Social Justice Report 1998 : Chapter 1: The Aftermath for Indigenous Peoples

Social Justice Report 1998

Chapter 1: The Aftermath
for Indigenous Peoples

Introduction
A
chance to be heard
Gains
in emotional strength
Understanding
each other
Raising
awareness in the Non-Indigenous community
Some
improvement in delivery of services
Gaining
an historical perspective
Relief
from guilt
New
pressures
Coping
with the responses from government
The
state of people's well being
Ambivalence
towards well-meaning non-Indigenous approaches
The
needs that have still to be met
Link-Up
A
place to go
Personal
compensation
The
way forward
Acknowledgements

Introduction

It has been
worth it because the wider community is more aware of the issues and
our history, but the opening of the old scars has been difficult.
It's vital that the truth comes out, though.

Community
Member, North Queensland.

These words capture
some of the complexity of Indigenous responses to Bringing Them Home
and to events since the conclusion of the National Inquiry into the
Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ��鱨վ from their
Families.

On one hand, Indigenous
people welcomed the Inquiry and the recommendations of Bringing Them
Home. A great deal that is positive has come from the Australian
community's increased understanding of the full dimensions and human
impact of separation policies. On the other hand, the exposure of intimate,
personal experiences has awakened the pain for many people. Memories,
stories of the past and fresh information have emerged from Indigenous
communities, producing a range of reactions. While the heartfelt apologies
of many Australians are deeply appreciated, the supportive responses
of the non-Indigenous community are regarded with a degree of wariness
by some Indigenous people. Doubts have been expressed about how enduring
this support will prove to be.

This chapter is
informed by an Indigenous perspective and is based on community consultation
by staff of the Commission's Social Justice Unit. We endeavour to present
the diversity of Indigenous responses to the Inquiry and events following
the release of Bringing Them Home. However, the views expressed
are a mere sampling and do not pretend to be exhaustive of Indigenous
perspectives. Resources limited the number of people we were able to
reach and talk with face to face. The substance of the chapter is guided
by discussions with 70 Indigenous people variously located in Adelaide,
Darwin, Launceston, Hobart, Perth, Brisbane, Cairns and Sydney. We are
particularly grateful to those from rural areas who travelled to Perth,
Adelaide and Launceston to offer their views. The people we spoke to
were drawn from many walks of life: youth workers, community health
workers, policy officers, social workers, elected Indigenous leaders,
directors and chief executive officers of Indigenous organisations,
legal officers, educators and community members. Some were people who
had taken part in the Inquiry. Others were not directly involved.

Individual attitudes
and views are, by their nature, diverse. We found regional differences
were quite marked and, to an extent, reflected the perceived impact
of the Report on the surrounding non-Indigenous community. However,
the greatest variation arises out of the profoundly emotional and complex
nature of the issues involved. The stories themselves, as well as the
direct experiences of separation, are intensely felt. Family reunions
and issues of identity; the immediate catharsis of telling 'your' story
and the longer term emotional aftermath; apologies and criticism of
the Inquiry and its recommendations; the responses of governments and
Sorry Day ceremonies: all these evoked complex and, at times, ambivalent
responses.

People repeatedly
expressed just how widespread and enduring is the suffering caused by
the forced removal of children and the separation of families. The damage
began a long time ago and continues to resonate in the physical, spiritual,
emotional and mental health of Indigenous communities. We found relief,
expectation, and a sense of completion, anger, frustration, despair,
determination, resilience and courage. This chapter provides an inadequate,
but necessary, medium for the direct expression of Indigenous responses.

I am so glad
I lived long enough to see this day, in my whole life I have never
felt so loved as I do today.

Indigenous
Elder, New South Wales, on Sorry Day.

To know who you
are, where you are from and to whom you belong is a basic human entitlement.
It is essential to the realisation of the 'dignity and worth of the
human person' which underpins the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Many Indigenous people report that with participation in the Inquiry,
and the release of Bringing Them Home, their deprivation of this
fundamental entitlement was at least acknowledged, if not restored.

The violation of
rights can be compensated. Reparation for the abuse of human rights
is essential to justice. Yet, at a more fundamental level, the separation
of children from their families is separation from a unique form of
love that can never be restored. Formal apology for what is irretrievably
lost is part of making amends and assuaging the pain. However, there
is something beyond apology. It was found in the quality of concern
and genuine sorrow expressed by so many Australians - a kind of grace
which moved many of us to feel our potential to make peace with the
past and find the basis for a new relationship between the Indigenous
and non-Indigenous people of this country.

It was experienced,
perhaps momentarily, in some Sorry Day events: in parks and local halls;
public rallies and small gatherings. It was stimulated by the information
provided in Bringing Them Home, but it was given substance by
the human warmth of those present. The experience of a kind of restorative
love, which some Indigenous people felt, is the highest achievement
flowing from the Inquiry.

A chance to be heard

Indigenous
people are receiving an ability to recover because they feel validated
now that their stories have been heard, believed and recorded.

Senior Project
Officer, South Australia

The Inquiry gave
people a chance to speak of their experiences and have them recorded
in a formal way. Many people spoke of how good it felt to finally tell
someone and be believed; to tell someone and be listened to with attention
and concern; to tell someone who felt empathy and did not blame them.
The private burdens of individual, isolated stories were lifted as they
were cast into a collective framework revealing the patterns of government
policies.

One of the women who gave her submission to the Inquiry spoke of how
frustrated she had felt for years, trying not only to tell people of
her experiences, but also to have them recognise that this practice
was official policy. Others spoke of a simple sense of relief when at
last their stories could be told and recorded.

Within many Indigenous
communities the process of telling the stories is considered one of
the most important events of recent Australian history.

Gains in emotional strength

It was good
for most people to be able to get this stuff off their chestpsychologically,
it's been good for most to get it out and be heard by officials.

Community
Health Executive, Western Australia

Sharing stories
with each other has given Indigenous people strength. This capacity
to gain strength from each other has held good for Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander communities in periods of difficulty throughout history.

An Indigenous youth
worker spoke of his stronger motivation to stand up to racism, particularly
among colleagues, because he feels there is an increased awareness and
understanding developing, as demonstrated by events such as Sorry Day.
He said, 'challenging colleagues on their attitudes towards Indigenous
clients is paying off.'

Some Indigenous
people struggling to deal with their feelings said they left rallies
and public meetings with a sense of greater support both at an individual
and community level.

Removed people
have been searching for their history and visiting places of significance
to their family for many years, but since the release of Bringing
Them Home the number encouraged to do so has increased.

Understanding each other

It has opened
the doors for family members to come home - removed individuals understand
more now and don't blame as much - forgiveness comes through reunion.

Senior Project
Officer, South Australia.

The most immediate,
direct benefit of the Inquiry for many people who participated was to
bring families together again. There were times during hearings when
family members who had been separated from each other were all gathered
in the same room for the first time since childhood. The intense emotions,
sense of relief and comfort were sometimes overpowering. The process
of reunion and the feeling of belonging is a critical part of the process
of gaining and improving self-esteem through a stronger sense of identity.

The issue of identity
is rendered complex by the very different experiences of those who were
taken and those who remained with their families and communities. A
young Aboriginal woman who has invested much energy in looking into
her family background, said that the Report had opened doors for her
to come into and be accepted within her community. She said she had
always felt there were 'classes' of Aboriginality, but the Report helped
her understand why people have such different experiences and such cultural
gaps in their lives. One of her sisters had always associated Aboriginality
with negative stereotypes to the extent that she found it difficult
to identify herself as Aboriginal. Since reading the Report, she has
felt the positive value and the healing that identification can bring.

Other people also
related how Bringing Them Home has assisted in educating people
about apparent and real divisions within Aboriginal communities. It
has helped people understand the diverse range of experiences of other
Indigenous people and to place them in context.

The Aboriginal
community around here has always known where most of their families
were but there was always this barrier, an inability to interact with
each other. The re-association process was always difficult but is
slowly becoming easier thanks to Bringing Them Home.

Manager, Land
Council, Tasmania

The information
gathered in our discussions demonstrated that the Inquiry and its Report
helped many people recognise the relationship between separation and
forced removal and problems they might have with issues such as identity,
family violence, substance abuse, parenting difficulties, depression
and offending behaviours.

An Aboriginal psychologist
who had the opportunity to run some workshops following the Inquiry
commented that finding out about people's particular backgrounds helped
to develop an understanding as to why some family members had taken
certain paths, especially in relation to damaging behavioural patterns
such as physical, emotional, drug and alcohol abuse. While the precise
relationship between childhood experiences and subsequent behaviour
is an individual matter, the appreciation of the widespread impact and
cumulative effects on families and communities became clearer through
the Report's identification of the systematic application of separation
policies. The burden of individual history was lifted into a new perspective.

The benefit of
new perspectives was by no means confined to Indigenous people.

Raising awareness in the
non-Indigenous community

Non-Indigenous
people may have reaped the biggest benefits from all of this. Murris
who have opened up and told of their experiences have opened the eyes
of the non-Indigenous community who may not have realised the extent
of removal that took place and the effects that have resulted from
this. There is a responsibility that goes along with this knowledge
that all Australian families and communities should respond to.

Community
Organisation Manager, North Queensland

Often when Indigenous
issues receive particular attention, there are some in the wider community
who become resentful and hostile. The notion that Abstudy is an unwarranted,
special program is one example of this attitude. Intemperate reactions
to the Wik decision is another. However, on the issue of the removal
of children, there was a sense of much greater understanding and greater
vocal and visible support from non-Indigenous Australians.

One clear reason
as to why Bringing Them Home was received so well by the broader
Australian community was suggested by a woman who made a submission
to the Inquiry. She felt that many mothers in the wider community were
supportive because of their ability to imagine what it might feel like
to have their own children stolen from them.

Other opinions
reinforced this view. It was perceived that the effects of breaking
the relationship between mother and child, as distinct from the relationship
between people and the land, is an issue with which non-Indigenous people
can directly identify and feel compassion.

Many Indigenous
people we spoke to said that they know many non-Indigenous people with
good intentions who are trying to respond appropriately to the Report
and this is deeply appreciated. They felt that relationships have been
strengthened during the activities and acknowledgements that have taken
place since Bringing Them Home. The apologies made by so many
governments, churches and ordinary Australians; the Sorry books, rallies
and other events of Sorry Day; the discussion of wider issues connected
to separation, have all been important steps in the healing process
and the road to improved relationships.

Support by non-Indigenous
people has flowed on into other areas. Despite the existence of substantial
opposition, there is increased support for the protection of native
title and an increased appreciation of the significance of reconciliation.
These issues have merged together in movements such as Australians for
Native Title and Reconciliation.

An Aboriginal youth
worker said that his opinion of non-Indigenous people has changed since
the publicity surrounding Bringing Them Home. He talked about
how some of the publicity had stirred up anger, but that the positive
and compassionate responses that had come from many people demonstrated
that the human quality of the Report had helped to break down negative
attitudes towards Indigenous Australians and to dispel a lot of ignorance.
This has been encouraging, particularly when he sees his non-Indigenous
colleagues trying to look at things differently and showing more understanding
when they work with young Aboriginal people.

There is evidence
of specific changes in attitudes. Part of the evidence to the Inquiry,
given by a member of the Aboriginal Women's Legal Resource Centre, stated
that: 'there have been a lot of Aboriginal women over the last 10 to
15 years who have been labelled with mental illness, with mental health
disorders. I believe, through information from the Department of Health,
that those women did not have psychotic episodes or anything like that:
that it was part of them not knowing who they were, and struggling within
themselves, [that] has caused women to have breakdowns ... they have
actually been labelled as schizophrenic, psychotic, when that really
isn't the truth of what's happening for them.' Enhanced knowledge of
the widespread experience of removal and its psychological impact, particularly
on the construction of identity, has not only deepened the understanding
of individual cases but has assisted in the design and delivery of more
effective community programs.

In Darwin we heard
how family history research has increased since the release of the Report
and that non-Indigenous staff involved are now noticeably more interested
in the work and helpful with Indigenous clients. This is doubly beneficial
through the inter-relationship of both factors: because the environment
is more supportive and comfortable, Aboriginal people are more willing
to use the service.

This example, drawn
from our consultations in Darwin, is representative of a wider phenomenon.
Many people commented that increased awareness of issues by non-Indigenous
Australians has produced new understanding and fresh attitudes that,
in turn, have produced many positive, cumulative effects. These effects
are primarily found in better Indigenous/non-Indigenous relations, but
they are wide reaching and can offer new reflections on issues such
as self-image and identity.

A young Aboriginal
person described how he still has relatives who are reluctant to identify
with their Aboriginality, but he has noticed that their attitudes are
beginning to change some in the Australian Community have responded
empathetically. They have begun to feel as though they do have a place
and a valid story to tell.

Some people felt
embraced by the wider community they live in and for the first time
able to actively participate in the life of their town. For others,
it has meant that strangers come up to them in the street, in restaurants
or in shops to explain all their reasons for not apologising: not a
welcome intrusion. It must also be said that, while many Indigenous
people are conscious of greater support, this shift is viewed against
a wider backdrop.

A lot of non-Indigenous
people have shown support for us, they have demonstrated that through
their tears and grief and frustration but they are also at a loss
as to what to do. They're a minority though - racism is still rampant.

Child Placement
Manager, South Australia

An Aboriginal woman
who works with Indigenous people to build their emotional well-being
said that she has enjoyed watching Aboriginal people increase their
trust of non-Indigenous people since Bringing Them Home. The
change of heart demonstrated by non-Indigenous people has encouraged
some Indigenous people to feel as though they have a reason to respond
positively. However, this is a tentative position.

Some improvement in delivery
of services

Big wounds
have been opened and now it's become a national wound. There is so
much emotional pain - what is being done to help the wound to heal,
what support is there?

Counsellor,
Western Australia

This question reflects
a major concern that has been frequently expressed. It is perceived
by some that counselling services currently available are inadequate,
both in supply and structure, to meet the needs of those affected by
separation.

In Western Australia,
it was felt that awareness of Indigenous health issues was assisted
by Bringing Them Home. We heard that there have been shifts in
attitudes, and although the change is relatively slight, some tangible
benefits in service delivery have been observed in some areas.

It is said by some
that the Report has given Indigenous people more confidence to share
their experiences, which has been beneficial to service providers. Those
in human services have been able to use this information to improve
their practices and deliver more relevant services. The publicity surrounding
the Report, public gatherings, discussion and public comment relating
to the effects of separation has resulted in human service workers gaining
a better insight into the issues so they can work with Indigenous communities
in more productive ways.

Gaining an historical perspective

My Nan was
removed, and I didn't know that before, particularly in terms of what
that meant

Student, New
South Wales

Bringing Them
Home has played an important role in educating those Indigenous
people who were not fully aware of what happened, how widespread separation
and forced removal was. In some families, experiences had been kept
secret because of the pain of remembering. In some communities, people
had felt these experiences were limited to their particular region.
The Report provided a depth and perspective that was not previously
available to many Indigenous people. It is very important, particularly
for young people, to gain an understanding of the experiences of their
elders, together with the spiritual and social placement of their families.

Before the release
of Bringing Them Home, many young people did not fully understand
the legacy affecting their lives. Older Indigenous people expressed
the view that a lot of younger community members feel personally responsible
for all their problems and this is reinforced by some non-Indigenous
people. They said that the Report has assisted young Indigenous people
to improve their knowledge and understanding of their community history:
to help them gain better insight and a wider view.

Relief from guilt

For some Indigenous
people, they are just realising for the first time that what happened
to them was not their fault, that it was due to Government policy.
They have stopped blaming themselves so much but then they feel sadness
because their whole lives have been destroyed. They wished they'd
discovered this much earlier.

Psychologist,
Western Australia

50 year old
men are still coming to terms with traumatic experience - only just
realising now why they have had the various problems they've had all
their lives with drugs, alcohol and parenting difficulties. They have
carried guilt for the years of hardship their families endured because
of this.

Psychologist,
Western Australia

During our meetings
it was frequently reported that the wider recognition of the effects
of past treatment is facilitating recovery. Until there was some recognition
of the broader causes and pattern of events, people somehow felt they
were exclusively and individually to blame. Understanding the effects
of removal does not diminish personal responsibility for present actions,
but it places them in context. The sense of personal guilt for something
that one had no power over is similar to the sense of responsibility
and guilt sometimes experienced by children whose parents divorce. The
acknowledgement of the legacy that removal and separation leaves has
been a benefit to people at a personal level in trying to make sense
of their lives.

At another level,
there have always been those who refuse to recognise the relationship
between current disadvantage and past government policies in relation
to Indigenous people, but the information and discussion raised by the
Inquiry makes this far more difficult to dispute. The compound impact
of the policies of separation and assimilation wreaked enormous damage
on the social cohesion of Indigenous communities throughout Australia.

In particular,
artificial 'communities' on missions and government settlements were
created, bringing people from many different places to the traditional
lands of other people. The cultural relationships and family structures
that gave identity, cohesion and meaning to social life were severely
damaged or destroyed. Connections to the people and places of origin
were lost, and these losses were exacerbated by education designed to
strip children of their language and culture and to denigrate the very
identity which was the cause of their removal.

Identity is a fundamental
issue and the process of establishing it has not been easy for many.
One woman recounted that, after the Inquiry, she had been told to go
back to where she came from, even though she does not know where that
is. All she is able to connect with as a result of her experience of
institutionalisation is a place and a community that does not acknowledge
her as a member. She now feels she does not belong anywhere. In our
meetings, we discovered this experience is not uncommon.

Another woman described
the pain and confusion she feels from belonging to a family where only
some of the siblings identify as Aboriginal and others do not. Reconciling
identity under these circumstances has interfered with once close relationships.
It has created rifts in this particular family which is tremendously
painful.

Subsequent to the
Inquiry, people spoke of their gratitude towards Indigenous communities,
which had embraced them and their different backgrounds. Previously,
some had often experienced exclusion from their local Indigenous communities,
they had feelings of not fitting in anywhere, in either the Indigenous
community or the non-Indigenous community. Intense confusion and feelings
of guilt about identity have, to some extent, been relieved.

New pressures

How do you
de-brief after 30 to 40 years of pain?

Community
Health Executive, Western Australia

It took 26
years for me to find out my identity and where I'm from. The pain
is still there, still strong and alive. Sorry Day has raised this
pain for people all over again. Just when we were beginning to get
on top of it. There remains scarring that can't be dealt with within
time frames that funding bodies and Government set, it's just not
realistic.

Trainer, South
Australia

In constant tension
with the perception of constructive outcomes, were responses by Indigenous
people which emphasised the anger, disappointment, frustration and pain
experienced as the aftermath of Bringing Them Home. In some ways
people felt that the impact of the Inquiry and its Report is an extra
weight on the shoulders of those who have carried the damaging legacy
of forced removal and separation from their families and communities.

The lack of counselling
services to help those who were emotionally distressed during the making
of submissions was a major complaint about the Inquiry process. It was
felt the Inquiry was under-resourced and consequently some participants
said they felt 'ripped off' yet again. The absence of a trained mediator
being consistently available during the Inquiry was interpreted as a
reflection on the value of the experiences under consideration. It was
felt that the effect of telling stories on the well-being of participants
was underestimated.

There hasn't
been enough follow-up, support or de-briefing - the process of the
Inquiry stuffed people up, people were exposing themselves in ways
they hadn't before and then the Inquiry moved on.

Senior Project
Officer, South Australia

There is a strong
feeling that the Inquiry aggravated a lot of old scars and that some
people were now hurting more. This result is balanced against the achievement
of recording the stories of removal and the benefit of communicating
the full impact of the laws, policies and practices of assimilation
to the Australian community. However, this sense of achievement is undercut
by a growing perception that the wider community now feels the issue
is over and done with - while for Indigenous people the repercussions
of separation remain.

There was much
frustration expressed at the lack of progress in many areas, particularly
in relation to services and the lack of money for them. There was deep
disappointment with the attitude of the Australian Government and the
view by some that most government initiatives in response to the recommendations
of the Report were 'mere tokenism'.

There were ambivalent
feelings about the value of some community activities such as Sorry
Day, the Sorry books and the entire notion of reconciliation. Though
some people welcomed the positive aspects of these things, others lamented
that Sorry Day provoked expressions of prejudice and gave racism a new
focus. The contempt that some non-Indigenous people expressed towards
the notion of apologising caused a great deal of distress.

Coping with the responses
from government

When Howard
didn't apologise, this was heart breaking for many, a harsh dismissal.

Indigenous
Liaison Officer, North Queensland

We found the reaction
of Indigenous people to some government responses following the release
of Bringing Them Home was, predominantly, one of intense disappointment
mingled with great sadness and anger. People frequently expressed the
view that the Australian Government had simply dismissed, and attempted
to discredit, the Report. This gave an impression that the truth was
being avoided and that the experiences of many Indigenous people in
this country were discounted and belittled. Many saw the lack of what
they considered to be an appropriate federal government response as
indicating a determination not to do anything that may seem to show
any understanding or compassion for Indigenous Australians.

We encountered
a strong belief that, at the very least, symbolically, an apology from
the Prime Minister on behalf of the nation would have demonstrated leadership
committed to bringing Indigenous and non-Indigenous people of Australia
closer together. Many thought that the Government was content for Indigenous
issues to be misunderstood by the public even though this was highly
detrimental to community well-being and the reconciliation process.

There were, as
always, different readings of events. Some people felt that the Prime
Minister's personal apology was a step in the right direction. The predominant
response, however, was an amalgam of disappointment, anger and hurt.
Many stated that the Government is comfortable to fully acknowledge
the weight of other terrible events in our history, yet appeared to
dismiss the removal of Indigenous children as merely an unfortunate
occurrence of the past. Justification of the intentions behind the policies
of separation seemed to outweigh any acceptance of responsibility on
behalf of the Australian State for the actual effects of these policies
and the devastation caused to the lives of so many Indigenous children
and their families.

The word sorry
still needs to come from the top. What's mostly required is attitudinal
change.

Educational
Executive Officer, Adelaide

A New South Wales
social worker commented that for many Indigenous people, the Prime Minister's
response had caused great distress, and was very disheartening. She
said that people would call her and say things like 'what's the point
of going on?'

It was commonly
reported that feelings about the federal government's refusal to give
a national apology were focussed quite personally and directly on the
Prime Minister, despite broad media coverage of similar views by others
within and outside government. Yet others conveyed that they were less
concerned about the Prime Minister's reactions than those in the community
in which they lived. It was expressed that local responses are equally
as important as national ones, and in fact, more relevant to their lives.
Some people said that they would not allow the lack of an apology from
the Prime Minister to enable non-Indigenous people to negate their personal
responsibility to take action.

Public debate about
the lack of a national apology by the federal government made it extremely
difficult for Indigenous people working in government positions. They
reported that elders in their communities expected them to make the
Government 'see sense'. For many of these people, trying to be balanced
about what action to take as well as endeavouring to educate their colleagues,
has taken its toll.

The recent
and current political climate has interfered with the impact that
the Report could have had The political backlash has been detrimental.

Educational
Executive Officer, South Australia.

There is a pronounced
sense of 'too much buck-passing' about the Inquiry's recommendations
between the State and Commonwealth levels of government. Both appear
to be waiting for the other to take decisive action and set a standard.
One man said he is feeling like a political football: as though the
life chances of his family are dependent on the whims of politicians.

Paradoxically,
Indigenous people advocating change within bureaucracies have found
themselves criticised for being too 'political', and this has been a
more prevalent response since the release of Bringing Them Home.
Nevertheless, most Indigenous people interviewed thought that politics
and responses to the issues raised by the Inquiry and recommendations
are closely intertwined.

You can't
separate politics and healing.

Psychologist,
Western Australia

�Դǳٳ󾱲Բ�
much has changed yet.

Community
Member, North Queensland

Many felt the slow
progress towards any tangible results for communities was directly due
to the political climate. Workloads of agencies that deal specifically
with Indigenous clients have definitely increased in areas dealing with
forced removal and identity matters.

Worries about how
counselling services will be set up once funding is distributed are
widespread.

In general, scepticism
towards the federal government's attitude, and doubts about the implementation
of the recommendations of the Inquiry, sum up the mood of the Indigenous
people who were interviewed. The federal government's response to Bringing
Them Home committing $63 million over 4 years seemingly had little
effect on this mood.

The total
government approach to all Indigenous issues makes life difficult.
$63 million over 4 years is only replacing what this government has
already removed from other Indigenous programs. The criteria for funding
mean that people who need it won't get it.

Community
worker, South Australia.

The state of people's well
being

The public
hearings were difficult - personal business became public property.

Community
Activist, Northern Territory

As soon as
people had participated in the hearings, they were left feeling depleted
- they gave of themselves, went back in time and now it's supposed
to be over.

Community
Health Education Worker, Northern Territory

Despite the positive
results we have noted, there were those who felt that in the twelve
months or more since the release of the Report, the well-being of the
Indigenous community has been depleted. While there was great excitement
and joy experienced initially in the reunion of families, the longer
term complexities of reunions were often traumatic. We heard of siblings
who felt little or no connection with each other, particularly when
they have spent their lives identifying their backgrounds differently.
This is especially true for some Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
people who are fair-skinned and who may feel isolated from their home
community. Given that the light colour of a child's skin was a criteria
for removal, this is not an uncommon experience. Some of those we spoke
with explained that they coped well for a time, then unexpectedly broke
down months later.

People spoke of
their experiences at the Inquiry as including awkward moments - reunited
families not knowing exactly what to do, whether to shake hands or embrace,
trying to fathom the intimacy of their relationship with people who
were effectively strangers. Others spoke of Sorry Day as being difficult,
and compared it to the unveiling of child sexual abuse or domestic violence.
There was an intense sense of public exposure and vulnerability.

Grief and
loss are inadequate words for what people experience.

Psychologist,
Western Australia

The destructive
long term effects on Indigenous people removed were operative long before
the Inquiry brought them to attention: identity problems in particular
are recognised to have repercussions in other areas such as mental health.

It's hard
to pass on an identity to your children if you don't have your own
identity sorted out.

Aboriginal
Educational Project Officer, Western Australia

Although there
was already acknowledgement that many Indigenous Australians suffer
from anxiety and adjustment disorders, substance abuse, cognitive impairment
in older people and conduct disorders in children, the fresh attention
given to these matters since the release of the Report has affected
Indigenous people deeply. Rather than alleviating these problems, the
release of Bringing Them Home has, in some cases, had the effect
of exacerbating them.

Depression,
premature death, mental anguish - all common results of removal policy.

Community
Health Executive, Western Australia

The process of
emotional and psychological healing is not an easy one and it is compounded
by the financial hardship people can suffer when these difficulties
are brought to the surface. The longer term effects of the Inquiry and
subsequent events has in some cases resulted in people leaving employment
for extended periods.

One manager described
the effects she had seen on Indigenous staff around her. Since the Inquiry,
there have been many workshops, seminars and community meetings where
people have had the opportunity or been encouraged to tell their personal
story. Not everyone has been able to cope after these public forums.
There are examples of people taking leave without pay, some have resigned
because they are suffering depression, and others have resorted to substance
abuse in an endeavour just to keep going.

A significant impact
on Indigenous communities has resulted from the responses of the wider
community to Bringing Them Home. In parallel to the feeling of
support, there has been a deep sense of surrounding indifference, even
hostility. Greatest disappointment was expressed at the dismissive response
that emerged from certain sections of the community which seemed to
expect Indigenous people to put everything behind them as if it had
never happened, in blunt terms, to stop exaggerating and complaining.

People who
gave evidence to the Inquiry were dismissed, judged, discredited.
It is so important that those people have their experiences validated.

Social Worker,
New South Wales.

Ambivalence towards well-meaning
non-Indigenous approaches

A more complex
response, heard repeatedly everywhere we visited, concerned reactions
by non-Indigenous people which were perceived by Indigenous people as
patronising. In their desire to be involved, some people it was said
'have gone overboard', resulting in embarrassing moments. Not everyone
feels comfortable with intimate emotional expressions from strangers.
In general this is regarded merely as a teething problem, but it demands
patience, sensitivity and some restraint from all concerned.

Reactions to Sorry
Day and the reconciliation process were profoundly ambivalent. While
some people found them a source of encouragement, others strongly disagreed
and considered that no reconciliation is possible until a national apology
is made. The backlash experienced due to Sorry Day received wide media
coverage. The case of a mother keeping her child home from a school
where some activities were held was frequently mentioned. There was
also a strong feeling that non-Indigenous people thought that once Sorry
Day was over, then that was that. Many Indigenous people see the need
for both Sorry Day and the reconciliation process, but recognise them
as being fraught with the potential for superficial gestures. Until
there is a genuine appreciation of the responsibility which goes with
saying sorry and a substantial basis for reconciliation founded on the
effective protection of Indigenous rights, both will continue to be
viewed with a significant degree of scepticism.

The needs that have still
to be met

It's wrong
to get people to talk about their pain without a process in place
to help with the healing.

Counsellor,
Western Australia

People had many
suggestions when asked about services to deal with the situation as
it is now. It was emphasised that funding agencies and service providers
should recognise the value of community-based activities. Community
initiated support groups are valuable in many ways. Local community-based
initiatives save service providers time and resources while meeting
needs suited to the particular circumstances of different Indigenous
groups. Suggestions were made regarding ways in which practical support
could be provided, for example, taking elders out on tours to significant
places where they can share yarns, have a laugh and thus undertake their
own healing and consolidate cultural traditions eroded by separation
policies.

The training of
Indigenous staff to manage existing programs was considered to be too
limited, especially where this training merely seeks to prepare Indigenous
people to work within conventional structures and methods. It was considered
that services would be greatly improved if those currently available
were better co-ordinated and more complementary. The need for more effective
communication between service providers, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous,
was also widely expressed.

The lack of appropriate
services to address mental health issues was identified as an urgent
matter. It is critically important to recognise the relationship between
forced removal and inter-generational problems. A mental health worker
working with young Indigenous people believes most of the issues his
client group are dealing with - especially those related to depression
and suicide - stem from problems their parents had. Many of their parents
were affected by the policies of forced removal. He said that addressing
the needs of only part of the family unit is problematic as the impacts
cross generational boundaries. The requirement of confidentiality was
also emphasised.

It does not
matter how much you do for the individual, if they are going back
to a home that hasn't secured well-being for itself, all the work
of months can be undone overnight.

Youth Mental
Health Worker, South Australia

The design of support
services is seen to be a distinct concern. Several people interviewed
suggested that leadership should be sought among those who had a direct
experience and understanding of the issues raised by removal and separation.

A Community Health
Worker observed that healing comes in many forms and it is vital that
all options are considered. He gave the example of people who have been
searching for their history, visiting places of significance to their
family. For many, healing has come through re-establishing these connections.
He believes the facilitation of such opportunities would be a useful
exercise for anyone in human services programs to address. Such activities
are simple, direct and bridge the gap resulting from interference with
cultural and family continuity.

Link-Up

There were
more calls in 6 months to Link-Up NSW after the launch of the Report
relating to crisis and suicide than there had been in total over the
previous 18 year period. It brought the issue to the fore.

Former Public
Relations Consultant, Link-Up, New South Wales

Without exception,
funding to Link-Up programs was an area of intense concern. There is
simply not enough staff in Link-Up structures to deal with the increased
demand since the release of Bringing Them Home. The nature of
the work takes its toll on the Indigenous workers in these programs.
In some regions, Link-Up was already overworked before the release of
the Report. While further funds have been committed to support the organisation,
it will not meet the increased demand for assistance.

A place to go

Land is the
most important thing - we need to have somewhere to bring people home.

Community
Member, South Australia

There are very
strong feelings about the recognition of relationships to land for those
who were removed from their communities. It was felt that the recent
amendments to the Native Title Act 1993 made insufficient provision
for the specific needs and rights of the stolen generations.

Native title is
a complex field integrating the interests of Indigenous and non-Indigenous
people, but it is often forgotten that it is also complex at the personal
and community level. The community workers we met with spoke of the
number of people they come across who feel that they can never return
to their traditional lands because they cannot be sure which community
is theirs or they fear exclusion and are afraid of the difficulties
in re-establishing connections to their people and traditional country.

In some cases,
those wanting to return home are seen as a threat by traditional owners
- there is suspicion as to their influence, coming as they do from a
very different background, which is precisely what the policies of assimilation
sought to promote. It is suggested that a dialogue needs to begin between
the various Aboriginal Land Councils, Representative Bodies under the
Native Title Act and representatives of the stolen generations so that
understanding can develop and progress made. This was a view shared
regularly in the Northern Territory and in Queensland. Though there
are examples of Indigenous people who have been welcomed back with open
arms to their traditional land, not all people are confident they will
get the same reception.

The importance
placed on land by those removed from their families and communities
is profound. It is their 'homeland' in every sense of the word. Yet
the Native Title Act 1993 allows only the most minimal accommodation
of the effects of removal and the dislocation of entire communities.
The registration of a native title claim requires the claimant group
to demonstrate a current 'traditional physical connection' with the
land claimed. This is an essential condition, save where it can be established
before a Federal Court judge that:

S.190D(4)(b) at
some time in his or her lifetime, at least one parent of one member
of the native title group had a traditional physical connection with
any part of the land or waters and would have been expected to have
maintained that connection but for things done by:

(i) the Crown
in any capacity; or

(ii) a statutory authority of the Crown in any capacity;

It is conceivable
that the interruption of physical connection to land through the removal
of children could be tempered by this provision. Prima facie proof of
native title rights would also be required. The outcome would remain
a matter for judicial discretion.

Personal compensation

Although personal
compensation will remain on the agenda for many people, it is not in
the forefront of the minds of all Indigenous people. There are non-Indigenous
Australians who are uncomfortable with the recommendations concerning
compensation. Clearly that does not undercut their validity or importance.
Nor do the judgements made in parts of Australia, that money is the
prime motivation behind telling the stories of forced removal, lessen
the belief that compensation is warranted as a plain matter of justice.
It was acknowledged that no amount of money could ever provide adequate
compensation. However, that is no justification for not addressing the
issue.

The way forward

As to the future,
our greatest desire and intention is to have our voices and views heard
and understood by the Australian community. They felt that ultimately
it is the way in which Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians relate
to each other in a positive way now which will resolve the manifold
effects of forced removal. The stories told to the Inquiry will take
their rightful place in the history of this country. The main objective
is to make improvements in the well-being of Indigenous communities
today, which will flow on to future generations.

The Inquiry and
Bringing Them Home have had a profound impact in showing the
wider community the experiences which have shaped the lives of Indigenous
Australians. Many have listened to personal stories and have absorbed
their full implications. These stories reach back into the past but
their real significance is in the present.

This chapter has
tried to give some sense of the complexity of the repercussions of a
process started by the Inquiry. It is flecked through with distress,
relief, expectation and doubt. It has both healed and opened wounds.

The relationship
between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians is under pressure,
influenced greatly by the recognition of rights to land in accordance
with distinctive Indigenous laws and customs. Native title has thrown
up exacting questions about the history of Australia and the present
enjoyment of Indigenous rights. In many ways the separation of Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander children from their families mirrors and
intensifies these questions. They cannot be avoided and will not be
resolved without understanding and respecting both the human experience
and the human rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders.

Acknowledgements

Throughout this
chapter we have presented the views of Indigenous people from different
parts of Australia. We thank them for sharing with us their opinions,
hopes and disappointments. We know that the journey of healing for Australia,
begun in 1997 with the release of Bringing Them Home, remains
largely incomplete. We can only trust that in the future all Australians
will contribute to the work necessary to achieve a resolution that will
nourish our country.

Thank you:

Richard Ah Mat	Andrea Mason
David Akbar	Garry Maynard
Rosie Baird	Roy Maynard
Adrian Booth	Karen Menzies
Tony Brown	Eric Milera
Trevor Buzzacott	Sandy Miller
Michelle Clarke	Kath Mills
Ken Colbung	Caroline Munns
Glenys Collard	Lyndon Murphy
Ashley Couzens	Marina Murray
Lynette Crocker	Melissa Mutton
Barbara Cummings	Frank Nam
Dennis Eggington	Jane Nelson
Jason Field	Wayne Newchurch
Malcolm Gollan	Bronwyn Newey
Leanne Goodes	Bryce Nimmo
Nellie Green	Mary O'Shane
Josey Hanson	Valma Pickett
Elizabeth Hayden	Bev Port-Louis
Colleen Hayward	Kylie Pursche
Ruth Hennings	Glenda Renato
Vicky Hensleigh	Clyde Rigney
Marie Holman	Dolores Scott
Rosita Howson	Mary Shadford
Ken Jurotte	Glenn Shaw
Carol Kendall	Heather Shearer
Katie Kiss	Di Spotswood
Joyleen Koolmatrie	Irene Stanton
Frank Lampard	Archie Tanna
April Lawrie-Smith	Eddie Thomas
Jane Lester	Sonia Waters
Kerri Lovegrove	Charlie Watson
Dennis McDermott	Christine Wellington-Stuart
Brett Mansell	James Whittaker
Clyde Mansell	Ted Wilkes
Sarah Marshall	Phyllis Williams

3
April 2003.

��鱨վ

AHRC Data Breach: For more information and to access support follow this link

Search