As someone who strongly activates for unity within humanity, I knew I wanted to research a topic that dealt with some form of injustice. Every year at Christmas my grandma donates a certain amount of money to an organization of our choosing. In 2016, my cousin chose to donate to a rescue mission for refugees in Syria. This caught my attention immediately because no one in my family had ever strayed away from feeding the hunger or saving stray animals. Inspired by my cousin, I selected the Australian refugee policy in particular to research because my father travels there often and simultaneously a basic human right was violated. My initial feelings of rage that stemmed from this discovery fueled a hypothesis that specifically attacked the Australian government. I understood thousands of refugees were encountering mistreatment, and I felt that statement alone could stand on its own. Unaware of the complexity of this country, I quickly learned there were way more layers underneath this assumption.
I found that not only were refugees being mistreated, but specifically their protection, religious freedom, and health care were depleted, which helped develop the groundwork of my thesis. My original question surrounded more of the religious aspect of the issue. The fact that your personal belief system could dictate whether you are denied or granted access to Australia seemed enough for me to write a whole book on. However, the further I dug into my research, the less the material answered my question. I decided to broaden my thesis to cover all three aspects of the mistreatment of the refugees. I expected to primarily learn about the different kinds of attacks and what mental trauma the refugees encountered. Surprisingly, the articles I stumbled upon were more about the government fighting to justify this new policy. I ran into difficulty not discussing the opposition too excessively and gaining a sufficient number of sources.
Towards the end of the developing process, my energy faded into a whirling pit of rephrasing and rewording. I became uncertain that my progress accurately reflected my best work. I took a few days to step back from my writing and continue manifesting thoughts inside of my head. Eventually returning to my work, I had many people revise what seemed to be something I could recite in my sleep. I turned in my paper
proudly, knowing now my ideas were exactly how I wanted them to be.
I found that not only were refugees being mistreated, but specifically their protection, religious freedom, and health care were depleted, which helped develop the groundwork of my thesis. My original question surrounded more of the religious aspect of the issue. The fact that your personal belief system could dictate whether you are denied or granted access to Australia seemed enough for me to write a whole book on. However, the further I dug into my research, the less the material answered my question. I decided to broaden my thesis to cover all three aspects of the mistreatment of the refugees. I expected to primarily learn about the different kinds of attacks and what mental trauma the refugees encountered. Surprisingly, the articles I stumbled upon were more about the government fighting to justify this new policy. I ran into difficulty not discussing the opposition too excessively and gaining a sufficient number of sources.
Towards the end of the developing process, my energy faded into a whirling pit of rephrasing and rewording. I became uncertain that my progress accurately reflected my best work. I took a few days to step back from my writing and continue manifesting thoughts inside of my head. Eventually returning to my work, I had many people revise what seemed to be something I could recite in my sleep. I turned in my paper
proudly, knowing now my ideas were exactly how I wanted them to be.
Header borrowed from: "Lowy Institute" Link: https://www.lowyinstitute.org/publications/australia-and-1951-refugee-convention |