Bringing-Them-Home-Report-Web

an environment which reinforces the social and cultural values characteristic of aboriginalsociety. We believe that white families are unable to provide such a supportive environment(Aboriginal task group report to the First Australian Conference on Adoption 1976, reliedupon by the Family Court in B and R 1995 page 605).In the context of [high] adult mortality and high incidences of imprisonment, other socialproblems and a generally hostile environment we have to ensure not only that our childrenare taken care of, but that they also grow up with a strong belief in themselves and theirpeople. We do this because they are the inheritors of this land, they are its guardians and wemust bring them up with the same values and attitudes that we have tried to uphold (Butler1989 page 29).Welfare departments in all jurisdictions continue to fail Aboriginal and TorresStrait Islander children. Although they recognise the Aboriginal Child PlacementPrinciple, they fail to consult adequately, if at all, with Indigenous families andcommunities and their organisations. Welfare departments frequently fail toacknowledge anything of value which Indigenous families could offer children andfail to address children’s well-being on Indigenous terms.Aboriginal families continue to be seen as the ‘problem’, and Aboriginal children continue tobe seen as potentially ‘savable’ if they can be separated from the ‘dysfunctional’ or‘culturally deprived’ environments of their families and communities. Non-Aboriginalscontinue to feel that Aboriginal adults are ‘hopeless’ and cannot be changed, but Aboriginalchildren ‘have a chance’ (Link-Up (NSW) submission 186 page 85).The needs of Indigenous families and communities are neglected whileIndigenous children continue to be disproportionately involved with ‘the welfare’.Evidence to the Inquiry repeatedly indicated a community perception that theproblems which result in removals need to be addressed in terms of communitydevelopment. However, welfare departments continue to pathologise andindividualise protection needs of Indigenous children. At the same time, recognitionof past failures, under-resourcing and, in some instances, racist attitudes frequentlyresult in a failure to intervene until the family crisis is of such proportions thatseparation is the most likely or even only possible course.Indigenous communities throughout Australia gave evidence to the Inquiry oftheir need for programs and assistance to ensure the well-being of their children. Nota single submission to the Inquiry from Indigenous organisations saw interventionfrom welfare departments as an effective way of dealing with Indigenous childprotection needs. Departments recognise that they need to provide culturallyappropriate services but they fail to develop them.Despite changes of names from Department of Community Welfare to the Department ofCommunity Development to the Department of Family and Children’s Services (FCS) [WA]many Aboriginal people feel that the Department has remained a welfare institutionreminiscent of Native Welfare. FCS still wields statutory control over families struggling tosurvive. Decisions which affect the lives of children are frequently made by staff withoutdiscussion with Aboriginal families. Many people facing crises with their families will oftennot seek assistance from the department because of their association with ‘Welfare’ who tookthe children away (Kimberley Land Council submission 345 page 28).