Drug-resistant ‘flesh-eating’ MRSA bacteria hits MSM in san francisco and boston

January 15, 2008

drug-resistant ‘flesh-eating’ MRSA bacteria hits MSM in san francisco and boston

By News Editor

A new, highly drug-resistant strain of the “flesh-eating” MRSA bacteria - which is known to thrive mainly in hospitals - is now being spread among gay men in San Francisco and Boston, researchers reported on Monday.

Sexually active gay men in San Francisco were 13 times as likely to contract methicillin- resistant staphylococcus aureus, or MRSA, than their heterosexual counterparts, said researchers at the University of California at San Francisco. Magnified image of a cluster of drug-resistant staphylococcus aureus bacteria. To dilute the concentration of bacteria, researchers suggest taking a shower after sexual contact and the use of regular soap. Based on a review of over 300 patients’ medical records from nine hospitals in San Francisco and two outpatient clinics in San Francisco and Boston, and through chemical analyses, it is also found that the bacteria is spreading among the gay communities of San Francisco and Boston. Researchers have found that the new strain of bacteria called USA300 is growing resistant - or unresponsive - to three or even four classes of widely used antibiotics. The study - published online in the Annals of Internal Medicine - warned that the new strain which seems to have “spread rapidly” in gay populations in San Francisco and Boston, “has the potential for rapid, nationwide dissemination” among gay men. The bacteria, which typically produces boils that can grow to the size of tennis balls, can lead to sepsis (blood poisoning) or a deadly flesh eating form of pneumonia that devours the lungs in severe cases. Researchers estimate that about 30 percent of all people carry ordinary staph chronically and most of those who do carry it in their noses or may manifests as an abscess or cellulitis in the buttocks, genitals and anal area. Staph infections often look like raised red dots on the skin. Left untreated, the areas can swell and fill with pus. “Once this reaches the general population, it will be truly unstoppable,” said Binh Diep, a researcher at the University of California, San Francisco who led the study. “That’s why we’re trying to spread the message of prevention.” And prevention could just be as simple as soap and water. “Taking a shower after sexual contact may minimise contamination,” says Dr Chip Chambers, co-author of the study and director of infectious diseases at San Francisco General. “Ordinary soap will do. It dilutes the concentration of bacteria. You don’t need antibacterial soap.” Previously, MRSA infections have been documented in sports teams, prison populations, gym-goers and the community at large. In December last year, a infectious disease expert in Hong Kong warned that visiting massage parlours or having facials may increase one’s chances of contracting MRSA. Even though the Department of Health conceded that there was insufficient scientific evidence to show a link between infections and massage parlours, the warning came after a finding that 10 percent of patients infected with MRSA in 2007 had visited massage parlours within 12 months of the onset of symptoms. According to the health department, the number of reported community- associated cases jumped from 32 in 2006 to 175 in 2007, with two deaths. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that in 2005 some 94,000 people in the US became infected with MRSA, of which some 19,000 succumbed to it.

Related Sites

Emergence of Multidrug-Resistant, Community-Associated, Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Clone USA300 in Men Who Have Sex with Men

Seoul policeman comes out, fights prejudice

January 11, 2008

seoul policeman comes out, fights prejudice

By News Editor

Faced with either denying that he’s gay or having to come out, a police conscript chose the latter and spoke out against the discrimination and insults he was subjected to at work.

Vowing to fight social prejudice against sexual minorities, a conscript serving in the riot police came out by declaring his sexual orientation in an Internet post on the riot police community web site on Dec 30. Private Kim Hyun-jong - a pseudonym used in a Korea Times report - is said to be the second policeman having done so after his squad mate Yoo Jeong Min-shik identified himself as being gay. He was however imprisoned in 2006 for refusing to finish his service term. In South Korea, men between graduation of high school and the age of 30 are obliged to complete up to 28 months of military service, or in the riot police. In his article, Kim revealed that he was forced to come out at the police station where he works after his colleagues read some private information he had saved on his computer. He said that although he had first denied it, he later made up his mind to come out and speak up against the discrimination and insults he was subjected to. “Some almost put a restraining order on me, and I heard many talking behind my back describing me as a ‘dirty’ gay man,” the Times quoted Kim as saying. “But I am a Korean man living in Korea and I have no reason to flinch. I will struggle against prejudice for all homosexual people and me,” he said, rallying others in the gay community to support his call for military camps to outlaw discrimination and harassment of gay servicemen. The report stated that not only does the South Korean military ban sexual relations between males serving in the forces but also describes homosexuality to be a mental disorder. Other related cases involve one soldier attempting suicide several times after telling his bosses he was gay after he was asked to submit photographs of himself having sexual intercourse with a man to prove he was gay. He was later forced to take an AIDS test and was publicly humiliated. In another case, a mother filed a petition to the National HumanRights Commission last October alleging that 20-year-old her son was forced to get into bed with his superiors after he had come out. According to the United State’s Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) World Factbook, some 345,000 males reach military service age annually in South Korea

Canada bars organ donations from gay men

January 10, 2008

canada bars organ donations from gay men

By News Editor

Gay activists in Canada have hit out at new regulations that ban gay men who have been sexually active in the past five years from donating their organs for transplant.

According to new Health Canada regulations, transplant programs will no longer be able to harvest organs from the bodies of gay men who were sexually active in the past five years. The new rules, which came into effect without much notice in December, are similar to the regulations for determining who can donate blood although any man who has had sex with a man since 1977 is barred from ever donating blood. The rule is applied in Canada, the United Sates and almost all countries in the world except Spain, Switzerland and Italy. Under the new regulations, groups that are at high risk of transmitting infectious diseases including HIV and hepatitis C and B will no longer be accepted as organ donors. The restrictions will also cover intravenous drug users, commercial sex workers and people who have had tattoos or body piercings in the last 12 months using shared needles, came into effect last month. Numerous gay rights groups and health care experts have criticised the new rules as the Canadian media and various news agencies picked up on the issue this week. The head of Nova Scotia Rainbow Action Project, a gay advocacy group, was quoted as saying that the new rules which exclude any man who has had sex with a man within five years from organ donation may not only send the wrong the message but leave those preparing for live donation in the lurch. “They seem to be making decisions that are bad for the health-care system, that don’t seem to be designed to meet the real needs of risk management and that send the wrong messages about the gay community and about HIV and AIDS,” Kevin Kindred said. “Of course that’s frustrating and of course people find that offensive.” Dr. Philip Berger, head of family and community medicine at St. Michael’s Hospital, told the Toronto Star that the rules are unfair to thousands of conscientious gays. “What about a gay monogamous couple, (Health Canada) is not going to let them donate? It’s ridiculous,” says Berger. “It’s been known for 20 years that the risk factor is not in being gay (but) in risky sexual behaviour.” Other medical experts have warned that the new rules could lead to deaths by shrinking an already small pool of donors. Egale Canada, a gay political lobby organisation, is calling on federal Health Minister Tony Clement to suspend the new policy and for a panel to be appointed to review organ donor rules. “Health Canada should be making sure the regulations stop unsafe organ transplants and not create a situation where healthy viable gay organs will be thrown away,” Helen Kennedy, Egale’s executive director, told Reuters. “It’s perpetuating stereotypes. It bans every gay or bisexual man who potentially is in a monogamous relationship - or other gay men who are vigilant about safe sex practices - from donating organs.”

Related Articles

US FDA reaffirms ban on gay blood donors

5 HIV+ blood donors sentenced to jail in s’pore

gay blood donors in NYC turned away

This has been a touchy subject for years, especially for those dependent on organ donation and for many a life and death scenario.

What do you think?

Lawrence

mum, dad, i’m gay

January 7, 2008 mum, dad, i’m gay By Dinah Gardner   What’s next for parents? Increasingly in China, parents of gay children are not only accepting their sexuality but trying to help other families in the same situation support each other, Dinah Gardner reports.     Every Chinese queer teen must dread the thought of coming out to the parents. A face off with the demon force of 2,000 years of Confucian traditions is no joke. While China is blessed with a largely secular nation – there is little right wing Christian or Islamic homophobia for instance – mainland parents dream of their offspring getting hitched and carrying on the family name with a child of their own. A gay son or daughter is an unwelcome spanner in the works that can bring on anything from tears to the outright severance of family ties. No wonder so many lesbians and gays keep their sexuality under wraps and even get married to fulfil familial obligations - the ultimate sacrifice. So when 18-year-old Zheng Yuantao in the southern Chinese city of Guangzhou told his mother he liked boys, he must have been delighted by her reaction. Wu Youjian didn’t cry, introduce him to hot women or disown him. Instead she taught herself how to use a computer, got herself a Sina blog, and put their story online in the hope she could help other gay and lesbian children come out to their parents. In just six months her site had clocked up 100,000 hits and she had earned the affection of hundreds of gays and lesbians who now call her Auntie Wu. Wu, a writer and editor by profession and a self-confessed liberal, said she found it easy to deal with her son’s sexuality because by the time, “Yuantao came out to me… I had read a lot of gay-themed books and movies (by his recommendation). Besides he had also been a good boy in school and in the family; he never made us worried.” And therein lies the key, she says. If you want to come out to your parents do some groundwork first and feed your parents information on what being gay is all about before coming out to them. “Always make sure your parents have some understanding and acceptance of homosexuality before coming out to them,” she advises. “Coming out to younger, trustworthy members of the family first might also help.” It also helps if you work hard in school and, in all ways, are an exemplary son or daughter. “Just make sure you’re well behaved [and a good student],” she says. This “can hopefully give you more credit when you try to convince your parents that you are gay and it’s fine.” But, Wu adds, not all gay children should feel they have to tell their family their sexuality. “If the parent-child relationship hasn’t been close then I don’t think they should tell.” Of course it helps if your parents are bohemian. But their story is not an isolated case. Now, increasingly in China, parents of gay children are not only accepting their sexuality but trying to help other families in the same situation support each other. When Wu Youjian’s was told by her son that he’s gay, she started a blog (top) to write about their experience in the hope she could help other gay and lesbian children come out to their parents. Similarly for Sun Dehua, who went from wanting to literally kill him to launching a hotline for parents to help them understand their gay children. Click on the link below to read article on Sun in the South china Morning Post. In 2001, when Sun Dehua - 58-year-old-farmer in China’s northeastern city of Dalian - found out his only son was shacked up with his boyfriend, he literally wanted to kill him. Sun was quoted as saying in the South china Morning Post in an interview published in 2005 that he had even bought a can of petrol with the intention of blowing a gay bar which his son, Mu, had owned and operated in Dalian. It was only after his son and partner fled the city that his father reconsidered his position after his son’s friends mediated the situation. He got to know more of his son’s gay friends and began reading some of the free material in his son’s bar (where he also worked) on homosexuality and HIV prevention. “I learned that my son is not mentally ill. It was my fault that I didn’t know my own son well enough before.” In September 2006, he started China’s first hotline to help parents understand their gay children. He has also become involved as a volunteer to raise HIV/AIDS awareness among the local gay community. He was quoted as saying in the Post: “I am really glad seeing them together, because Mu is so happy when he’s with him (his son’s boyfriend). Now it feels like I have two sons. And I do hope the law will allow them to get married one day.” Wu also encourages parents to do their homework on what being gay is all about. “They should seek to find out what science says about homosexuality,” she says. “Science can rid them of this unreasonable fear. I feel comfortable that my son is gay because I know being gay is not a crime… or a disgrace.” At the end of the day your child’s happiness is more important than carrying on the family name, she says. On her blog, 60-year-old Wu offers encouraging words to gays and lesbians struggling with their sexuality and dispenses advice on everything from boyfriend/girlfriend troubles to how to deal with parental pressure to have a conventional marriage. She says she values how far-reaching the web can be. “I can actually use my blog to connect to people and express my views – encouraging society and families to accept homosexuality.” She has a lot of fans on her site. Many gays and lesbians find her articles and advice a comforting resource. “Auntie Wu, you are so great!,” writes one blogger. “It must be great to be your son. My mother left me when I was seven years old. I cannot imagine what she would think if she knows I am gay.” Not everyone is so appreciative. Homophobes also find their way onto her blog. “”Even animals don’t have gay sex,” writes one angry blogger. “Don’t you have any shame? Go to hell!” Wu told Chinese media that she sometimes deletes hateful comments but leaves others just to create some controversy. Their situation attracted the attention of local media. Two years ago the mother and son team appeared on a Nanfang TV talk show. Wu says she was initially worried about appearing on the show. “I hesitated, because here, in this city [Guangzhou], there are a lot people who know me and what would they think of me if they knew my son is gay. But later, I thought there was nothing wrong with my son to love boys, I am his mother. I am supposed to stand by him.” She adds that after the show aired she became a minor celebrity. “Even taxi drivers recognised me and encouraged me.”   Related Sites Wu Youjian’s blog (in Chinese) Dalian Rainbow work group (in Chinese) Father’s path from pain to acceptance of gay son (South china Morning Post, PDF)

what lies behind siu cho’s struggle in RTHK case

January 4, 2008 what lies behind siu cho’s struggle in RTHK case By Nigel Collett   Following the Broadcasting Authority’s ruling that a programme discussing same-sex marriage is “biased towards homosexuality” and that future programmes may be required to include anti-gay views, Joseph Cho who appeared in the programme has sought a judicial review of the matter. Civil Rights for Sexual Diversities’ Nigel Collett highlights the implications of the outcome of the case.     Hong Konger Joseph Cho Man-kit (Siu Cho to his friends, of whom there is a growing number) is about to get his judicial review of the Broadcasting Authority’s censure of Radio Television Hong Kong (RTHK) over its programme Hong Kong Connection – Gay Lovers. The review has wide implications and is an important one for the gay community in Hong Kong, so before launching into a discussion of the issues it raises, let us remind ourselves of the story, which Fridae.com has reported on several times since it broke. The Broadcasting Authority ruled that an episode of the RTHK-produced series Hong Kong Connection - featuring Joseph Cho Man-kit and well-known lesbian activist-couple Connie Chan (left) and Wei Siu-lik - was ‘’unfair, partial and biased towards homosexuality, and having the effect of promoting the acceptance of homosexual marriage.’’ Siu Cho, who is a 26-year-old PhD student researching gender studies at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, appeared with two well known activist lesbian partners, Connie Chan and Wei Siu-lik, on the Jade Channel on 9 July 2006 in a show which aired the issues surrounding gay and lesbian partnerships in Hong Kong. The programme was an innocuous, even a quietly charming one and contained no graphic scenes or matter likely to offend any but the most religiously intolerant. All three participants spoke of their lives directly to the camera and appeared openly under their own names. The fact that the programme was so restrained, and that the three had the temerity to even appear to be happy, upset some of Hong Kong’s Christian fundamentalists, who would prefer it that all gays and lesbians be portrayed as sad cases living unstable and unhealthy lifestyles. Twenty-two of these fanatics complained to the Television and Entertainment Licensing Authority (TELA) that the programme had ‘discriminated against them’ as it did not show the happily partnered gays dying of AIDS and as no Christian group had been invited on the programme to put a contrary view. TELA threw out these complaints and upheld RTHK’s editorial right to choose the content of its programmes. One of the complainants then appealed to the Broadcasting Authority, which, in a press release on 20 January this year, upheld part of the complaints and ruled that RTHK had breached the Generic Code governing their operations. Their press release said that: “The programme was presented in the form of a documentary and that the contents of the programme about homosexuality and the legalization of homosexual marriage were controversial in many societies including Hong Kong. The programme was therefore a factual programme dealing with matters of public policy or controversial issues of public importance in Hong Kong and should be subject to the impartiality rule under the relevant code. However, the programme presented only the merits of homosexual marriage and featured only the views of three homosexuals on the legislation of homosexual marriage, rendering the presentation unfair, partial and biased towards homosexuality and having the effect of promoting the acceptance of homosexual marriage.” The programme had in no way ‘promoted’ anything, so RTHK objected to this ruling. However, despite the fact that it is clear that the Broadcasting Authority was applying a stricter line than that called for in the Generic Code which governs broadcasters’ activities (the Code does not require absolute neutrality, but allows editorial judgment), and the certain fact that the Code does not stipulate the inclusion of opposing viewpoints on every programme, RTHK did not appeal to the Executive Council. This it was their right to have done, but one factor which must have weighed in their decision not to appeal was the political pressure brought to bear on them by Joseph Wong, Secretary (Minister, in effect) for Commerce, Industry and Technology, and himself an ex officio Executive Council member. His portfolio includes broadcasting and he took it upon himself to meet the RTHK Director of Broadcasting to ‘show his concern’ and to frame Chu’s refusal to issue a ‘repentance’ statement as defying the memorandum signed between RTHK and the Broadcasting Authority on programming guidelines. In the face of this, RTHK can be forgiven for thinking that an appeal to Exco would not have been worth the bother. It did, though, refuse a request by the Broadcasting Authority to broadcast some representative anti-gay comment. The issue was taken up by Hong Kong’s Legislative Council in March this year, when Legco’s Panel on Information Technology and Broadcasting held a session to examine the matter. After hearing testimony from all sides, they concluded that: “This Panel considers that the decision of the Broadcasting Authority concerning the episode entitled Homosexual Lovers in “Hong Kong Connection” of Radio Television Hong Kong (RTHK) is in fact discrimination on the ground of sexual orientation.” They went on to urge the Broadcasting Authority to withdraw its decision. The Broadcasting Authority ignored the Panel, claiming that it had no power to reverse its decision. So, the ruling stands. What it means in effect is that RTHK, and all other broadcasters, will be obliged to include some representative of the anti-gay lobby in every documentary programme mentioning LGBT subjects. There things would have stood had it not been for the bravery of Siu Cho, who decided to fight. Initially, he tried all administrative routes of redress: an online petition to the Chief Executive with about 2000 signatures received no reply. The fundamentalists organised a counter petition and, at a conference they called in June, boasted that they outnumbered Siu Cho’s supporters. The Broadcasting Authority was petitioned, of course to no effect. The Ombudsman was approached, however the Ombudsman had no powers to intervene since the Broadcasting Authority is simply excluded from the list of organizations to which the Ombudsman Ordinance applies, while TELA is on the same list. The reason of such exclusion is unknown. Complaints to the Equal Opportunities Commission would get nowhere in the absence of any legislation against discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation. A submission to the Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation Unit, established in the Home Affairs Bureau in 2005 to ‘actively promote equal opportunities for gays, lesbians and transgender persons’ (as the Hong Kong Government put it in its obligatory report to the United Nations) was merely ‘actively’ forwarded to the Broadcasting Authority. Eventually, only an application for a judicial review was left, an impossibility had not Hong Kong’s legal system remained free enough to rule that the issue was of sufficient public importance to warrant the grant of legal aid. Such, thankfully, it did, and with the help of his solicitor, Michael Vidler, who recently helped Billy Leung overturn one of Hong Kong’s discriminatory criminal buggery/sodomy laws, and barrister Hector Pun Hei, who has been involved in the conservationist fight to save Queen’s Pier, Siu Cho has been granted legal aid to challenge the Broadcasting Authority’s ruling in the courts. The date of the review is yet to be announced but it will be soon. The case will be fought by the Government and is expected to be a long one. The implications of all this are wider than they seem. This is not some obscure dispute about a single programme and a TV broadcaster’s code of ethics. This is a major issue of media freedom and religious-inspired censorship. What has also become clear since January 2007 is that the Broadcasting Authority’s ruling is in danger of becoming Hong Kong’s equivalent to Britain’s notorious section 28 (of the Local Government Act) which, enacted by Margaret Thatcher’s government to ban the ‘promotion of homosexuality’ in schools and other institutions, in effect banned any discussion of the subject at all. ‘A similar chilling effect is visible now in Hong Kong,’ says Siu Cho, who has personal experience of this already. Interviewed by me recently, he said that he had been invited to appear on an Cable TV programme in January, but that, after the Broadcasting Authority ruling, Cable TV felt itself compelled to invite a fundamentalist to take part. As a result, Siu Cho withdrew. In another case in which he has been involved personally, a government social worker delayed, then effectively shelved, an invitation to Siu Cho and others to share their experiences with a public audience. The man had been subjected to pressure from a superior who feared that, after the Broadcasting Authority ruling, the Hong Kong Government, who were his employers, would accuse him of ‘promoting’ homosexuality. In such dry bureaucratic processes are the seeds of censorship nurtured. Of course, we have no real way of telling why the Broadcasting Authority’s members acted and continue to act the way they do. This case does, though, raise the issues of the criteria for the appointment of members to such statutory bodies and the way Government appointees have been found repeatedly attempting to impose their own moral codes within their spheres of responsibility. In this case, as with the case of the 2005 appointment of the Society for Truth and Light to teach ‘human rights’ to school teachers, where civil servants in the Education and Manpower Bureau issued almost identical statements to those of the fundamentalists, we seem to see some partiality towards the fundamentalist right lurking in corners of the Government and its appointed organs. This is a partiality which is much in evidence in Hong Kong’s often religiously sponsored schools. It may not be coincidental, here, that one member of the Broadcasting Authority is a headmaster in a church secondary school. What underlies this issue is a concerted attempt by the fundamentalist activists in bodies such as the Society for Truth and Light and New Creation to infiltrate the views they derive from their interpretation of the Christian faith into all discourse on LGBT issues. This is not something new. Some years back, New Creation persuaded the Hong Kong Government to include them in meetings of the Sexual Minority Forum, a body set up to provide liaison between the LGBT communities and the Home Affairs Bureau (now the Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau). They did so on the spurious grounds that they represented a ‘minority within a minority’, the gay people who didn’t want to be gay. Now, all discussion between the LGBT communities and the Government includes, and of course is monitored by, the Christian right, which is doing all in its power to prevent those discussions bearing any fruit at all. Continually now, in the Hong Kong press, advocates of these groups demand to be given the right to air their prejudices every time any LGBT issue is debated. They do so, of course, to be enabled to continue to exercise their ‘right’ to discriminate. They do so that, even if it is no longer legally possible in Hong Kong to put all gays and lesbians back in the closet, all discussion of issues concerning them can be locked up there instead. The Hong Kong Government, or at least several large parts of it, seems to have swallowed these arguments and has given these organisations not only credence but public funding to spread their views. The Society for Truth and Light, for instance, runs courses in our secondary schools, courses on which it hands out pre-printed forms of complaint for the students to send to Government departments about any broadcast they dislike. Forms, it would seem, which are likely to have been paid for by the taxpayer. So, the issues are clear. In seeking this judicial review, Siu Cho is fighting not only for the freedom of the press to examine and comment uncensored upon LGBT issues. He is also striking a blow against the growing attempt by the Christian right to manipulate Government policy and to insert itself into every debate upon LGBT rights. His action is a major part of the ongoing struggle in Hong Kong to have a law enacted against discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation, for this will never happen without open and informed public debate. It is clear that a great deal hangs on the results of this review, much that affects us all. The next few months of legal argument will set the parameters for public debate on LGBT issues in Hong Kong for some time to come. We will watch with more than interest. This guest column was written by Nigel Collett for Hong Kong’s Civil Rights for Sexual Diversities (www.cr4sd.org), a NGO working for the rights of people who may be disadvantaged by the law, policies and social prejudices in Hong Kong because of their sexual orientation, gender identity and sexual expression. The column will be written by founding member Roddy Shaw and various writers. Nigel Collett is an English biographer and businessman living in Hong Kong. Author of several books, including The Butcher of Amritsar, he has written for GMagazine and reviews for the Asian Review of Books. He is a moderator for the Hong Kong Man International Literary Festival.   Related Articles news around the world 14-mar-07 news around the world 24-jan-07 Related Sites Radio Television Hong Kong

Australia to get second lesbian parliamentarian

January 2, 2008

australia to get second lesbian parliamentarian

By News Editor

Senator-elect for Western Australia Louise Pratt has become the second openly lesbian woman - after Climate Change Minister Penny Wong - to serve in newly-elected prime minister Kevin Rudd’s administration.

Louise Pratt, a former Western Australia Legislative Council member, will take up her Senate seat in July this year. She had notably become the youngest woman ever elected to the Western Australia Legislative Council at the time of her election in 2001. Louise Pratt, a former Western Australia Legislative Council member, will be sworn-in in July this year. Having served as a regular spokesperson for prominent advocacy group Gay and Lesbian Equality in WA before her appointment to the Legislative Council, the 35-year-old Labor Party member has been credited for playing a significant role in a gay and lesbian law reform committee that pushed for the passage of the Acts Amendment (Lesbian and Gay Law Reform) Act 2002. It is considered to be some of the most progressive laws in the country. The reforms included a complete ban on discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, the granting of the right for same-sex couples to adopt children, a lowering of the age of consent from 21 to 16, the right for same-sex couples to inherit from a deceased partner, and the repeal of legislation which had made it an offence to promote homosexuality in schools. Pratt was quoted as saying in the gay Sydney Star Observer that law reform for same-sex couples and GLBT individuals would be high on her agenda and has vowed to ensure that her party makes good on its promise to implement all 58 federal laws which discriminate against gays and lesbians. “It is very exciting to be coming in with the change in government,” Pratt said. “I think we can already begin to see how different the political landscape is going to be. With (former PM) John Howard gone, we have a much less conservative Opposition leader as well as a Labor government.” Defending her party’s resolve to reform gay and lesbian laws nationally, she said, “I can only go from my experience. At a State level, we promised we would reform the law and we did.” “We have committed to changing the laws at a national level, and Kevin Rudd is already asking his Cabinet colleagues to pursue election promises. “The proof will be in the pudding, and I look forward to having that dialogue with the lesbian and gay community as we undertake the reform agenda.” Her other key policy interests as stated on her web site include environmental issues; refugees, minority and gender equity issues; social, economic and environmental sustainability; and family policy, including child welfare, adoption, childcare and life work family balance.

Related Articles

malaysia-born lesbian lawyer becomes australia’s first openly gay cabinet minister

Related Sites

Louise Pratt