Editing Stolen Generations (section)

==Policy in practice==
[[File:A.O. Neville, Australia's Coloured Minority - Assimilation Policy.jpg|thumb|The successive breeding out of "colour" in the [[Aboriginal Australians|Aboriginal]] population, demonstrated here in A. O. Neville's "Australia's coloured minority" book]]
The ''[[Aboriginal Protection Act 1869]]'' (Vic) included the earliest legislation to authorise child removal from Aboriginal parents. The [[Aboriginal Protection Board|Central Board for the Protection of Aborigines]] had been advocating such powers since 1860. Passage of the Act gave the colony of Victoria a wide suite of powers over Aboriginal and "half-caste" persons, including the forcible removal of children, especially "at-risk" girls.<ref>{{cite book |first=M. F. |last=Christie |title=Aboriginal People in Colonial Victoria, 1835–86 |pages=175–176}}</ref> Through the late 19th and early 20th century, similar policies and legislation were adopted by other states and territories, such as the ''[[Aboriginals Protection and Restriction of the Sale of Opium Act 1897]]'' (Qld), the ''Aboriginals Ordinance 1918'' (NT), the ''Aborigines Act 1934'' (SA), and the ''1936 Native Administration Act'' (WA).<ref name="stolen62"/>

As a result of such legislation, states arranged widespread removal of (primarily) mixed-race children from their Aboriginal mothers. In addition, [[Protector of Aborigines|Aboriginal protectors]] were appointed in each state who exercised wide-ranging [[Legal guardian|guardianship]] powers over Aboriginal people up to the age of 16 or 21, often determining where they could live or work. Policemen or other agents of the state (some designated as "Aboriginal Protection Officers") were given the power to locate and transfer babies and children of mixed descent from their mothers, families, and communities into institutions for care. In these Australian states and territories, institutions (both government and missionary) for half-caste children were established in the early decades of the 20th century to care for and to educate the mixed-race children taken from their families, with the goal of assimilation into Anglo-Australian society.{{sfn|Cruickshank|McKinnon|2023|p=98}}<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.tim-richardson.net/joomla15/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=29:the-stolen-generations-robert-manne&catid=67:opinion&Itemid=72 |title=Tim Richardson on ''The Stolen Generations: Robert Manne'' |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110724105956/http://www.tim-richardson.net/joomla15/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=29%3Athe-stolen-generations-robert-manne&catid=67%3Aopinion&Itemid=72 |archive-date=24 July 2011}}</ref>{{sfn|Haebich|1992|p=138}} Examples of such institutions include [[Moore River Native Settlement]] in Western Australia, [[Doomadgee, Queensland|Doomadgee Aboriginal Mission]] in [[Queensland]], [[Ebenezer Mission]] in Victoria, and [[Wellington Valley Mission]] in [[New South Wales]], as well as Catholic missions such as [[Beagle Bay Community|Beagle Bay]] and [[Pirlangimpi|Garden Point]].<ref>{{cite journal |url=http://web.maths.unsw.edu.au/~jim/franklinmissions.pdf |first=James |last=Franklin |title=Catholic missions to aboriginal Australia: an evaluation of their overall effect |journal=Journal of the Australian Catholic Historical Society |volume=37 |number=1 |date=2016 |pages=45–68 |access-date=1 December 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230408115936/https://web.maths.unsw.edu.au/~jim/franklinmissions.pdf |archive-date=8 April 2023}}</ref>

The exact number of children removed is unknown. Estimates of numbers have been widely disputed. The ''[[Bringing Them Home]]'' report (produced by the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families in 1987), says that "at least 100,000" children were removed from their parents. This figure was estimated by multiplying the Aboriginal population in 1994 (303,000), by the report's maximum estimate of "one in three" Aboriginal persons separated from their families. The report stated that "between one in three and one in ten" children were separated from their families. Given differing populations over a long period of time, different policies at different times in different states (which also resulted in different definitions of target children), and incomplete records, accurate figures are difficult to establish.{{Citation needed|date=March 2018}} The academic [[Robert Manne]] has stated that the lower-end figure of one in 10 is more likely; he estimates that between 20,000 and 25,000 Aboriginal children were removed over six decades, based on a survey of self-identified Indigenous people by the television station [[ABS (TV station)|ABS]].{{sfn|Flood|2006|p=232}} According to the ''Bringing Them Home'' report:

{{blockquote|In certain regions and in certain periods the figure was undoubtedly much greater than one in ten. In that time not one Indigenous family has escaped the effects of forcible removal (confirmed by representatives of the Queensland and WA [Western Australia] Governments in evidence to the Inquiry). Most families have been affected, in one or more generations, by the forcible removal of one or more children.<ref>{{cite web |title=Bringing them Home {{!}} Part 2: Tracing the History {{!}} Chapter 2: National Overview |date=1997 |publisher=[[Australian Human Rights Commission]] |location=Sydney |url=https://bth.humanrights.gov.au/the-report/part-2-tracing-the-history/chapter-2-national-overview |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180307113135/https://bth.humanrights.gov.au/the-report/part-2-tracing-the-history/chapter-2-national-overview |archive-date=7 March 2018}}</ref>}}

The report closely examined the distinctions between "forcible removal", "removal under threat or duress", "official deception", "uninformed voluntary release", and "voluntary release".<ref name="Scope of Inquiry">{{cite web |url=http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/IndigLRes/stolen/stolen04.html |author=Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission |title=Indigenous Law Resources: Bringing them Home: Part 1: Scope of the Inquiry |publisher=Australasian Legal Information Institute |date=1997 |access-date=25 November 2016}}</ref> The evidence indicated that in numerous cases, children were brutally and forcibly removed from their parent or parents,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/IndigLRes/stolen/stolen06.html |title=Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission: Bringing them Home: Part 2: Tracing the History |via=AustLII |date=1997 |access-date=25 November 2016}}</ref> possibly even from the hospital shortly after birth, when identified as mixed-race babies.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/IndigLRes/stolen/stolen13.html |title=Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission: Bringing Them Home: Part 2: 7 Western Australia |via=AustLII |date=1997 |access-date=25 November 2016}}</ref> Aboriginal Protection Officers often made the judgement to remove certain children. In some cases, families were required to sign legal documents to relinquish care to the state. In Western Australia, the ''[[Native Administration Act 1905|Aborigines Act 1905]]'' removed the legal guardianship of Aboriginal parents. It made all their children legal [[Ward (law)|wards]] of the state, so the government did not require parental permission to relocate the mixed-race children to institutions.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://nla.gov.au/nla.obj-55208686/view?partId=nla.obj-55209481 |title=The Acts of the Parliament of Western Australia: Aborigines Act of 1905 |publisher=National Library of Australia |date=23 December 1905 |access-date=25 November 2016}}</ref>

In 1915, in New South Wales, the ''Aborigines Protection Amending Act 1915'' gave the [[Aboriginal Protection Board|Aborigines' Protection Board]] authority to remove Aboriginal children "without having to establish in court that they were neglected." At the time, some members of Parliament objected to the NSW amendment; one member stated it enabled the Board to "steal the child away from its parents." At least two members argued that the amendment would result in children being subjected to unpaid labour (at institutions or farms) tantamount to "slavery".<ref name=humanrights1/> Writing in the 21st century, Professor Peter Read said that Board members, in recording reasons for removal of children, noted simply "For being Aboriginal."<ref name=humanrights1/><ref>{{cite news |last=Read |first=Peter |title=Don't let facts spoil this historian's campaign |work=The Australian |date=18 February 2008 |access-date=18 February 2008 |url=http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23229208-7583,00.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080218052203/http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0%2C25197%2C23229208-7583%2C00.html |archive-date=18 February 2008 |url-status=dead |df=dmy-all}}</ref>

In 1909, the Protector of Aborigines in [[South Australia]], [[William Garnet South]], reportedly "lobbied for the power to remove Aboriginal children without a court hearing because the courts sometimes refused to accept that the children were neglected or destitute". South argued that "all children of mixed descent should be treated as neglected".<ref name=stolen14>{{cite web |url=http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/IndigLRes/stolen/stolen14.html |title=Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission: Bringing them Home: Part 2: 8 South Australia |via=AustLII |date=1997 |access-date=25 November 2016}}</ref> His lobbying reportedly played a part in the enactment of the ''Aborigines Act (1911).'' This designated his position as the legal guardian of every Aboriginal child in South Australia, not only the so-called "half-castes".<ref name=stolen14/>{{sfn|Cruickshank|McKinnon|2023|pp=97–98}}

The ''Bringing Them Home'' report identified instances of official misrepresentation and deception, such as when caring and able parents were incorrectly described by Aboriginal Protection Officers as not being able to properly provide for their children. In other instances, parents were told by government officials that their child or children had died, even though this was not the case. One first-hand account referring to events in 1935 stated:

{{blockquote|I was at the post office with my Mum and Auntie [and cousin]. They put us in the police ute and said they were taking us to Broome. They put the mums in there as well. But when we'd gone [about {{convert|10|mi|km|spell=in}}] they stopped, and threw the mothers out of the car. We jumped on our mothers' backs, crying, trying not to be left behind. But the policemen pulled us off and threw us back in the car. They pushed the mothers away and drove off, while our mothers were chasing the car, running and crying after us. We were screaming in the back of that car. When we got to Broome they put me and my cousin in the Broome lock-up. We were only ten years old. We were in the lock-up for two days waiting for the boat to Perth.<ref name="Scope of Inquiry"/>}}

The report discovered that removed children were, in most cases, placed into institutional facilities operated by religious or charitable organisations. A significant number, particularly females, were "fostered" out. Children taken to such institutions were trained to be assimilated to Anglo-Australian culture.{{sfn|Cruickshank|McKinnon|2023|p=98}} Policies included punishment for speaking their local Indigenous languages.{{sfn|Manne|2012|p=218}}{{sfn|Haebich|2012|p=274}}{{sfn|Cruickshank|McKinnon|2023|pp=93–94}} The intention was to educate them for a different future and to prevent their being [[Socialization|socialised]] in [[Australian Aboriginal culture|Aboriginal cultures]]. The boys were generally trained as agricultural labourers and the girls as [[Domestic worker|domestic servants]]; these were the chief occupations of many Europeans at the time in the largely rural areas outside cities.<ref name="stolen62">{{cite web |url=http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/IndigLRes/stolen/stolen62.html |title=Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission: Bringing them Home: Appendices |via=AustLII |date=1997 |access-date=25 November 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230519193921/http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/IndigLRes/stolen/stolen62.html |archive-date=19 May 2023}}</ref>

A common aspect of the removals was the failure by these institutions to keep records of the actual parentage of the child, or such details as the date or place of birth. As is stated in the report:
<blockquote>the physical infrastructure of missions, government institutions and children's homes was often very poor and resources were insufficient to improve them or to keep the children adequately clothed, fed and sheltered.<ref name="stolen18"/></blockquote>

The children were taken into care purportedly to protect them from neglect and abuse. However [[child sexual abuse|sexual assault and abuse]] was widespread, with the report finding that among the 502 inquiry witnesses, 17% of female witnesses and 7.7% of male witnesses reported having suffered a [[sexual assault]] while in an institution, at work, or while living with a foster or adoptive family.<ref name="stolen18">{{cite web |url=http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/IndigLRes/stolen/stolen18.html |title=Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission: Bringing them Home: Part 3: 10 Childrens Experiences |via=AustLII |date=1997 |access-date=25 November 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240816144634/https://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/IndigLRes/stolen/stolen18.html |archive-date=16 August 2024}}</ref>{{sfn|Cruickshank|McKinnon|2023|p=99}} Beyond this, conditions in the institutions were found to be invariably poor, with severe discipline, excessive child labour, poor nutrition, physical and emotional abuse, and poor quality education. Staff were found to be generally unqualified and given complete control and power over the children.{{sfn|Cruickshank|McKinnon|2023|p=99}}{{sfn|Haebich|2023|p=554}}

Documentary evidence, such as newspaper articles and reports to [[parliamentary committee]]s, suggest a range of rationales. Apparent motivations included the belief that the Aboriginal people would die out,{{citation needed|date=August 2017}} given their catastrophic population decline after white contact, the belief that they were heathens and were better off in non-indigenous households,<ref>{{cite news |last=Wahlquist |first=Calla |url=https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/may/25/australias-stolen-generations-a-legacy-of-intergenerational-pain-and-broken-bonds |title=Australia's stolen generations: a legacy of intergenerational pain and broken bonds |newspaper=[[The Guardian]] |date=25 May 2017 |access-date=9 October 2017 |quote=We were taken off our mother, we were told that we were taken off her because she was a heathen, she was not capable of looking after us ... |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240624082320/https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/may/25/australias-stolen-generations-a-legacy-of-intergenerational-pain-and-broken-bonds |archive-date=24 June 2024}}</ref> and the belief that full-blooded Aboriginal people resented [[miscegenation]] and the mixed-race children fathered and abandoned by white men.<ref>{{cite Q |Q128122479 |mode=cs1 |ref={{harvid|Bates|1938}} |orig-date=1938 |quote=Half-castes came among them, a being neither black nor white, whom they detested [...] I did what I set out to do{{em dash}}to make their passing easier and to keep the dreaded half-caste menace from our great continent. |access-date=2024-08-01}}</ref>{{Primary source inline|date=March 2017}}