Theorising Mothers' Everyday Security in the Context of Irregular Migration

This paper explores the everyday security of refugee and asylum-seeking mothers before, during and after irregular migration. Based on narrative interviews with mothers residing in Melbourne, we analyse how their needs both do and do not fall into Nussbaum’s capabilities list. We argue that Nussbaum’s framework is not sufficient to capture the gendered aspects of everyday security related to carework. Based on this analysis, we suggest a new framework to understand carework and everyday security in the context of refugee and asylum-seeking women. Centring carework in the discussion of the everyday security of people seeking asylum is a significant step away from traditional security literature and allows mothers’ voices to be highlighted in a unique way.

Queer legibility and the refugee status determination process

It is well documented that LGBTIQ+ applicants face a multitude of stereotypes and biases from decision-makers worldwide. We build on literature that argues that there is an unspoken component of credibility – to what extent the applicant is legible to the decision-maker. Based on interviews with legal representatives of LGBTIQ+ people seeking asylum in Australia, we observe that if the applicant’s narrative and label of their lived experience is familiar to the decision-maker, they are more likely to be understood by the decision-maker. Those whose experiences fall outside Western, and specifically Australian, conceptualisations of sexuality and gender identity categories are less legible to the decision-maker, than those who present a dominant, definitive, and stable identity narrative that is ‘out and proud’. Importantly, this paper also found that legal representatives shepherd applicants towards a clear label to perform an identity that is understood, or knowable to decision-makers

Correlation of baseline biomarkers with clinical outcomes and response to fulvestrant with vandetanib or placebo in patients with bone predominant metastatic breast cancer: An OCOG ZAMBONEY sub-study

AbstractBackgroundBone metastases are common in women with breast cancer and often result in skeletal related events (SREs). As the angiogenic factor vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) regulates osteoclast activity and is associated with more extensive bone metastases and SRE risk in metastatic breast cancer, we hypothesized that blockade of VEGF signaling could be a therapeutic strategy for inhibiting bone metastases progression and possibly prolonging overall (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS). The Zamboney trial was a randomized placebo-controlled study designed to assess whether patients with bone predominant metastatic breast cancer benefited from addition of the VEGF receptor (VEGFR) targeting agent, vandetanib, to endocrine therapy with fulvestrant. As a companion study, evaluation of biomarkers and their potential association with response to vandetanib or SRE risk was performed.MethodsBaseline overnight fasted serum from enrolled patients was analyzed for levels of various putative biomarkers including; VEGF-A, soluble (s)VEGFR2, sVEGFR3, transforming growth factor (TGF)-β1 and activinA by ELISA. Spearman correlation coefficients and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to investigate potential relationships between biomarker values and baseline clinical parameters. Prognostic and predictive ability of each marker was investigated using Cox proportional hazards regression with adjustments for treatment and baseline strata of serum CTx (<400 versus ≥400ng/L).ResultsOf 129 enrolled patients, serum was available for analysis in 101; 51 in vandetanib and 50 in placebo arm. Mean age amongst consenting patients was 59.8 years. Clinical characteristics were not significantly different between patients with or without serum biomarker data and serum markers were similar for patients by treatment arm. Baseline sVEGFR2 was prognostic for OS (HR=0.77, 95% CI=0.61–0.96, p=0.020), and although a modest association was observed, it was not significant for PFS (HR=0.90, 95% CI=0.80–1.01, p=0.085) nor time to first SRE (HR=0.82, 95% CI=0.66–1.02, p=0.079). When interaction terms were evaluated, sVEGFR2 was not found to be predictive of response to vandetanib, although a modest association remained with respect to PFS (interaction p=0.085). No other marker showed any significant prognostic or predictive ability with any measured outcome.ConclusionsIn this clinical trial, sVEGFR2 appeared prognostic for OS, hence validation of sVEGFR2 should be conducted. Moreover, the role of sVEGFR2 in breast cancer bone metastasis progression should be elucidated

J. Freedman, Gendering the International Asylum and Refugee Debate

None</p

Drowning In It: State Crime and Refugee Deaths in the Borderlands

This paper examines the current state of border hardening against refugees in the European Union and Australia through the lens of state crime. Border hardening strategies are described for both of these areas and a theoretical basis of state crime victimology is used to examine the refugees who encounter this border hardening. The present study analyzes two data sets on border deaths, one for the European Union and one for Australia, to examine the demographics of the refugees who perish while attempting to transgress the border. Results indicated that there remains a significant amount of missing data, suggesting that official methods of record-keeping are necessary to determine the most basic demographics, such as gender and age, so analyses can be run to determine significance in this area. One clear finding was that migrants most frequently die from drowning (EU: 83.6%; AU: 93%) compared to any other cause. Also, there is indication that those from disadvantaged areas of origin (such as the Middle East and Africa) are more likely to die in the borderlands than others in the dataset. Practical implications of the findings are discussed along with suggestions for future research