Thanks for sharing this information, Mark.  I don't know details of  
the proposed legislation, but I've seen the long-term effect of one  
paternalistic "solution" to child welfare problems.

Indigenous residents of the USA remember the "boarding schools" of  
early 20th century, in which the "white" majority set about to prevent  
the transmission of Native languages and culture, thus facilitating  
Indian assimilation and "progress".  To achieve this goal, parents  
were required to send their children away to assigned boarding  
schools.  At these schools, children were forbidden to wear  
traditional clothing, speak traditional languages, or engage in  
traditional cultural/religious practices.

The result appears now to have been almost entirely negative.  Loving  
and capable families were disrupted.  Languages were extinguished.   
Little or no economic progress was facilitated.  As they became  
adults, the boarding-school children lacked a full understanding of  
how to live in their native culture, but also lacked opportunities to  
live successfully in European-American majority communities.

About a century later, Native Americans are still dealing with family,  
cultural, linguistic, and economic deprivations inherited from the  
"boarding school" generation.  I've talked with some who think the  
boarding schools were just as destructive to Native Americans as the  
loss of their land.

Paternalism is attractive to the powerful -- but, even when  
paternalism is well-intentioned, the "side effects" are destructive.   
Whatever the problems of Aboriginal peoples, I hope that Australian  
authorities work humbly WITH Aborigines to devise culturally  
appropriate priorities and solutions.

Best wishes!

Dave Cundiff, MD, MPH
Olympia, Washington, USA

***

Quoting Mark Boyd <[log in to unmask]>:

> Unfortunately, Australia is winding back the clock and enforcing
> genocidal policies on Aboriginal people. Here's yesterday's editorial by
> WHO social Determinants Commissioner Fran Baum:
>
>
> Apartheid to be enforced on Aborigines
> Fran Baum
> August 7, 2007
> http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/apartheid-to-be-enforced-on-aborig
> ines/2007/08/06/1186252625016.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
>
> THIS will be a week of shame for all non-indigenous Australians if the
> legislation planned by the Howard Government is passed by Parliament.
> This legislation, among other things, will make the welfare system an
> apartheid one with different rules for Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal
> people and make payments depend on government-dictated behaviour. It
> will also take control away from Aboriginal people over who goes on
> their land.
>
> Ironically, this intervention is part of the Government's response to
> the Little Children are Sacred report by Pat Anderson and Rex Wild, QC.
> Anderson's and Wild's report is nuanced, wise and demonstrates deep
> understanding of the complexity of abuse in communities that have
> suffered long and hard from the processes of colonisation - processes
> such as
>
> land grabs, stolen children and fundamental lack of respect and racism
> from the dominant white culture.
>
> Their report called not for the declaration of war, with its echoes of
> domination and crisis, but for a thoughtful consultative process that
> stands some chance of achieving meaningful change.
>
> It recognised that there has to be change but that this was likely only
> if Aboriginal people are listened to and respected - the basis of any
> functional relationship. Instead, the Government is sending in the army,
> boots and all.
>
> I write this while attending the Garma Festival, which is organised by
> the Yothu Yindi Foundation and held at Gulkula on the Gove Peninsula, in
> East Arnhem Land. The festival is a celebration of the art, culture and
> ceremony of the Yolngu people who are the traditional owners of this
> land.
>
> We are in the heart of one of the oldest living cultures on earth, one
> that stretches back thousands of years and reverberates through the
> heart and spirit of this festival and the land on which it is held.
>
> It is such a privilege for me, a non-indigenous Australian, to
> experience this. The theme for discussion at this year's festival is
> "Indigenous health: real solutions for a chronic problem".
>
> The forum was designed a year ago to be a celebration of some of the
> positive processes in indigenous health: the success of Aboriginal
> Community Controlled Health services in Central Australia at increasing
> the birth weight of Aboriginal babies to the national average, for
> example; or the health services in Katherine that are as well thought
> out as any mainstream services in Australia.
>
> Yet instead of this anticipated celebration, the overwhelming feeling is
> now despair and anger. Despair that a report that bravely named and
> respectfully described the problem of child sexual abuse is being used
> by the Government for an assault on fragile Aboriginal communities.
> Anger at the damage the intervention and associated legislation are
> likely to do.
>
> One Aboriginal leader said the past month had been one "of the most
> destructive times in our history".
>
> People are speculating on why this is happening. Is it a bid for the
> swinging votes in the marginal seats? Is it an attempt to wedge Kevin
> Rudd as the federal election looms large? Is it a cover for long-held
> desires to force an assimilationist agenda?
>
> Is it a Trojan horse by which to undo hard-won land rights? Is it
> because Clare Martin's Northern Territory Government created a vacuum,
> offering no strong response to the Anderson and Wild report?
>
> It could be all or none of these, but one thing I'm sure about - based
> on my knowledge of public health - is that the intervention stands a
> very good chance of being detrimental to the health of Aboriginal people
> and their communities.
>
> For the past two years I have been serving on the Commission on the
> Social Determinants of Health, which was established by the World Health
> Organisation and has gathered evidence from around the world about the
> underlying causes of disease and illness.
>
> A consistent message from the evidence is that when you rob people of
> control over their lives, it is uniformly bad for their health, whether
> they be British civil servants or Indian women living in slums.
>
> The commission's interim statement, to be published soon, will stress
> the importance to health of people having control over their lives and
> meaningful participation in decision-making processes.
>
> I assume that John Howard and Mal Brough would justify their tactics as
> a means to the end of providing safety for children. But what evidence
> is there that these and the removal of control will make children safer?
>
> The Anderson and Wild report offered a gentler way with 97
> recommendations designed to invest in communities, build trust by
> involving people in the solutions and ensuring that the healing
> necessary in damaged communities could happen.
>
> Their recommendations should form the basis of some kind of accord
> across state and federal governments and with a bipartisan approach
> about long-term, sustainable action plans that are developed through
> real and meaningful partnerships that ensure control remains with
> Aboriginal people.
>
> Child abuse is wrong and abhorrent. On that we all agree. But the
> legislation that is going to be forced through our Federal Parliament
> this week is equally wrong. It robs Aboriginal people of their rights
> and respect. It will undermine trust that is so essential to good
> policymaking. It assumes
>
> that Aboriginal people are the problem rather than the solution. It
> ignores the evidence on the central importance of control to individual
> and community wellbeing.
>
> Fran Baum is professor of public health at Flinders University.
>
> -------------------
> Problems/Questions? Send it to Listserv owner: [log in to unmask]
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send the following message in the text section --   
> NOT the subject header --  to [log in to unmask]
>
> SIGNOFF SDOH
>
> DO NOT SEND IT BY HITTING THE REPLY BUTTON. THIS SENDS THE MESSAGE   
> TO THE ENTIRE LISTSERV AND STILL DOES NOT REMOVE YOU.
>
> To subscribe to the SDOH list, send the following message to   
> [log in to unmask] in the text section, NOT in the subject header.
>
> SUBSCRIBE SDOH yourfirstname yourlastname
>
> To post a message to all 1200+ subscribers, send it to [log in to unmask]
> Include in the Subject, its content, and location and date, if relevant.
>
> For a list of SDOH members, send a request to [log in to unmask]
>
> To receive messages only once a day, send the following message to   
> [log in to unmask]
> SET SDOH DIGEST
>
> To view the SDOH archives, go to:   
> https://listserv.yorku.ca/archives/sdoh.html
>

-------------------
Problems/Questions? Send it to Listserv owner: [log in to unmask]


To unsubscribe, send the following message in the text section -- NOT the subject header --  to [log in to unmask]

SIGNOFF SDOH

DO NOT SEND IT BY HITTING THE REPLY BUTTON. THIS SENDS THE MESSAGE TO THE ENTIRE LISTSERV AND STILL DOES NOT REMOVE YOU.

To subscribe to the SDOH list, send the following message to [log in to unmask] in the text section, NOT in the subject header.

SUBSCRIBE SDOH yourfirstname yourlastname

To post a message to all 1200+ subscribers, send it to [log in to unmask]
Include in the Subject, its content, and location and date, if relevant.

For a list of SDOH members, send a request to [log in to unmask]

To receive messages only once a day, send the following message to [log in to unmask]
SET SDOH DIGEST

To view the SDOH archives, go to: https://listserv.yorku.ca/archives/sdoh.html