dlowan wrote:Oh for Pete's sake Builder! You only have to look at government policy papers to realize there was for some time a partly eugenics based policy to remove especially "half-caste" children from Aboriginal parents.
Yes, and the movie "Rabbit Proof Fence" touched far too lightly on the topic, for mine. The possibility that the facts have been clouded by time and propaganda still leaves me with little doubt that "coloured" or half-caste children were literally enslaved and sexually abused and shunned socially, in their own communities, both then and now. I've lived it.
Surely not all of the stolen generation were in this category, but many of them were, and their mothers/carers gladly handed them over to the authorities, just as mothers/carers today literally hand over the care and well-being of their charges to the school systems. Kids literally have to go to school if they want to be fed. I've seen this on several communities, and researched it for others, Deb.
Less than ten percent of indigenous homes on communities have a refrigerator, and the reasons behind that are not poverty-driven; rather, the "cultural" attitude that what's yours is mine, leads to nobody wanting food in their house because it will be eaten by those who spend their money on addictions.
dlowan wrote:The government departments involved have acknowledged it, I see no reason why you cannot.
I acknowledge it, and personally have nothing against saying sorry. My point was, the people who stand to gain from this apology, are not those who are in the greatest need of help.
dlowan wrote:The road to hell and all that....I have no doubt people involved believed they were doing the best thing, and also that many kids were actually removed because they were living in abusive conditions.
Yes, agreed. I also think it should still be happening today.
dlowan wrote:However, to deny the terrible effects this policy has had on Aboriginal people is sheer wanton blindness.
Like I said, if it can be proven that the act caused no benefit to the child, at that time, or a case of physical and/or sexual abuse at the hands of the so-called carers can be established, then the courts will award compensation like they do for any such case. Paedophilia and ephebophilia cases by non-indigenes against the clergy are ongoing. This avenue for recompense is available for any person.
dlowan wrote:I agree with you that it has probably had the effect of making authorities too reluctant to act in cases of current child abuse in aboriginal communities, and that the problem is horrendous in many of those communities....however, the issue is intensely complex, and the alternative care systems are in such disarray, that taking aboriginal, or any, kids, given the care options facing them, is a fraught decision.
Agreed. The whole system needs a massive kick up the arse.
dlowan wrote:The things you refer to happen in the non-aboriginal community, too, you know...though I agree the prevalence is currently horribly out of control in some aboriginal communities.
I was referring to non-indigenous kids.
Indigenous communities were handed self-rule, and that failed dismally.
If I wanted to set up camp in the middle of nowhere, with thirty-odd hippy mates, and demanded a centrelink office, clinic and school be built, I would be laughed out of town. What's so special about indigenous camps? Most of them were established by non-indigenous people anyways.
dlowan wrote:I do not think that denying that is in any way helpful, and aboriginal abusers need to be held as accountable as any other abusive adults, but understanding of the dynamics in operation is also necessary, and denial of how those communities got to be that way is as dangerous as denial of the current facts on the ground, in my view.
I've researched the topic widely, Deb. I wish I had some answers, but throwing more money at the problem will kill these people quicker than anything else I know.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace