Victoria requires all public sector workers to undergo anti-bias training in a bid to counter prejudice at the organizational level.

However, Victorian initiatives represent a more advanced strategy, some constrictions do remain however. For example, criticisms are made that while legislation and public sector policies are the main focus in Victoria, the progress in private sector employment or housing discrimination might be poor. Holding from the studies conducted at the VEOHRC it can be stated that legal protections do not necessarily decrease proportions of gender and racial discrimination in some specific sectors, which suggests the need for developing extended strategies in the sphere of employment.

Federal Response

The federal Australia has responded to biases and discrimination in the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 and the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986. They offer national standards and focus on the importance of Australia’s guarantee of human rights of individuals. However, the federal approach has come under much criticism primarily for not having the exactly same kind of details provided in the state laws such as the ones passed in Victoria against conversion therapy. Moreover, the federal government provides some means to remove gaps in Indigenous peoples’ health; still, the Indigenous peoples remain disadvantaged (Puszka et al. 2022.p. 115047).

A particularly important drawback of the federal approach is that usually it acts as the starting point for further work, and state legislation itself is required to resolve specific problems of social justice. This approach can create gaps when, for instance, NSW has different responses to biases against the LGBTQ+ community than does Victoria (Waller et al. 2021.p.1069). The federal government is mainly involved in providing support with state governments addressing deficiencies through specific acts as well as programs bearable to the specific region.

5. Conclusion

The same has brought the problem of biases and discrimination as a significant deficit in the social justice fraternity in Australia as it continues to affect minorities across the society. Comparing New South Wales and Victoria responses to Discrimination, it is clear that though both have acted to reduce Discrimination in Victoria, there is a clear progressive positive action while in NSW there are mere slow gradual changes in policies. In addition, it is relevant to state that the federal government establishes a general policy.

This social fight requires many fronts in order to achieve a more just society. This must embrace enhanced implementation measures on anti discrimination laws, increased federal federalism for state based programs and subsequent public awareness on “Prejudicial” actions and thoughts. Overcoming these challenges is a big job which is possible only if the federal and state governments, universities, and NGOs collectively commit to it. In order to eradicate discriminations and prejudices in the society that Australia has, the country must dedicate itself to ongoing social justice process.

Reference list

Baker, M., & Clegg, S. (2023). Policies and practices of gender-based equality and diversity in Australian project-based organizations. Project Leadership and Society,
4, 100087. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plas.2023.100087 [Retrieved on 2 November 2024]

Butler, R. (2022). Migration, class and intra-distinctions of whiteness in the making of inland rural Victoria. Journal of Rural Studies, 94, 344-352. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2022.07.001 [Retrieved on 3 November 2024]

Elias, A., & Paradies, Y. (2021). The costs of institutional racism and its ethical implications for healthcare. Journal of bioethical inquiry, 18(1), 45-58. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-020-10073-0 [Retrieved on 2 November 2024]

Hine, R., Krakouer, J., Elston, J., Fredericks, B., Hunter, S. A., Taylor, K., ... & Skouteris, H. (2023). Identifying and dismantling racism in Australian perinatal settings: Reframing the narrative from a risk lens to intentionally prioritise connectedness and strengths in providing care to First Nations families. Women and Birth, 36(1), 136-140. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2022.04.007 [Retrieved on 2 November 2024]

humanrights,(2024).Make a complaint about discrimination with the support of someone you trust. Retrieved from: https://www.humanrights.vic.gov.au/ [Retrieved on 2 November 2024]

humanrights,(2024).Our Work. Retrieved from: https://humanrights.gov.au/ [Retrieved on 3 November 2024]

Kilicaslan, J., Lewis, J., Kennon, T., Lane, R., & Petrakis, M. (2024). Healthcare professionals' experiences and perceptions about LGBTIQA+ safety and responsiveness in a mainstream Australian health service: Qualitative findings. Archives of psychiatric nursing, 48, 85-92. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnu.2024.01.017 [Retrieved on 2 November 2024]

Le, H. H., Staley, B., Shore, S., & Nutton, G. (2024). Beyond awareness: Social justice agents and preservice teacher possible selves. Teaching and Teacher Education, 148, 104698. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104698 [Retrieved on 3 November 2024]

Parmenter, J., Leroy-Dyer, S., & Holcombe, S. (2024). Breaking the hierarchy: Exploring intersectional employment strategies in the Australian mining industry for Indigenous women. The Extractive Industries and Society, 19, 101480. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2024.101480 [Retrieved on 3 November 2024]

Permezel, J., Arnold, A. S. C., Thomas, J., Maepioh, A. L., Brown, R., Hafford-Letchfield, T., ... & McNair, R. P. (2023). Experiences in the delivery of preconception and pregnancy care for LGBTIQA+ people: A systematic review and thematic synthesis of patient and healthcare provider perspectives. Midwifery, 123, 103712. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2023.103712 [Retrieved on 2 November 2024]

Puszka, S., Walsh, C., Markham, F., Barney, J., Yap, M., & Dreise, T. (2022). Towards the decolonisation of disability: A systematic review of disability conceptualisations, practices and experiences of First Nations people of Australia. Social Science & Medicine, 305, 115047. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115047 [Retrieved on 3 November 2024]

Schwartz, G. L., Jahn, J. L., & Geller, A. (2022). Policing sexuality: Sexual minority youth, police contact, and health inequity. SSM-population health, 20, 101292. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssmph.2022.101292 [Retrieved on 3 November 2024]

Thurber, K. A., Brinckley, M. M., Jones, R., Evans, O., Nichols, K., Priest, N., ... & Lovett, R. (2022). Population-level contribution of interpersonal discrimination to psychological distress among Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults, and to Indigenous–non-Indigenous inequities: cross-sectional analysis of a community-controlled First Nations cohort study. The lancet, 400(10368), 2084-2094. Retrieved from: DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01639-7 [Retrieved on 3 November 2024]

Waller, D., Brooks, F., Perry, L., Kang, M., & Steinbeck, K. (2021). Australian federal, state and territory policy on the health and wellbeing of young people: a scoping review. Health Policy, 125(8), 1065-1076. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2021.05.017 [Retrieved on 3 November 2024]