Australia Bans 23-Year-Old Briton From Entering, Saying Her Cystic Fibrosis Makes Her 'Too Much of a Liability'

Regan Sparks, a 23-year-old British woman with cystic fibrosis, has been denied entry into Australia twice, first on a working holiday visa and again as a tourist, after the Department of Home Affairs ruled that her medical condition made her too much of a financial liability on the Australian healthcare system. Cystic fibrosis is an inherited chronic condition that affects the lungs, digestive system and other organs.

Sparks, who detailed her experience on Instagram, says the decision has left her feeling discriminated against. She offered to bring her own medication, take out private insurance, cover all her medical expenses and sign a waiver releasing the Australian government from any financial responsibility for her care, but was still turned away on both occasions. She says cystic fibrosis has never stopped her from doing anything 'normal,' and that being told she cannot travel because of it was deeply upsetting.

Three Years of Trying

Sparks' attempts to enter Australia began three years ago, when she applied for a working holiday visa and was immediately asked to undergo a medical examination, which she hoped would clear the way for her entry. It did not. After her initial application was rejected, she submitted a formal appeal to the Department of Home Affairs and obtained a letter of support from the Cystic Fibrosis Trust Foundation in Australia. That second attempt was also denied.

The rejection became harder to accept when Sparks learned that a friend who also has cystic fibrosis had been allowed to travel to Australia without issue. Sparks acknowledged that the condition presents differently in different people, meaning the Department of Home Affairs may have assessed their applications differently based on individual medical profiles. She concluded that her only realistic path into Australia would be a change in the country's migration health laws, and she has been clear that she considers the decision discriminatory.

How Australia Assesses Medical Visa Applications

A spokesperson for the Department of Home Affairs, speaking generally and not specifically about Sparks' case, explained that all applications are assessed individually based on legal requirements and the severity of each applicant's condition. Having a medical condition does not automatically disqualify an applicant from entry.

The key threshold is cost. A medical officer determines whether a traveller's condition is likely to result in charges of more than A$86,000 (approximately £44,000) to the Australian healthcare system. For permanent visa applicants, the assessment covers the applicant's remaining life expectancy, up to a maximum of 10 years.

'For an applicant applying for a permanent visa, a [medical officer] will provide a costing for the applicant's remaining life expectancy, up to a maximum of 10 years. If the applicant does not meet the migration health requirement, the department cannot grant a visa unless a health waiver is available for the visa subclass applied for, and it is exercised by the delegate,' the spokesperson said.

Sparks' case has drawn significant attention online, with many following her story with sympathy. For Sparks, the ban is not just a bureaucratic decision but a statement about how Australia values people living with chronic illness. She says the ruling is discriminatory, that the country's migration health laws need to change, and she has no plans to stop making that case.