Reprieve for Seymour family fighting deportation over sick son

There’s new hope for a Seymour family who face deportation because their sick three-year-old son is considered a “burden” to the healthcare system. They’re in for a nervous wait amid a ministerial review.

Tony and Christine Hyde with their son, Darragh, 3. Picture: Jay Town

A Seymour family facing deportation because of their son’s cystic fibrosis have been given fresh hope as federal Immigration Minister David Coleman has agreed to review the case.

Christine and Anthony Hyde and their Australia-born son, Darragh, can stay until the outcome of the ministerial intervention.

The family applied for permanent residency but were rejected because Darragh, 3, was considered a “burden” to the nation’s healthcare system.

The reprieve comes as their bridging visas are due to expire on Tuesday.

The couple first came to Australia on a working holiday in 2009 and then returned in 2011. They applied for permanent residency in 2015 when Ms Hyde was pregnant.

But they were shocked to discover that Darragh’s diagnosis, when he was just eight weeks old, threatened to block their bid to build a life together in Australia.

“Darragh was born here, we see him as an Aussie,” Ms Hyde, an assistant principal at Broadford Primary School, told the Herald Sun last week.

The Hydes are fighting deportation over their young son’s cystic fibrosis diagnosis. Picture: Jay Town

The family even has the support of Victorian Daniel Andrews who called for “some compassion and common sense’’ to prevail.

A Home Affairs spokeswoman said the department could not comment on individual cases.

“Most visas require applicants to meet the migration health requirement set out in Australian migration law. The health requirement is not condition-specific and the assessment is undertaken individually for each applicant based on their condition and level of severity,’’ the spokeswoman said.

MORE: BROTHERS NABBED OVER TOP COP’S BASHING

‘I’M APPALLED’: AFL CHIEF’S APOLOGY TO FANS

“The minister only intervenes in a relatively small number of cases which present unique and exceptional circumstances and where he considers that it is in the public interest to do so.’’

The minister would consider each case on its merits, she said.

“Individuals may remain in Australia while their case is being considered.’’

Darragh needs the drug Kalydeco which is subsidised by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme but would otherwise cost the family a crippling $300,000 every year.

The family fears a forced return to Ireland would mean at least a 12-month delay in accessing the drug in the Irish health system.

@IanRoyall

[e-mail]