Advertisement

No choice for exposure to radiation at AMC

By 18 February 2010 55

My family member is in remand at the AMC and now will be subjected to several doses of radiation per week as they will now be x-rayed through SOTARS after every visit.  While they would prefer to be subjected to strip searches – they have  been told they must go through the x-ray or have a non-contact visit through the glass booth.  Do they not have the right to express health concerns because they are a prisoner?  I can not find anywhere – where the radiation council has approved the use of this equipment for use, yet it was in use last weekend.  But not today. What is the point of this machine anyway if it is not going to be used consistently?  How can I even begin to oppose its use when there don’t seem to be any publicly available policies on it? I don’t think it’s right that my family member is a guinea pig for the government’s new security screen.  My family member is not a drug user and is not in maximum security.  Now I have the guilt of knowing what they must further endure when I visit.  Family visits and support are an important part of the rehabilitation process for a person in prison and yet my mere presence will be be putting my family member at a measurable health risk.

Please login to post your comments
55 Responses to No choice for exposure to radiation at AMC
#1
H1NG08:17 am, 18 Feb 10

Small amounts of radiation can be a good thing. Look at the Ninja Turtles.

#2
buzz8199:03 am, 18 Feb 10

While I understand your concern, YOU have to understand that your family member is in there for being naughty. Unfortunately that means that they are in there with a lot of other people that have also been naughty. (If the courts have decided to remand them then they have been very naughty or naughty on a lot of occasions).

It doesn’t matter if he is a drug user or not, the fact is that there is a high level of drug users in the centre and they will do anything to get drugs in. It picks up more than drugs, ie potential weapons.

I know there are a lot of people that go in there that have the opportunity to use more than when they are outside.

It is the only way that ACT Corrections can try and get on top of the problem. The Corrections officers are the ones on the inside that have to deal with the crims, so I think it should be a way in making it safer for them, yeah?

My advise, suck it up and deal with it, or just do non-contact visits.

#3
chewy149:13 am, 18 Feb 10

Hey look on the bright side.
At least your family member will be protected from large doses of UV radiation for a while.
I hear they can be deadly.

#4
Tooks9:39 am, 18 Feb 10

Happy to be corrected, but the levels of radiation you’re talking about would be negligible, I would’ve thought.

#5
sloppery9:44 am, 18 Feb 10

buzz819 said :

While I understand your concern, YOU have to understand that your family member is in there for being naughty. Unfortunately that means that they are in there with a lot of other people that have also been naughty. (If the courts have decided to remand them then they have been very naughty or naughty on a lot of occasions).

It doesn’t matter if he is a drug user or not, the fact is that there is a high level of drug users in the centre and they will do anything to get drugs in. It picks up more than drugs, ie potential weapons.

I know there are a lot of people that go in there that have the opportunity to use more than when they are outside.

It is the only way that ACT Corrections can try and get on top of the problem. The Corrections officers are the ones on the inside that have to deal with the crims, so I think it should be a way in making it safer for them, yeah?

My advise, suck it up and deal with it, or just do non-contact visits.

Well said. They don’t put people in gaol here for nothing. Harden up.

#6
Skidbladnir9:56 am, 18 Feb 10

According to the manufacturer of the SOTER scanner system in place at the AMC:
‘The radiation dose of one SOTER RS scan is 2.7 µSv (microsieverts) for males and 2.2 µSv (microsieverts) for females. This is approximately equivalent to a one hour subsonic plane flight at an altitude of 10,000m’.

Does anyone feel guilty about mutant flight stewardesses or their potentially mutant chldren from ongoing radiation exposure on a plane flights?
No, because the impact is trivial and the risk of harm is minimal, so it is deemed an acceptable risk.

Learn more about microsiverts here, from British Airways, or here, from the Canadian Nuclear Power Generator, OPG.
The amount of radiation you get annually from eating a normal diet is approximately 150 times higher than the radiation scan, and the soil itself gives off more radiation over the course of a year than you would get if you visited your husband every day in that same year.

Personally, I like having a Hobson’s Choice on contact visitation in a prison.
You can either exercise the option they give you, or not exercise it and get no contact visit.
That is your only choice.

#7
Northwest910:07 am, 18 Feb 10

I’ve said it before and ill say it again to anyone who complains about their treatment in that palace they call the “hume hilton”, which as far as I’m concerned is a giant spit in the face of victims wanting justice

The best way to avoid percieved mistreatment in a prison is to NOT BREAK THE LAW.

Quite simple really.

#8
MsCheeky10:22 am, 18 Feb 10

Sent this one off to my friend who is a radiation expert in a govt. dept. that won’t let staff access riotact, and got the following:

“Hmmm. Lots of generalities, non-specifics and acronyms to obscure the facts. What is ‘SOTARS’ anyway? I think this person is using the term ‘x-rayed’ much like people who ‘hoover’ the floor. Does the screening device actually use an x-ray source or an RF source? I couldn’t imagine that an x-ray source for this application would gain approval anywhere – even the use of airport baggage x-ray scanners is strictly controlled to ensure that humans cannot access the x-ray radiation. An RF source, however, such as the new XRF body scanners, is an ideal solution and is as safe as the proverbial out-house.

I reckon its one more reason to avoid going to jail.”

I think my friend and skidbladinir are in agreement. Stop worrying about the ‘xrays’ and focus on the important things.

#9
PigDog11:04 am, 18 Feb 10

While I don’t have any sympathy for this person, there is a requirement (through a notifiable instrument) that they use the SOTER scanner, and it is publically available:

http://www.legislation.act.gov.au/ni/2010-37/current/pdf/2010-37.pdf

#10
GardeningGirl11:06 am, 18 Feb 10

“they have been told they must go through the x-ray OR have a non-contact visit through the glass booth.”
Sounds like a choice to me.
I’m sure victims of crime would have liked a choice.

#11
Ian12:07 pm, 18 Feb 10

They had plenty of choice about the radiation – they blew it when they committed crimes that got them sent to jail (and in the ACT that would take some fairly major crimes and probably repeat offences).

#12
MsCheeky1:51 pm, 18 Feb 10

Ok, nerd friend has been on the job, and now offers the following:

I’ve done a bit of research and it appears to me that the SOTER dealing is very well controlled in terms of legislation. The scanner delivers less than 3 uSv per scan and the ACT Government has set a limit of 0.25 mSv per prisoner, which gives approx 84 scanned visits per year. The limit set by the ACT Govt is arbitrarily set well below the National noc-occupational /general public radiation dose limit. This limit, which is set by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) and based on international standards, is 1 mSv per year. To put this limit into perspective, the background exposure level in Australia is about 2 mSv per year – you have no choice in avoiding this dose – with about 12% of that (coincidentally about 0.25 mSv) coming from internal sources, mostly radioactive Potasium-40. Yep, we are all naturally radioactive and you can’t avoid that either. I would be more concerned with driving the car to the correction centre and walking around under solar UV radiation emitted by the sun than the piddly dose from these x-ray scanners.”

Visit early, visit often.

#13
bd842:08 pm, 18 Feb 10

They aren’t making him live inside the machine so there isn’t a problem. The radiation levels from these machines is very small, and it is normally only dangerous when exposed to it constantly and at higher levels. If he really doesn’t like being subjected to the scans then he should change his lifestyle so it keeps out of jail. Xray scanning is far more acceptable compared to these people running around in the community committing crimes.

#14
p12:44 pm, 18 Feb 10

I’d rather be x-rayed then have body cavity searches. But that’s just me.

#15
Pommy bastard4:19 pm, 18 Feb 10

I’ve heard those machines can cause sterility.

We live in hope.

#16
hellspice4:23 pm, 18 Feb 10

If they would prefer to be subjected to strip searches instead of a quick scan i think you should be more worried about STD’s than tumors !

#17
paperboy7:01 pm, 18 Feb 10

sloppery said :

buzz819 said :

While I understand your concern, YOU have to understand that your family member is in there for being naughty. quote]

Well said. They don’t put people in gaol here for nothing. Harden up.

Northwest9 said :

The best way to avoid percieved mistreatment in a prison is to NOT BREAK THE LAW.

Umm, not everyone in AMC is a convicted offender. Some are on remand.

#18
buzz8199:35 pm, 18 Feb 10

paperboy said :

sloppery said :

buzz819 said :

While I understand your concern, YOU have to understand that your family member is in there for being naughty. quote]

Well said. They don’t put people in gaol here for nothing. Harden up.

Northwest9 said :

The best way to avoid percieved mistreatment in a prison is to NOT BREAK THE LAW.

Umm, not everyone in AMC is a convicted offender. Some are on remand.

Yeah, but they are on remand for doing naughty things…. So they still broke the law, just cause the courts here don’t want to convict them is not the point.

In case you don’t know paperboy, it is very very hard to actually get remanded in the ACT.

They are still a criminal, they are in there because they don’t want to follow society’s rules, if this means they have to be inconvenienced in any way then so be it.

If you ask me they have to many luxury’s, to many rights and the way that the ACT treats it’s criminals is a disgrace, rehabilitation did not work the first 20 or 30 times, why do they think it is going to work on the 100th?

#19
capitolm10:24 pm, 18 Feb 10

Thanks for your comments – I did mispell SOTERS – new keyboard- please understand that many people that are in there are not given information when they need it. There are some who would not even understand the information that is provided. Some have adult literacy problems. Some do not speak fluent English. They are simply told that they need to do something and don’t have easy access to the level of information they would like and they don’t have the luxury of conversations with experts. Thanks Ms Cheeky for your information – I have read that because I have the time to do a little research – where my family member doesn’t have access to research information. It’s also the people like me, who visit that just hear about these things through our loved ones and we are not given unbiased, professional information either. (Yes they are somebody’s loved one)

I don’t share the black and white opionions of some of you re: if you are in jail you deserve whatever bad happens. I have learned over the last year that many people in prison have been victims of crime or products of their environment. Some people just take a wrong turn regardless of their environment. Prisoners are not sent to prison to die. They are serving time to society and should be doing all the things it takes to rehabilate and learn how to make the right decisions, develop skills, and overcome adversity so that they can find their way when they get out- be a contributing member of society – have the skills to be a good parent,or partner, or teacher or doctor…or are those things too ‘off limits’ once someone has “broken the law”?

Just because my FM is in jail doesnt mean they should not be able to express concern about things. FM would like to be a parent one day and because FM doesn’t know of the levels of radiation (because they haven’t printed the information sheets yet for the detainees)has health concerns regarding this)- Or should FM also no longer have the right to a future as a parent?

And correct to Northwest9: Not everyone is a convicted offender. FM is on remand but is subject to exactly the same process as everyone else. FM is all good with this except wants to be able to make an informed decision when it comes to radiation exposure.

#20
Northwest99:27 am, 19 Feb 10

paperboy said :

sloppery said :

buzz819 said :

While I understand your concern, YOU have to understand that your family member is in there for being naughty. quote]

Well said. They don’t put people in gaol here for nothing. Harden up.

Northwest9 said :

The best way to avoid percieved mistreatment in a prison is to NOT BREAK THE LAW.

Umm, not everyone in AMC is a convicted offender. Some are on remand.

true that, being on remand simply means you broke the law (allegedly) and went to a hearing where a judge decided that you arent fit for public life until you go to court.

then when you get to court you are either 1. convicted, and moved into the sentenced area, and are issued with your new grey uniform, as apposed to the snazzy blue of remand, (women remand and sentenced sport a stylish maroon) 2.are released due to the patheticaly soft magistrates in the ACT, 3. manage to prove innocence, and are set free.

thing is, you dont get put in remand for doing 45 in a school zone.

and no, prisoners are not sent to prison to die, they are sent there to watch large screen LCD tvs, be educated, provided with first class medical and dental care, 3 square meals a day and a warm bed. tough gig. i know pensioners who struggle with getting that

#21
Pommy bastard10:22 am, 19 Feb 10

capitolm said :

I don’t share the black and white opionions of some of you re: if you are in jail you deserve whatever bad happens. I have learned over the last year that many people in prison have been victims of crime or products of their environment. Some people just take a wrong turn regardless of their environment.

Cry me a river…

#22
sloppery10:54 am, 19 Feb 10

Pommy bastard said :

capitolm said :

I don’t share the black and white opionions of some of you re: if you are in jail you deserve whatever bad happens. I have learned over the last year that many people in prison have been victims of crime or products of their environment. Some people just take a wrong turn regardless of their environment.

Cry me a river…

I agree. What about the victims of the crimes this ‘FM’ committed? Ever thought about what they’ve been through?

#23
capitolm11:52 am, 19 Feb 10

sloppery said :

Pommy bastard said :

capitolm said :

I don’t share the black and white opionions of some of you re: if you are in jail you deserve whatever bad happens. I have learned over the last year that many people in prison have been victims of crime or products of their environment. Some people just take a wrong turn regardless of their environment.

Cry me a river…

I agree. What about the victims of the crimes this ‘FM’ committed? Ever thought about what they’ve been through?

Oh Golly gosh now ..No I never thought of that…(!??) Are you kidding me? We are victims of this crime too and we think and deal with this every day, including FM. We talk about it often- FM is deeply humbled and regretful of it…to all who have become ‘victims’ because of FMs very poor decision.

Oh yeah…and the ‘education’ programs hmmmm…I believe one can obtain a certificate in such things as coffee making, laundry duties, haircutting…oh and of course limitless cognitive therapy is available…yep…so much to aspire for and prepare one for returning to society. In long bay prison you can study law.

Clearly there are many strong opinions here about what should be the course of action for the treatment of ‘criminals’ and they all seem to go in one big box. Very glad we have a legal system to guide some of the decision making.

Cry ME a river! : )

#24
paperboy12:32 pm, 19 Feb 10

Northwest9 said :

being on remand simply means you broke the law (allegedly) and went to a hearing where a judge decided that you arent fit for public life until you go to court.

being on remand does not mean you broke the law. Until you’re convicted you are innocent of the charge. A court may believe there are grounds for a conviction, but more than a few remandees end up being found not guity and walk free

#25
Skidbladnir12:32 pm, 19 Feb 10

While we all have opinions on the cuddleprison and its residents, get back to discussing radiation exposure and compulsory bodyscanning people after contact visits.

#26
sloppery1:32 pm, 19 Feb 10

Capitolm – perhaps you need to consider WHY it is that people hold these opinions.

#27
buzz8191:35 pm, 19 Feb 10

capitolm said :

sloppery said :

Pommy bastard said :

capitolm said :

I don’t share the black and white opionions of some of you re: if you are in jail you deserve whatever bad happens. I have learned over the last year that many people in prison have been victims of crime or products of their environment. Some people just take a wrong turn regardless of their environment.

Cry me a river…

I agree. What about the victims of the crimes this ‘FM’ committed? Ever thought about what they’ve been through?

Oh Golly gosh now ..No I never thought of that…(!??) Are you kidding me? We are victims of this crime too and we think and deal with this every day, including FM. We talk about it often- FM is deeply humbled and regretful of it…to all who have become ‘victims’ because of FMs very poor decision.

Oh yeah…and the ‘education’ programs hmmmm…I believe one can obtain a certificate in such things as coffee making, laundry duties, haircutting…oh and of course limitless cognitive therapy is available…yep…so much to aspire for and prepare one for returning to society. In long bay prison you can study law.

Clearly there are many strong opinions here about what should be the course of action for the treatment of ‘criminals’ and they all seem to go in one big box. Very glad we have a legal system to guide some of the decision making.

Cry ME a river! : )

Wow sounds like you aspire to go to Long Bay to get a Law degree…

I think what you’ve done is come to a place where, a) you thought that people would care for a criminal, b) would help and sympathize with you about the heinous reality of being locked up because one broke the law, and c) you don’t want to hear the reality of what society thinks about people who break the law.

Hope you family member gets a wake up call and can one day look at himself in the mirror, then uppercut himself…

#28
Northwest92:41 pm, 19 Feb 10

capitolm said :

sloppery said :

Pommy bastard said :

capitolm said :

I don’t share the black and white opionions of some of you re: if you are in jail you deserve whatever bad happens. I have learned over the last year that many people in prison have been victims of crime or products of their environment. Some people just take a wrong turn regardless of their environment.

Cry me a river…

I agree. What about the victims of the crimes this ‘FM’ committed? Ever thought about what they’ve been through?

Oh Golly gosh now ..No I never thought of that…(!??) Are you kidding me? We are victims of this crime too and we think and deal with this every day, including FM. We talk about it often- FM is deeply humbled and regretful of it…to all who have become ‘victims’ because of FMs very poor decision.

Oh yeah…and the ‘education’ programs hmmmm…I believe one can obtain a certificate in such things as coffee making, laundry duties, haircutting…oh and of course limitless cognitive therapy is available…yep…so much to aspire for and prepare one for returning to society. In long bay prison you can study law.

Clearly there are many strong opinions here about what should be the course of action for the treatment of ‘criminals’ and they all seem to go in one big box. Very glad we have a legal system to guide some of the decision making.

Cry ME a river! : )

i am led to believe the IT course was booked out pretty quickly. as IT is what butters my bread, are my aspirartions lower than those of criminal persuasion

and anyway, if coffee making and haircutting is below the crims, dont get put in prison, again i come back to how simple it is.

i hope you look at your barrister next time your buying a coffee and show them the kind of disdain you clearly have for their profession, being that it is below that of a crim….

my missus pays 180 for a haircut, ill let her know to tell her hairdresser that you think his profession is below the lofty aspirations of someone who society has deemed not fit for life in public prior to their trial.

#29
Northwest92:51 pm, 19 Feb 10

paperboy said :

Northwest9 said :

being on remand simply means you broke the law (allegedly) and went to a hearing where a judge decided that you arent fit for public life until you go to court.

being on remand does not mean you broke the law. Until you’re convicted you are innocent of the charge. A court may believe there are grounds for a conviction, but more than a few remandees end up being found not guity and walk free

hence the “allegedly” i put in there, the cops figured you did it and charged you with a crime, you front a court. some statements are made, and someone decided whether your a risk or not.

no risk, you walk on bail.

deemed a risk, you go inside to learn how to not get court next time

#30
Northwest92:55 pm, 19 Feb 10

not get caught, not court

terrible spelling… oops

Sponsors
RiotACT Proudly Supports
Advertisement
Copyright © 2014 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.