Bringing Them Home

Twenty years later, the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare reports that Indigenous children make up 35 percent of children living in out-of-home care. While there are undoubtedly circumstances where children need to be removed from their families, greater efforts are required to empower and support Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to break free from the cycle that brings them into contact with child protection authorities in the first place. This includes learning more about the intergenerational impact of past policies of removal on our children.

This report sets out a plan to help reduce the impact of trauma, with a focus on four key priorities:. Breadcrumb Home Significance About bringing them home.

Bringing them Home Report (1997)

About Bringing Them Home. A Landmark Report The calling of the National Inquiry, and the release of the Bringing them Home report, raised the awareness of the Australian public of the historical policies of forced removal, as well as the ongoing impacts. A Lasting Impact The present plight, in terms of health, employment, education, living conditions and self-esteem, of so many Aborigines must be acknowledged as largely flowing from what happened in the past.

The dispossession, the destruction of hunting fields and the devastation of lives were all related. The new diseases, the alcohol and the new pressures of living were all introduced. True acknowledgment cannot stop short of recognition of the extent to which present disadvantage flows from past injustice and oppression Bringing Them Home 20 Years On. This report sets out a plan to help reduce the impact of trauma, with a focus on four key priorities: I looked like her, you know? It was really nice.

She just kind of ran up to me and threw her arms around me and gave me a hug and that was really nice. And then suddenly there was all these brothers coming out of the woodwork. And uncles and aunts and cousins. Suddenly everyone was coming around to meet me.

• Future Leader Development of Army Noncommissioned Officers: Workshop Results (Conference Proceedings).
• Prima di Adamo (Before Adam) (Radici) (Italian Edition).
• Social Media.
• What Every Christian Ought to Know: Solid Grounding for a Growing Faith.
• Uncharted Journey?

When I was 20 years old I was reunited with my mother for the first time shortly before she died. I suppose I had a natural curiosity to meet and know her. My mother was the first Tasmanian Aboriginal person I had met. A few of my natural siblings were with her. The Inquiry found that an unknown number of Indigenous children were taken overseas by foster or adoptive families. For them, locating family and re-establishing links are particularly difficult, if not impossible. The importance of doing so is likely to be as great for them as for people living in Australia.

Responses from churches and governments The Inquiry investigated and made recommendations on three ways governments could assist people affected by forcible removal:. The Inquiry found that most people have access to their own files but there are many difficulties:. The Inquiry recommended the process of accessing personal and family records should be easier and more straightforward.

The guidelines for access should be developed by a state or territory taskforce with government, church and Indigenous agency representatives. The Inquiry found that many people need counselling when they read their files. The Inquiry recommended Indigenous community-based family tracing and reunion services be established in each region and funded to meet all the needs of clients for as long as they need it. There are a lot of untrue things about me on those files. I have cried about the lies on those files. Can I please see my dad? The Inquiry recommended that counselling and support should be made available through Indigenous family tracing and reunion services.

The Inquiry recommended the focus should change from the individual who seems to be suffering mental illnesses to the needs of the whole community. Funding should go to community based prevention services that take a holistic view of health and a cultural perspective on health and well-being of the whole family and community. Where specialists are needed they should work in partnership with Indigenous healers.

The Inquiry recommended that all those who work with Indigenous people - doctors, police, judges, magistrates, social workers — be properly trained. Their training must include information about the history of forcible removal and the effects of forcible removal on children, families and communities. This is a prerequisite for the provision of good services to Indigenous communities.

Family tracing and reunion services and Aboriginal and Islander Child Care Agencies are appropriate organisations to provide this training. The Inquiry recommended that these services employ Indigenous people. Indigenous people should be trained and culturally appropriate Indigenous trainers should be employed. Scholarships and traineeships should be set up by governments for Indigenous people to become healers, health workers, genealogists, archivists, researchers and counsellors.

The Inquiry found churches played a major role in forcible removals by providing accommodation and other services to the children in line with government policy. With hindsight, we recognise that our provision of services enabled these policies to be implemented. We sincerely and deeply regret any hurt, however unwittingly caused, to any child in our care. In addition to acknowledging and apologising for their roles, the Inquiry recommended that churches can help now by:. We just got taken away because we was black kids, I suppose — half-caste kids.

The Inquiry concluded that the forcible removal of Indigenous children was a gross violation of their human rights. It was racially discriminatory and continued after Australia, as a member of the United Nations from , committed itself to abolish racial discrimination. The Inquiry found that by the early s, the international prohibition of racial discrimination of the kind to which Indigenous families and children were subjected was well-recognised, even in Australia.

The Inquiry concluded that forcible removal was an act of genocide contrary to the Convention on Genocide ratified by Australia in Genocide is not only the mass killing of a people. The essence of genocide is acting with the intention to destroy the group, not the extent to which that intention has been achieved. The Inquiry concluded that even before international human rights law developed in the s the treatment of Indigenous people breached Australian legal standards.

Indigenous families were entitled to expect the protection of the British common law imported into Australia. Two relevant legal principles were denied on racial grounds to Indigenous families. The first was that children should not be removed from their parents unless a court makes that decision. The court order must be based on evidence proving removal is in the best interests of the child. The second principle was that parents are the legal guardians of their children unless a court orders otherwise in the interests of the child.

The legal guardian has the right to decide where the children will live and how they will be educated and raised. But under British and Australian law, non-Indigenous parents were the full guardians of their children unless a court transferred guardianship to the State. The Inquiry found that many forcibly removed children had harrowing experiences in mission dormitories, childrens homes, group homes and foster families.

Many were denied proper care and education, contrary to the legal responsibilities of the authorities at the time. The Inquiry concluded that, by causing harm and allowing the children to be harmed and abused, the Protection Board or Native Welfare breached its legal duty to look after them properly. And for them to say Mum neglected us! I was neglected when I was in this government joint down here. The Inquiry concluded forcible removal involved human rights breaches and the denial of common law protections to Indigenous families and children.

According to international legal principles, reparation has five parts:. The Government has to explain why it happened. What was the intention? I have to know why I was taken. Why was my Mum meant to suffer?

Bringing them home - Community Guide - update | Australian Human Rights Commission

Why was I made to suffer with no Aboriginality and no identity, no culture? Why did they think that the life they gave me was better than the one my Mum would give me? I just have to get on with my life but compensation would help. But it has to be recognised. And in the homes I never showed my tears I need to be counselled for me to get on with my life.

The Inquiry determined everyone affected by forcible removals should be entitled to reparation. Those affected include the children who were forcibly removed, their families, communities, children and grandchildren. Australian governments should ensure the adequate funding of appropriate Indigenous agencies to record, preserve and administer access to the testimonies of people affected by forcible removal, who wish to provide their histories in written, audio or audio-visual form.

Australian parliaments, police forces and churches should acknowledge their responsibility and apologise to everyone affected by forcible removal. There should be a national Sorry Day for the children and their families and ATSIC should coordinate other commemorations in local and regional areas. Everybody — including primary and secondary school children, judges, doctors, police and other decision-makers — should be told about the history of forcible removal and the continuing effects on families, communities and the next generation.

Family reunion workers should have enough funds to help people go home to their country and to tell their communities about the history of forcible removal and its effects. Language, culture and history centres should be established in each region to teach the separated children and their descendants their language and to teach the history to everyone. Indigenous organisations which help people find their families should be able to certify a person is of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent and is accepted as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander by the organisation.

A person who was a forcibly removed child should get a lump sum amount for compensation unless the removal was justifiable.

You are here

The 'Stolen Children' report". Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. Retrieved 8 January Archived from the original on 23 March Retrieved 15 July Archived from the original PDF on 30 December Retrieved 8 October International Service for Human Rights. Archived from the original PDF on 26 March Retrieved 7 November Parliament of Australia Parliamentary Library.

Archived from the original on 4 April Retrieved 2 November Parliament of Australia Hansard. Retrieved 4 November The Sydney Morning Herald.

Retrieved 11 December Archived from the original on 13 October Retrieved 26 April I know people who have become extremely distraught at the thought of this inquiry If people have been traumatised and are still suffering from the effects of that trauma, they are re-traumatised every time something reminds them of the trauma, even people who have made some degree of recovery.

And that is the case in any situation where there is a post-traumatic stress disorder. Things that remind people of the trauma will bring back memories of the trauma and severe distress Jane McKendrick, Victorian Aboriginal Mental Health Network, evidence The nature of the Inquiry process and of the information sought and provided meant that evidence and submissions could not be tested as thoroughly as would occur in a courtroom.

We carefully report what we have heard so that the community generally will know the different perspectives on what has occurred. We also sought out independent sources where possible and include them in this report.

• Our Favourites!
• Breadcrumb?
• The Rig Veda: Book 3.
• 50 Cent Flash Fiction - Anthology 2: Portland.

We have ensured that our findings, conclusions and recommendations are supported by the overwhelming weight of the evidence. Institute of Public Affairs Ltd. Archived from the original PDF on 12 October Archived from the original on 14 April Retrieved 4 May