The Australia Stolen generation
People of the stolen generation have been negatively affected by Australian polices. The stolen generation means “children of mixed descent who were removed from their Indigenous mothers and communities with the aim of assimilating them into white Australian culture” (Kennedy, 2011, p. 333). Thus the removal of mixed descent Indigenous children was part of the assimilation policy that was introduced in the early twenty century. By 1972 it was evidence that the policy of assimilation had negative consequences to the Indigenous population. Therefore the Whitlam government replaced the policy of assimilation to that of self-determination, which viewed that the government should accommodate for the Indigenous culture.
…show more content…
The constitution was changed in 1967 with a 90 per cent of population voting yes in the referendum (Griffiths, 2006). Thus changes in the referendum deemed that commonwealth was responsible for Indigenous affairs and for the first time the Indigenous population were to be counted in the census (Attwood & Markus, 2007). Therefore with changes to constitution the federal government could now have greater involvement in Indigenous affairs (Attwood & Markus, 2008). Hence in 1972 when the Whitlam government was elected into power they replaced the assimilation policy with the policy of self-determination which is still in effect today (Chesterman, 2005). The self-determination policy came as a reaction to problematic assimilation policy, which saw the displacement of many Indigenous people. The policies of self-determination argued that government policies should accommodate for the indigenous culture (Kowal, 2008). Additionally the self-determination policy viewed that the Indigenous people should have involvement in decisions that affect their lives (McIntyre & McKeich, 2010) Furthermore, the outcomes of the self-determination policy saw the end to the forcibly removing mixed descent children from their families and communities (Young, 1998). In addition self-determination policies saw for the first time a separate government department to address Indigenous affairs (Neil, 2002). As well as saw the start of community services and government organisations that address specific Indigenous issues, such as Link Up an organisation the assist members of the stolen generation find lost family members (Sullivan, 2011). What’s more self-determination policy saw the start of providing funding by the government to address the high rates of children that had been removed as part of the assimilation policy (Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, 1997). However,
The stolen generation is a scenario carry out by the Australian government to separate most aboriginal people’s families. The government was enforced take the light skinned aboriginal kids away from their guardians to learn the white people’s culture in the campus around the country and then send them back to their hometown and prohibit them join the white people’s society after they turn be an adult. The
There have been many unanswered questions in Australia about Aboriginal history. One of these is which government policy towards indigenous people has had the largest impact on Indigenous Australians? Through research the Assimilation Policy had the largest impact upon Indigenous Australians and the three supporting arguments to prove this are the Aborigines losing their rights to freedom, Aboriginal children being removed from their families, and finally the loss of aboriginality.
Of the 8 successful, the 1967 referendum which proposed the removal of the words in section 51 (xxvi) ‘… other than the aboriginal people in any State’ (National Archives of Australia ND), and the deletion of section 127, both, which were discriminative in their nature toward the Aboriginal race, recorded a 90.77% nationwide vote in favour of change (National Archives of Australia, 2014). As a result, the Constitution was altered; highlighting what was believed to be significant positive political change within Indigenous affairs at the time (National Archives of Australia, 2014). Approaching 50 years on, discussion has resurfa...
Struggles by Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander people for recognition of their rights and interests have been long and arduous (Choo & Hollobach: 2003:5). The ‘watershed’ decision made by the High Court of Australia in 1992 (Mabo v Queensland) paved the way for Indigenous Australians to obtain what was ‘stolen’ from them in 1788 when the British ‘invaded’ (ATSIC:1988). The focus o...
During the late sixteen century, when the first fleet arrived to Australia and discovered the free settlers or known as Australian Indigenous inheritors (The Aborigines), the community of aboriginal inhabitants since then have experienced vast levels of discrimination and racism against their gender, race, colour and ethnicity. The term over representations refers to the presents of minority or disproportionate ethnic aboriginal groups represented in the criminal justice system (CJS). This essay will further explain the relationship between aboriginal communities and policing discussed in Blagg (2008) and Cunneen (2007, the three major sources of concern in association to aboriginal over representation in CJS which include; systematic bias,
The journey for the Aboriginals to receive the right to keep and negotiate land claims with the Canadian government was long but prosperous. Before the 1970's the federal government chose not to preform their responsibilities involving Aboriginal issues, this created an extremely inefficient way for the Aboriginals to deal with their land right problems. The land claims created by the Canadian government benefited the aboriginals as shown through the Calder Case, the creation of the Office of Native Claims and the policy of Outstanding Business.
The power structure between aboriginal and non-aboriginal people always plays some role to impede a kind of equal dialogue between them. Non-aboriginal people on average are more affluent than aboriginals. Also, the social infrastructures in some off-reserve major metropolitan cities are much more mature than on-reserve areas. The inequality between aboriginals and non-aboriginals makes non-aboriginal policy makers be inclined to bring their own sense of superiority to the analysis of aboriginal issues, which could likely lead to policies with biases and prejudices. Perhaps an effective conversation between aboriginal and government can lead to a better outcome because aboriginals’ own voice would be heard. In this essay, I will demonstrate why, when compared with Flanagan’s assimilationist proposal, Cairns’ concept of “citizen plus” is more persuasive as an effective approach to aboriginal policy. Firstly, I would outline the debate between Thomas Flanagan and Alan Cairns on aboriginal policy. A brief compare and contrast between their opinions will be made. Secondly, with some other academic sources in my mind, I would state the reasons why I stand aside with Cairns more than with Flanagan. Some advisable
The gross over representation of indigenous people in the Australian criminal justice system (CJS) is so disturbingly evident that it is never the source of debate. Rather it is the starting point of discussions centring on the source and solutions to this prominent social, cultural and political issue. Discourse surrounds not only the economic and social disadvantage of indigenous communities, but also the systemic racism and continuing intergenerational trauma resulting for the unjust colonisation of a nation which has profited whites at the detriment to indigenous people throughout history. In respect to the currently CJS, trepidations are raised by indigenous communities around the lack of culturally diverse laws and punishments within the system. The overtly western system does not provide a viable space for indigenous
Struggles by Aboriginal and Torres Strait islander people for recognition of their rights and interests have been long and arduous (Choo & Hollobach 2003:5). The ‘watershed’ decision made by the High Court of Australia in 1992 (Mabo v Queensland) paved the way for Indigenous Australians to obtain what was ‘stolen’ from them in 1788 when the British ‘invaded’ (ATSIC:1988). The focus of legislation in the past w...
The Stolen Generation has left devastating impacts upon the Aboriginal culture and heritage, Australian history and the presence of equality experienced today. The ‘Stolen Generation’ refers to the children of Aboriginal descent being forcefully abducted by government officials of Australia and placed within institutions and catholic orphanages, being forced to assimilate into ‘white society’. These dehumanising acts placed these stolen children to experience desecration of culture, loss of identity and the extinction of their race. The destructive consequences that followed were effects of corruption including attempted suicide, depression and drug and alcohol abuse. The indigenous peoples affected by this have endured solitude for many years, this has only been expressed to the public recently and a proper apology has been issued, for the years of ignorance to the implementation of destruction of culture. The Stolen Generation has dramatically shaped Australian history and culture.
Since the time of federation the Aboriginal people have been fighting for their rights through protests, strikes and the notorious ‘day of mourning’. However, over the last century the Australian federal government has generated policies which manage and restrained that of the Aboriginal people’s rights, citizenships and general protection. The Australian government policy that has had the most significant impact on indigenous Australians is the assimilation policy. The reasons behind this include the influences that the stolen generation has had on the indigenous Australians, their relegated rights and their entitlement to vote and the impact that the policy has had on the indigenous people of Australia.
It is clear that many steps were taken to achieve the same rights and freedoms as the rest of Australia for the Aborigines especially since 1945. Major steps forward and setbacks included the Day of Mourning, the Aboriginal Protection Act, the Child Welfare Act, the ‘Freedom Ride’, the 1962 Electoral Act and the 1967 Referendum, the tent ‘Aboriginal Embassy’, the protest at Wave Hill, Frank Hardy’s project to find the ‘real Australia’, Prime Minister Gough Whitlam giving back 300 000 square kilometers of land, the Mabo decision in 1982, the Native Title Act, John Howard’s plan in 1996, and Kevin Rudd’s apology speech. Overall, there has been a long struggle for reconciliation. Indigenous Australians now have the same rights as other Australians, but social and economic equality are still to be improved.
The Stolen Generations refers to the forcible removal of Aboriginal, mostly those who were not full blooded taken between the 1830’s and the 1970’s. They were removed due to their mixed heritage, consisting of Indigenous mothers and European fathers. The Stolen Generations have had a damaging effect on the native owners of Australia, their culture, their identity and most importantly, their sense of belonging,
The ability of police to exercise discretion was originally designed to allow officers to maintain the peace by allowing certain types of crime to remain unpunished in certain circumstances. This essay will aim to explore the issue of police discretion that suggests that the application of discretion works against the interests of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. In drawing this conclusion, this essay will examine the relationship between policing ideals and the use of discretionary powers and the relationship between policing attitudes and the use of discretionary powers. A discussion regarding the use of police discretion towards Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples can scarcely be mentioned without making reference to arguably the greatest failing by a police officer since indigenous Australians were formally recognised as citizens. Further to this, the case of Mulrunji Doomadgee (Cameron) will be examined from the point of view of officer discretionary powers. The penultimate point to be made will involve the Anglo Australian response to this case as well as the ongoing relationship between indigenous Australians and the institutions that govern them. As mentioned, the first point will involve policing ideals and their relationship to discretionary powers.
It is important to understand the cultural tradition carried out by Indigenous Australians because they are still practiced today. A strategy would be running workshops to get an education about policing directly from officers and youths sharing their cultural values and tradition (Grant, H 2015). This strategy provides police officers to learn about the Indigenous youth and their culture, while the youths build a positive relationship with police aiming to developing confidence and becoming a better role model in their community (Cunneen 2001). In regards to the case study if the ingenious children would have been involved in programs like this or had a better relationship with the police they would not have stolen the car or been shot (Cunneen 2001).