The call made this week by Dr David Gillespie, Federal Assistant Minister for Children and Families for more white families to be allowed to adopt abused Aboriginal children beggars belief.
Most certainly, the recently released Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Child Protection report for 2016-17 gives us cause to remain very concerned about the disproportionate representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children in the child protection system. As reported elsewhere in this week’s edition of our eNews, the rate of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children being admitted into out-of-home care rose from 12.8 to 14.5 per 1,000 between 2012-13 and 2015-16, then fell to 13.6 per 1,000 in 2016-17. For non-Indigenous children, the rate remained stable over the 5-year period, at about 1.5 per 1,000.
Dr Gillespie’s call for the removal of more Aboriginal children from their families appears to have been focussed on his concerns about children being raped and the high rate of STDs being contracted by these children. But let’s look more closely at the AIHW report and what it has to tell us about the sexual abuse of children. Out of around 13,750 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children who were found to have been harmed during the reporting period, 8.3% were recorded as having been sexually abused. In respect of non-Indigenous children, the figure was higher at 13.4%.
The assumed link between the high rate of STDs amongst Aboriginal children and sexual abuse is now also being challenged with leading academics such as Professor Marcia Langton arguing that it is more likely that STDs are spreading as a result of teenagers engaging in consensual sex. That in itself is a problem, of course, but it is a problem that will be compounded if it is not properly understood and if solutions such as the removal of children from their families are grabbed at based on racial stereotypes rather than the truth. It’s a solution that’s akin to saying I’m going to fix your broken left arm by amputating your healthy right leg.
And what else can we learn from the AIHW report? Based on the five tiered Index of Relative Socio-Economic Disadvantage, the AIHW figures indicate that, of the 7,778 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children found to have been abused or neglected in 2016-17, 46.1% came from the most economically disadvantaged areas in the country and 86.3% came from the lowest three tiers of the index. The figures for non-Indigenous children were similar – 30.6% and 78.5%.
Bearing this in mind, in the statement released by Dr Gillespie, where was mention made of the correlation between child abuse and economic disadvantage or the devastating impacts of poverty that do not discriminate between Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander families and those who are non-Indigenous?
Rather than focussing on what can be done to address poverty that would actually be helpful in reducing the over-representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, Dr Gillespie’s gaze seems to be placed solely on Aboriginal people themselves rather than the social conditions many are contending with each and every day of their lives. In my mind, that’s akin to blaming someone for their ‘flat affect’, whilst choosing to ignore the fact that that they have been pummelled and flattened by a steamroller. And most assuredly, inquiry after inquiry has graphically demonstrated that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have indeed been severely pummelled and flattened by government policies of the past.
Now is the time to listen to and walk with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as they heal and recover from these policies. Now is not the time to be calling for the same old solutions – the removal of Aboriginal and Torres children from their families and their adoption by white carers – that have been so frequently and resoundingly discredited and condemned. That’s akin to calling back the steamroller to do some more pummelling and flattening. It won’t work and it’s simply unconscionable.
– Lindsay Wegener, Director
Thanks for putting some data and evidence into the conversation, Lindsay. Like many others, I was lost for words when this discussion began to play out in the media. Not only does it cover old and damaging ground, it simply does not acknowledge the complexities of adoption, the impacts of which can be lifelong.
Dr David Gillespie comments are revisiting policies of Assimilation- seems he has gone back in time-very disappointing
Thanks Lindsay for focusing the discussion on economic disadvantage which should lead us to look at ways of supporting families and children rather than blaming them. The subsequent willingness of people to make comment without the voice of Indigenous people being represented is also symptomatic of a paternalistic approach that we hoped we had left behind.