Stolen Generation Essay Example

whites, who considered themselves superior due to technological and industrial advancements, feared the proliferation of mixed children between them and the indigenous population (Anthony et al 2005).

As per Carter's (2006) findings, the indigenous children were taken away from their families in order to protect and educate them. The Aborigines Protection Board believed that this would prevent the declining population of indigenous people from becoming extinct. However, it is widely regarded as an attempt to maintain racial purity for white settlers and ultimately eradicate the native population in British-claimed territories. Australia's constitution excluded the indigenous population from being counted as part of the country's population when it was established in 1901. Ted (2003) observes that in 1915, complete authority over separating children from their parents without considering neglect was granted to the Aboriginal Protection Board. Ann (2008) contends that after declaring half-castes natives in 1889 through the Aboriginal Protection Act of 1869, some children were placed into half-caste institutions while others worked on farms as laborers, guides and servants.

During this period, established homes took girls to be trained as domestic servants in white households. However, a significant proportion of aboriginal children were forcefully removed from their families through brutal means. This caused immense trauma and left parents and families bruised and depressed. Approximately 75% of total aboriginal children removed from families were subjected to force and brutality. As estimated by Helen in 2004, this translates to approximately 25-35% of the total aboriginal child population. The separation had far-reaching impacts on individuals, the community, and the country.

The long-term implications of the stealing of children from their families in Australia have affected parents, communities, government, administration, and

most importantly, the children themselves. These impacts are recurring in various settings and are described as having far-reaching effects that may persist well into the future. As Tickner and James (2001) point out, a generation without progeny lacks a future and hope that is essential for progress. The stolen children of the past generation have faced the greatest impacts of this practice, and these effects may even impact future generations.

It was previously noted that most children lost their connection with their community and parents, leading to a loss of cultural values for future generations (Carter 2006). The separated children were placed in various institutions where they were not taught community norms and practices. Additionally, their language development suffered as they primarily communicated in basic English during this time.

According to Anthony et al (2005), the whites withheld the children's communication with their communities until they completed their work on the farms and homes, either at age 16 or 21. The poor education and care they received during those 21 years resulted in stunted individual development. The children were only taught basic skills necessary for serving the whites in their farms and homesteads, omitting advanced scientific subjects like physics, biology, and chemistry. This lack of education hindered long-term self-sufficiency, a trait that persisted throughout the individuals' lives, as noted by Tickner and James (2001).

According to Richardson (2002), there are high levels of brutality, hostility, and family breakups due to the coercive and brutal acts experienced by parents who were taken away, brutal mentorship, and increased harassment by whites. These experiences have led to the development of hostile characters in individuals, which are passed on to

subsequent generations, increasing the possibility of hostility recurrence in different settings. Consequently, many children from families with inherited relationship traits with previously 'stolen children' are being lost to welfare states and justice agencies. Ann (2008) notes that during work on white farms and homesteads, children were not paid their money, leading to a large tendency towards drug and alcohol addiction, which is very addictive and long-term destructive to the lives of the 'stolen children'.

Gwynneth (2000) notes that drug abuse can have long-term effects on both children and future generations. Ted (2003) emphasizes that separation from family can lead to a lack of understanding of familial values, resulting in increased family breakdowns. This lack of education on social norms is evident not only within communities but also within institutions, leading to high levels of drug and alcohol abuse and disregard for traditional family values. Heide et al (2008) link the prevalence of mental illness among Aboriginal people to the era when children were removed from their families.

The Aborigines Protection Act passed in 1869 had devastating effects on families and the Indigenous community. Despite disregarding their opinions and needs, policymakers opted for raids instead of actually implementing policies (Gwynneth 2000). As a result, caregivers were plagued with insecurity, low self-esteem, and drug abuse. Sadly, the elderly population from the mid-20th century to early 21st century experienced severe mental and physical stress which led to higher mortality rates.

Efforts to have more children have resulted in increased mortality rates within indigenous communities, as traditional medicine proved inadequate in handling complications from physical injuries and trauma (Heather & John, 2001). Additionally, separation from their community has led to a loss

of cultural identity among indigenous peoples (Anthony et al., 2005), with 'stolen children' only learning subjects meant to aid white society or areas where they were stationed during the 21 years of segregation. This minimal interaction with their communities caused a disconnection from major happenings and demands.

Due to the rapid decline of parents' health, many have passed away, leading to a loss of essential community information and knowledge that should have been transferred to younger generations. This loss has resulted in a significant impact on cultural identity and major cultural activities. As noted by Heide et al (2008), this marks a breakpoint for the transfer of community information to later generations. Furthermore, there is a high probability of a new culture emerging, borrowing several aspects of indigenous communities while not entirely similar.

The process of individual development is said to be a combination of one's genetics and immediate surroundings. The government's decision to emancipate the "stolen children" will result in a lack of connection to their original culture due to their upbringing in disparate environments and under different rules (Ted 2003). The elimination of this practice in the 1970s has led to heightened criminal activity, drug abuse, lawlessness, and opposition across all previously affected regions within the Australian government and administration (Heather & John 2001).

The origins of the challenges faced by aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children have been ascribed to harsh upbringing, sexual abuse, and the traumatic experience of witnessing their parents being taken away (Carter 2006). In recognition of these factors, the government has prioritized the speedy and effective resilience of these groups through special measures proposed by researchers and psychologists (Linda 2003). The

government acknowledgment in December 2007 that the 'stealing of children' resulted in a denial of good education and reduced intellectual capacity highlighted a major hindrance to Australia's development in the 20th century (Heide et al 2008). It is widely accepted that human capital is a key driver of entrepreneurship and economic growth, and lack of adequate development opportunities can contribute to monopoly and stifle capitalist progress. However, the current landscape of globalization requires high levels of innovative abilities, which can only be achieved through healthy competition (Damien 2008).

In December 2007, the Australian government issued a significant apology to indigenous Australians regarding past wrongs. Despite regretting such occurrences in Australia, the government pledged to allocate substantial resources to ensure that affected individuals were adequately compensated and resettled to preserve their history. Consequently, significant amounts of money have been used to compensate and resettle large numbers of indigenous people in their former land. Although some argue that the practice of taking away children had negative consequences, it had notable positive effects on the country and its citizens. For instance, it played a significant role in modernizing Australia. It also enabled many people to acquire useful skills that have contributed to the development of the country, including modern animal husbandry and plant growing techniques that were introduced (Richardson 2002).

Since its establishment under British colonial rule, the 'Stolen generation' has caused major issues in Australia, impacting indigenous communities negatively. These issues persist to this day, leading to significant cultural effects and the potential loss of indigenous community identity. The affected children not only suffer from trauma but also experience difficulties in developing alongside their peers. Additionally, mental

illnesses are prevalent among these communities, perpetuating problems that have persisted for a long time (Damien 2008).

To achieve unity and peace, the government has relocated and compensated indigenous communities. Despite negative consequences, it is crucial to professionally address these issues through reconciliation and collaboration to heal current wounds. This requires cooperation from various entities such as NGOs, human rights groups, scholars, researchers, and government departments to effectively address all associated effects. Moreover, establishing a comprehensive legislative framework is necessary to prevent future occurrences. Finally, while preserving their distinct culture, the government must safeguard the community's human rights against both local and international threats. (Adapted from Linda 2003)