The authors discuss the use of human rights discourse as a framework for arguing that the Australian Government has an international obligation to improve Indigenous health. Two potential directions for this discourse are examined. These focus on the human right to health, and the interactions between health and human rights. The authors find that there is a limited opportunity to improve the health of Indigenous Australians through international law in relation to both legal and moral imperatives. In their conclusions they note that barriers to using this framework to improve Indigenous health include some which are perpetuated by the Australian Government. However, despite the governments hostility toward including human rights considerations into its public policy decision making, human rights discourse “does provide a sustainable intellectual framework in which to consider the social and structural determinants of health and maintain these issues on the political agenda.”
As we move from the ‘needs’ based analysis and reasoning to developing a framework to improve Mäori health outcomes that is based on Indigenous and Human rights, it is interesting to read how the Indigenous Australians fared with a similar argument at a national level. The paper is useful to everyone working in health, not just policy makers, as it provides evidence of the ways in which rights of Indigenous people are breached and how these impact on health outcomes.
Independent commentary by Dr. Matire Hardwood
Dr Matire Harwood (Ngapuhi) has worked in Hauora Māori, primary health and rehabilitation settings as clinician and researcher since graduating from Auckland Medical School in 1994. She also holds positions on a number of boards, committees and advisory groups including the Health Research Council. Matire lives in Auckland with her whānau including partner Haunui and two young children Te Rangiura and Waimarie.
Research Review publications are intended for New Zealand health professionals.
Disclaimer: This publication is not intended as a replacement for regular medical education but to assist in the process. The reviews are a summarised interpretation of the published study and reflect the opinion of the writer rather than those of the research group or scientific journal. It is suggested readers review the full trial data before forming a final conclusion on its merits.
